Jump to content

Article about ET Highway PT closure


Recommended Posts

http://www.lvrj.com/news/nevada-sends-geocachers-money-elsewhere-117892984.html?ref=984

 

Interesting read about the closure of the ET Highway power trail, comments from NDOT, tourist cachers, and local businesses...It seems that business owners are seeing an impact on their business already. Wow...to have business owners feel the economic impact already is impressive?

Doesn't surprise me the business dried up by March 2. Love it the NDOT worker doesn't get ice in his coke. Bet all the NDOT workers are carrying a lunch now instead of getting a burger in Rachel. Well the Attorney General can determine if encroachment permits will solve the problem or not, the problem is solved, the goose is dead and the gold left the silver state.

Link to comment
7000 signatures in the first cache???? Is that really true?

 

No, it isn't really true.

There are 662 finds logged on the E.T. 001 and 449 finds on E.T. 1021.

(I didn't make that up, I looked at the cache page. )

 

700 people would have been a modest exaggeration.

 

Still, for the local business(es) that addition of ~60 visitors per month had to be pretty special. Clumps and bunches some weekends.

 

I didn't find the article especially well written. It seems to hammer the DOT for doing its job - and vastly overstates the economic impact of the series.

7000 - 660 hey it's only factor of 10.

 

I wonder how the article about someone being killed or seriously injured would have read?

Edited by Isonzo Karst
Link to comment

Meh. The article is written by someone with no knowledge of the hobby at the behest of someone with a very specific agenda.

 

Anyway, geocaching apparently is an inexpensive adventure enjoyed by hard-core cachers or outdoorsy families.

 

So, you're either a hard-core cacher or an outdoorsy family or there is no room for you in the hobby. Feel sorry for the solo cacher who picks off the occassional cache in the local parks.

 

It is all about the fun, unless, apparently, you wander into the state transportation agency's territory.

 

No, it's apparently all about the numbers. Take away the chance to run up big numbers and suddenly cachers aren't interested in having "fun" in your area any more. Sad statement on the state of the hobby, IMO.

 

The government suits are to geocachers what vice cops are to frat parties: Buzz kills.

 

Awesome. Lets compare cachers to potheads and make it sound like we have a standoffish relationship with government agencies. Nothing like putting us at odds with each other.

 

Power cache because of the sheer number of treasures in a relatively short distance. It allows collectors to rack up caches without a lot of effort.

 

I'll ignore the fact that it is called a "power trail" not a power cache. I laughed at the fact that despite appealing to "hard-core" cachers they apparently don't want to expend any effort. :laughing:

 

As of March 1, more than 7,000 geocachers had logged their names on the sheet marking the first treasure site along the highway.

 

Already proven to be inaccurate given the number of online logs -- and, let's face it, if you're doing a "power cache" you're in it for the numbers so you can be sure you'd be logging online.

 

A group from Ireland pulled into West's place last week to begin a trip they had planned for more than a year, West said.

 

I didn't think the series had even existed for a year, so they must have had pretty good insider info to have been plannning for that long. I also find it funny they did so much planning yet wouldn't know the series was gone until after they arrived. If I planned a year for a cache series you could bet I'd have at least some of them on my watch list.

 

"A guy from NDOT was in the other day and wanted ice in his Coke," West said. "I said, 'No, you're NDOT. You've xxxxxxx me off.' "

 

Good business there -- complain about the customers you've lost while actively discouraging the few clients you have left.

 

The straight portion of the highway isn't as much of a hazard as the curvy summit sections.

 

So, a little forethought on the placement of these caches would have gone a long way. But, then again, we couldn't have cachers drive more than 161m without another smiley to rack up, right?

 

Both transportation officials and locals acknowledge there aren't any great hiking trails or reasons to park on the road.

 

Huh? What do hiking trails have to do with parking on the road? This whole section eluded me.

 

Hamilton and West agree that some geocachers are careless or disrespectful.

 

"I understand some geocachers were rushing to find as many as they could in the shortest amount of time and didn't follow the rules," Hamilton said. "There were some problems with people pulling out into traffic, especially in front of a snow plow. It is a shame that a few have ruined it for so many."

 

Here we are again. The whole point of the series was to find as many caches as you could. I'm willing to wager it was more than "a few" cachers who caused problems along the road. The very nature of the series encouraged this sort of behavior.

 

I've worked on emergency scenes where -- even with a big red trucks with tons of flashing lights, pylons, signs, etc. -- drivers don't pay attention and endanger your life. You figure along this stretch of "desolate" highway drivers are even less likely to expect people to be pulled over plus the cachers who are more interested in getting to the next cache than paying attention and you have a recipe for disaster.

 

Sorry, I just can't buy into the NDOT is evil tone of the article. The Little Ale-Inn has been there for years, long before this cache series, and I expect it will be there the next time I'm in Nevada and I drive the ET highway.

Link to comment

http://www.lvrj.com/...84.html?ref=984

 

Interesting read about the closure of the ET Highway power trail, comments from NDOT, tourist cachers, and local businesses...It seems that business owners are seeing an impact on their business already. Wow...to have business owners feel the economic impact already is impressive?

Thanks for posting the article. I'm getting the impression that the owner of the Little A'Le'Inn is quite a character, to say the least. smile.gif

 

Yesterday we attended a local event and we got to talk with a couple that had done the trail last year. They were sad that it was shut down as it was one of their more memorable and enjoyable experiences they've had in the several years they've geocached.

 

When the topic of safety came up they were a bit skeptical of the snow plow story and said the biggest safety issue on that road was the cows. The area is open rangeland, it's one big cow pasture, and anybody driving that road has to constantly keep their eyes peeled for cattle sitting or walking on the highway. It's particularly challenging at night as black cows will park on the warmer black pavement. So anybody experienced with driving on that highway are keeping an eye out for obstacles.

 

They also mentioned that some cachers they knew helped the CO's of the ET trail to clean up the caches along the highway. So no worries about abandoned geotrash.

 

The couple is going to do the Route 66 trail in a few weeks. They made a point of checking to make sure all was still good with that trail before putting out any money.

Link to comment

It's like an editorial and a regular article had a kid, and that kid obviously favors one parent over the other. So much for professional journalistic detachment.

 

Agreed. The article paints all cachers and caches with the same brush- the whiny, childish, over-entitled brush.

 

I'll say it again, if the power trail was the ONLY thing keeping their local economy alive then the decline of their economy was/is inevitable.

Link to comment

It's like an editorial and a regular article had a kid, and that kid obviously favors one parent over the other. So much for professional journalistic detachment.

 

Agreed. The article paints all cachers and caches with the same brush- the whiny, childish, over-entitled brush.

 

Just so I'm clear, in your opinion, which ones are the whiny, childish, self-entitled cachers? The ones that enjoyed finding the referenced caches or the ones that rail against them?
Link to comment

It's like an editorial and a regular article had a kid, and that kid obviously favors one parent over the other. So much for professional journalistic detachment.

 

Agreed. The article paints all cachers and caches with the same brush- the whiny, childish, over-entitled brush.

 

Just so I'm clear, in your opinion, which ones are the whiny, childish, self-entitled cachers? The ones that enjoyed finding the referenced caches or the ones that rail against them?

 

:blink: Huh? He said that the article paints them that way... not that they are whiny, childish, self-entitled cachers in his opinion. I thought you were the one that was always telling others that they need to read more carefully.

Link to comment

It's like an editorial and a regular article had a kid, and that kid obviously favors one parent over the other. So much for professional journalistic detachment.

 

Agreed. The article paints all cachers and caches with the same brush- the whiny, childish, over-entitled brush.

 

Just so I'm clear, in your opinion, which ones are the whiny, childish, self-entitled cachers? The ones that enjoyed finding the referenced caches or the ones that rail against them?

 

My post doesn't say what you think it says. :P

Link to comment

I am sure that the Inn at Rachel will miss our business, but it is sad to read cachers state that they no longer have reason to visit Southern Nevada. Some of the best caches I have done are there, in some amazing places, with plenty of numbers for everyone.

 

Still, now that professional darts has pulled out of the state - perhaps a victim of the cost of bringing prime time television crews and the top players in the world from Europe - I have less reason to go there myself. So perhaps it is a matter of priorities.

Link to comment

I'll say it again, if the power trail was the ONLY thing keeping their local economy alive then the decline of their economy was/is inevitable.

Agreed. Any business model that is dependent upon 1000 film cans strewn along a highway has already failed at a very basic level. What saddens me the most is not that some goober of a "journalist" (to use the term loosely) got the facts wrong, but rather, that geocachers who know better support the twisted version of reality posted by said "journalist".

Link to comment

definitely an interesting read. Even if she got the facts wrong in some cases pretty badly, seems to be the most effort to try and write a serious article about a geocaching niche issue that I have seen. Whats her next story to be about, folks traveling around the state doing the Nevada Delorme? (and no, I do not know if there is a Nevada Delorme, but you get the idea)

Edited by lamoracke
Link to comment

I'll say it again, if the power trail was the ONLY thing keeping their local economy alive then the decline of their economy was/is inevitable.

Agreed. Any business model that is dependent upon 1000 film cans strewn along a highway has already failed at a very basic level. What saddens me the most is not that some goober of a "journalist" (to use the term loosely) got the facts wrong, but rather, that geocachers who know better support the twisted version of reality posted by said "journalist".

I suppose that you can always criticize the economy that relies on some business you don't like. There are plenty who would complain that Las Vegas is dependant on gambling.

 

Geocaching may make up on a tiny part of any economy but in some rural areas this can still be a significant benefit. Groundspeak is all to happy to tout the local tourist boards that promote caching vacations and the state and national parks that have geocaching programs to promote visitation to the parks. I think there is a problem if a geocache needs to pass the Clan Riffster/Castle Mischief test before you can claim that geocaching promotes tourism or economic activity.

 

While some people seem vehimently opposed to what they call repetative numbers caching, it seems obvious that there are many geocacher who enjoy finding these kinds of caches. Outside of whether these trails promote unsafe or reckless behavior, the fact is they result in many geocacher planning trips to find these caches. These geocachers bought food and lodging, contributing to the local economy. If some were also causing problems for the state transportation department, then there is a tradeoff that needs to be made by the authorities to determine what kind of geocaching is appropriate for this area.

Link to comment

I was one of the last groups out there on the E.T. Highway run and we stopped at the Little Ale'inn to get a bite to eat. I really felt bad for them. This whole time they thought everything was getting worked out and we had to tell them that there was a group coming by the next day pulling all of the caches. While we was waiting for our lunch, they was telling us that they ordered 100 pathtags to sell to cachers who was coming in. They hadn't gotten the order yet so they lost out on selling them for the Highway hunters. They was having such a great flow in buisness that they haven't had in along time. I hope cachers still go out for the Alien head caches since it starts next to the town.

Link to comment

You have got to remember that some cachers like to cache more than three times a year and with the on going gas prices going higher every week/day, they sometimes enjoy getting out and doing a long cache run like the E.T Highway was so you can feel a little better for all the money you just spent on gas finding little plastic containers. 100 dollars in gas divided by 1021 caches = 10 cents a caches. Pretty good investment. I spent less than 100 dollars in gas so it was even a better investment that I will do again and again.

Link to comment

Power trail caches will never ever promote healthy geocaching practices. No matter how much you want to blame the few bad apples. It is the power trail style caching that promotes bad behavior and practices in many ways and gives other styles of geocaching a bad name and can lead to further regulations and restrictions. I do not like the style, but I am more concerned about ramifications. I think brianstat said it very well in another thread "Powertrails take a low visibility/low impact hobby and make it high visibility/high impact" Which is not a good thing in my opinion.

What if NDOT decided to ban caching on their lands in the whole state because of this. I can guarantee you that it was at least discussed in meetings. And yes, I know a few on here will question the guarantee, but I've heard rumblings of that very thing on podcasts and it would be naive to think that it wasn't at least brought up, even if they ultimately decide not to. Geocaching doesn't need that kind of scrutiny.

There are many other types of hides and practices that are not good, but they are not nearly as visible on that scale. Just like parking lot LPC's. Years ago there may have been 2 in a town and they got visited a dozen times, now there may be 20, and they may get visited 40 times. It is not more of a bad practice now, than it was then, but 24 total visits compared to 800 total visits a year just increases the issues.

Geocaching is a unique sport, where growth is not a good thing. I don't have the answer, and I'm torn on many issues myself. When I first started, I enjoyed the urban micro under the noses of the muggles. It was part of the fun. Now, with the explosion of them and numbers of cachers, and a larger percentage of cachers being less commited (monetarily at least. Cost of GPS's used to weed out some of the seagulls), I don't think they are very good for the hobby. I still like a nicely done urban micro in a appropriate area, but they are few and far between.

Link to comment

 

While some people seem vehimently opposed to what they call repetative numbers caching, it seems obvious that there are many geocacher who enjoy finding these kinds of caches.

 

The fact that some geocachers considering repetitive numbers caching fun is hardly a compelling argument for the proliferation of power trails without a consideration of the negative impact that they can have on the game.

 

I can think of numerous activities enjoyed by groups of people that the participant consider to be fun that also have other groups of people that are vehement about the nature of that activity.

 

Anyone that lives near a college campus has most likely been witness to excessive alcohol consumption, and the students that do so will probably tell you that they have a lot of fun doing it. Ask a parent of a student that's died of alcohol poisoning due to binge drinking and I suspect that you're going to get a strong opinion about drinking alcohol.

 

There are some people that consider recreational drug use fun.

 

There are some people that consider bullying fun.

 

There are some people that think vandalism is fun.

 

In many instances "having fun" comes with the expense of consequences to themselves or others that should not be ignored.

Link to comment

 

While some people seem vehimently opposed to what they call repetative numbers caching, it seems obvious that there are many geocacher who enjoy finding these kinds of caches.

 

The fact that some geocachers considering repetitive numbers caching fun is hardly a compelling argument for the proliferation of power trails without a consideration of the negative impact that they can have on the game.

 

I can think of numerous activities enjoyed by groups of people that the participant consider to be fun that also have other groups of people that are vehement about the nature of that activity.

 

Anyone that lives near a college campus has most likely been witness to excessive alcohol consumption, and the students that do so will probably tell you that they have a lot of fun doing it. Ask a parent of a student that's died of alcohol poisoning due to binge drinking and I suspect that you're going to get a strong opinion about drinking alcohol.

 

There are some people that consider recreational drug use fun.

 

There are some people that consider bullying fun.

 

There are some people that think vandalism is fun.

 

In many instances "having fun" comes with the expense of consequences to themselves or others that should not be ignored.

 

Even people telling others how they should or shouldn't cache is fun.

 

Snowball fights are fun until someones gets a eye put out. ;)

 

Edited for the word how not who.

Edited by joranda
Link to comment

I was one of the last groups out there on the E.T. Highway run and we stopped at the Little Ale'inn to get a bite to eat. I really felt bad for them. This whole time they thought everything was getting worked out and we had to tell them that there was a group coming by the next day pulling all of the caches. While we was waiting for our lunch, they was telling us that they ordered 100 pathtags to sell to cachers who was coming in. They hadn't gotten the order yet so they lost out on selling them for the Highway hunters. They was having such a great flow in buisness that they haven't had in along time. I hope cachers still go out for the Alien head caches since it starts next to the town.

 

You didn't happen to have a run in with a snow plow?

Link to comment

What if NDOT decided to ban caching on their lands in the whole state because of this. I can guarantee you that it was at least discussed in meetings. And yes, I know a few on here will question the guarantee, but I've heard rumblings of that very thing on podcasts and it would be naive to think that it wasn't at least brought up, even if they ultimately decide not to. Geocaching doesn't need that kind of scrutiny.

If NDOT banned caches on their lands then you would not have any roadside caches in Nevada. You would still have plenty of places to hide caches where you need to hike to, or on dirt roads in BLM areas. And you'd have plenty of places in towns and cities, including LPCs in parking lots. Any one particular agency banning caches is not the end of the world.

 

However, NDOT did not ban caches, dispite your guarantee that they discussed it. (Were you or any of those who reported this in their meetings? Guarantee is a strong word for speculation - even if in your opinion they would be naive if they didn't consider it). What I have seen was an effort on the part of NDOT to try an find a way to ensure that caches are placed a safe distance off the highway. It seems they are not interested in banning geocaches, after all their employees want to be able to get ice in their soda. The geocachers who hid this trail assumed that a rural highway that gets very little traffic and where the cattle can walk right onto the highway would be a good place where cachers could stop and safely retrieve the caches. Apparently, there were sections of the road where this assumption was wrong and several incidents that got brought to NDOT's attention. It even seems that initially there was some attempt to simply move the caches in these sections, but eventually NDOT decided that asking for the whole trail to be archived was easier. In fact, the Groundspeak policy of immediately archiving caches when a land owner or agency complains has worked time and again to demonstrate that if a geocache causes a problem, or is even perceived to cause a problem, it will be archived, and removed if necessary.

 

We can all wish for the days when geocaching was under the radar. This is not the case anymore; the clock can't be turned back. This is a popular activity and with the availability of smart phone apps, it is now mainstream. It is also now a fact that geocaching, especially in rural areas, can have a significant economic impact. There will be cases, no matter what changes are made to the guidelines or the review process, that will get scrutiny. It is important that agencies know that they can work with Groundspeak and local geocaching organizations to correct problems when they happen.

Link to comment

100 dollars in gas divided by 1021 caches = 10 cents a caches. Pretty good investment. I spent less than 100 dollars in gas so it was even a better investment that I will do again and again.

 

The moment I start gauging my caching experiance on the "investment" I make in a tank of gas (using the "cents a caches" ratio) is the moment that I archive my caches and throw my GPRr into the lake.

Edited by Castle Mischief
Link to comment

 

While some people seem vehimently opposed to what they call repetative numbers caching, it seems obvious that there are many geocacher who enjoy finding these kinds of caches.

 

The fact that some geocachers considering repetitive numbers caching fun is hardly a compelling argument for the proliferation of power trails without a consideration of the negative impact that they can have on the game.

 

I can think of numerous activities enjoyed by groups of people that the participant consider to be fun that also have other groups of people that are vehement about the nature of that activity.

 

Anyone that lives near a college campus has most likely been witness to excessive alcohol consumption, and the students that do so will probably tell you that they have a lot of fun doing it. Ask a parent of a student that's died of alcohol poisoning due to binge drinking and I suspect that you're going to get a strong opinion about drinking alcohol.

 

There are some people that consider recreational drug use fun.

 

There are some people that consider bullying fun.

 

There are some people that think vandalism is fun.

 

In many instances "having fun" comes with the expense of consequences to themselves or others that should not be ignored.

I think I'll give Carlos Estevez a call and see when he wants to do the Route 66 power trail.

Link to comment

 

Snowball fights are fun until someones gets a eye put out. ;)

 

 

I live in Ithaca so know a thing or two about snowball fights.

 

A month ago or so the second annual Cornell Snowball fight took place. Here's page with a few photos showing some of the action. However, the harmless fun didn't last...Here's an article describing what went down (warning, article contains profanity).

 

There's also a youtube video or two describing the action (search for Cornell Snow Fight).

Link to comment

100 dollars in gas divided by 1021 caches = 10 cents a caches. Pretty good investment. I spent less than 100 dollars in gas so it was even a better investment that I will do again and again.

 

The moment I start gauging my caching experiance on the "investment" I make in a tank of gas (using the "cents a caches" ratio) is the moment that I archive my caches and throw my GPRr into the lake.

While I don't track my milage to caches ratio, I do half way keep track of hours of amusment from caching in relation to money spent on the GPS, maps and membership.

Link to comment

I guess the fact that everyone is taking their money to California really shows "it's all about the numbers" and not the scenery and fun. You'd get the fun and scenery in Nevada. Just not the big numbers any more.

 

Riiiight. Nevada has so much more to see than California. [/sarcasm] :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Power trail caches will never ever promote healthy geocaching practices. No matter how much you want to blame the few bad apples. It is the power trail style caching that promotes bad behavior and practices in many ways and gives other styles of geocaching a bad name and can lead to further regulations and restrictions. I do not like the style, but I am more concerned about ramifications. I think brianstat said it very well in another thread "Powertrails take a low visibility/low impact hobby and make it high visibility/high impact" Which is not a good thing in my opinion.

What if NDOT decided to ban caching on their lands in the whole state because of this. I can guarantee you that it was at least discussed in meetings. And yes, I know a few on here will question the guarantee, but I've heard rumblings of that very thing on podcasts and it would be naive to think that it wasn't at least brought up, even if they ultimately decide not to. Geocaching doesn't need that kind of scrutiny.

There are many other types of hides and practices that are not good, but they are not nearly as visible on that scale. Just like parking lot LPC's. Years ago there may have been 2 in a town and they got visited a dozen times, now there may be 20, and they may get visited 40 times. It is not more of a bad practice now, than it was then, but 24 total visits compared to 800 total visits a year just increases the issues.

Geocaching is a unique sport, where growth is not a good thing. I don't have the answer, and I'm torn on many issues myself. When I first started, I enjoyed the urban micro under the noses of the muggles. It was part of the fun. Now, with the explosion of them and numbers of cachers, and a larger percentage of cachers being less commited (monetarily at least. Cost of GPS's used to weed out some of the seagulls), I don't think they are very good for the hobby. I still like a nicely done urban micro in a appropriate area, but they are few and far between.

You raise some interesting points. Yes power trails should be banned because it is bad for the sport. Urban caches should be banned because it is a cause of bomb scars and is bad for the sport. Caches in the woods should be banned because it leads to wanton destruction of the plant life and brings focus on caching. We won't even start on the terror it causes the wildlife. Caches in the deserts should be banned because the few bad apples actually drive their cars or worse go roaring around in their ATVs and brings focus on caching. Actually now that I think about it there is not one place where a cache can be hidden that does not bring scrutiny to geocaching. Perhaps the best thing at this point to avoid any more harm to the activity is declare a moratorium on any new hides and aggressively archive the less desirable hides and any that have the slightest maintenance issues. As the number of caches dwindle the impact and scrutiny will dwindle as will the number of cachers. In a couple years the activity will again be unnoticed and for the few remaining participants a fun activity again.

Link to comment

You raise some interesting points. Yes power trails should be banned because it is bad for the sport. Urban caches should be banned because it is a cause of bomb scars and is bad for the sport. Caches in the woods should be banned because it leads to wanton destruction of the plant life and brings focus on caching. We won't even start on the terror it causes the wildlife. Caches in the deserts should be banned because the few bad apples actually drive their cars or worse go roaring around in their ATVs and brings focus on caching. Actually now that I think about it there is not one place where a cache can be hidden that does not bring scrutiny to geocaching. Perhaps the best thing at this point to avoid any more harm to the activity is declare a moratorium on any new hides and aggressively archive the less desirable hides and any that have the slightest maintenance issues. As the number of caches dwindle the impact and scrutiny will dwindle as will the number of cachers. In a couple years the activity will again be unnoticed and for the few remaining participants a fun activity again.

Well stated.

 

Fact is, as much as it is a big part of our lives, it's hardly a blip on the radar of general society. Even those who've heard of it, know little about it and have no real opinion on the subject. As for those most impacted by the ET trail, the locals approved of the cache as it brought tourist dollars to an economically depressed area. (Based on statements by those in local businesses and comments from the Nye County commissioners.)

 

You all may now continue with your sisyphean debate on power trails...again.

Link to comment

I suppose that you can always criticize the economy that relies on some business you don't like.

And I suppose that you can always post a disjointed, rambling, overly long and mostly irrelevant statement defending poor caching practices.

For decades, the Little A'Le'Inn followed reasonable business practices, reducing their staff to match seasonal conditions.

Recently, they saw a small increase in traffic, and decided to keep their doors open for the normally closed season.

Now, things have returned to normal, and the owners of the Little A'Le'Inn are gnashing their collective teeth over "lost" income?

Really?

Link to comment

Well the Attorney General can determine if encroachment permits will solve the problem or not, the problem is solved, the goose is dead and the gold left the silver state.

Encroachment permits are for encroachments in the right of way. No permits = no permission for the E.T. trail. How unexpected, especially in light of Miss Jenn's widely ignored statement regarding obtaining permission. But permits cost money, so yes there might be a pot of gold at the end of this rainbow after all.

Link to comment

I suppose that you can always criticize the economy that relies on some business you don't like.

And I suppose that you can always post a disjointed, rambling, overly long and mostly irrelevant statement defending poor caching practices.

For decades, the Little A'Le'Inn followed reasonable business practices, reducing their staff to match seasonal conditions.

Recently, they saw a small increase in traffic, and decided to keep their doors open for the normally closed season.

Now, things have returned to normal, and the owners of the Little A'Le'Inn are gnashing their collective teeth over "lost" income?

Really?

You realize that we are still recovering from the worst recession in decades and the gas prices are recently skyrocketing.

 

I doubt that things are "back to normal". The businesses in Rachel - which presumably depend on traffic using the ET highway - have likely seen some tough times recently. The added traffic from geocachers doing the power trail must have seemed like a godsend to some of these businesses. This part of Nevada is not like central Florida. The highway is mostly used by truckers avoiding the interstate (and the cops enforcing speeding laws), ranchers, extraterristrial enthusiasts, workers from area 51, and NDOT workers stopping for ice for their soda. My guess is that the economy has taken its toll on the "normal" traffic. Looking for ways to increase business is not an unreasonable business practice, nor is the decision to retain staff to support this new business or the decision to stock geocaching supplies that they might sell to these new customers.

 

But if people are all behaving like idiots and crashing into snowplows then who needs them as customers? :unsure:

Link to comment

100 dollars in gas divided by 1021 caches = 10 cents a caches. Pretty good investment. I spent less than 100 dollars in gas so it was even a better investment that I will do again and again.

 

The moment I start gauging my caching experiance on the "investment" I make in a tank of gas (using the "cents a caches" ratio) is the moment that I archive my caches and throw my GPRr into the lake.

 

So, do I need to hurry up and plan a trip to Hartselle this weekend, or do I have some time? :grin:

Link to comment

100 dollars in gas divided by 1021 caches = 10 cents a caches. Pretty good investment. I spent less than 100 dollars in gas so it was even a better investment that I will do again and again.

 

The moment I start gauging my caching experiance on the "investment" I make in a tank of gas (using the "cents a caches" ratio) is the moment that I archive my caches and throw my GPRr into the lake.

 

So, do I need to hurry up and plan a trip to Hartselle this weekend, or do I have some time? :grin:

 

You won't need to go that far. My southern-most one is near Cullman. :P

 

But if you know you'll be caching up this way give me shout and I'll let you know if my schedule is open! There are plenty of caches in the area that I haven't seen.

Edited by Castle Mischief
Link to comment

I suppose that you can always criticize the economy that relies on some business you don't like.

And I suppose that you can always post a disjointed, rambling, overly long and mostly irrelevant statement defending poor caching practices.

For decades, the Little A'Le'Inn followed reasonable business practices, reducing their staff to match seasonal conditions.

Recently, they saw a small increase in traffic, and decided to keep their doors open for the normally closed season.

Now, things have returned to normal, and the owners of the Little A'Le'Inn are gnashing their collective teeth over "lost" income?

Really?

 

I believe that, in one of the other threads, that someone said the Little A'Le'Inn upgraded their rooms once they saw the increased traffic, as well. Of course, they probably needed to do it anyway, but they figured they'd have the income to make it worthwhile.

Link to comment

You raise some interesting points. Yes power trails should be banned because it is bad for the sport. Urban caches should be banned because it is a cause of bomb scars and is bad for the sport. Caches in the woods should be banned because it leads to wanton destruction of the plant life and brings focus on caching. We won't even start on the terror it causes the wildlife. Caches in the deserts should be banned because the few bad apples actually drive their cars or worse go roaring around in their ATVs and brings focus on caching. Actually now that I think about it there is not one place where a cache can be hidden that does not bring scrutiny to geocaching. Perhaps the best thing at this point to avoid any more harm to the activity is declare a moratorium on any new hides and aggressively archive the less desirable hides and any that have the slightest maintenance issues. As the number of caches dwindle the impact and scrutiny will dwindle as will the number of cachers. In a couple years the activity will again be unnoticed and for the few remaining participants a fun activity again.

 

I saw that response coming from as far away as I can see most hides these days. About a mile. As I've stated earlier. It shouldn't be all or nothing as many on here try to make it. Groundspeak should make rules of moderation. Although banning powertrails is my preference for many many reasons. I also stated that I'm torn and understand that it is a catch 22 type situation. I don't have the answer, just adding my thoughts.

Edited by M 5
Link to comment

As for those most impacted by the ET trail, the locals approved of the cache as it brought tourist dollars to an economically depressed area.

 

Newsflash: the whole country is an economically depressed area.

 

Relatively speaking, there's a whale of difference between Roswell & (pick a city) Houston. Even in this economy.

 

In the last census, the per capita income in Roswell was $14,589 which was about a 1/3rd less than the national average.

Link to comment

As for those most impacted by the ET trail, the locals approved of the cache as it brought tourist dollars to an economically depressed area.

 

Newsflash: the whole country is an economically depressed area.

 

Relatively speaking, there's a whale of difference between Roswell & (pick a city) Houston. Even in this economy.

 

In the last census, the per capita income in Roswell was $14,589 which was about a 1/3rd less than the national average.

whoosh

Link to comment

As for those most impacted by the ET trail, the locals approved of the cache as it brought tourist dollars to an economically depressed area.

 

Newsflash: the whole country is an economically depressed area.

 

Relatively speaking, there's a whale of difference between Roswell & (pick a city) Houston. Even in this economy.

 

In the last census, the per capita income in Roswell was $14,589 which was about a 1/3rd less than the national average.

 

So what you're saying is that there would hard times in Roswell Rachel (made harder by the national economy) regardless of the situation regarding the ET trail? What happened to all those natural wonders and vistas that everybody was coming to the ET trail to see? Did they roll up the sunsets along with the film canisters?

Edited by Castle Mischief
Link to comment

As for those most impacted by the ET trail, the locals approved of the cache as it brought tourist dollars to an economically depressed area.

 

Newsflash: the whole country is an economically depressed area.

 

Relatively speaking, there's a whale of difference between Roswell & (pick a city) Houston. Even in this economy.

 

In the last census, the per capita income in Roswell was $14,589 which was about a 1/3rd less than the national average.

whoosh

 

You appear to have sprung a leak.

Link to comment

As for those most impacted by the ET trail, the locals approved of the cache as it brought tourist dollars to an economically depressed area.

 

Newsflash: the whole country is an economically depressed area.

 

Relatively speaking, there's a whale of difference between Roswell & (pick a city) Houston. Even in this economy.

 

In the last census, the per capita income in Roswell was $14,589 which was about a 1/3rd less than the national average.

Just a hunch - but the cost of a house in Rachel is likely a little lot less than the average house in Houston. As well as a few other things. Cost of living is as important as income.

Link to comment

As for those most impacted by the ET trail, the locals approved of the cache as it brought tourist dollars to an economically depressed area.

 

Newsflash: the whole country is an economically depressed area.

 

Relatively speaking, there's a whale of difference between Roswell & (pick a city) Houston. Even in this economy.

 

In the last census, the per capita income in Roswell was $14,589 which was about a 1/3rd less than the national average.

 

I thought the ET trail was in Nevada (Rachel), not New Mexico (Roswell).

 

John

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...