Jump to content

Geocache Sites


Followers 2

Recommended Posts

Is it appropriate to report illegal geocache sites? Getting out there on the hunt one gets to see some of the dirty sides to geocaching. I would commonly come across geocaches on properties that are posted next to signs Will Prosecute! No Trespass and also cache sites that tend to destroy the surrounding vegetation, bring trash to the area. I do the cach in trash out thing, but what fun is there to see this all the time. Should these sites be shut down; or is the Find more important, and move on? I shut one cache down for the the past reasons, and I was made to feel like I just killed somebody, or left a cult! Tired of the profanity thrown my way for doing the right thing. Perhaps it's not worthwhile to clean up the sport.

Link to comment

Is it appropriate to report illegal geocache sites? Getting out there on the hunt one gets to see some of the dirty sides to geocaching. I would commonly come across geocaches on properties that are posted next to signs Will Prosecute! No Trespass and also cache sites that tend to destroy the surrounding vegetation, bring trash to the area. I do the cach in trash out thing, but what fun is there to see this all the time. Should these sites be shut down; or is the Find more important, and move on? I shut one cache down for the the past reasons, and I was made to feel like I just killed somebody, or left a cult! Tired of the profanity thrown my way for doing the right thing. Perhaps it's not worthwhile to clean up the sport.

If it is the right thing to do, it is the right thing to to. If you don't want the bad rap, just don't log the find, and then send a private e-mail to the reviewer that published the cache explaining your concerns.

Link to comment

Taking grief is one of the benefits of doing what needs to be done.

 

Profanity and harassing emails? Well, there is also a mechanism to handle that.

 

Granted, these things are not everybody's cup-of-tea (probably nobody's cup-of-tea). But if the geocaching community doesn't police itself, who will? You don't want to answer that question, BTW!

 

It's sort of like having a family members' drivers license revoked because they are no longer capable of driving safely and are a danger to themselves and others. Quite frankly, it ****s (family friendly).

 

Andronicus provided the possible solution. Try that route.

 

Just what is bad about leaving a cult? Isn't that generally considered a good thing? I know, I know, it makes you a Judas.

Link to comment

if the site is truly illegal then you are doing a service to all geocachers. If you feel that ire has come upon you, you can PM the reviewer directly by finding out the original reviewer that approved the cache at the bottom of all the logs that way its done anonymously.

Last thing I want on a fun day is to get picked up by a POd property owner.

Link to comment

The guidelines are there for the most part to protect the long term viability of geocaching. Caches that violate them could jeopardize geocaching for everybody. If you see caches that violate the guidelines or have the potential to harm the image of geocaching, you'd be doing the geocaching community a favor if you reported it.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

If you feel the cache violates any guidelines just post a Needs Archived log. If you want to report it without having your name attached email the reviewer.

 

There are cache behind No Trespassing signs that have permission. The owner of the property may be okay with people geocaching but does not want others back there.

Link to comment

also cache sites that tend to destroy the surrounding vegetation, bring trash to the area.

 

You think a site is bad because it might "bring trash to the area"? I think every site could be considered bad using that criteria.

 

I'd say report caches that are illegally placed on private property, but let the rest be. At most, I'd put a comment in your log about why you don't think it's a good site.

Link to comment

Feel free to post an NA log on any cache that violates the guidelines but be prepared to point out which guideline is being violated. The world is filled with angsty mean people - not too surprising that some of them become Geocachers. Disregard the negativity and properly report anybody that crosses the line.

Link to comment

Is it appropriate to report illegal geocache sites? Getting out there on the hunt one gets to see some of the dirty sides to geocaching. I would commonly come across geocaches on properties that are posted next to signs Will Prosecute! No Trespass and also cache sites that tend to destroy the surrounding vegetation, bring trash to the area. I do the cach in trash out thing, but what fun is there to see this all the time. Should these sites be shut down; or is the Find more important, and move on? I shut one cache down for the the past reasons, and I was made to feel like I just killed somebody, or left a cult! Tired of the profanity thrown my way for doing the right thing. Perhaps it's not worthwhile to clean up the sport.

 

inquiring minds need to know

 

so you've been caching for 2 years and its only now that you are seeing and become concerned about this type of hides?

 

you can still do the right thing without making enemies, just use a more diplomatic approach, contact the reviewer that published the "offending" cache and explain the issues

 

perhaps choosing a less "aggravating" vocabular instead of the "illegal" caches and "shutting down" might be a better approach too

 

in any case afaic there is nothing wrong with a cache placed next to a "No Trespassing" sign...its obviously off the property

Edited by t4e
Link to comment

Caches don't bring trash to the area cachers do.

 

This is the part of the original post that I have to take issue with. I have never, ever seen this. I have seen caches hidden in places that attract trash from non-cachers, but those areas attracted trash before the cache was there, and will continue to after the cache has been removed.

 

I don't personally know of any cachers that litter, and I know quite a few cachers. There are always exceptions, I'm sure, but I don't think litterers tend to be the sort of people that are attracted to geocaching, in general, If you posted a NA log on a cache just because you found trash there, I would imagine you would not be a very popular guy.

 

However... I must say this: We, as cachers, can post Needs Archived logs. We as cachers, though, can not archive a cache. It takes a reviewer to do that, and even then, there is an appeals process.

Link to comment

I need to rephrase that. I didnt mean that cachers bring trash. As a group we are very good about cleaning up. I meant that just because there is a cache and trash in the same location doesn't mean the cache caused it. I agree that using illegal and shutdown is inflammatory makes the poster seem like he is going out of his way to see problems

Link to comment

I need to rephrase that. I didnt mean that cachers bring trash. As a group we are very good about cleaning up. I meant that just because there is a cache and trash in the same location doesn't mean the cache caused it. I agree that using illegal and shutdown is inflammatory makes the poster seem like he is going out of his way to see problems

 

You're referring to a cache being in a trash-strewn area?

 

Generally that's seen as a poor choice for a hiding place, but it can be relative. I've seen some fantastic hides on abandoned structures (dangerous, but terrain reflected it) and I've seen some poor hides in literal garbage dumps.

 

Be diplomatic in how you approach that issue with the CO. If they've received a number of complaints that the cache area is poor for a cache, it's up to them to archive it - they may or may not. If it's a single complaint, chances are that may not be enough. As finders, it's up to us to read previous logs to determine if it's a cache worth going after. This can become a little muddy with puzzle caches as we may not be entirely sure of what the GZ is like from previous logs.

Link to comment

I need to rephrase that. I didnt mean that cachers bring trash. As a group we are very good about cleaning up. I meant that just because there is a cache and trash in the same location doesn't mean the cache caused it. I agree that using illegal and shutdown is inflammatory makes the poster seem like he is going out of his way to see problems

 

You're referring to a cache being in a trash-strewn area?

 

Generally that's seen as a poor choice for a hiding place, but it can be relative. I've seen some fantastic hides on abandoned structures (dangerous, but terrain reflected it) and I've seen some poor hides in literal garbage dumps.

And while a poor choice for a hiding place may be grounds for walking away, it is not grounds for a Needs Archived log.
Link to comment

Hopefully, TPTB will change the name of the Needs Archived log to Needs Reviewer Attention.

 

If you see a questionable cache you shouldn't have to think it is your responsibility to get it shut down. Instead it is your responsibility to report it so that a reviewer can work with the cache owner to resolve any guidelines issues.

 

Needs Reviewer Attention does not necessarily result in the cache being archived. The reviewer may decide there is no issue to address, or the reviewer may contact the cache owner and resolve the issue simply by having the cache owner provide an explanation. In many cases, the reviewer might disable or sometimes temporarily archive the cache while the owner makes the changes to bring the cache into compliance with the guidelines.

Link to comment

And, I have seen a number of 'formerly private, posted' areas that are now public proerty, and no one took down the No respassing signs. The best was the NJ Department of Environmental Protection sign posted ON the no trespassing sign.

 

This is pretty common down here in the southern part of New Jersey as well. A number of former gravel mining operations have become state property as green acres sites or expansions of nearby Wildlife Management Areas. They all have old "No Trespassing" signs, fences and other things left over from their commercial days. The state just doesn't have the resources to go pull them all down. Often the CO will mention them in the cache description but there are a lot of cachers that don't read the cache page and trouble ensues.

That said, even in a case of clear violation of the placement guidelines, I have sent a note to my reviewer instead of logging the N/A. He's the one that will, as has been stated, make the final determination.

Link to comment

Hopefully, TPTB will change the name of the Needs Archived log to Needs Reviewer Attention.

 

If you see a questionable cache you shouldn't have to think it is your responsibility to get it shut down. Instead it is your responsibility to report it so that a reviewer can work with the cache owner to resolve any guidelines issues.

 

Needs Reviewer Attention does not necessarily result in the cache being archived. The reviewer may decide there is no issue to address, or the reviewer may contact the cache owner and resolve the issue simply by having the cache owner provide an explanation. In many cases, the reviewer might disable or sometimes temporarily archive the cache while the owner makes the changes to bring the cache into compliance with the guidelines.

I like this idea Toz. Let the reviewers decide after the problem has been brought to their attention. Will the NRA be anonymous or should it be logged on the cache page. Some cachers get MAD when they are reported.

Link to comment
I don't personally know of any cachers that litter, and I know quite a few cachers. There are always exceptions, I'm sure, but I don't think litterers tend to be the sort of people that are attracted to geocaching, in general, If you posted a NA log on a cache just because you found trash there, I would imagine you would not be a very popular guy.
I once left an empty Dunkin' Donuts cup at a cache location by accident. I set it down to retrieve the cache and completely forgot about it. Didn't realize it until I arrived at work. I confessed in the log that I posted.

 

Luckily someone else was out caching that morning as well, picked it up, and logged that they'd done so before I was able to go back out to clean up after myself.

Link to comment

Hopefully, TPTB will change the name of the Needs Archived log to Needs Reviewer Attention.

 

If you see a questionable cache you shouldn't have to think it is your responsibility to get it shut down. Instead it is your responsibility to report it so that a reviewer can work with the cache owner to resolve any guidelines issues.

 

Needs Reviewer Attention does not necessarily result in the cache being archived. The reviewer may decide there is no issue to address, or the reviewer may contact the cache owner and resolve the issue simply by having the cache owner provide an explanation. In many cases, the reviewer might disable or sometimes temporarily archive the cache while the owner makes the changes to bring the cache into compliance with the guidelines.

I like this idea Toz. Let the reviewers decide after the problem has been brought to their attention. Will the NRA be anonymous or should it be logged on the cache page. Some cachers get MAD when they are reported.

 

Anyone who likes the NRA idea should go and vote for it on the feedback site: http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/1237605-needs-archive

Link to comment

Hopefully, TPTB will change the name of the Needs Archived log to Needs Reviewer Attention.

 

If you see a questionable cache you shouldn't have to think it is your responsibility to get it shut down. Instead it is your responsibility to report it so that a reviewer can work with the cache owner to resolve any guidelines issues.

 

Needs Reviewer Attention does not necessarily result in the cache being archived. The reviewer may decide there is no issue to address, or the reviewer may contact the cache owner and resolve the issue simply by having the cache owner provide an explanation. In many cases, the reviewer might disable or sometimes temporarily archive the cache while the owner makes the changes to bring the cache into compliance with the guidelines.

I like this idea Toz. Let the reviewers decide after the problem has been brought to their attention. Will the NRA be anonymous or should it be logged on the cache page. Some cachers get MAD when they are reported.

 

Anyone who likes the NRA idea should go and vote for it on the feedback site: http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/1237605-needs-archive

Thanks I gave a couple votes.

Link to comment

Sometimes "Needs Archived" is the appropriate choice. I reported one last week where the owner was only active for a couple of weeks, almost three years ago. During that time he hid two caches (one in his own yard) and found one, and that was the end of his caching career. I don't think he's going to go maintain his cache, it truly needs to be archived (or adopted).

 

Hey, maybe a "Needs Adoption" option would work...

Link to comment

Sometimes "Needs Archived" is the appropriate choice. I reported one last week where the owner was only active for a couple of weeks, almost three years ago. During that time he hid two caches (one in his own yard) and found one, and that was the end of his caching career. I don't think he's going to go maintain his cache, it truly needs to be archived (or adopted).

 

Hey, maybe a "Needs Adoption" option would work...

 

Just curious. Was there actually something wrong with the cache, or did you post a NA because the owner quit the game?

Link to comment

Sometimes "Needs Archived" is the appropriate choice. I reported one last week where the owner was only active for a couple of weeks, almost three years ago. During that time he hid two caches (one in his own yard) and found one, and that was the end of his caching career. I don't think he's going to go maintain his cache, it truly needs to be archived (or adopted).

 

Hey, maybe a "Needs Adoption" option would work...

 

Just curious. Was there actually something wrong with the cache, or did you post a NA because the owner quit the game?

 

Well, I couldn't find the cache. I realize that it may in fact be there and I just couldn't find it (I did log a DNF before the "Needs Archived". But it has not been found since August of last year. The cache is this one....

 

GC1C8KF

 

Since I can't say for sure that the cache isn't there, was it appropriate for me to log a "Needs Archived"? Should I attempt to contact the owner? It just seems unlikely to me that he is much concerned about the status of his cache since he hasn't cached in 3 years (and then only for a few weeks). It just seems to me that given the evidence (no finds for an extended period, cache owner no longer active) that this cache should be considered abandoned and probably be archived.

Link to comment

Reading the string of responses. I have to agree that sending a concern NA to a reviewer is the best way to go. Years ago I would have no concern over questionable caches, sign the log, and move on; not reporting anything. I don't want to be a crusader to report bad caches, that's not where I want to go. After seeing a cache that could put the searching geocacher in jeoparty, or in trouble, I feel it's important to pass the word. Thank you for the responses.

Link to comment

Sometimes "Needs Archived" is the appropriate choice. I reported one last week where the owner was only active for a couple of weeks, almost three years ago. During that time he hid two caches (one in his own yard) and found one, and that was the end of his caching career. I don't think he's going to go maintain his cache, it truly needs to be archived (or adopted).

 

Hey, maybe a "Needs Adoption" option would work...

 

Just curious. Was there actually something wrong with the cache, or did you post a NA because the owner quit the game?

 

Well, I couldn't find the cache. I realize that it may in fact be there and I just couldn't find it (I did log a DNF before the "Needs Archived". But it has not been found since August of last year. The cache is this one....

 

GC1C8KF

 

Since I can't say for sure that the cache isn't there, was it appropriate for me to log a "Needs Archived"? Should I attempt to contact the owner? It just seems unlikely to me that he is much concerned about the status of his cache since he hasn't cached in 3 years (and then only for a few weeks). It just seems to me that given the evidence (no finds for an extended period, cache owner no longer active) that this cache should be considered abandoned and probably be archived.

 

With this particular cache I probably would have done the same thing. This is listed as a small. It looks like went missing sometime ago and someone took it upon themselves to replace it with a micro, probably in the wrong spot. A few found it, then another string of DNFs. The cache obviously has problems that will not be addressed by the owner. If a cache was in good condition, yet had an absentee owner, I would not want to see a NA posted for only that reason. That's what I was curious about.

Link to comment

With this particular cache I probably would have done the same thing. This is listed as a small. It looks like went missing sometime ago and someone took it upon themselves to replace it with a micro, probably in the wrong spot. A few found it, then another string of DNFs. The cache obviously has problems that will not be addressed by the owner. If a cache was in good condition, yet had an absentee owner, I would not want to see a NA posted for only that reason. That's what I was curious about.

 

Something of a side note, but I almost fell off the couch laughing when I read the early notes and realized that the original "cache" hidden by the CO was a plastic cup full of candy, covered with Saran Wrap held on with a rubber band.

 

And yeah, this is the sort of situation that absolutely warrants a polite public NA - it's crystal clear that it was questionable to begin with (and not just because of what was hidden), and that it's not going to be maintained.

Link to comment

Should I attempt to contact the owner? It just seems unlikely to me that he is much concerned about the status of his cache since he hasn't cached in 3 years (and then only for a few weeks).

 

He didn't even "cache for a few weeks". He found ONE cache. A bit later, he hid a cache in his own yard,logged it as found (saying it was an "awesome cache"), then immediately disabled it. :lol: He's the only person who ever "found" it, although some other poor soul went looking for it.

 

Check it out: Matts Yard=

Edited by cimawr
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...