Putting a cache on private land?

[Pup Patrol]

Just taking a guess here, but is this the cache in question?

http://coord.info/GC35EJQ

 

We found about half of these caches today, and plan to cache that area again tomorrow. This one was not one we found today, and knowing the nearby landowner's feelings, will be deleted from our list for tomorrow. Whether the gentleman in question is correct or not regarding the law, it bugs him. On the slip of paper that can be printed from the Groundspeak website and placed in a regular sized cache, there is some statement to the effect that "if there any problems, please contact (cache owner's name) to fix it." Knowing those rural roads, I can see why some of the folks out there might not be happy with the sudden increase in traffic.

 

It looks like slbens was the first finder of this cache, not the placer. I'm sure the people who placed these caches did so in good faith, and I'm guessing they'll address the issue once they know about it.

 

Personally we don't love caches right near someone's home, unless the cache owner lives there, but others may roll differently. We just returned from a long road trip that involved lots of 5 mile plus hikes with large altitude increases, so the easy caching today was welcome. We just aren't as young anymore as we'd like to think.

 

Good work finding the cache in question.

 

Why hasn't anyone posted a "Needs Archived" on that cache page?

 

Finders have posted their "found it" logs, but not "Needs Archived", after their encounter with the person claiming they are trespassing.

 

The land owner has posted threatening logs on the cache page, and said that the cache is destroyed. Yet, people still claimed finds.

 

What's up with that?

[TorgtheViking]

Just taking a guess here, but is this the cache in question?

http://coord.info/GC35EJQ

 

We found about half of these caches today, and plan to cache that area again tomorrow. This one was not one we found today, and knowing the nearby landowner's feelings, will be deleted from our list for tomorrow. Whether the gentleman in question is correct or not regarding the law, it bugs him. On the slip of paper that can be printed from the Groundspeak website and placed in a regular sized cache, there is some statement to the effect that "if there any problems, please contact (cache owner's name) to fix it." Knowing those rural roads, I can see why some of the folks out there might not be happy with the sudden increase in traffic.

 

It looks like slbens was the first finder of this cache, not the placer. I'm sure the people who placed these caches did so in good faith, and I'm guessing they'll address the issue once they know about it.

 

Personally we don't love caches right near someone's home, unless the cache owner lives there, but others may roll differently. We just returned from a long road trip that involved lots of 5 mile plus hikes with large altitude increases, so the easy caching today was welcome. We just aren't as young anymore as we'd like to think.

 

Good work finding the cache in question.

 

Why hasn't anyone posted a "Needs Archived" on that cache page?

 

Finders have posted their "found it" logs, but not "Needs Archived", after their encounter with the person claiming they are trespassing.

 

The land owner has posted threatening logs on the cache page, and said that the cache is destroyed. Yet, people still claimed finds.

 

What's up with that?

 

Very good work in finding the cache! As for people claiming finds? Perhaps there is a certain segment of us cachers that believe every cache desires a find. Naaah! We're all Golden.

[+dbrierley]

In Illinois as with most states, a person is guilty of trespassing only after they have been notified and given the opportunity to freely leave the property. The state code says a person is guilty of trespass only when he/she:

 

• "enters upon the land of another, after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner or occupant that such entry is forbidden;" or
• "remains upon the land of another, after receiving notice from the owner or occupant to depart."

The key point here is that generally in the US, it is not illegal to enter private land. It is only illegal to enter or remain knowingly, after having been notified. s:

 

This is not always true. In California it is an infraction to enter any land that is fenced, or properly posted without fencing, without regard to whether you are asked to leave. It can rise to a misdemeanor if you remain on land after being asked to leave. Even in Illinois, you can violate the law if "written notice forbidding such entry has been conspicuously posted or exhibited at the main entrance to such land or the forbidden part thereof." Therefore, a notice at the entrance will be deemed sufficient to provide you warning even if you enter by another way. And of course if you enter into an agricultural field or orchard . . .

 

It can be important to know the rules. A nearby cache was placed on private property, behind fenced land that was posted in part. I decided not to look for it in light of the above law. But other cachers did. Neither the cache owner or the reviewer took any interest in the problem, but it was archived after a run in with the angry property owner. Luckily, no one was arrested.

 

+1

 

Furthermore, it is important to note that entering private property and placing something on that property, such as a geocache or letterbox, are two different things. I doubt there is any legal defense for leaving something on private property without landowner permission.

[4wheelin_fool]

Just taking a guess here, but is this the cache in question?

http://coord.info/GC35EJQ

 

We found about half of these caches today, and plan to cache that area again tomorrow. This one was not one we found today, and knowing the nearby landowner's feelings, will be deleted from our list for tomorrow. Whether the gentleman in question is correct or not regarding the law, it bugs him. On the slip of paper that can be printed from the Groundspeak website and placed in a regular sized cache, there is some statement to the effect that "if there any problems, please contact (cache owner's name) to fix it." Knowing those rural roads, I can see why some of the folks out there might not be happy with the sudden increase in traffic.

 

It looks like slbens was the first finder of this cache, not the placer. I'm sure the people who placed these caches did so in good faith, and I'm guessing they'll address the issue once they know about it.

 

Personally we don't love caches right near someone's home, unless the cache owner lives there, but others may roll differently. We just returned from a long road trip that involved lots of 5 mile plus hikes with large altitude increases, so the easy caching today was welcome. We just aren't as young anymore as we'd like to think.

 

Good work finding the cache in question.

 

Why hasn't anyone posted a "Needs Archived" on that cache page?

 

Finders have posted their "found it" logs, but not "Needs Archived", after their encounter with the person claiming they are trespassing.

 

The land owner has posted threatening logs on the cache page, and said that the cache is destroyed. Yet, people still claimed finds.

 

What's up with that?

 

 

It seems that the landowner is irate.

 

And if it doesnt get archived soon with an apology, it may spawn a cache pirate.

[TorgtheViking]

Who would want to risk retalliation from other cachers by suggesting an "Archive". This cache is a hot potato. Need more details! As the CO says "If you see that one of them is missing, please feel free to place a new film can size container". Like this thread, the Cache is Immortal, it will never die! Cache On!

Edited October 22, 2011 by TorgtheViking

[knowschad]

I have contacted the owners of the suspected cache (I know them) and let them know about this thread. I'm not sure if they are interested in participating, or not, but thought they should know, at least. Somebody else has said that they notified the reviewer. I suspect this will be taken care of post-haste.

 

I will say that it appears to me that the cache may well be on private property at the entrance to this man's driveway, and should probably be archived even if not, given the landowner's feelings on the cache being there, but his attitude towards this, as well as the OP's attitude, could certainly stand some improvement as well.

Edited October 22, 2011 by knowschad

[Pup Patrol]

Who would want to risk retalliation from other cachers by suggesting an "Archive". This cache is a hot potato. Need more details! As the CO says "If you see that one of them is missing, please feel free to place a new film can size container". Like this thread, the Cache is Immortal, it will never die! Cache On!

 

 

Did you read the notes on the cache page from the person believed to be the land owner?

 

Retaliation from other cachers?????? Perhaps one should look at the big picture, instead of worrying about a smiley.

 

People are still logging finds for the cache that was supposed to have been "destroyed". People are still logging finds, even after 2 messages from the person believed to be the land owner.

 

10/20/2011

 

Do not bother looking for this cache on Norway RD and Green Acres RD any more,we have destroyed it and will continue to do so with the ones that are placed in or around this area,we do not appreciate the increased traffic,nor the disturbance of our privacy by strangers....KEEP OUT!!!!BE WARNED!!!!!! 7:29pm

 

10/21/2011

 

Trespassing is defined as An unlawful intrusion that interferes with one's person or property.25 ft from the centerline including mailboxes,fence posts,road signs and ditches are not public properties in Lindina township.I pay taxes for this property which makes it mine,the only people that have the right to be off the black top and on my property are people that work for utilities,Lindina township ,surveyors and law enforcement,anyone else is trespassing.Plain and simple....I don't appreciate 19+ strangers walking around on my land,learn the local laws.

 

The cacher who found it and encountered the land owner should have posted a "Needs Archived", in addition to their very detailed "found it" log:

 

10/20/2011

 

Truckin' away at these caches to accomplish the 100 caches across 3 states in one day challenge. So far on my adventure, I'd been questioned twice by people that happened to drive by when I was signing the log (mostly just stopping to see if I needed help and/or what I was doing). I usually take the opportunity to introduce people to the hobby and it has always been well-received. The first woman that questioned me was very interested and seemed almost excited about the fact that this cool thing was going on right in her own back yard. The second gentleman had heard of it and his son is an active member, so he found it interesting as well. Unfortunately, at this cache, I had a different experience. First of all, I was afraid this dog was going to bite me, so I was trying to finish up quickly, and then I was approached by "not welcome". It made me uncomfortable as I was all alone, so I just wanted to get back to my car quickly, but I explained to him what I was doing, and he wasn't amused by the extra "traffic" in "his" part of town. So, probably need to find a different intersection for #36. Sorry about that - sometimes I'm too friendly for my own good - I should have just avoided this muggle! SL TFTC!!

[TorgtheViking]

Who would want to risk retalliation from other cachers by suggesting an "Archive". This cache is a hot potato. Need more details! As the CO says "If you see that one of them is missing, please feel free to place a new film can size container". Like this thread, the Cache is Immortal, it will never die! Cache On!

 

 

Did you read the notes on the cache page from the person believed to be the land owner?

 

Retaliation from other cachers?????? Perhaps one should look at the big picture, instead of worrying about a smiley.

 

People are still logging finds for the cache that was supposed to have been "destroyed". People are still logging finds, even after 2 messages from the person believed to be the land owner.

 

10/20/2011

 

Do not bother looking for this cache on Norway RD and Green Acres RD any more,we have destroyed it and will continue to do so with the ones that are placed in or around this area,we do not appreciate the increased traffic,nor the disturbance of our privacy by strangers....KEEP OUT!!!!BE WARNED!!!!!! 7:29pm

 

10/21/2011

 

Trespassing is defined as An unlawful intrusion that interferes with one's person or property.25 ft from the centerline including mailboxes,fence posts,road signs and ditches are not public properties in Lindina township.I pay taxes for this property which makes it mine,the only people that have the right to be off the black top and on my property are people that work for utilities,Lindina township ,surveyors and law enforcement,anyone else is trespassing.Plain and simple....I don't appreciate 19+ strangers walking around on my land,learn the local laws.

 

The cacher who found it and encountered the land owner should have posted a "Needs Archived", in addition to their very detailed "found it" log:

 

10/20/2011

 

Truckin' away at these caches to accomplish the 100 caches across 3 states in one day challenge. So far on my adventure, I'd been questioned twice by people that happened to drive by when I was signing the log (mostly just stopping to see if I needed help and/or what I was doing). I usually take the opportunity to introduce people to the hobby and it has always been well-received. The first woman that questioned me was very interested and seemed almost excited about the fact that this cool thing was going on right in her own back yard. The second gentleman had heard of it and his son is an active member, so he found it interesting as well. Unfortunately, at this cache, I had a different experience. First of all, I was afraid this dog was going to bite me, so I was trying to finish up quickly, and then I was approached by "not welcome". It made me uncomfortable as I was all alone, so I just wanted to get back to my car quickly, but I explained to him what I was doing, and he wasn't amused by the extra "traffic" in "his" part of town. So, probably need to find a different intersection for #36. Sorry about that - sometimes I'm too friendly for my own good - I should have just avoided this muggle! SL TFTC!!

 

Enlightenment

Edited October 22, 2011 by TorgtheViking

[Pup Patrol]

Actually, once the cache owner received the email notification of the land owner's logs, he/she should have slapped an "archived" log on that cache immediately.

 

And should be deleting those "found it" logs that came in after the note saying that the cache had been destroyed.

 

The other caches in the area should be closely looked at, too, as the land owner said:

 

10/20/2011

 

Do not bother looking for this cache on Norway RD and Green Acres RD any more,we have destroyed it and will continue to do so with the ones that are placed in or around this area,we do not appreciate the increased traffic,nor the disturbance of our privacy by strangers....KEEP OUT!!!!BE WARNED!!!!!! 7:29pm

[hunter61073]

WOW, go away one night, and this thread goes haywire.

 

The person "Not Welcome" I believe found the landowner face to face.... Here lies the problem... We just need to have this cache removed from any lists. The road is a very seldom traveled road, and when traffic goes up so bad, as to where you actually wonder what is going on... well... I would wonder too.

Like I said... do not shoot the messenger... as MANY of you have.... I am just relaying a message from the landowner.

WHY do people take things so literally?? If I told you he also enjoyed played the banjo in the early eve... sitting out in his back 40... I wonder where it would go from there?

 

sheesh people... relax.

 

Take it seriously... but also take it in stride. No one has been hurt, the cache has been removed, the police are aware of the situation from the landowner, People out there prefer quiet over heavy traffic, and people out wandering around daily are NOT WELCOME...lol. (Sorry for the pun... could not resist).

 

As for the location of the cache... I will find out where it was, so we can get it solved in the proper manner...

[hunter61073]

AHHHHHH. TY Pup Patrol!!!

After reading your post... I remembered the name of the road. Green Acres Road.... Any and all caches in this area need to be closely looked at....IMO.

 

Everyone else... have a great day!! Happy Hunting... I plan on going out with my boys today to look for a few caches....

[hunter61073]

There is a little side road off of the main road to this persons property. There is an old schoolhouse/barn, etc. in the close area to the road. The land is a real cool place to put a cache actually, and I can see why someone would like to put one there. The road here is usually a very untraveled road, and I know he has young kids and pets that typically roam and play without worry there.

Really... the only reason a person would be on these roads is either they live there... or they are going to see someone that lives out there. (Pretty tight knit group of people)...

All of a sudden there are cars driving up and down... going slow... stopping. If you were the land owner, you would wonder what the heck is going on also. He just so happens to not agree with this hobby, and wants no part of it on or near his land.

Lets just get this cache off the grid around there, and no more needs to be said.

 

Cheers....

[+EdrickV]

There is a little side road off of the main road to this persons property. There is an old schoolhouse/barn, etc. in the close area to the road. The land is a real cool place to put a cache actually, and I can see why someone would like to put one there. The road here is usually a very untraveled road, and I know he has young kids and pets that typically roam and play without worry there.

Really... the only reason a person would be on these roads is either they live there... or they are going to see someone that lives out there. (Pretty tight knit group of people)...

All of a sudden there are cars driving up and down... going slow... stopping. If you were the land owner, you would wonder what the heck is going on also. He just so happens to not agree with this hobby, and wants no part of it on or near his land.

Lets just get this cache off the grid around there, and no more needs to be said.

 

Cheers....

 

Apparently another reviewer saw the cache listing and posted an NA log, and the cache has been disabled till the situation is resolved.

 

Edit: Oh, and I thought about posting an NA but I have not been out there, did not know for sure if that cache was the one talked about here, and am not sure if "Not Welcome" actually is the owner of the land where the cache is or not. So I just contacted the reviewer that published the cache.

Edited October 22, 2011 by EdrickV

[Mr.Yuck]

Actually, once the cache owner received the email notification of the land owner's logs, he/she should have slapped an "archived" log on that cache immediately.

 

And should be deleting those "found it" logs that came in after the note saying that the cache had been destroyed.

 

The other caches in the area should be closely looked at, too, as the land owner said:

 

10/20/2011

 

Do not bother looking for this cache on Norway RD and Green Acres RD any more,we have destroyed it and will continue to do so with the ones that are placed in or around this area,we do not appreciate the increased traffic,nor the disturbance of our privacy by strangers....KEEP OUT!!!!BE WARNED!!!!!! 7:29pm

 

That was a pretty new Geocacher who posted that long log detailing their encounter with "Not Welcome", and it was a couple days after their find, because it wasn't there yesterday!! I wouldn't fault them or the cache owner on their reaction, as I'm of the opinion that log just showed up sometime Saturday, even though it's dated for Thursday.

 

I would like to know how someone gets a "trail" of roadside micros over 100 miles from their listed Town in another State published in Wisconsin with wording encouraging throw-downs on the cache page though.

[knowschad]

WOW, go away one night, and this thread goes haywire.

 

The person "Not Welcome" I believe found the landowner face to face.... Here lies the problem... We just need to have this cache removed from any lists. The road is a very seldom traveled road, and when traffic goes up so bad, as to where you actually wonder what is going on... well... I would wonder too.

Like I said... do not shoot the messenger... as MANY of you have.... I am just relaying a message from the landowner.

WHY do people take things so literally?? If I told you he also enjoyed played the banjo in the early eve... sitting out in his back 40... I wonder where it would go from there?

 

sheesh people... relax.

 

Take it seriously... but also take it in stride. No one has been hurt, the cache has been removed, the police are aware of the situation from the landowner, People out there prefer quiet over heavy traffic, and people out wandering around daily are NOT WELCOME...lol. (Sorry for the pun... could not resist).

 

As for the location of the cache... I will find out where it was, so we can get it solved in the proper manner...

I'm sorry if some of us took your "shoot first, ask questions later" "humor" too literally. You supported that "humor" with a reference to the cache owner being in the military, too, so it didn't exactly come across as the light-hearted fun that you apparently meant it to be. You see, we also sometimes tend to "shoot first" around here.

 

If the cache is on the cache owner's property, he has every right to have it removed. But if he simply doesn't like the new traffic, there isn't a whole lot that he can legally do about it, I'm afraid. He can politely ask the cache owner to pull their caches, or he can get out there and steal every cache and every cache replacement, but public property is just that.

 

I emailed the cache owners this morning. I don't know them well, but I do know them, and they are a very nice young couple. That they haven't replied to me, or disabled the cache themselves tells me that for some reason, they are currently incommunicado.

[Mr.Yuck]

There is a little side road off of the main road to this persons property. There is an old schoolhouse/barn, etc. in the close area to the road. The land is a real cool place to put a cache actually, and I can see why someone would like to put one there. The road here is usually a very untraveled road, and I know he has young kids and pets that typically roam and play without worry there.

Really... the only reason a person would be on these roads is either they live there... or they are going to see someone that lives out there. (Pretty tight knit group of people)...

All of a sudden there are cars driving up and down... going slow... stopping. If you were the land owner, you would wonder what the heck is going on also. He just so happens to not agree with this hobby, and wants no part of it on or near his land.

Lets just get this cache off the grid around there, and no more needs to be said.

 

Cheers....

 

One of my biggest beefs actually, as a Geocacher myself, regarding caches near and/or in view of houses. Someone is living in a quiet neighborhood for decades in many cases, and all of a sudden, one day out of nowhere, people start driving up and go to the same spot. Magnify that about 20 times for a "for the numbers" roadside micro trail in rural Wisconsin.

 

But I might say, your friend "Not welcome" seemed to warn cachers about all the caches along Norway Road. As long as they are in the public right of way, I don't see a problem with them. Sure the neighbors notice the increased traffic, but I would think most of them would be understanding once they knew what was going on. Again, assuming all other caches are in the public ROW.

[+Danbike_Lizbike]

Ill now has the law that you can mark property as NO TRESSPASSING by painting a purple mark on the fence line. Man, I can't wait for the argument that "I'm colorblind", or "That's not purple enough."

 

 

We all respect your friend's deeply held beliefs about property ownership and the right to be left alone on one's homestead. I for one have fought dearly for those rights. But we're also trying to run a civil society here, that depends on giving people the benefit of the doubt. There is a balance that has stood the test of time everywhere in the US, no matter where "those parts" happen to be. Here's what the law says in your particular "those parts:"

 

In Illinois as with most states, a person is guilty of trespassing only after they have been notified and given the opportunity to freely leave the property. The state code says a person is guilty of trespass only when he/she:

 

• "enters upon the land of another, after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner or occupant that such entry is forbidden;" or
• "remains upon the land of another, after receiving notice from the owner or occupant to depart."

The key point here is that generally in the US, it is not illegal to enter private land. It is only illegal to enter or remain knowingly, after having been notified. Posting written notices only applies if the area is enclosed and marked at the principal entrances, or if not enclosed, is marked sufficiently that any person could reasonably see written notice from his point of entrance onto the property. The burden of proof that a trespasser should have reasonably seen the signs rests upon the complainant. In general, force cannot be used to eject them unless they refuse to leave, and if they attempt to leave, force absolutely cannot be used to detain them.

 

I'm an animal lover, so I feel deeply sorry for any dog sent after me, they're going to have a rough day with me. And being an Army sniper and special operations soldier, I feel equally sorry for the people who shot first. I haven't always gotten the first shot. I have however always gotten the last.

[knowschad]

Ill now has the law that you can mark property as NO TRESSPASSING by painting a purple mark on the fence line. Man, I can't wait for the argument that "I'm colorblind", or "That's not purple enough."

OMG! I thought for sure you were either kidding, or badly mistaken, but no... its the Purple Paint Law! What on earth was the thinking behind that one?

[+Trekkin' and birdin']

Since we were driving by, we checked out the location today. There is as the OP said, a side road that is a dead end. Right where you would turn from the more traveled road to that side road is the expected "DEAD END" sign. One does not really need to step off the road to retrieve the small container placed at the base of this sign, as all the others in this grouping were placed. No one is likely to even turn onto that dead end road, as travel to the next cache continues on the main road, anyway, and the sign is right at the corner.

 

Having seen the placement, I still agree that if the neighbors find it bothersome, it should probably be removed. But it is well within the public right of way. Also, the container in place is the one originally placed. The cache owners do know about the situation...they were busy with the event. My understanding is that one of them is originally from that town, has family there, and was asked to help with this event.

Edited October 22, 2011 by Trekkin' and birdin'

[GOF and Bacall]

Ill now has the law that you can mark property as NO TRESSPASSING by painting a purple mark on the fence line. Man, I can't wait for the argument that "I'm colorblind", or "That's not purple enough."

OMG! I thought for sure you were either kidding, or badly mistaken, but no... its the Purple Paint Law! What on earth was the thinking behind that one?

 

But the real question is do they now have the "shoot first" law?

[knowschad]

Ill now has the law that you can mark property as NO TRESSPASSING by painting a purple mark on the fence line. Man, I can't wait for the argument that "I'm colorblind", or "That's not purple enough."

OMG! I thought for sure you were either kidding, or badly mistaken, but no... its the Purple Paint Law! What on earth was the thinking behind that one?

 

But the real question is do they now have the "shoot first" law?

 

From what I've been able to find online... no, not yet. Only the "Ask Questions Later" law has been passed so far.

[GOF and Bacall]

Ill now has the law that you can mark property as NO TRESSPASSING by painting a purple mark on the fence line. Man, I can't wait for the argument that "I'm colorblind", or "That's not purple enough."

OMG! I thought for sure you were either kidding, or badly mistaken, but no... its the Purple Paint Law! What on earth was the thinking behind that one?

 

But the real question is do they now have the "shoot first" law?

 

From what I've been able to find online... no, not yet. Only the "Ask Questions Later" law has been passed so far.

 

I'll bet the RNCLU could argue that the one is an implied endorsement of the other.

 

(that's Red Neck Civil Liberties Union)

[Mr.Yuck]

Since we were driving by, we checked out the location today. There is as the OP said, a side road that is a dead end. Right where you would turn from the more traveled road to that side road is the expected "DEAD END" sign. One does not really need to step off the road to retrieve the small container placed at the base of this sign, as all the others in this grouping were placed. No one is likely to even turn onto that dead end road, as travel to the next cache continues on the main road, anyway, and the sign is right at the corner.

 

Having seen the placement, I still agree that if the neighbors find it bothersome, it should probably be removed. But it is well within the public right of way. Also, the container in place is the one originally placed. The cache owners do know about the situation...they were busy with the event. My understanding is that one of them is originally from that town, has family there, and was asked to help with this event.

 

Well it certainly wouldn't be the first time a Geocacher was told "hey, that's my land", and it wasn't. Heck, I've been told that a few times in my life, long before Geocaching existed.

 

Although not a power trail, the neighbors don't seem to enthused about these caches, and they are going to be pretty high traffic being a numbers trail. I don't know what the solution should be here. Certainly a "public right of way deal with it" attitude probably isn't a good idea.

[AZcachemeister]

Not now that they know what Geocaching is...

[+slbens]

I have a VERY ticked off friend. He has had his dogs going nuts for a few months, and could not figure out why. He was out looking for felled trees for this winter heating, and he spotted a lady wandering around on his wooded property. He asked her what she was doing there... Long story short.... He removed the cache, called the police and found out his rights.

WHY do people put these caches on private land without permission? This only gives this fun aftertime a bad name.

I told him all about it, and he understands the idea... but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point....

I go out on the weekends... with MAYBE 2 or 3 to find... all in a close area. I do not goaround looking all over a 3 county area looking for as many as I canin one day.

I guess all I am asking or saying is... please respect landowners rights... or this hobby will go to the wayside real fast.

 

My initial assumption would be that it was placed there by mistake. Was the land posted? Does it border on some sort of public land where caches are generally accepted? Too many unanswered questions.

 

>> but complains about people who go out anddrive all day just looking for these things when gas prices are outrageous. I see his point.... You do?

 

The private property thing is his business. What people chose to burn gas on, however, is not.

 

Yeah, I'd love to see the cache listing. My guess? Wooded, unposted property. Probably of the variety where the owner thought it was a no-brainer/never needed to bother posting it. But anything anyone puts anywhere and gets it posted on this website is going to have a endless parade of smiley seekers.

 

Smiley seekers whom by the way, I would not absolve of any blame. Knowing this websites "look the other way and assume permission" policy, I have walked away from many caches that had obvious private property issues. Or ignored them from Google earth.

 

The name on the cache is ....slbens or slloens ... left there on 10/7/11. It is in the area by Mauston,Wi.

 

**UPDATE** ... I found the user, and sent an Email on here. I am hoping the couple will either call him, or go and talk to him to get things figured out. Happy Hunting!!!

 

****PLEASE NOTE--I am slbens and I DID NOT place this cache. I was a finder. I do not want to be wrongly accused of placing these caches in questionable locations! Thanks!

[+slbens]

I did not place this series of caches. I just happened to be a finder. The question of whether or not it is on public property is irrelevant in my opinion. If the nearby landowners are uncomfortable then let's respect it regardless of the reason. I also live on the "Great Pumpkin Trail" and eventhough we are cachers it is a mixed blessing having the increased traffic on our otherwise quiet dead end road.

[+Jumpin' Jack Cache]

I did not place this series of caches. I just happened to be a finder. The question of whether or not it is on public property is irrelevant in my opinion. If the nearby landowners are uncomfortable then let's respect it regardless of the reason. I also live on the "Great Pumpkin Trail" and eventhough we are cachers it is a mixed blessing having the increased traffic on our otherwise quiet dead end road.

 

+1

[+EdrickV]

I did not place this series of caches. I just happened to be a finder. The question of whether or not it is on public property is irrelevant in my opinion. If the nearby landowners are uncomfortable then let's respect it regardless of the reason. I also live on the "Great Pumpkin Trail" and eventhough we are cachers it is a mixed blessing having the increased traffic on our otherwise quiet dead end road.

 

Most (if not all) of us have figured out you didn't place it. The cache has since been disabled while things get resolved, though thanks to the wonders of Pocket Queries the cache has had quite a few more visitors, so apparently the container hasn't been picked up yet. Supposedly the CO is working on getting everything straightened out, though he/she hasn't gotten involved with this thread.

[+trista74]

We have archived The Great Pumpkin Trail #36 due to Not Welcome’s concerns. If he had e-mailed us and said he lived nearby and wanted the cache to be archived, we would have done so or by seeing a NA log, would have alerted us to was happened and we whould of taken action to what was happening. As said before, we were running events all day 8am till 8pm for the city of Mauston, so we were not able to act more quickly. Our intent in placing these caches was not to cause any alarm with any of the nearby landowners, but to raise positive awareness of geocaching in the community. The nearby city of Mauston has embraced geocaching and they asked us to have an event there. We ended up having four events in the area this weekend and we placed the caches in conjunction with the events. Our events in the area have been very successful and we have really enjoyed meeting the other geocachers in the area.

 

If any other landowners have a problem with the caches, i would ask them to contact us, and we will archive those caches as well.

Edited October 23, 2011 by trista74

[Mr.Yuck]

I did not place this series of caches. I just happened to be a finder. The question of whether or not it is on public property is irrelevant in my opinion. If the nearby landowners are uncomfortable then let's respect it regardless of the reason. I also live on the "Great Pumpkin Trail" and eventhough we are cachers it is a mixed blessing having the increased traffic on our otherwise quiet dead end road.

 

Most (if not all) of us have figured out you didn't place it. The cache has since been disabled while things get resolved, though thanks to the wonders of Pocket Queries the cache has had quite a few more visitors, so apparently the container hasn't been picked up yet. Supposedly the CO is working on getting everything straightened out, though he/she hasn't gotten involved with this thread.

 

Yeah everyone knew you weren't the placer. I was forced to investigate your hides early in the thread though. They look pretty nice. Not too far from the Tick capital of the world Fort McCoy, Wisconsin too. Been there a few times. Too many, actually.

[Mr.Yuck]

We have archived The Great Pumpkin Trail #36 due to Not Welcome’s concerns. If he had e-mailed us and said he lived nearby and wanted the cache to be archived, we would have done so or by seeing a NA log, would have alerted us to was happened and we whould of taken action to what was happening. As said before, we were running events all day 8am till 8pm for the city of Mauston, so we were not able to act more quickly. Our intent in placing these caches was not to cause any alarm with any of the nearby landowners, but to raise positive awareness of geocaching in the community. The nearby city of Mauston has embraced geocaching and they asked us to have an event there. We ended up having four events in the area this weekend and we placed the caches in conjunction with the events. Our events in the area have been very successful and we have really enjoyed meeting the other geocachers in the area.

 

If any other landowners have a problem with the caches, i would ask them to contact us, and we will archive those caches as well.

 

Excellent. Thank you for coming here and addressing it!!

[hunter61073]

Now, this landowner in question has brought to my attention that his (Well posted) land has been trespassed and hunted on today by a certain ethnic group that is a little more dominant in this area. OH BOY... He is one unhappy person.

I would like to say I'm sorry to slbens for the inappropriate accusation on my part. Email was recieved, and I thank you for the understanding. And also... thank you to the cache placer to come foreward, and take charge of the situation.

 

I guess some people are a little ... shall I say... racist (My friend), and it is a little upsetting to me... but that is his choice. I guess I would be a little upset too, if a certain type of group repeatedly is tresspassing on my land... when it is clearly posted. The Sheriff has been notified .. yet again. Things are gonna get hairy out in those parts if things do not settle down.... SAD... just SAD.

 

All I can do is ask him to be nice to people that are CLEARLY not out to hunt on or near his land. If he sees a GPS in hand... just smile, and go about your way.

[knowschad]

Now, this landowner in question has brought to my attention that his (Well posted) land has been trespassed and hunted on today by a certain ethnic group that is a little more dominant in this area. OH BOY... He is one unhappy person.

I would like to say I'm sorry to slbens for the inappropriate accusation on my part. Email was recieved, and I thank you for the understanding. And also... thank you to the cache placer to come foreward, and take charge of the situation.

 

I guess some people are a little ... shall I say... racist (My friend), and it is a little upsetting to me... but that is his choice. I guess I would be a little upset too, if a certain type of group repeatedly is tresspassing on my land... when it is clearly posted. The Sheriff has been notified .. yet again. Things are gonna get hairy out in those parts if things do not settle down.... SAD... just SAD.

 

All I can do is ask him to be nice to people that are CLEARLY not out to hunt on or near his land. If he sees a GPS in hand... just smile, and go about your way.

 

Is this another one of those "plays his banjo out back" humor things, or should we take this one seriously? OK, I am going to take it seriously... your friend had better get some professional help with his anger and control issues before he finds himself on the wrong side of the law. Your posts about this guy are truly upsetting.

[hunter61073]

Well... here is the latest on whats going on. He was confronted by the Sheriff last eve... while out chopping wood. Someone had bow shot a buck on someone elses property, and he owns the type of truck...well.... His dog was almost tazed, He was almost cuffed and hauled off, until He told the police he does not even bow hunt. (Karma??) ... lol. AND YES, it is upsetting... but true.

Professional help, I do not think it is needed. He and many others in this area are very frustrated by the protection some people get by being immune to certain laws that pertain to some and not others.

Getting his thoughts in order and a certain understanding of the foundation of this country are needed... IMO.