An FTF Tale

[+fizzymagic]

A cautionary FTF tale for your delectation....

 

Today I went to a geocaching event put on by the state parks department at an off-road vehicle park. The wonderful park staff had put out over 25 new geocaches and around 40 cachers showed up to participate in a fun event in an area of the park that is brand-new and still closed to the public.

 

The cachers gathered, heard a briefing from the park staff, and set out to explore and find the new caches. There was some excitement that everybody would have a chance to FTF one of the new caches.

 

Except that it turns out that a couple of local FTF hounds had entered the off-limits part of the park before the event and grabbed all the FTFs for themselves. These cachers did not participate in the event in any way.

 

The park staff was livid. Here they had an event that was partly to help build relationships with local geocachers, only to have their new caches logged illegally by FTF hounds entering a closed area without a permit and without paying the required entrance fee.

 

It gave geocaching a black eye with the park staff; I can only hope that the appreciation and response of the legitimate community will be enough to overcome it.

 

So next time you claim that FTF hounds are "just playing the game their way" keep this story in mind.

[+jellis]

That bites to all who participated and paid to go in for their chance. I would have replaced all the logsheets and start over since that was clearly a violation of the park rules to enter without permission.

Plus they should get fined for trespassing. Maybe that would teach them. They are really going to look bad too when they log their FTFs

Edited April 8, 2012 by jellis

[+6NoisyHikers]

Is it the Hollister Hills series? It looks like those caches were accidentally published early. OOPS!

 

I'm just trying to play the Devil's advocate here. If a cache gets published, then retracted, the coordinates are still out there, right? Could the FTFers have picked up those caches on April 2nd? Maybe they didn't know these caches were attached to an event and it was a reviewer error that led to the caches being published early.

 

Please, no black eyes!

[Encino]

A cautionary FTF tale for your delectation....

 

Today I went to a geocaching event put on by the state parks department at an off-road vehicle park. The wonderful park staff had put out over 25 new geocaches and around 40 cachers showed up to participate in a fun event in an area of the park that is brand-new and still closed to the public.

 

The cachers gathered, heard a briefing from the park staff, and set out to explore and find the new caches. There was some excitement that everybody would have a chance to FTF one of the new caches.

 

Except that it turns out that a couple of local FTF hounds had entered the off-limits part of the park before the event and grabbed all the FTFs for themselves. These cachers did not participate in the event in any way.

 

The park staff was livid. Here they had an event that was partly to help build relationships with local geocachers, only to have their new caches logged illegally by FTF hounds entering a closed area without a permit and without paying the required entrance fee.

 

It gave geocaching a black eye with the park staff; I can only hope that the appreciation and response of the legitimate community will be enough to overcome it.

 

So next time you claim that FTF hounds are "just playing the game their way" keep this story in mind.

 

I'm by no means a FTF hound (never had a FTF!), not really interested in that part of the game. There does appear to be a bit more to this story though! From looking at the caches you are referring to, these caches were actually published prior to the event (on 2 April), then retracted the same day. The cache pages themselves also do not refer to any event or that they were located in an off-limits part of the park (or that any fee or permit is required). It is possible those who found the cache prior to the event, got notifications and downloaded the cache information prior to the retraction. Unless there is some indication at the park area that it is off-limits or a permit/fee required - then I don't see how you can fault the ones who found it prior to the event. It would appear to be an issue with either the ones who placed the caches for submitting them early or the Reviewer if he was not suppose to publish them until later.

[+hydnsek]

The park staff was livid. Here they had an event that was partly to help build relationships with local geocachers, only to have their new caches logged illegally by FTF hounds entering a closed area without a permit and without paying the required entrance fee.

That sounds like a really cool event and great park staff!

 

However, if the caches were indeed published early, as others suggest, how would any cacher know that it was "illegal" to go get them? I don't see anything on the cache pages that states that the area is off-limits without a permit and entrance fee. If this is true, the parks should have stated such - heck, how would future cachers know about the permit and fee if it's not on the cache pages?

 

I'm not a FTFer, and I agree that some FTF hounds do ignore rules and create issues, but in this case, your assessment seems harsh. The first finders saw newly published caches with no apparent restrictions and went for them.

 

If anything, this is a cautionary tale to cache owners - be sure to state any restrictions (park hours, fees, parking, etc.) on your cache pages! Instead of berating the hapless FTFers, perhaps a bit of education to the park staff could help them see this as the accident it apparently was, and help them improve their cache pages to prevent a recurrence.

Edited April 8, 2012 by hydnsek

[+dakboy]

I'm just trying to play the Devil's advocate here. If a cache gets published, then retracted, the coordinates are still out there, right?

Only if they loaded the cache page (or had a PQ run) in the time between publication & retraction. It would depend upon how quickly the reviewer realized his/her mistake, or was alerted by someone in the know so they could take action.

 

I've seen a couple caches where I clicked the link within a minute or two of getting the publish notification, only to be told the cache doesn't exist/hasn't been published yet. But that's probably not the case 90% of the time.

[+dakboy]

Except that it turns out that a couple of local FTF hounds had entered the off-limits part of the park before the event and grabbed all the FTFs for themselves.

Was this part of the park posted as being off-limits? IOW, did these FTF hounds cross a "do not enter" sign or barrier?

 

So next time you claim that FTF hounds are "just playing the game their way" keep this story in mind.

 

They can "just play the game their way" all they want, right up to the point where they're breaking laws or posted restrictions in an area. I have called out an FTF hound who posted in his log that he made an FTF at 4 AM in a location that was only open during daylight hours, and the CO gave credit to "the first legal FTF" (written that way) on the cache page instead of "FTF" - along with a reminder to people that the area isn't available 24/7 (it was already noted either in the attributes or description).

 

However, if the area isn't marked as off-limits, and the cache description doesn't say anything about it either, I have to side with these "hounds", unfortunately - how is one expected to know that they shouldn't chase that FTF if there's no information telling them the area's off-limits?

 

Or, why weren't the caches held unpublished until the areas were officially open?

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

When I hide new caches for an event, I would not have them published until that evening. I would bring print outs of the cache listing to the event, and post them through the event. That way I know attendees get a shot at FTF.

[+kunarion]

if the area isn't marked as off-limits, and the cache description doesn't say anything about it either, I have to side with these "hounds", unfortunately - how is one expected to know that they shouldn't chase that FTF if there's no information telling them the area's off-limits?

That's annoying. Why wouldn't a cache page in a state park NOT mention it's a state park and list the park access routes, times and fees?

If there's nothing on the cache page, people know when a park's closed, upon arrival, due the signs, locked gates, stuff like that. Make it a point to know property boundaries. It's important. But list it on the cache pages, too.

 

If the cachers get advance coord info, they can go using a park pass, when the park's open. Maybe that's what happened. If they were there paying no fee when the park was closed, there's nothing unusual about that. Many cachers do shocking things, staunchly defended. So the parks people need to know, and now they're up to speed.

Edited April 8, 2012 by kunarion

[+dakboy]

That's annoying. Why wouldn't a cache page in a state park NOT mention it's a state park and list the park access routes, times and fees?

2 reasons (with sub-reasons):

 

1) People are lazy

1a) People can't be bothered to look things up

2) The state park requires a permit, but they haven't gotten one. By not saying it's in a state park, they hope the reviewer won't notice and will publish without asking questions

2a) They haven't bothered to check for a permit requirement

 

If there's nothing on the cache page, people know when a park's closed, upon arrival, due the signs, locked gates, stuff like that. Make it a point to know property boundaries.

That's what I was asking about. If there's no indication that the area is currently off-limits (in this case), how were these "hounds" to know that they weren't allowed to be there? Edited April 8, 2012 by dakboy

[+kunarion]

If there's nothing on the cache page, people know when a park's closed, upon arrival, due the signs, locked gates, stuff like that. Make it a point to know property boundaries.

That's what I was asking about. If there's no indication that the area is currently off-limits (in this case), how were these "hounds" to know that they weren't allowed to be there?

I hate to tell the state parks people how to run their park, but just as a suggestion, at a minimum they need signs that show the times when the park is open. Otherwise, anyone may be there anytime. Cache or not, the OP's park is surreal.

[+dakboy]

I hate to tell the state parks people how to run their park, but just as a suggestion, at a minimum they need signs that show the times when the park is open. Otherwise, anyone may be there anytime. Cache or not, the OP's park is surreal.

The park itself was open. Re-read the post. It was a new section of the existing park. You've never seen a "trail closed" sign in an otherwise open park?

 

We aren't getting the whole story here. It would be immensely helpful if we knew whether or not the "off limits" area of this park had signage indicating such. If there are no signs, then the park people screwed up. If there are signs, the FTF hounds did.

Edited April 8, 2012 by dakboy

[+jellis]

The cachers knew this park and the rules, they were just hounds. At least the cachers knew they did wrong and didn't claim the FTFs.

[+lamoracke]

on a side note, did they really all feel like 5 terrain?

Edited April 8, 2012 by lamoracke

[+kunarion]

I hate to tell the state parks people how to run their park, but just as a suggestion, at a minimum they need signs that show the times when the park is open. Otherwise, anyone may be there anytime. Cache or not, the OP's park is surreal.

The park itself was open. Re-read the post. It was a new section of the existing park. You've never seen a "trail closed" sign in an otherwise open park?

I did see that it was specified that area was closed, yet... open? I'm getting confused.

[+CanadianRockies]

I've been to more than a dozen of these kinds of caching events. In every case, they published the caches a couple days (or more) in advance to give people time to plot their routes and solve the puzzles. At the start of each cache listing page, there was a sentence indicating this cache is part of an event and is not to be found before a specified date and time. Out of the hundreds of listings, I've only heard about two caches that were found before the specified date and time.

[+kunarion]

I've been to more than a dozen of these kinds of caching events. In every case, they published the caches a couple days (or more) in advance to give people time to plot their routes and solve the puzzles.

If the trails are open (that is, if it's OK to travel on them and it's within the park hours) and I have the coords, the spare time, and the 4WD, I might go to those caches without a care. If later someone says "it was kind of not ready, everyone else was waiting til Saturday", that would be a little embarrassing, but that's partly a communication issue. I can't imagine solving a puzzle cache without also discovering info on the cache page about when it's time, but if the page itself didn't mention that, there's your problem.

 

You've got to get the word out to all cachers somehow, to not go yet. But tell the parks people that when a cache is published, it's time to find it (be ready). Once it is published, if you can't allow people there, either cordon off the area, or sequester all the cachers (make it part of an Event). It's cool that some places release coords and everyone sits around til everyone's ready (that's quite a polite group!). But I'm still thinking it's best to wait til a planned moment to publish rather than hoping everyone gets the memo.

Edited April 8, 2012 by kunarion

[+JesandTodd]

on a side note, did they really all feel like 5 terrain?

 

I'm guessing it's the requirement of an off road vehicle....but 37 T5s in one day is pretty fantastical!

[+The A-Team]

It's cool that some places release coords and everyone sits around til everyone's ready (that's quite a polite group!).

There was a cache-and-release event in my area a couple of years ago. One of the requirements to have your cache included as part of the event was to put the following into your short description:

This cache is for the GCGV RACE-2010 event, and should not be sought prior to noon on October 29th 2010. Any logs from before this time will be deleted at the discretion of the cache owner.

The caches were published the day before to give people time to plan their route, but the searching couldn't start until noon. Of the 29 caches released, not a single cache was found early, and there are A LOT of FTF-hounds in this town.

 

If you don't want people to find your cache before a certain time or date, you have to say so in the description. That's the only way to make sure everyone gets the message. If you don't say anything, as far as cachers can tell, it's fair game.

[Encino]

It's cool that some places release coords and everyone sits around til everyone's ready (that's quite a polite group!).

There was a cache-and-release event in my area a couple of years ago. One of the requirements to have your cache included as part of the event was to put the following into your short description:

This cache is for the GCGV RACE-2010 event, and should not be sought prior to noon on October 29th 2010. Any logs from before this time will be deleted at the discretion of the cache owner.

The caches were published the day before to give people time to plan their route, but the searching couldn't start until noon. Of the 29 caches released, not a single cache was found early, and there are A LOT of FTF-hounds in this town.

 

If you don't want people to find your cache before a certain time or date, you have to say so in the description. That's the only way to make sure everyone gets the message. If you don't say anything, as far as cachers can tell, it's fair game.

 

Would that not be an ALR? Wouldn't it be easier to just have the cache(s) published after the event to ensure only attendees can be the first to search for them?

[+ShaunEM]

I have a problem with you using logging a find along with the word illegal.

 

Any self respecting FTF hound would give up the FTF if it turned out they had found a cache that wasn't active yet.

 

Shaun

[+DragonsWest]

on a side note, did they really all feel like 5 terrain?

 

I'm guessing it's the requirement of an off road vehicle....but 37 T5s in one day is pretty fantastical!

 

There are some near the entrance which can be found by hiking a short distance, but the remainder, deeper in the area are only accessible by ORV, no hikers, bikers or horses. So I believe that covers the 'Special Equipment Requirement' of the 5T

 

As to the interlopers, what is commonly referred to as Willful Ignorance was at the root of the matter. As they approached the park they did see signs about an event, but evidently felt it was unnecessary to follow the signs or pursue the knowledge or the event further. The Northeast area, called Hudner Property, is for groups only and the event was for those who registered. These were people who did know the park and could not claim to not know rules about the Hudner Property.

 

The event organizers, parks workers and volunteer geocachers had put in a big effort to create this event, hiding collectible cards, publishing a booklet to fill out as part of the competition, obtain raffle prize donations and super, super awesome to make entrance to the property free (where there is usually a considerable cost to have it opened for a group) as an introduction to the property, so news and word of mouth can spread the positive vibes of the park and this restricted property.

 

A great day had by all, but the FTF hounds certainly did cast a bit of a shadow on things. Temper that urge to be First to Find with common sense and when you don't know ASK!

[Encino]

As to the interlopers, what is commonly referred to as Willful Ignorance was at the root of the matter. As they approached the park they did see signs about an event, but evidently felt it was unnecessary to follow the signs or pursue the knowledge or the event further. The Northeast area, called Hudner Property, is for groups only and the event was for those who registered. These were people who did know the park and could not claim to not know rules about the Hudner Property.

 

The event organizers, parks workers and volunteer geocachers had put in a big effort to create this event, hiding collectible cards, publishing a booklet to fill out as part of the competition, obtain raffle prize donations and super, super awesome to make entrance to the property free (where there is usually a considerable cost to have it opened for a group) as an introduction to the property, so news and word of mouth can spread the positive vibes of the park and this restricted property.

 

A great day had by all, but the FTF hounds certainly did cast a bit of a shadow on things. Temper that urge to be First to Find with common sense and when you don't know ASK!

 

Since the cache was published on GC (apparently by the land managers themselves) and there were no indications on the pages about any event, then why would you expect the cachers to "ASK" if attendance at this event was required?

[+DragonsWest]

As to the interlopers, what is commonly referred to as Willful Ignorance was at the root of the matter. As they approached the park they did see signs about an event, but evidently felt it was unnecessary to follow the signs or pursue the knowledge or the event further. The Northeast area, called Hudner Property, is for groups only and the event was for those who registered. These were people who did know the park and could not claim to not know rules about the Hudner Property.

 

The event organizers, parks workers and volunteer geocachers had put in a big effort to create this event, hiding collectible cards, publishing a booklet to fill out as part of the competition, obtain raffle prize donations and super, super awesome to make entrance to the property free (where there is usually a considerable cost to have it opened for a group) as an introduction to the property, so news and word of mouth can spread the positive vibes of the park and this restricted property.

 

A great day had by all, but the FTF hounds certainly did cast a bit of a shadow on things. Temper that urge to be First to Find with common sense and when you don't know ASK!

 

Since the cache was published on GC (apparently by the land managers themselves) and there were no indications on the pages about any event, then why would you expect the cachers to "ASK" if attendance at this event was required?

 

First: The Hudner Property is restricted access.

Second: There were signs and a sensible person would inquire.

 

Choosing to ignore both points is Willful Ignorance. There's clearly an event going on and checking into the event would be the right thing to do.

[+Glenn]

If the area was closed at the time by the land managers does this mean that those that were on the property when it was close could be brought up on Trespassing charges? Could their log entries be used as evidence of their Trespassing?

 

If the cache owner deems a FTF in violation of rules or laws can the cache owner assign FTF to the first to find while following all the rules and laws? In other words since it is the cache owners cache isn't the cache owner that determines who he gives the title of FTF?

 

Would have disabling the cache made a difference or once a cache is placed, regardless of listing status, it is "free game" to be found and logged. This goes back to the old scenario where someone places a cache and has a friend along with that logs a FTF on the cache before it is even listed anywhere.

[Encino]

First: The Hudner Property is restricted access.

Second: There were signs and a sensible person would inquire.

 

Choosing to ignore both points is Willful Ignorance. There's clearly an event going on and checking into the event would be the right thing to do.

 

So the caches are located in an area not available to all cachers? I wouldn't have stopped at an "Event" if I was out caching. I don't do events. If it was published and no restrictions are listed on the page or at the cache site, I don't see an issue. Now if the caches are located in an area that is restricted and posted, that is a different story (and issue).

[+The A-Team]

Second: There were signs and a sensible person would inquire.

If there were signs clearly stating the area was closed, then the FTF hounds really have no excuse for going in there.

I just had a thought. What did the signs say? Did they say the area was closed, or did they just refer to the event? If the event, did they say it had anything to do with geocaching? It's possible the FTF hounds saw signs for some event ("Event --->"), but since it didn't appear to be anything to do with caching (as far as they could tell), they just skipped it because they'd rather go find the caches than visit some unknown event. Looking at your profile, it doesn't look like the event was a geocaching.com-listed event, so there's another reason why they may not have known about it.

I'm not trying to defend them or anything, just playing devil's advocate and trying to find out more about what happened. This could be a good learning opportunity for many.

[+CanadianRockies]

I've been to more than a dozen of these kinds of caching events. In every case, they published the caches a couple days (or more) in advance to give people time to plot their routes and solve the puzzles. At the start of each cache listing page, there was a sentence indicating this cache is part of an event and is not to be found before a specified date and time. [bold sentence restored.]

You've got to get the word out to all cachers somehow, to not go yet.

That's what the listing page's first sentence does.

 

It's cool that some places release coords and everyone sits around til everyone's ready (that's quite a polite group!).

I guess the members of our geocaching community don't take FTFs as seriously as some do. For the most part, FTFs here are considered a fun competition.

 

But I'm still thinking it's best to wait til a planned moment to publish rather than hoping everyone gets the memo.

It might be the safer way to release coordinates, but I'm not sure it's the better way. By publishing caches early with a starting date/time, you might save dozens of people the task of manually entering dozens of cache coordinates, parking coordinates, trailhead coordinates, etc. You also give them time to plan gas-saving routes to the various caches. And you give people time to solve non-trivial puzzles.

[+addisonbr]

I've been to more than a dozen of these kinds of caching events. In every case, they published the caches a couple days (or more) in advance to give people time to plot their routes and solve the puzzles. At the start of each cache listing page, there was a sentence indicating this cache is part of an event and is not to be found before a specified date and time. [bold sentence restored.]

You've got to get the word out to all cachers somehow, to not go yet.

That's what the listing page's first sentence does.

I don't know if you're referring to these specific caches, or other caches you've seen in the past... and I don't know if these caches had their descriptions edited in the last few hours. But I didn't see the leading sentence you're referring to?

[+addisonbr]

This is what I saw on the first one I clicked on:

 

There may look like there is a trail leading to this cache but it is only a temporary trail, so do not continue to drive on it. Parking is accessible at trail head.

 

Hollister Hills SVRA Geocache Tips to Follow

 

It is the policy of Hollister Hills District Staff to encourage positive use of park land and its many natural resources. Geocaching can be a positive recreational activity when practiced following established conditions and procedures. While Geocaching within Hollister Hills SVRA be vigilant and aware of your surroundings, as well as other park visitors.

 

Also, be aware of erosion and the impacts you have while Geocaching. Please stay on all existing roads and trails. Park your vehicle so that there is ample room for other vehicles to pass while being aware of not driving over any vegetation or off trail. Be aware of poison oak and what it looks like year round. Also, be aware that there are ticks in Hollister Hills SVRA and continuously check yourself for them. Enjoy your time in the park and Happy Geocaching!!

I didn't see anything about "event-only" or "restricted access". I might have made the (apparent) mistake of going for this cache outside of the associated event. I don't even have events on my notifications, so would never have known that non-event-goers weren't welcome until the angry emails started rolling in.

[+addisonbr]

This cache is for the GCGV RACE-2010 event, and should not be sought prior to noon on October 29th 2010. Any logs from before this time will be deleted at the discretion of the cache owner.

You can do that?

[+The A-Team]

This cache is for the GCGV RACE-2010 event, and should not be sought prior to noon on October 29th 2010. Any logs from before this time will be deleted at the discretion of the cache owner.

You can do that?

It may vary by area, but the reviewers here didn't have any problem with it. The group that organized the event kept the reviewers in the loop the entire time, and they had no problem publishing the caches with this wording. I can understand if some reviewers may not allow this wording (they all apply the guidelines differently), but I personally don't see any problems with it. I don't consider it an ALR, and the reviewers didn't seem to see it that way, either.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

 

Any self respecting FTF hound would give up the FTF if it turned out they had found a cache that wasn't active yet.

 

Shaun

 

Why?

 

If they found the cache, published or not, then they get the credit.

[+slukster]

Except that it turns out that a couple of local FTF hounds had entered the off-limits part of the park before the event and grabbed all the FTFs for themselves. These cachers did not participate in the event in any way.

I am curious as to what the date in the logs for the FTF's were. Since the caches were published then retracted 5 days before the event, did the cachers wait until the day of the event or did they go out right after receiving the notification?

[+CanadianRockies]

I've been to more than a dozen of these kinds of caching events. In every case, they published the caches a couple days (or more) in advance to give people time to plot their routes and solve the puzzles. At the start of each cache listing page, there was a sentence indicating this cache is part of an event and is not to be found before a specified date and time. [bold sentence restored.]

You've got to get the word out to all cachers somehow, to not go yet.

That's what the listing page's first sentence does.

I don't know if you're referring to these specific caches, or other caches you've seen in the past... and I don't know if these caches had their descriptions edited in the last few hours. But I didn't see the leading sentence you're referring to?

I'm referring to the more than a dozen of these kinds of caching events that I've attended, not this specific event. It's an alternative way of releasing coordinates that seems to work well in Alberta.

Edited April 8, 2012 by CanadianRockies

[+Scubasonic]

A cautionary FTF tale for your delectation....

 

Today I went to a geocaching event put on by the state parks department at an off-road vehicle park. The wonderful park staff had put out over 25 new geocaches and around 40 cachers showed up to participate in a fun event in an area of the park that is brand-new and still closed to the public.

 

The cachers gathered, heard a briefing from the park staff, and set out to explore and find the new caches. There was some excitement that everybody would have a chance to FTF one of the new caches.

 

Except that it turns out that a couple of local FTF hounds had entered the off-limits part of the park before the event and grabbed all the FTFs for themselves. These cachers did not participate in the event in any way.

 

The park staff was livid. Here they had an event that was partly to help build relationships with local geocachers, only to have their new caches logged illegally by FTF hounds entering a closed area without a permit and without paying the required entrance fee.

 

It gave geocaching a black eye with the park staff; I can only hope that the appreciation and response of the legitimate community will be enough to overcome it.

 

So next time you claim that FTF hounds are "just playing the game their way" keep this story in mind.

 

I'm by no means a FTF hound (never had a FTF!), not really interested in that part of the game. There does appear to be a bit more to this story though! From looking at the caches you are referring to, these caches were actually published prior to the event (on 2 April), then retracted the same day. The cache pages themselves also do not refer to any event or that they were located in an off-limits part of the park (or that any fee or permit is required). It is possible those who found the cache prior to the event, got notifications and downloaded the cache information prior to the retraction. Unless there is some indication at the park area that it is off-limits or a permit/fee required - then I don't see how you can fault the ones who found it prior to the event. It would appear to be an issue with either the ones who placed the caches for submitting them early or the Reviewer if he was not suppose to publish them until later.

 

I believe there is always 2 sides to a story, and with the postings I have seen from Fizzymagic in the past, regarding FTFs...it's safe to say that he is not a FTF fan in anyway, I think he is slanting the story to make the FTFers look like the bad guys, when they are not if the caches were published before the event by mistake, well I think fingers need to be pointed in a different direction, rather then Hanging the FTFers

[+Scubasonic]

 

Any self respecting FTF hound would give up the FTF if it turned out they had found a cache that wasn't active yet.

 

Shaun

 

Why?

 

If they found the cache, published or not, then they get the credit.

 

whoever signs the log first is the FTFer. JMO

[+Scubasonic]

The cachers knew this park and the rules, they were just hounds. At least the cachers knew they did wrong and didn't claim the FTFs.

 

Jellis,

How do you know "They Knew this Park and the rules" have you spoke to them personally? how can you make this statement with such certainty?

[+6NoisyHikers]

So, to clarify:

 

A special geocaching event was organized for April 6th, 2012 to celebrate a new section of parkland - open only to groups - that required registration and a fee to access.

 

Parks staff placed several new caches and invited the geocaching public to attend.

 

The caches were published then retracted on April 2nd, 2012. They were re-published on April 6th.

 

There is no information on the cache pages that state that these caches are tied to an event or have any rules about when they can be accessed. There is also no information about the area being available only to groups, or that a fee is required.

 

A group (pair, unit, gaggle?) of cachers attained the co-ordinates of the aforementioned caches and went on an FTF spree. They are said to know the area, and are acquainted with the rules of restricted access.

 

There was event signage in the area. There was no "restricted access" signage in the area.

 

Have I covered the facts so far? Please correct me if I've missed or misrepresented anything.

 

The questions to be answered, then, are:

 

Were the listings accidentally published early?

Was there adequate information provided on the cache pages informing seekers of the event?

Was there adequate signage in the area to inform people that the site had restricted access?

Was this truly a case of "Willful Ignorance" on the part of eager FTFers?

[+kunarion]

By publishing caches early with a starting date/time, you might save dozens of people the task of manually entering dozens of cache coordinates, parking coordinates, trailhead coordinates, etc.

That's a plus. It takes me FOREVER to input a list of caches handed out on a sheet of paper at an Event. Such as "Geocaching 101", where I might be one of the guys standing around who's enlisted to help type them all into the GPSrs on the table. After the first set of coords, I'm already missing Pocket Queries.

[+fizzymagic]

I didn't see anything about "event-only" or "restricted access". I might have made the (apparent) mistake of going for this cache outside of the associated event. I don't even have events on my notifications, so would never have known that non-event-goers weren't welcome until the angry emails started rolling in.

 

I could not have asked for clearer support for my original point than this.

 

Apparently, you (and several others in this thread) believe that unless access permissions are explicitly stated on the cache page, geocachers have no responsibility to know or obey the rules for a park. In this view, as soon as a cache is available, cachers are free to go get it however and whenever they want, and are under no obligation to obey any park rules not listed on the cache page.

 

The issue here is not whether the caches in question were reserved for the event or not; there were several event caches that were placed in publicly-accessible parts of the park, and nobody had any issues with others finding those before the event participants. The caches in question were in a part of the park current only open to special groups. The literature one receives upon paying the entrance fee made this exceptionally clear, if one took the time to actually, you know, look at it.

 

The park staff in this park are new to geocaching and were hiding their first caches; they had no idea that unless they stated every rule explicitly some cachers would claim it their "right" to violate park policies in their quest for FTF gold.

 

With attitudes like those expressed by several people in this forum, blaming park staff for the problem, it's no wonder land managers often get a bad taste in their mouths from experiences with geocachers.

[+lamoracke]

post #23 and post #24 refer to a quote by me which I have never said in this thread, for what its worth. That was Dragon West I believe.

[+fizzymagic]

with the postings I have seen from Fizzymagic in the past, regarding FTFs...it's safe to say that he is not a FTF fan in anyway

 

Unfortunately, that does not capture my position at all. I am in no way "anti-FTF." I enjoy the odd clean logsheet, though if a cache has been out less than a week I am not very likely to go for it. To me, FTFs for caches that have been out for a while are a lot more fun than a race to be the first to lift a lamp skirt.

 

I am, however, anti FTF-hounds who have little or no consideration for other cachers. I am not against a minor friendly competition, but I find the taunting and bragging about FTF stats distasteful. I recently learned that some people cheat in their efforts to pad their FTF numbers, and I find that annoying, as I do all cheating.

[+ShaunEM]

 

Any self respecting FTF hound would give up the FTF if it turned out they had found a cache that wasn't active yet.

 

Shaun

 

Why?

 

If they found the cache, published or not, then they get the credit.

 

That is the point isn't it?

 

If it said "NOT to log it until after this date/time" then this situation would make more sense.

 

Shaun

[+ShaunEM]

I didn't see anything about "event-only" or "restricted access". I might have made the (apparent) mistake of going for this cache outside of the associated event. I don't even have events on my notifications, so would never have known that non-event-goers weren't welcome until the angry emails started rolling in.

 

I could not have asked for clearer support for my original point than this.

 

Apparently, you (and several others in this thread) believe that unless access permissions are explicitly stated on the cache page, geocachers have no responsibility to know or obey the rules for a park. In this view, as soon as a cache is available, cachers are free to go get it however and whenever they want, and are under no obligation to obey any park rules not listed on the cache page.

 

The issue here is not whether the caches in question were reserved for the event or not; there were several event caches that were placed in publicly-accessible parts of the park, and nobody had any issues with others finding those before the event participants. The caches in question were in a part of the park current only open to special groups. The literature one receives upon paying the entrance fee made this exceptionally clear, if one took the time to actually, you know, look at it.

 

The park staff in this park are new to geocaching and were hiding their first caches; they had no idea that unless they stated every rule explicitly some cachers would claim it their "right" to violate park policies in their quest for FTF gold.

 

With attitudes like those expressed by several people in this forum, blaming park staff for the problem, it's no wonder land managers often get a bad taste in their mouths from experiences with geocachers.

 

I would fault the CO for not being clearer on the cache page(s). Restricted access to this cache (by date and/or payment) would definitely have avoided this.

 

Shaun

[+slukster]

The issue here is not whether the caches in question were reserved for the event or not; there were several event caches that were placed in publicly-accessible parts of the park, and nobody had any issues with others finding those before the event participants. The caches in question were in a part of the park current only open to special groups. The literature one receives upon paying the entrance fee made this exceptionally clear, if one took the time to actually, you know, look at it.

The bolded part made me laugh. It reminded me of a EULA (end-user license agreement) that comes with the software you buy for your computer. Many tell you that you are signing your life over to Microsoft (or other company) by downloading the software but you can only read the EULA after you buy the software. Besides the literature that you receive because you already signed up as a special group, does it say anywhere else in the park that this area is open only to special groups?

Edited April 9, 2012 by slukster

[+JesandTodd]

 

I am, however, anti FTF-hounds who have little or no consideration for other cachers. I am not against a minor friendly competition, but I find the taunting and bragging about FTF stats distasteful. I recently learned that some people cheat in their efforts to pad their FTF numbers, and I find that annoying, as I do all cheating.

 

I couldn't agree with you more....

[+fizzymagic]

Besides the literature that you receive because you already signed up as a special group, does it say anywhere else in the park that this area is open only to special groups?

 

Wow, you guys are really doing a great job of making FTF hounds look bad!

 

The literature in question is the literature that everyone receives when they pay the required fee to enter the park.

 

Perhaps our FTF hounds didn't see the literature because they entered the park without paying the fee? I predict that you will claim that this is somehow still not their fault, though to be honest I can't predict what the excuse will be this time.

[+Scubasonic]

 

The park staff in this park are new to geocaching and were hiding their first caches;

 

Then someone with Geocaching Experience should have advised the CO that they needed to be specific in the description as to what was going on. The fault I feel lies with the CO.

[+J the Goat]

 

The park staff in this park are new to geocaching and were hiding their first caches;

 

Then someone with Geocaching Experience should have advised the CO that they needed to be specific in the description as to what was going on. The fault I feel lies with the CO.

 

Not if the FTFers entered a restricted area or didn't pay the required fee. Then it lies on them. Rebuttle?