An FTF Tale

[Trinity's Crew]

We're not talking about a newbie that doesn't know the area, the people or the rules of this (and every park) in the area. This is somebody with well over 5K finds that a history of doing things like this.

Thanks for providing this information. It does seem to answer the question of whether they knowingly broke park rules. Hopefully this public shaming will convince them to change their ways.

I'm not sure. The caches were briefly published early. If they paid the day use fee for the area sometime between April 2nd and the event then maybe it was ok for them to be there.

 

Again, I'm not sure. I could be misinterpreting the Hollister Hills description of the area.

 

I 'm not in either camp on this issue, at least not yet. I am just trying to make sure I'm getting the whole picture.

[+Mr.Benchmark]

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.

 

Quoting this again for context. I am amazed at the number of people here who are trying to rationalize this. (I am especially amused by some in this thread who seem to blame the park staff because possibly they didn't post the park hours in the cache description, yet who in other threads feel the finder is typically at fault for not being situationally aware.) The behavior of these cachers frustrated and embarrassed the land managers for this park. That alone is cause for concern - annoying land managers is not typically viewed as being a healthy thing for this game.

 

There is not one thing wrong with healthy competition for FTF, and many of the people who complain about "why can't I get FTF?!?" need to cry less and learn to play more.

 

However, it would appear in this instance that the cachers in question ran onto the field before the game started, and ran up the score, annoying the park staff who went to all that effort. That is not healthy competition in my opinion. Since nobody but these two were running for these caches, it sure wasn't much of a competition, was it?

 

It is difficult for me to view this in any way other than the two in question were just extremely selfish, or at least their seemingly rather single-minded competitiveness drove them to do things that they should've known better than to do.

 

I certainly hope the staff doesn't decide geocachers are simply not worth the trouble.

Edited April 11, 2012 by Mr.Benchmark

[+The A-Team]

The caches were briefly published early. If they paid the day use fee for the area sometime between April 2nd and the event then maybe it was ok for them to be there.

I don't think they found them before the event day. Several times in this topic it was mentioned they had to drive past a sign pointing to the event. That sure sounds like they found them on the morning of the day of the event.

 

You're right, it isn't clear looking at the website what the status of the Hudner Property is. The map shows it, but doesn't say anything about "group use only". In fact, the only mentions of the Hudner Property I could find on the entire site was on the map and the grand opening scheduled for May 12 on the event calendar. From what others have said, though, the day-use pass doesn't give you access to that property, so if they were there anytime other than as part of the geocaching event, they were there illegally.

 

I think I'm leaning more and more towards the screaming mob.

[+The A-Team]

I am amazed at the number of people here who are trying to rationalize this.

I'm not sure it's rationalization, we're just speculating based on the information we have. As we get more and more information, it's appearing very likely that the FTF hounds knowingly went in illegally solely to get the FTFs.

 

I certainly hope the staff doesn't decide geocachers are simply not worth the trouble.

I agree. Hopefully the fact that so many other cachers came to the event and followed the rules can overshadow the black eye created by these FTF hounds.

[+Mr.Benchmark]

I am amazed at the number of people here who are trying to rationalize this.

I'm not sure it's rationalization, we're just speculating based on the information we have. As we get more and more information, it's appearing very likely that the FTF hounds knowingly went in illegally solely to get the FTFs.

 

I certainly hope the staff doesn't decide geocachers are simply not worth the trouble.

I agree. Hopefully the fact that so many other cachers came to the event and followed the rules can overshadow the black eye created by these FTF hounds.

 

In my opinion, if these guys wanted to exhibit good sportsmanship, they should consider:

1. Apologizing to the park staff.

2. Volunteering, even briefly, to assist with something at the park. (This doesn't need to be huge in my opinion - they offended people - they didn't break stuff.)

Even if these guys really made a completely innocent and honest mistake (we all make them), they offended people and they should make up for that, in my opinion. Doing something like that would go a long way to apologize for spoiling the event, I'd think. We all make mistakes - it's what we do about them to make amends that says something about us.

[+6NoisyHikers]

 

In my opinion, if these guys wanted to exhibit good sportsmanship, they should consider:

1. Apologizing to the park staff.

2. Volunteering, even briefly, to assist with something at the park. (This doesn't need to be huge in my opinion - they offended people - they didn't break stuff.)

Even if these guys really made a completely innocent and honest mistake (we all make them), they offended people and they should make up for that, in my opinion. Doing something like that would go a long way to apologize for spoiling the event, I'd think. We all make mistakes - it's what we do about them to make amends that says something about us.

 

+1 Absolutely! Has anyone been in contact with these cachers? (well, okay, has anyone been in civil conversation with these cachers?)

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Imagine instead of a geocaching event, this had been a birthday party - an open party for a neighborhood. So a couple of the neighbors really, really like cake. So they get to the party really early. They find the cake sitting out there, ready to be eaten. So they eat it all. They don't stay for the party.

 

Would anyone feel like that was a neighborly thing to do?

If you tweak this just a bit, as shown, it would make for an excellent analogy:

 

Imagine instead of a public park event to highlight geocaching, this had been a birthday party - a closed party for only those attendees who signed a waiver. In setting up the party, the host posts the location and description of the presents on a public website, and makes no mention that viewing the presents are for only those folks who sign a waiver. So a couple of the locals really, really like the concept of presents. So they get to the party really early. They find the presents sitting out there, ready to be opened. So they open them, peek inside, admire them, scribble "Happy Birthday From Us" on the packaging and close them back up. They don't stay for the party, because parties are not their cup of tea.

 

Admittedly, it's not perfect, as analogies go, but it's better than the cake one.

 

But ya know what goes good with cake?

 

[Clan Riffster]

Yep...and looking at a number of random cache pages...I still don't see the limits/boundaries talked about here being addressed...

A lot of the parks and open spaces around here have restrictions (e.g., closed dusk to dawn). Some cache descriptions mention such restrictions; some don't. Whether or not the cache descriptions mention the restrictions, they apply to everyone, even geocachers.

Sure. No one is arguing otherwise. a rule is a rule, after all. In our continuing bid to win land managers over to our way of thinking, obeying the rules is rather important for the continuance of this hobby.

 

I'm just not sure it applies in this case, as no one has pointed out any rules which were broken. A group went to a public park, paid their entrance fee, then drove into an area they had legal access to, finding geocaches along the way.

 

How is "FTF" not like a piece of cake?

I suppose we could tweak your original analogy to make the item in question a cake instead of a present. It would go something like this:

 

Imagine instead of a park event about geocaching, this had been a birthday party - a closed birthday party which required attendees to sign a waiver. The party host posts on a public website "Free Cake!" and provides the coordinates for the cake. They don't mention anything else. So a couple guys really like cake. So they get to the given coordinates before the host. They find a cake sitting out there, ready to be eaten, just as promised. So they eat it all. They don't stay for the party, because they didn't know anything about a party. They just knew if they went to this particular location, they would get cake.

 

Is that worth breaking out the torches and pitchforks?

 

We're not talking about a newbie that doesn't know the area, the people or the rules of this (and every park) in the area. This is somebody with well over 5K finds that a history of doing things like this.

Thanks for providing this information. It does seem to answer the question of whether they knowingly broke park rules. Hopefully this public shaming will convince them to change their ways.

I'm not certain it does. For instance, I know the rules for the Little Big Econ State Park very well. I do geocaching related volunteer work for them. When I arrive, if someone were to hand me a flyer that looked, to all outward appearances, indistinguishable from the hundreds of other flyers I've gotten from them in the past, I probably wouldn't read it. There's no reason to. I already know the rules. If my objective is to hike a particular trail, in search of an early morning FTF, and I see nothing so much as hinting that my presence is not welcome on said trail that day, does my experience with that park increase or lessen the chance that my hike was done maliciously? Other parks I work closely with are the Charles Bronson State Park, the Wekiva State Park, Blue Springs State Park, St. John's River Water Management District lands, Seminole County parks, Orange County parks, Volusia County parks... the list goes on and on. Without a single exception, if there is a day when they do not want me to travel a particular section of trail, or a particular region in a park, they will post prominently displayed signage to that effect. I've asked a couple times, and haven't gotten an answer on whether or not appropriate signage was in place when the FTF group arrived.

 

I am amazed at the number of people here who are trying to rationalize this.

So far I haven't seen anyone try to rationalize anyone's behavior. I have seen a few people lighting torches, sharpening pitchforks and issuing dire utterances about evil being afoot. And, I've seen a few people ask some questions which have yet to be answered. I've even seen some folks offer some advice on how a similar situation could be avoided in the future. But I haven't really seen anything I would rate as rationalization. It seems pretty clear that the consensus in this thread is two sided:

 

Side 1: "Those cheaters are gonna be the death of geocaching! They should hang their head in shame! How dare they take all the FTFs!"

 

Side 2: "Right is right, and wrong is wrong. If they broke the rules, there should be consequences. Can anyone tell us, specifically, which rule was broken, and how they broke it? Pretty please? With sugar on top?"

 

(I am especially amused by some in this thread who seem to blame the park staff because possibly they didn't post the park hours in the cache description, yet who in other threads feel the finder is typically at fault for not being situationally aware.)

I don't think anyone suggested this was an issue regarding park hours. Even the worst complainers have admitted that these guys paid their fees. That's certainly indicative of the park being open. I'll agree with those who suggested that the staff add information relevant to the park's operating policy to the cache page. Hopefully my agreement won't cause you to place me in the "They must be blaming the staff" camp. I'll also agree with the other half of your supposition; that visitors to a park do have some responsibility for knowing the rules and adhering to them. But that responsibility goes away if the park makes no mention, anywhere, of a particular rule. For instance, if the Blue Springs State Park manager decided that the Blue Trail was closed until further notice, and kept that information to himself, would I be held accountable if I were caught walking on the Blue Trail?

 

The behavior of these cachers frustrated and embarrassed the land managers for this park.

I heard it made them "livid"...

 

However, it would appear in this instance that the cachers in question ran onto the field before the game started, and ran up the score,

Actually, it appears that the cachers in question strolled out onto a field because nobody bothered to tell them it was closed. Then they were publicly vilified for their sins.

 

It is difficult for me to view this in any way other than the two in question were just extremely selfish, or at least their seemingly rather single-minded competitiveness drove them to do things that they should've known better than to do.

Here's where you lose me. If there is nothing in place to communicate what is, and what is not, acceptable behavior, (say, for instance, signage telling them to keep out), how were they supposed to know better? They paid their fee, entered an area that was seemingly open to the public, and found caches that were posted on a mostly public website.

 

Not exactly a sin, from where I'm sitting.

[Luckless]

Perhaps these caches that were in restricted areas should not have been published and instead just used for the event also making a special announcement that under normal circumstances this area was restricted. Publishing them opens them up the general public which is liable to create more problems.

 

OK, I'll have to spell this out all over again. The area of dispute is for Groups. Like many state parks, there's an Entrance or Day-Use fee for bringing a vehicle into a park. So any caches in State Parks are available, should you pay the fee. The area for which the cachers paid an entrance fee for is ONLY the 4x4 area South of the road. The Group area your day use fee is not applicable for (Fizzymagic has already stated this) The Hudner Property is for groups and the group was the event hosted by the park staff (users of this area had to Register to be allowed entry.)

 

Park staff did an amazing thing for geocachers who want to use the area for group outtings or for members of groups who may be introduced to geocaching to find.

 

This really is a cautionary tale -- slow down cowpoke! Scout it out and know what fees and or restrictions apply to areas where geocaches are placed. Just because there's a cache there doesn't mean you can just stroll on in.

 

There is yet another section of the SVRA which is open only to Dirt Bikes and ATVs, with several nice caches in. You are not allowed to hike, bike or take a 4x4 into this area. So there is yet another example of caches which are placed which you must access by appropriate means. Violation of the park rules to make finds and play dumb later or claiming all caches must be available to all geocachers is no defense.

 

I'm confused. How did they get caches in a restricted area listed? It would seem to me these caches would only be available for the event. One day is not enough time for a cache to be listed on geocaching.com- or so I've been led to believe. That's why I say perhaps the caches should not have been listed but just used at the event.

[+Lil Devil]

Actually, it appears that the cachers in question strolled out onto a field because nobody bothered to tell them it was closed. Then they were publicly vilified for their sins.

This is exactly what I was thinking. My bet is there are no signs, but rather some gates, and if there were signs they were on the gates, which were already opened in anticipation of the event that was to start soon. With the gates opened, the signs would have been facing away from the road and unseen by the cachers. So these guys drove on to the caches, unaware they were supposed to wait for the event to start.

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong, and also please explain why any of this is really a problem?

[+cache_test_dummies]

... and also please explain why any of this is really a problem?

These are the Geocaching Forums. In here, everything is a problem.

[Luckless]

... and also please explain why any of this is really a problem?

These are the Geocaching Forums. In here, everything is a problem.

[+AustinMN]

I'm just not sure it applies in this case, as no one has pointed out any rules which were broken. A group went to a public park, paid their entrance fee, then drove into an area they had legal access to, finding geocaches along the way.

 

Thank you for playing, but please go back and read again, separating fact from speculation. It's been spelled out repeatedly, unless you are calling certain posters liars. Sort of makes the rest of your post meaningless.

 

Austin

[+J the Goat]

 

However, it would appear in this instance that the cachers in question ran onto the field before the game started, and ran up the score,

Actually, it appears that the cachers in question strolled out onto a field because nobody bothered to tell them it was closed. Then they were publicly vilified for their sins.

 

It is difficult for me to view this in any way other than the two in question were just extremely selfish, or at least their seemingly rather single-minded competitiveness drove them to do things that they should've known better than to do.

Here's where you lose me. If there is nothing in place to communicate what is, and what is not, acceptable behavior, (say, for instance, signage telling them to keep out), how were they supposed to know better? They paid their fee, entered an area that was seemingly open to the public, and found caches that were posted on a mostly public website.

 

Not exactly a sin, from where I'm sitting.

 

Or perhaps the flyer they were handed on paying their fees that they have the responsibility to read prior to doing anything else? Yes, I've ignored flyers that I thought I've read before. That doesn't mean I'm not responsible for the rules and regs in said flyer. That, and this restricted area wasn't newly restricted. I'm sure that if anything changed, it was the allowance of ANYONE in the area, so wouldn't it make sense to read the information on the newly opened area before entering it?

 

I'm not anti FTF. Go ahead, race your little hearts out. The bottom line is that we're all responsible to know and follow the rules of the locations in which we're caching. To say "it should have been posted better" is just like saying "it's not our responsiblity to know, it's their responsibility to make sure we know." By maybe, say..... handing out a flyer with the rules? Maybe?

[+DragonsWest]

Perhaps this log entry, from a cache deep in the 4x4 Upper Ranch (not the Hudner, which only opened this past weekend) could illustrate the sort of FTF mentality we're talking about.

Finally!!! Had to get this one. It was begging to be found. I had to get access to a vehicle. Noone wanted to go. I finally talked to my neighbor and he agreed to let his son drive me to Hollister in his truck....AFTER I helped in do a 'little' work in his vineyard. Well...that took awhile...and it was raining! AHHHHHHHHHH!!!

We finished the vineyard work and headed down to Hollister and I was very happy/surprised that it really hadn't rained there.....so the ground was actually dry! Nice!

We headed up to the cache area...in an old beater truck (2wdr!) with bald tires. Well....that wasn't a good idea but we had to get the cache. We got stuck several times and eventually had to abandon the truck and finish the quest on foot. We got to the cache area and found it pretty quickly. Nice! We had to hustle because we heard the grading tractor below us and we were afraid of what would happen if they saw an unoccupied truck out there!

We headed out and played in the obstacle course area for twhile and that was fun too. Nice day to play in the mud!

The best part was when we went over a big bump a bit to fast and got some air. One of the batteries came loose and hit the hood and there were sparks all over the place! It was the 4th of July for a split second! Priceless!

 

Thanks for the cache....it was a great one!

 

#XXX for us and FTF #XXX

 

Does this sound responsible to anyone here? Just askin.

[+M 5]

Perhaps this log entry, from a cache deep in the 4x4 Upper Ranch (not the Hudner, which only opened this past weekend) could illustrate the sort of FTF mentality we're talking about.

Finally!!! Had to get this one. It was begging to be found. I had to get access to a vehicle. Noone wanted to go. I finally talked to my neighbor and he agreed to let his son drive me to Hollister in his truck....AFTER I helped in do a 'little' work in his vineyard. Well...that took awhile...and it was raining! AHHHHHHHHHH!!!

We finished the vineyard work and headed down to Hollister and I was very happy/surprised that it really hadn't rained there.....so the ground was actually dry! Nice!

We headed up to the cache area...in an old beater truck (2wdr!) with bald tires. Well....that wasn't a good idea but we had to get the cache. We got stuck several times and eventually had to abandon the truck and finish the quest on foot. We got to the cache area and found it pretty quickly. Nice! We had to hustle because we heard the grading tractor below us and we were afraid of what would happen if they saw an unoccupied truck out there!

We headed out and played in the obstacle course area for twhile and that was fun too. Nice day to play in the mud!

The best part was when we went over a big bump a bit to fast and got some air. One of the batteries came loose and hit the hood and there were sparks all over the place! It was the 4th of July for a split second! Priceless!

 

Thanks for the cache....it was a great one!

 

#XXX for us and FTF #XXX

 

Does this sound responsible to anyone here? Just askin.

 

How did being FTF factor into that story? Sounds like it was way after it was published, and I have a feeling that the next finders will show the same 4X4 trail mentality (not ftf mentality) to get to the cache

[+DragonsWest]

Perhaps this log entry, from a cache deep in the 4x4 Upper Ranch (not the Hudner, which only opened this past weekend) could illustrate the sort of FTF mentality we're talking about.

Finally!!! Had to get this one. It was begging to be found. I had to get access to a vehicle. Noone wanted to go. I finally talked to my neighbor and he agreed to let his son drive me to Hollister in his truck....AFTER I helped in do a 'little' work in his vineyard. Well...that took awhile...and it was raining! AHHHHHHHHHH!!!

We finished the vineyard work and headed down to Hollister and I was very happy/surprised that it really hadn't rained there.....so the ground was actually dry! Nice!

We headed up to the cache area...in an old beater truck (2wdr!) with bald tires. Well....that wasn't a good idea but we had to get the cache. We got stuck several times and eventually had to abandon the truck and finish the quest on foot. We got to the cache area and found it pretty quickly. Nice! We had to hustle because we heard the grading tractor below us and we were afraid of what would happen if they saw an unoccupied truck out there!

We headed out and played in the obstacle course area for twhile and that was fun too. Nice day to play in the mud!

The best part was when we went over a big bump a bit to fast and got some air. One of the batteries came loose and hit the hood and there were sparks all over the place! It was the 4th of July for a split second! Priceless!

 

Thanks for the cache....it was a great one!

 

#XXX for us and FTF #XXX

 

Does this sound responsible to anyone here? Just askin.

 

How did being FTF factor into that story? Sounds like it was way after it was published, and I have a feeling that the next finders will show the same 4X4 trail mentality (not ftf mentality) to get to the cache

 

Did you miss the parts about 2WD in a 4x4 park? Bald tires? Likely a very inexperienced driver? It's their luck they didn't get stuck because they would have probably been banned from the park for that.

[4wheelin_fool]

Perhaps this log entry, from a cache deep in the 4x4 Upper Ranch (not the Hudner, which only opened this past weekend) could illustrate the sort of FTF mentality we're talking about.

Finally!!! Had to get this one. It was begging to be found. I had to get access to a vehicle. Noone wanted to go. I finally talked to my neighbor and he agreed to let his son drive me to Hollister in his truck....AFTER I helped in do a 'little' work in his vineyard. Well...that took awhile...and it was raining! AHHHHHHHHHH!!!

We finished the vineyard work and headed down to Hollister and I was very happy/surprised that it really hadn't rained there.....so the ground was actually dry! Nice!

We headed up to the cache area...in an old beater truck (2wdr!) with bald tires. Well....that wasn't a good idea but we had to get the cache. We got stuck several times and eventually had to abandon the truck and finish the quest on foot. We got to the cache area and found it pretty quickly. Nice! We had to hustle because we heard the grading tractor below us and we were afraid of what would happen if they saw an unoccupied truck out there!

We headed out and played in the obstacle course area for twhile and that was fun too. Nice day to play in the mud!

The best part was when we went over a big bump a bit to fast and got some air. One of the batteries came loose and hit the hood and there were sparks all over the place! It was the 4th of July for a split second! Priceless!

 

Thanks for the cache....it was a great one!

 

#XXX for us and FTF #XXX

 

Does this sound responsible to anyone here? Just askin.

 

Who was injured? What was damaged? Which laws were broken?

 

It sounds like me at 18.

[+M 5]

Perhaps this log entry, from a cache deep in the 4x4 Upper Ranch (not the Hudner, which only opened this past weekend) could illustrate the sort of FTF mentality we're talking about.

Finally!!! Had to get this one. It was begging to be found. I had to get access to a vehicle. Noone wanted to go. I finally talked to my neighbor and he agreed to let his son drive me to Hollister in his truck....AFTER I helped in do a 'little' work in his vineyard. Well...that took awhile...and it was raining! AHHHHHHHHHH!!!

We finished the vineyard work and headed down to Hollister and I was very happy/surprised that it really hadn't rained there.....so the ground was actually dry! Nice!

We headed up to the cache area...in an old beater truck (2wdr!) with bald tires. Well....that wasn't a good idea but we had to get the cache. We got stuck several times and eventually had to abandon the truck and finish the quest on foot. We got to the cache area and found it pretty quickly. Nice! We had to hustle because we heard the grading tractor below us and we were afraid of what would happen if they saw an unoccupied truck out there!

We headed out and played in the obstacle course area for twhile and that was fun too. Nice day to play in the mud!

The best part was when we went over a big bump a bit to fast and got some air. One of the batteries came loose and hit the hood and there were sparks all over the place! It was the 4th of July for a split second! Priceless!

 

Thanks for the cache....it was a great one!

 

#XXX for us and FTF #XXX

 

Does this sound responsible to anyone here? Just askin.

 

How did being FTF factor into that story? Sounds like it was way after it was published, and I have a feeling that the next finders will show the same 4X4 trail mentality (not ftf mentality) to get to the cache

 

Did you miss the parts about 2WD in a 4x4 park? Bald tires? Likely a very inexperienced driver? It's their luck they didn't get stuck because they would have probably been banned from the park for that.

 

You must know nothing about 4X4 trails, sounds like fun. Banned for getting stuck, that is a good one. WOW!

[+DragonsWest]

Perhaps this log entry, from a cache deep in the 4x4 Upper Ranch (not the Hudner, which only opened this past weekend) could illustrate the sort of FTF mentality we're talking about.

Finally!!! Had to get this one. It was begging to be found. I had to get access to a vehicle. Noone wanted to go. I finally talked to my neighbor and he agreed to let his son drive me to Hollister in his truck....AFTER I helped in do a 'little' work in his vineyard. Well...that took awhile...and it was raining! AHHHHHHHHHH!!!

We finished the vineyard work and headed down to Hollister and I was very happy/surprised that it really hadn't rained there.....so the ground was actually dry! Nice!

We headed up to the cache area...in an old beater truck (2wdr!) with bald tires. Well....that wasn't a good idea but we had to get the cache. We got stuck several times and eventually had to abandon the truck and finish the quest on foot. We got to the cache area and found it pretty quickly. Nice! We had to hustle because we heard the grading tractor below us and we were afraid of what would happen if they saw an unoccupied truck out there!

We headed out and played in the obstacle course area for twhile and that was fun too. Nice day to play in the mud!

The best part was when we went over a big bump a bit to fast and got some air. One of the batteries came loose and hit the hood and there were sparks all over the place! It was the 4th of July for a split second! Priceless!

 

Thanks for the cache....it was a great one!

 

#XXX for us and FTF #XXX

 

Does this sound responsible to anyone here? Just askin.

 

How did being FTF factor into that story? Sounds like it was way after it was published, and I have a feeling that the next finders will show the same 4X4 trail mentality (not ftf mentality) to get to the cache

 

Did you miss the parts about 2WD in a 4x4 park? Bald tires? Likely a very inexperienced driver? It's their luck they didn't get stuck because they would have probably been banned from the park for that.

 

You must know nothing about 4X4 trails, sounds like fun. Banned for getting stuck, that is a good one. WOW!

 

In that half of the park the trails are all Blue or Black Diamond. I don't doubt getting through that alive makes for some exciting and fond memories, but it can also lead to obituaries. Experienced drivers don't take that kind of behavior in the park lightly.

[+J the Goat]

Perhaps this log entry, from a cache deep in the 4x4 Upper Ranch (not the Hudner, which only opened this past weekend) could illustrate the sort of FTF mentality we're talking about.

Finally!!! Had to get this one. It was begging to be found. I had to get access to a vehicle. Noone wanted to go. I finally talked to my neighbor and he agreed to let his son drive me to Hollister in his truck....AFTER I helped in do a 'little' work in his vineyard. Well...that took awhile...and it was raining! AHHHHHHHHHH!!!

We finished the vineyard work and headed down to Hollister and I was very happy/surprised that it really hadn't rained there.....so the ground was actually dry! Nice!

We headed up to the cache area...in an old beater truck (2wdr!) with bald tires. Well....that wasn't a good idea but we had to get the cache. We got stuck several times and eventually had to abandon the truck and finish the quest on foot. We got to the cache area and found it pretty quickly. Nice! We had to hustle because we heard the grading tractor below us and we were afraid of what would happen if they saw an unoccupied truck out there!

We headed out and played in the obstacle course area for twhile and that was fun too. Nice day to play in the mud!

The best part was when we went over a big bump a bit to fast and got some air. One of the batteries came loose and hit the hood and there were sparks all over the place! It was the 4th of July for a split second! Priceless!

 

Thanks for the cache....it was a great one!

 

#XXX for us and FTF #XXX

 

Does this sound responsible to anyone here? Just askin.

 

DW, I do think this is a bit out of context. Irresponsible trail use is different than blatantly ignoring park rules for an FTF.

[+niraD]

I'm confused. How did they get caches in a restricted area listed?

The guidelines prohibit commercial caches. They do not prohibit caches in parks that require entrance fees, that enforce rules, etc.

 

For example, there are night caches in parks that allow only campers with paid camping permits after dark. If you don't pay for the camping permit, they you aren't allowed in the park after dark, and you can't do the night cache.

 

This is no different. To get access to this area of the park, you have to pay the entrance fee and obey the rules for this area of the park. Paying for access to other areas of the park does not grant access to this area of the park.

[+DragonsWest]

[snip]

Does this sound responsible to anyone here? Just askin.

 

DW, I do think this is a bit out of context. Irresponsible trail use is different than blatantly ignoring park rules for an FTF.

 

As an answer to the character question (broadly defended through devils advocate positions) The example post was from one of the pair, whose activity gave rise to this discussion.

 

I ask, does this look like the means of caching of someone who follows ORV park rules in the pursuit of finds and/or first to finds? This is why it is a cautionary tale.

 

Sure, go out and find caches, but employ sense, abide park rules and when caches are placed in new areas and there are clear EVENT signs posted, ask.

 

Had that pickup truck truly run into difficulty on technical trails (and some back there really are) how do you defend the pursuit of Geocaching? Luck was with them, but it isn't with everyone always.

[+J the Goat]

[snip]

Does this sound responsible to anyone here? Just askin.

 

DW, I do think this is a bit out of context. Irresponsible trail use is different than blatantly ignoring park rules for an FTF.

 

As an answer to the character question (broadly defended through devils advocate positions) The example post was from one of the pair, whose activity gave rise to this discussion.

 

I ask, does this look like the means of caching of someone who follows ORV park rules in the pursuit of finds and/or first to finds? This is why it is a cautionary tale.

 

Sure, go out and find caches, but employ sense, abide park rules and when caches are placed in new areas and there are clear EVENT signs posted, ask.

 

Had that pickup truck truly run into difficulty on technical trails (and some back there really are) how do you defend the pursuit of Geocaching? Luck was with them, but it isn't with everyone always.

 

I understand where you were taking it, but my understanding of this thread was a general cautionary tale using a specific example of something that shouldn't have happened. Park rules were ignored by geocachers and it angered park staff. Whether that was them, or me, or you, that's what happened. Folks are trying to defend the offending cachers, but what it boils down to is that rules weren't followed, in turn creating some bad blood (even if temporary). Anything brining up past logs turns the thread more into an attack on the the cachers in question instead of pointing out the negative impact of their actions, at least IMHO.

[jholly]

After having a couple of FTF'ers blatantly ignore the signs at the entrance to the parks where I hid caches and then discussed their exploits by flashlight in the logs. I was a bit miffed. I asked them to edit their logs to remove the obvious rule violations. I now ask the reviewer to publish my caches in the morning when I hide them in parks. I also let the reviewer know they can wait until it is convenient for them to do this. So far I have not had any push back from the reviewers. Thank you Washington State reviewers!

 

I see parallels with this incident and hopefully the rangers learned a lesson. If they do something like this again they need to have a reviewer note clearly explaining that they don't want the caches published until the morning of the event. Perhaps even asking for a time after which they can be published. Hopefully this will put the hounds off the sent and the event could be enjoyed as the rangers wanted. I am not saying the cachers did not abide by the rules, but I have noted that FTF hounds tend to have extreme tunnel vision and can think of only one thing and will do what ever it takes to get the blank log.

[Luckless]

I'm confused. How did they get caches in a restricted area listed?

The guidelines prohibit commercial caches. They do not prohibit caches in parks that require entrance fees, that enforce rules, etc.

 

For example, there are night caches in parks that allow only campers with paid camping permits after dark. If you don't pay for the camping permit, they you aren't allowed in the park after dark, and you can't do the night cache.

 

This is no different. To get access to this area of the park, you have to pay the entrance fee and obey the rules for this area of the park. Paying for access to other areas of the park does not grant access to this area of the park.

 

Wow really- In order to hunt for a night cache in a park with camping permits you must have paid a fee to camp there even if you're not camping. How can a reviewer agree to that? I mean I suppose in essence it is an entrance fee- the price to get in- still it doesn't seem right. There is a privately owned walking trail near here that I once considered placing caches in, but nixed the idea immediately because they charged a dollar fee to walk around on the property and private commercial property with fees to enter is not allowed. Don't think that applies to state parks.

 

Okay. I was indeed thinking perhaps there were two fees for the park mentioned in this thread- one for each part of the park. So does that mean you can only hunt for the caches in that restricted part of the park if you are part of a group paying to stay in that part of the park? Individuals can't go there?

Or as an individual do you have to pay for each part of the park you want to cache in? This "groups' thing the OP is talking about is confusing me and I was wondering just how that would work.

[+CanadianRockies]

Wow really- In order to hunt for a night cache in a park with camping permits you must have paid a fee to camp there even if you're not camping. How can a reviewer agree to that? I mean I suppose in essence it is an entrance fee- the price to get in- still it doesn't seem right. There is a privately owned walking trail near here that I once considered placing caches in, but nixed the idea immediately because they charged a dollar fee to walk around on the property and private commercial property with fees to enter is not allowed. Don't think that applies to state parks.

I'm guessing this night cache is inside a public park (e.g., a state park). Groundspeak generally frowns upon caches inside commercial establishments, especially if one needs to pay to get inside. But public parks aren't considered commercial establishments, and fees can be charged there.

 

As long as the park fees are noted on the cache listing pages, this is okay with me. I can decide whether or not it's worth paying the fee to access the park. Fortunately, I don't feel a need to find every cache out there...or even every cache in my area.

 

Okay. I was indeed thinking perhaps there were two fees for the park mentioned in this thread- one for each part of the park. So does that mean you can only hunt for the caches in that restricted part of the park if you are part of a group paying to stay in that part of the park? Individuals can't go there?

 

Or as an individual do you have to pay for each part of the park you want to cache in? This "groups' thing the OP is talking about is confusing me and I was wondering just how that would work.

It appears that individuals can access the Upper Hills area (after registering) as long as a group hasn't reserved the area for a special event. Here's a link to the Hollister Hills website.

[+ShaunEM]

Can someone post a few of the cache pages being discussed? I would be interested to see what they say.

 

I went to go check the website listed and my first thought was, "I don't think I have ever seen an area like this".

 

Shaun

[+The A-Team]

Can someone post a few of the cache pages being discussed? I would be interested to see what they say.

GC3G2A2 is one of them, roughly in the center of the area in question. The caches are owned by "Hollister Hills SVRA".

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

After having a couple of FTF'ers blatantly ignore the signs at the entrance to the parks where I hid caches and then discussed their exploits by flashlight in the logs. I was a bit miffed. I asked them to edit their logs to remove the obvious rule violations. I now ask the reviewer to publish my caches in the morning when I hide them in parks. I also let the reviewer know they can wait until it is convenient for them to do this. So far I have not had any push back from the reviewers. Thank you Washington State reviewers!

 

If you set the "Not Available at all times" attribute, our reviewer automatically waits until the next day to publish it, knowing people will go out at all hours for the FTF.

 

Thanks gpsfun!

[Clan Riffster]

I'm just not sure it applies in this case, as no one has pointed out any rules which were broken. A group went to a public park, paid their entrance fee, then drove into an area they had legal access to, finding geocaches along the way.

 

Thank you for playing, but please go back and read again, separating fact from speculation. It's been spelled out repeatedly, unless you are calling certain posters liars. Sort of makes the rest of your post meaningless.

 

Austin

And yet again, another participant in the drama thread who refuses to provide facts...

I guess by now I should expect such knee jerk posts.

I suppose I should thank you for the entertainment...

 

Or perhaps the flyer they were handed on paying their fees that they have the responsibility to read prior to doing anything else?

 

Not sure what this means, but I'll give it a go.

 

First, it has not been established that the FTF crew got a flyer.

We've heard that they were handed out at the event.

They may have been handed out at the gate, once the event was geared up.

We don't know if it was handed out days, or even hours before the event.

 

Second, it has not been established that there even was a new flyer.

Several folks, fairly good at Googling, have been unable to locate any trace of it.

 

Third, if we assume there was a flyer, supposedly with rules on it for the off-road area, we have no idea what the flyer says because those folks who went to the event, and supposedly got the shiny new flyer, refuse to tell us exactly what the flyer says.

 

 

That doesn't mean I'm not responsible for the rules and regs in said flyer.

 

I don't think anyone is making such an argument.

Rather, the question seems to be, did the FTF crew know about the rules?

If Orlando Florida bans red dresses on Thursdays, but opts against telling the citizenry that red dresses are banned on Thursdays, would it be reasonable to send the screaming, pitchfork jabbing, torch waving mob after someone who unknowingly violated that rule? Sure, the violator is still responsible, but shouldn't we tone down the punishment if there was no way a reasonable person could have known they were in violation?

 

 

That, and this restricted area wasn't newly restricted.

We still don't know the details of said restriction.

What we have heard is that you have to pay a fee. Some say you have to pay an extra fee to access this area, in addition to the fee you already paid to get in the park. Some say you don't have to pay anything but the regular admission. The torch wavers have admitted that the FTF crew paid their admission fees. We've heard that this area is restricted to groups. The FTF crew was a group. We've heard that the area was closed to the public for a long time, but we have not heard when it opened up. The torch wavers would have us believe that it didn't open up until the park hosted event. The information on the park's website seems to dispute this. The torch wavers said you had to fill out a waiver to use this section of the park, but that also is disputed by the park's website, leading me to speculate that the waiver signed by the wavers was in reference to participating in activities with the staff, as opposed to being in a specific area.

 

 

To say "it should have been posted better" is just like saying "it's not our responsiblity to know, it's their responsibility to make sure we know." By maybe, say..... handing out a flyer with the rules? Maybe?

No. To say, "It should have been posted better" is like offering constructive criticism in an effort to avoid a repeat of this horribly devastating tragedy. No one who offered that bit of advice is suggesting, in any way, that the park staff's decision to leave what any sane geocache hider would consider critical information regarding a location, (little things like, you must be in a group, you must pay an additional fee, you must sign a waiver, you must pout if you are too slow to grab the FTF, etc) off of their cache page in any way exempts the FTF crew from their responsibility to follow the rules.

 

If it can be demonstrated that the FTF crew violated any rules, (it hasn't happened yet), then I will join you in your finger waggling, though I'll probably stop there, as I'm not seeing any evidence that the FTF crew had any way of knowing they were in violation. Supposed rules spelled out in a supposed flyer that no one can produce?... No "Off Limits" signs posted... No closed gates... Just a bunch of caches posted on a mostly public website by park staff who elected to not include these supposed new rules on the cache pages.

 

Finger waggling, yes. (If they broke any rules)

 

Torches, pitchforks & screaming mobs, no.

[Clan Riffster]

Park rules were ignored by geocachers and it angered park staff.

We keep hearing this, yet those who supposedly know the fine details keep refusing to explain it. What rules, exactly, were broken, and how, exactly, were they broken? Did they enter a park without paying an entrance fee? Not according to the torch wavers. Did they drive past signs proclaiming that the area was off limits? Not according to the torch wavers. Did the enter a group only area solo? Not according to the torch wavers.

 

Simply proclaiming "The area in question is restricted" in no way indicates that the FTF crew violated any of the restrictions.

 

Details, please.

 

Folks are trying to defend the offending cachers,

Not really. But some of us are suggesting that crucifixion should probably wait until at least some facts have been established. If they were in the wrong, and a reasonable and prudent person in their position would have known that what they were doing was illegal, then perhaps we can break out the torches and the pitchforks.

 

but what it boils down to is that rules weren't followed,

Which rules?

Sorry to sound like a broken record, but this still hasn't been answered.

[+J the Goat]

 

To say "it should have been posted better" is just like saying "it's not our responsiblity to know, it's their responsibility to make sure we know." By maybe, say..... handing out a flyer with the rules? Maybe?

No. To say, "It should have been posted better" is like offering constructive criticism in an effort to avoid a repeat of this horribly devastating tragedy. No one who offered that bit of advice is suggesting, in any way, that the park staff's decision to leave what any sane geocache hider would consider critical information regarding a location, (little things like, you must be in a group, you must pay an additional fee, you must sign a waiver, you must pout if you are too slow to grab the FTF, etc) off of their cache page in any way exempts the FTF crew from their responsibility to follow the rules.

If it can be demonstrated that the FTF crew violated any rules, (it hasn't happened yet), then I will join you in your finger waggling, though I'll probably stop there, as I'm not seeing any evidence that the FTF crew had any way of knowing they were in violation. Supposed rules spelled out in a supposed flyer that no one can produce?... No "Off Limits" signs posted... No closed gates... Just a bunch of caches posted on a mostly public website by park staff who elected to not include these supposed new rules on the cache pages.

 

Finger waggling, yes. (If they broke any rules)

 

Torches, pitchforks & screaming mobs, no.

 

First off, I like your style once again CR. I pretty much agree with every bit of argument shredding you've done throughout the thread, and also agree that monster chasing pitchfork weilding mobs aren't appropriate for this situation. Thatnks for the thoughtful responses that go beyond "the caches were published so FTF is fair game" type of vibe that some others are putting off.

 

I don't however agree with the highlighted statement above, or not completely at least. There was a quote earlier regarding the park rules and the area restrictions, although I didn't take the time to read back through entire thread to find it so I look silly bringing it up

 

What it boils down to, for me at least, is the CACHERS responsibility to know the rules. That doesn't mean they should be crucified for not following rules that could have been posted better, but my gut feeling (oh boy, here we go) that's only supported by, well.... my gut feeling, is that these cachers knew what they were doing and that they shouldn't have been doing it. That holds absolutely no water in a discussion like this and I get that, but it is what rings in my brain as what happened, on some level. Malice aforethought? Probably not. Complete disregard for some rules that are clearly easy to get around with the expectation of nobody being the wiser? Probably. Did they dodge the group event on purpose? Maybe not, they may not have known. The entrance of the restricted area is where this whole thing rubs me the wrong way.

 

You're not quite as dumb as that bag of hammers you're always talking about buddy, maybe all that gator-dodging has sharpened your wits a bit

[Clan Riffster]

Wow really- In order to hunt for a night cache in a park with camping permits you must have paid a fee to camp there even if you're not camping. How can a reviewer agree to that?

Why wouldn't a Reviewer agree to that? It's not like the cache hider is inventing arbitrary rules just because they want to. I own a night cache which is a perfect example of this concept. It is in the Little Big Econ State Forest. The Division of Forestry charges a $2 per person day use fee for anyone using the park during daylight hours. The park is closed at sunset to anyone who does not have a valid camping permit. They charge $10 for a camping permit. It really doesn't matter if you are camping or not. To be there after sunset you need a camping permit. I posted this information on my cache page so future seekers would know what the rules were.

[Clan Riffster]

What it boils down to, for me at least, is the CACHERS responsibility to know the rules. That doesn't mean they should be crucified for not following rules that could have been posted better, but my gut feeling (oh boy, here we go) that's only supported by, well.... my gut feeling, is that these cachers knew what they were doing and that they shouldn't have been doing it. That holds absolutely no water in a discussion like this and I get that, but it is what rings in my brain as what happened, on some level. Malice aforethought? Probably not. Complete disregard for some rules that are clearly easy to get around with the expectation of nobody being the wiser? Probably. Did they dodge the group event on purpose? Maybe not, they may not have known. The entrance of the restricted area is where this whole thing rubs me the wrong way.

Now that I can agree with. We know from JHolly's post that these guys have a penchant for putting common sense aside when there is a cache to be found. It is entirely possible that the FTF crew did know about the supposed restrictions, and used the early publication, the lack of signage and the lack of park rules on the cache pages to justify their behavior. Is it possible that these guys did break the rules knowingly? Certainly. They don't sound like the kind of cachers I want to associate with.

 

I'd just like a few facts before I 'helps my Paw string 'em up'.

[4wheelin_fool]

In the future this type of activity can be easily prevented by communicating with land managers that list caches of typical geocacher behavior, and by clearly posting rules and regulations on cache pages. That's really what should be discussed. Prevention from occurring again. Deleting logs of rulebreakers is enough of a deterrant to stop it. There are very few who will go for the FTF if they cannot log it, and if the cache pages clearly spell it out, it will sharply reduce the activity.

 

Grabbing the pitchforks after the fact, and attempting to publicly humiliate those that make mistakes is no way to correct the behaviour, and will only make it worse. There will always be races for FTF. It cannot be stopped. Learn to accept the things that cannot be changed, and to be wise enough to know what can be changed.

 

If the OP does not like competition, that is fine. There is no need to spin the tale any more than it needs to be.

 

My real reason for disliking Certitude is that it lists the solvers and the order in which they solved the puzzle, thus turning puzzle caching into a competitive sport. It has brought an unwanted (to me) aspect into Bay Area puzzle caching.

[+Sundance Cassidy]

I got my FTF just last weekend. I've gotten one and now I am perfectly satisfied. I suppose I just don't understand the obsession and certainly not when it jeopardizes the entire community. I was proud to see that empty log and proud to sign my name, but honestly I don't care if I never get another FTF. To me, I am competing against myself and not other cachers. I do it for myself and as a stress reliever...not to grab numbers and FTF's. But to each their own.

[+DragonsWest]

I got my FTF just last weekend. I've gotten one and now I am perfectly satisfied. I suppose I just don't understand the obsession and certainly not when it jeopardizes the entire community. I was proud to see that empty log and proud to sign my name, but honestly I don't care if I never get another FTF. To me, I am competing against myself and not other cachers. I do it for myself and as a stress reliever...not to grab numbers and FTF's. But to each their own.

This is how the whole FTF thing went with me. I was anxious to get one and finally managed one about 3 years ago. After that the novelty evaporated. I'd much rather find old caches or interesting caches, or cache in a very nice area than drag myself out to race other cachers to a find. (Now if they did another film themed one with movie props I might feel a bit different, but that's about it.)

 

Minutes late on what could have been an FTF this morning, but it didn't ruin my day - got to chat with a fellow cacher for a few minutes, see a very cool Red-legged Salamander (vulnerable species - which is actually trapped near the cache so I'll go back to rescue it later) and picked up a daily find.

 

These days I dream of having enough time to just go out somewhere and wander - finding caches along the way.

[+Straight-Cache-Homey]

These days I dream of having enough time to just go out somewhere and wander - finding caches along the way.

Amen. To have more time to do the things you want to do....