Geocaches in public places

[+Haunted Thunder]

Hello

 

I'm fairly new to Geocaching and was really getting into it, but I just tried to find a cache hidden in a public area and got marched out and interrogated by a guard as soon as I found ground zero. Others seem to have found the cache no problem, but others like myself have been kicked out. I thought all chaches were placed in locations that didn't mind geocachers? Is there something we were doing wrong? We went late evening hoping to avoid muggles, but were caught within minutes of arrival.It was really terrible and now I feel quite embarrassed.

 

Also- is there a way of filtering out caches so the one's I go for are in more 'accessible' places? I don't want to be getting into trouble

 

Taz

[+Keelmann And Cici]

You were kicked out of a public area? For what reason? What type of public area was this?

[ll JK ll]

I thought all chaches were placed in locations that didn't mind geocachers?

As someone fairly new to the game I've learned that this isn't always the case. It seems plenty of caches are placed without permission from the landowner and can lead to situations like yours.

 

A while back I was going for a park and grab near my house and was confronted by hotel security. They were more curious than hostile so it wasn't a big deal but I can see how curiosity can quickly escalate to hostility depending on what the location is.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Kicked out of a public area? If that is true, would you mind telling us the rest of the story?

 

Guard - public area - kicked out: Doesn't add up.

 

EDIT: unless you mean The White House (public area) - Guard (Park Police or Secret Service) - kicked out (self explanatory).

Edited September 4, 2012 by Gitchee-Gummee

[Luckless]

Agree with the others- if there is a guard it doesn't sound like a public place. What makes you say it was a public place?

[jholly]

Hello

 

I'm fairly new to Geocaching and was really getting into it, but I just tried to find a cache hidden in a public area and got marched out and interrogated by a guard as soon as I found ground zero. Others seem to have found the cache no problem, but others like myself have been kicked out. I thought all chaches were placed in locations that didn't mind geocachers? Is there something we were doing wrong? We went late evening hoping to avoid muggles, but were caught within minutes of arrival.It was really terrible and now I feel quite embarrassed.

 

Also- is there a way of filtering out caches so the one's I go for are in more 'accessible' places? I don't want to be getting into trouble

 

Taz

I will make a leap of faith that the "public area" really is private property like a parking structure or parking lot. Security noticed some thing going on in the area, not sure what, but is making sure the riff raff is escorted off the property. Would be interesting the know the GC of the cache to take a look at what the problem is.

[+captnemo]

Hello

 

I'm fairly new to Geocaching and was really getting into it, but I just tried to find a cache hidden in a public area and got marched out and interrogated by a guard as soon as I found ground zero. Others seem to have found the cache no problem, but others like myself have been kicked out. I thought all chaches were placed in locations that didn't mind geocachers? Is there something we were doing wrong? We went late evening hoping to avoid muggles, but were caught within minutes of arrival.It was really terrible and now I feel quite embarrassed.

 

Also- is there a way of filtering out caches so the one's I go for are in more 'accessible' places? I don't want to be getting into trouble

 

Taz

I going to make the jump that the public area was in a mall or parking lot but on private property. That being so, the cache was most likely placed without permission. I would email the Cache owner and ask for an conformation of permission and who you should talk to if you go back. If no response from the CO then I would post a NA on the cache.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Kicked out of a public area? If that is true, would you mind telling us the rest of the story?

 

Guard - public area - kicked out: Doesn't add up.

 

EDIT: unless you mean The White House (public area) - Guard (Park Police or Secret Service) - kicked out (self explanatory).

 

I was kind of thinking of the same thing about the White House. There are lots of public area just outside the fences surrounding the White House but loitering around in one spot in those areas is likely going to attract attention. I searched for a cache for a few minutes near a government building with security guard stations nearby while in Rome once and just got the feeling that if I spent any more time I would have been questioned.

 

Some areas that are open to the public still might be places where someone spending a bit of time searching for a cache is going to attract attention.

 

To the OP: You did not do anything wrong. This is a classic example of a cache that technically meets that guidelines, and thus has published, but probably should be removed if it's creating uncomfortable encounters with law enforcement for those like yourself that try to find it.

[+Haunted Thunder]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

[jholly]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

Yep, although it is "public" in the sense you can go there and be there to visit the business(es), it is private property. The guards comments makes me think the security folks think there is drug dealing going on.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

Yep, although it is "public" in the sense you can go there and be there to visit the business(es), it is private property. The guards comments makes me think the security folks think there is drug dealing going on.

 

Too many cache hiders seem to equate "open to the public" as "public property".

[+Armorsmith]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

 

I've run into this a few times... maybe we need to put something on the cache creation page to remind people that while many locations are considered public (I.E. the public is welcome to access and use the area without express permission), unless the cache owner also owns the property, they will need to get permission.

 

Essentially, "public" land or "public" access does not mean "the public owns it, so do whatever the %(#* you want."

 

I've been stopped by police a couple of times, the most awkward was when I was searching for my last cache of the day and it was getting dark. The cache was placed with permission, but I didn't know that there had been several robberies in the area in recent weeks, so the police were on watch and spotted me hanging around.

 

If you do get stopped, particularly if the person is in uniform, be completely honest and forthright and above all polite. Explain what geocaching is, show them your GPS device, and your app or printouts showing the location of the cache. I usually tell them that all geocaches are supposed to be placed with the permission of the property owner or managers and apologize on your behalf and on behalf of the cache owner if it wasn't. A lot of times, the person who originally gave the permission didn't bother to inform other people (particularly security) and if they leave, no one knows that permission was ever given. I even offer to follow up on it to make sure it was indeed placed with permission, and if not, to contact the cache owner to let them know that they will have to either ask for permission, or re-ask as the case may be.

 

Whatever you do, don't lie, making an excuse is suspicious and a good way to find out what the inside of a cop car feels like.

 

I've only placed a couple of caches, but I've made it a point to ask the person granting permission to provide the permission in writing and to inform the staff and relevant security personnel that the cache has been placed and what to expect. I ask them to copy me on any emails they send to that effect so that I can keep them for my records. Just in case there is ever an issue, I want to be able to back up my claim that I placed the cache with permission.

 

It's a little more work, but it keeps geocaching safe for participants and prevents blanket bans of the activity from being put into place (as many communities have because cachers didn't ask for permission before placing them in public areas).

[+Isonzo Karst]

A cache was placed in small strip mall parking lot. Listing referenced having permission.

 

That strip mall belonged to my parents; nobody asked them. My parents used a management company to deal with maintenance, rentals, repairs, etc. Nobody asked the manager.

 

Cacher had talked with a renter in one of the stores and that was "permission".

 

Many caches in commercial areas have this kind of permission (many more have none at all).

From someone who can't actually give it, doesn't notify anyone who needs to know about the cache, and may not be around much, or for long.

 

It sounds like your parking lot cache owner didn't talk to anyone, but it's not uncommon for people to place having spoken with "somebody" - say the guy on day shift, collecting parking fees.

Edited September 5, 2012 by Isonzo Karst

[4wheelin_fool]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

 

It sounds like a privately owned area open to the public during the day.

 

If you go after hours when everything is closed, that is what happens.

[+SwineFlew]

The cache in question. http://coord.info/GC3BPE2

[knowschad]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

 

This seems to be a clear case of the cache not being wanted, regardless of any permissions or property rights. The cache owner should archive it or get it straightened out with the landowner. It would seem to me that either an NA log or an email to the reviewer would be in order in this situation.

 

I loved the part about the guard sending the list of geocacher's names to the police, though. Even if the log is readable (and often they aren't) all they're going to get is caching names, and even if the police somehow had the inclination to look them up on geocaching.com, there still isn't anything they could do about it.

[Mr.Yuck]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

Yep, although it is "public" in the sense you can go there and be there to visit the business(es), it is private property. The guards comments makes me think the security folks think there is drug dealing going on.

 

Too many cache hiders seem to equate "open to the public" as "public property".

 

The guy's cache was approved by a reviewer. What do you expect him to think?

 

I actually can't see the "cache in question". I've temporarily lost my Premium Membership due to a PayPal issue. For the 3rd time in 8 years, I might add.

[+kunarion]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot.

A parking lot is a fun, scenic place to visit . I've only been to one such cache, and somehow didn't really enjoy it all that much. The unique challenge was to figure out which of four levels to search, and having no signal except on the roof. I went downtown on New Year's Day, and that parking lot was not only empty, there were no guards anywhere (at that cache, they enjoy playing hot-cold with Geocachers). But there were plenty of security cameras.

 

Anyway, pick a holiday. Then the parking lot can entertain you to its full potential.

Edited September 5, 2012 by kunarion

[+SwineFlew]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot.

A parking lot is a fun, scenic place to visit . I've only been to one such cache, and somehow didn't really enjoy it all that much. The unique challenge was to figure out which of four levels to search, and having no signal except on the roof. I went downtown on New Year's Day, and that parking lot was not only empty, there were no guards anywhere (at that cache, they enjoy playing hot-cold with Geocachers). But there were plenty of security cameras.

 

Anyway, pick a holiday. Then the parking lot can entertain you to its full potential.

Read my post above and it got the link to the cache in question.

 

Its a view of a new building that going up. Looks pretty nice building if you ask me.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

Yep, although it is "public" in the sense you can go there and be there to visit the business(es), it is private property. The guards comments makes me think the security folks think there is drug dealing going on.

 

Too many cache hiders seem to equate "open to the public" as "public property".

 

The guy's cache was approved by a reviewer. What do you expect him to think?

 

If you re-read my post, I said "cache hiders", not finders. Finders have to assume everything is in order.

[Mr.Yuck]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

Yep, although it is "public" in the sense you can go there and be there to visit the business(es), it is private property. The guards comments makes me think the security folks think there is drug dealing going on.

 

Too many cache hiders seem to equate "open to the public" as "public property".

 

The guy's cache was approved by a reviewer. What do you expect him to think?

 

If you re-read my post, I said "cache hiders", not finders. Finders have to assume everything is in order.

 

Nope, I was referring to the hider of this phantom PMO cache, which I cannot temporarily see.

 

More specifically this quote by the OP of this thread: "Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back..."

Edited September 5, 2012 by Mr.Yuck

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

More specifically this quote by the OP of this thread: "Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back..."

Sure... that is the fine-line distinction between public parking lot* and a parking lot that is there for the public's use**.

 

 

* Park-n-Ride parking lot

 

** "X"Mart parking lot

 

One is public, one is not.

 

Some people have trouble distinguishing the difference of the two. Cacher's and Cache Owner's each.

Sometimes, it is completely unclear to all!

Edited September 5, 2012 by Gitchee-Gummee

[+L0ne.R]

More specifically this quote by the OP of this thread: "Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back..."

Sure... that is the fine-line distinction between public parking lot* and a parking lot that is there for the public's use**.

 

 

* Park-n-Ride parking lot

 

** "X"Mart parking lot

 

One is public, one is not.

 

Some people have trouble distinguishing the difference of the two. Cacher's and Cache Owner's each.

Sometimes, it is completely unclear to all!

 

Thought I'd add a screen cap of Google Street View for reference:

 

[+J the Goat]

In my eyes, unless the CO can provide the information regarding who he/she received permission from, this cache needs to be archived. It's not welcome by security, which means they haven't been told it's allowed. I know some of you will take the opposite standpoint, but I think this is a clear case of a lack of adaquate permission. Put an NA log on it and let the reviewer sort it out with the CO.

[+stijnhommes]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

 

This seems to be a clear case of the cache not being wanted, regardless of any permissions or property rights. The cache owner should archive it or get it straightened out with the landowner. It would seem to me that either an NA log or an email to the reviewer would be in order in this situation.

 

I loved the part about the guard sending the list of geocacher's names to the police, though. Even if the log is readable (and often they aren't) all they're going to get is caching names, and even if the police somehow had the inclination to look them up on geocaching.com, there still isn't anything they could do about it.

Maybe it's just me, but visiting a cache that's near a shop at night does seem suspicious and I wouldn't hold it against a security guard.

I think visiting the place during day is a much better idea. You'd draw a lot less attention.

[+Haunted Thunder]

It may be a little unfair to show which cache it was speaking in regard to- I wouldn't want to offend anyone and certainly not get anyone in trouble. With regards to going when the car park is closed, it's open 24-7 so can't really do that. The cache owner gave me exact details when I mailed them so I could find it very quickly if I ever whent back which was very helpful, but I think unless I knew for definite there was permission asked to place the cache I still wouldn't want to go back. It's a beautiful place to put a cache- just not really practical if permission to cache isn't acknowledged.

[+J the Goat]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

 

This seems to be a clear case of the cache not being wanted, regardless of any permissions or property rights. The cache owner should archive it or get it straightened out with the landowner. It would seem to me that either an NA log or an email to the reviewer would be in order in this situation.

 

I loved the part about the guard sending the list of geocacher's names to the police, though. Even if the log is readable (and often they aren't) all they're going to get is caching names, and even if the police somehow had the inclination to look them up on geocaching.com, there still isn't anything they could do about it.

Maybe it's just me, but visiting a cache that's near a shop at night does seem suspicious and I wouldn't hold it against a security guard.

I think visiting the place during day is a much better idea. You'd draw a lot less attention.

 

Still doesn't have adaquate permission unless he can show different. When security asks you to leave, the cache now becomes not allowed until proven otherwise. Just my pair of pennies, I think we all know what kind of authority I have around here

 

I'd still put the NA log and let the reviewers figure it out. They're the ones who will make the decision anyway.

[+Haunted Thunder]

The reviewers asked me for my story and considered this, but decided that the guards were just being arsey and are leaving it. We went at 7:30pm at night, so not too late- if it was dark we couldn't see it. Maybe it's just me ;-) maybe I look dodgy?

hang on- still a bit of a newbie- the reviewers are the cache owners or is there an overseer group? If so I could refer it to them- that's a good idea

Edited September 5, 2012 by Haunted Thunder

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

Thank you for everyone who has replied to my post. As guessed, yes it was in a parking lot. We went there at night time to ensure there wouldn't be many cars around, and literally got moved on as soon as we got to the spot. We didn't even have chance to look. I had an e-mail conversation with the cache owner, who seems to think that it's just the guards being arsey, as only 2 other people got moved on. (though apparently the guards told one of the cachers that they gave the list of names in the cache to the police.) Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back...

Yep, although it is "public" in the sense you can go there and be there to visit the business(es), it is private property. The guards comments makes me think the security folks think there is drug dealing going on.

 

Too many cache hiders seem to equate "open to the public" as "public property".

 

The guy's cache was approved by a reviewer. What do you expect him to think?

 

If you re-read my post, I said "cache hiders", not finders. Finders have to assume everything is in order.

 

Nope, I was referring to the hider of this phantom PMO cache, which I cannot temporarily see.

 

More specifically this quote by the OP of this thread: "Still, although the cache owner says its in a public place and that we have a right to be there, I doubt I'll be going back..."

 

How should he have known? He can check public records to see who owns the piece of property the cache is on!

[Andronicus]

...Maybe it's just me ;-) maybe I look dodgy?...

Your avitar looks dodgy, so maybe you are right?

[+SwineFlew]

I think the cache is on top of the parking garage because of write up on the cache page. Its about a new building thats going up nearby and very likely its a good view to watch them build it.

[+The A-Team]

hang on- still a bit of a newbie- the reviewers are the cache owners or is there an overseer group? If so I could refer it to them- that's a good idea

Nope, the reviewers are not the owners (though they do own caches). The reviewers are volunteers appointed by Groundspeak to review each cache submission to make sure they comply with the guidelines and publish the ones that do. They also deal with problems arising with specific caches, like if a cache may be on private property without permission. If you scroll down to the oldest log on the cache, the user that is listed on the "Publish" log is the reviewer that published it. If you have concerns about whether the cache complies with the guidelines, you can contact them.

[+Don_J]

It may be a little unfair to show which cache it was speaking in regard to- I wouldn't want to offend anyone and certainly not get anyone in trouble. With regards to going when the car park is closed, it's open 24-7 so can't really do that. The cache owner gave me exact details when I mailed them so I could find it very quickly if I ever whent back which was very helpful, but I think unless I knew for definite there was permission asked to place the cache I still wouldn't want to go back. It's a beautiful place to put a cache- just not really practical if permission to cache isn't acknowledged.

 

I understand that you are fairly new and don't want to make waves, but if you look at the part of your quote that I underlined, this is exactly what the cache owner is doing by insisting that the cache is okay. He led you into a bad situation, and he is willing to lead others as well. The typical response to such a situation is to post a Needs Archive log which alerts one of the area's reviewers. They can then communicate with the cache owner and figure out the best course of action. If you feel more comfortable doing this out of the public view, you can email the reviewer privately. Give them the cache GC# and explain your experience.

[+J the Goat]

The reviewers asked me for my story and considered this, but decided that the guards were just being arsey and are leaving it. We went at 7:30pm at night, so not too late- if it was dark we couldn't see it. Maybe it's just me ;-) maybe I look dodgy?

hang on- still a bit of a newbie- the reviewers are the cache owners or is there an overseer group? If so I could refer it to them- that's a good idea

 

I think this is a mistake. Not only is this attitude promoting caches without permission, but leaving the cache unchecked leaves the possibility that other cachers will have run ins with security on their search. Next time, it may be the real cops when security calls them about repeated trespassing. An NA log doesn't mean that the cache will be archived, it just brings to the reviewers attention that there are issues with the cache that need to be addressed. If all's well, no action taken, no harm no foul.

[+Haunted Thunder]

Thanks

 

I've sent a message to the reviewer..x

[+pa79]

There's a series of parking house caches in my hometown, which is quite nice. The owner explicitly states that they can only be done during opening hours (daylight from Mo-Sa), but still a few cachers try to do them Sunday morning at 3am and wonder why they got kicked out by security. In a few places the security guards had enough and just destroyed the cache. Can't blame them. Always consider that the cache owner is just a normal cacher like you and me, not a professional. Most don't ask for permission to hide a cache on somehwat private property.

 

If you're hiding a cache you always have to consider that a few cachers only check the coordinates and ignore everything else like the description or attributes. Create caches so that in the worst case, the searcher just doesn't find them. If it leads to trouble for the searcher or the destruction of the cache, you should change it.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

There's a series of parking house caches in my hometown, which is quite nice. The owner explicitly states that they can only be done during opening hours (daylight from Mo-Sa), but still a few cachers try to do them Sunday morning at 3am and wonder why they got kicked out by security. In a few places the security guards had enough and just destroyed the cache. Can't blame them. Always consider that the cache owner is just a normal cacher like you and me, not a professional. Most don't ask for permission to hide a cache on somehwat private property.

 

There's no "somewhat" involved here. It IS private property, period.

[Mr.Yuck]

There's a series of parking house caches in my hometown, which is quite nice. The owner explicitly states that they can only be done during opening hours (daylight from Mo-Sa), but still a few cachers try to do them Sunday morning at 3am and wonder why they got kicked out by security. In a few places the security guards had enough and just destroyed the cache. Can't blame them. Always consider that the cache owner is just a normal cacher like you and me, not a professional. Most don't ask for permission to hide a cache on somehwat private property.

 

There's no "somewhat" involved here. It IS private property, period.

 

Now maybe I'll take this opportunity to better explain myself BBWolf+3Pigs, since I messed up twice.

 

-Cacher thinks the fact that the Wal-Mart parking lot is open to the public means it's OK to cache there.

 

-Cacher finds caches in the Wal-Mart parking lot, and they're approved, and listed on Geocaching.com so it's OK to cache there.

 

-Cacher places a cache in the Wal-Mart parking lot without asking permission, it gets approved no questions asked, so it's OK to own a cache there. Because it's open to the public, right?

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

There's a series of parking house caches in my hometown, which is quite nice. The owner explicitly states that they can only be done during opening hours (daylight from Mo-Sa), but still a few cachers try to do them Sunday morning at 3am and wonder why they got kicked out by security. In a few places the security guards had enough and just destroyed the cache. Can't blame them. Always consider that the cache owner is just a normal cacher like you and me, not a professional. Most don't ask for permission to hide a cache on somehwat private property.

 

There's no "somewhat" involved here. It IS private property, period.

 

Now maybe I'll take this opportunity to better explain myself BBWolf+3Pigs, since I messed up twice.

 

-Cacher thinks the fact that the Wal-Mart parking lot is open to the public means it's OK to cache there.

 

-Cacher finds caches in the Wal-Mart parking lot, and they're approved, and listed on Geocaching.com so it's OK to cache there.

 

-Cacher places a cache in the Wal-Mart parking lot without asking permission, it gets approved no questions asked, so it's OK to own a cache there. Because it's open to the public, right?

 

And that's why I think GC needs to address the problem with some sort of global stance (such as no caches on commercial property, period).

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

There's a series of parking house caches in my hometown, which is quite nice. The owner explicitly states that they can only be done during opening hours (daylight from Mo-Sa), but still a few cachers try to do them Sunday morning at 3am and wonder why they got kicked out by security. In a few places the security guards had enough and just destroyed the cache. Can't blame them. Always consider that the cache owner is just a normal cacher like you and me, not a professional. Most don't ask for permission to hide a cache on somehwat private property.

 

There's no "somewhat" involved here. It IS private property, period.

 

Now maybe I'll take this opportunity to better explain myself BBWolf+3Pigs, since I messed up twice.

 

-Cacher thinks the fact that the Wal-Mart parking lot is open to the public means it's OK to cache there.

 

-Cacher finds caches in the Wal-Mart parking lot, and they're approved, and listed on Geocaching.com so it's OK to cache there.

 

-Cacher places a cache in the Wal-Mart parking lot without asking permission, it gets approved no questions asked, so it's OK to own a cache there. Because it's open to the public, right?

 

And that's why I think GC needs to address the problem with some sort of global stance (such as no caches on commercial property, period).

 

The problem still is that many (most?) people's perception is exactly what you describe. It is not a public parking lot -- it is a parking lot open to the public. Two different kinds of snakes -- one is venomous, the other is not.

Edited September 6, 2012 by Gitchee-Gummee

[+Armorsmith]

And that's why I think GC needs to address the problem with some sort of global stance (such as no caches on commercial property, period).

 

That would be a bit extreme, not considering that it would eliminate nearly every cache within 20 miles of my home.

 

It would be much more practical and far less restricting simply to implement some kind of penalty that reviewers can place on cachers who place unauthorized caches. Maybe require that the name and phone number of the authorizing person be submitted on the cache creation page. That way the reviewer, at his or her discretion, could spot check new caches for permission and ban violators from the site for a per-defined period of time.

 

I don't know if I agree with that kind of action. I hate to take what should be a casual and fun sport and have to go all hard-line in it. In general, cachers are some of the most considerate and respectful people I've ever encountered. I think the problem is that a lot of people just don't see there is problem with it.

 

Perhaps we could make a PSA about it? I'll volunteer to do the technical leg work on it if we can find the stories. With as many people as have had a problem with this, I'm sure there are actual stories about people getting to see the inside of the cop car due to this. Anyone with a bad story ranging from an arrest to having geocaching banned on public lands in your community due to caches placed without permission, and who is willing to film themselves telling the story, go ahead and PM me, we'll see if we can't get something going on this.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

That would be a bit extreme, not considering that it would eliminate nearly every cache within 20 miles of my home.

 

You have my sympathy if the only caches nearby are P&Gs.

 

It would be much more practical and far less restricting simply to implement some kind of penalty that reviewers can place on cachers who place unauthorized caches. Maybe require that the name and phone number of the authorizing person be submitted on the cache creation page. That way the reviewer, at his or her discretion, could spot check new caches for permission and ban violators from the site for a per-defined period of time.

 

I don't know if I agree with that kind of action. I hate to take what should be a casual and fun sport and have to go all hard-line in it. In general, cachers are some of the most considerate and respectful people I've ever encountered. I think the problem is that a lot of people just don't see there is problem with it.

 

Perhaps we could make a PSA about it? I'll volunteer to do the technical leg work on it if we can find the stories. With as many people as have had a problem with this, I'm sure there are actual stories about people getting to see the inside of the cop car due to this. Anyone with a bad story ranging from an arrest to having geocaching banned on public lands in your community due to caches placed without permission, and who is willing to film themselves telling the story, go ahead and PM me, we'll see if we can't get something going on this.

 

So much easier to just ban the buggers. It's easy enough to look at Google maps and see the cache is in a parking lot of a strip mall or plaza.

[+Haunted Thunder]

Hi- Just wanting to clarify that I have contacted the reviewers who are looking into the matter,and that my previous comment about them was mis written, as I thought the cache owners reviewed their own cache until it was explained to me on this thread. Please accept my apologies for any misunderstanding thats occurred- especially the reviewers x

[+Armorsmith]

You have my sympathy if the only caches nearby are P&Gs.

 

I think you're making the assumption that "urban"=commercial and "rural"=private, but let's inventory the land in America shall we?

 

1. Stores, Factories, Parking Lots, and the like = Commercial Property, knocks out the city
   
2. Non-government owned parks and rec areas, usually owned by apartment complexes, corporations, country clubs = Commercial Property
   
3. Most undeveloped land not owned by the city, county or state is held by investors, and since most people who invent in land in the scale we're talking about incorporate = Commercial property
   
4. Areas of woodlands that provide division, erosion control, wind breaking, or held for future cultivation, usually on the edges or in the middle of farmland and since most farmers incorporate these days = Commercial property
   
5. Most Timberlands = Commercial Property
   

 

We're very rapidly running out of places to put geocaches at this point.

All that's left is state and city parks (already blanked banned by the NPS), on roads, the medians of freeways, and privately held land not-for-farming, most of which is only suitable for P&G type hides anyway.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Most Timberlands = Commercial Property

 

Only true to a point, ya know. If it weren't for forested lands, the USFS just might be out on a limb (pun intended).

 

In our neck 'o da woods, they are the big landholders.

 

Edit to add: Much of the rest is private, but is filed under CFR (Commercial Forest Reserve[?]). As such, it is open to all legal activities, much like land under control of the USFS.

Edited September 6, 2012 by Gitchee-Gummee

[+Armorsmith]

Most Timberlands = Commercial Property

 

Only true to a point, ya know. If it weren't for forested lands, the USFS just might be out on a limb (pun intended).

 

In our neck 'o da woods, they are the big landholders.

 

Edit to add: Much of the rest is private, but is filed under CFR (Commercial Forest Reserve[?]). As such, it is open to all legal activities, much like land under control of the USFS.

Good point, hence "most" and I should stress the differentiation between woodlands and timberlands. Woodlands being wooded areas, and timberlands being land help specifically to be periodically harvested. Most woodlands are either owned by the government, or are on the outskirts of large commercial tracts and a lot of timberland is owned by the federal government and leased by the USFS.

 

As I understand it, the CFR is a regulatory thing that prevents too much of the nation's timberland from being harvested at once. I know a gentleman who bought a small (10 acre) lot of timberland that is part of a larger tract of land managed by a larger corporation. I think this is because the state he lives in has progressive property taxes, but I'm not sure. Anyway, there are strict guidelines that govern when he can and can't harvest his property.

 

Of course, a lot of woodlands and timberlands, both privately and publicly owned are used for hunting 4-5 months out of the year.

 

Also the USFS does allow for permits for geocaching even though the NPS doesn't, but they generally only last a year and then need to be re-applied for.

 

Edit: One other thing... getting permission from a corporate entity is sometimes a lot easier than getting it from an individual due to liability issues and the fact that most corporations already have liability insurance due to the number of people who use their land.

Edited September 6, 2012 by Armorsmith

[+Team Bayberry]

certainly not get anyone in trouble.

 

I understand that you are fairly new and don't want to make waves, but if you look at the part of your quote that I underlined, this is exactly what the cache owner is doing by insisting that the cache is okay. He led you into a bad situation, and he is willing to lead others as well. The typical response to such a situation is to post a Needs Archive log which alerts one of the area's reviewers. They can then communicate with the cache owner and figure out the best course of action. If you feel more comfortable doing this out of the public view, you can email the reviewer privately. Give them the cache GC# and explain your experience.

 

I recently was asked by a friend (fairly new cacher) to go look at a cache (placed by a even newer newbie) that may or may not be on private property. It's in a copse of trees, definitely the property of the local office building owners. The question was raised because of two "Private Property" signs nearby. One sign also said "No Thru Traffic" (the property is on a busy corner.) This sign I ignored, since there was none on the other end of the driveway. But the 2nd was on a fence surrounding a natural gas gate station. Right in front of the gate is a gravel parking space. I just know that someone will call police when a cacher parks there. Bad enough that the building owner didn't give permission, and the CO refuses to understand that it IS private property. But the close placement of a cache to a prime terrorist target per Homeland Security - whether we agree or not - is a problem.

 

But the reviewer said that the cache wasn't dangerous (?) and "However, it should be pointed out that the cache would not have been published had it not met the reviewing and publishing criteria."

 

So I doubt that I'll post any more NAs. It's just not worth the hassle.

Edited September 7, 2012 by Team Bayberry

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

You have my sympathy if the only caches nearby are P&Gs.

 

I think you're making the assumption that "urban"=commercial and "rural"=private, but let's inventory the land in America shall we?

 

 

My "ban" would be for caches placed on clearly commercial locations (such as shopping malls). When you said that would elimiate most of the nearby hides, I assumed that meant most of the hides near you were in shopping plazas.

 

 

1. Stores, Factories, Parking Lots, and the like = Commercial Property, knocks out the city
   
2. Non-government owned parks and rec areas, usually owned by apartment complexes, corporations, country clubs = Commercial Property
   
3. Most undeveloped land not owned by the city, county or state is held by investors, and since most people who invent in land in the scale we're talking about incorporate = Commercial property
   
4. Areas of woodlands that provide division, erosion control, wind breaking, or held for future cultivation, usually on the edges or in the middle of farmland and since most farmers incorporate these days = Commercial property
   
5. Most Timberlands = Commercial Property
   

 

We're very rapidly running out of places to put geocaches at this point.

All that's left is state and city parks (already blanked banned by the NPS), on roads, the medians of freeways, and privately held land not-for-farming, most of which is only suitable for P&G type hides anyway.

 

I live in the smallest state, and there's still plenty of space to hide caches in state and city parks and state DEM land. PLENTY of space.

[+noxencachehunter]

i think another aspect to it is that everyone is on high alert after things like 9/11 and such. Plus, cachers tend too look extremely sketchy when hunting. You may want to start out with finding caches in less public areas like woods trails and cemeteries to build up your 'geocaching courage"

[+J the Goat]

certainly not get anyone in trouble.

 

I understand that you are fairly new and don't want to make waves, but if you look at the part of your quote that I underlined, this is exactly what the cache owner is doing by insisting that the cache is okay. He led you into a bad situation, and he is willing to lead others as well. The typical response to such a situation is to post a Needs Archive log which alerts one of the area's reviewers. They can then communicate with the cache owner and figure out the best course of action. If you feel more comfortable doing this out of the public view, you can email the reviewer privately. Give them the cache GC# and explain your experience.

 

I recently was asked by a friend (fairly new cacher) to go look at a cache (placed by a even newer newbie) that may or may not be on private property. It's in a copse of trees, definitely the property of the local office building owners. The question was raised because of two "Private Property" signs nearby. One sign also said "No Thru Traffic" (the property is on a busy corner.) This sign I ignored, since there was none on the other end of the driveway. But the 2nd was on a fence surrounding a natural gas gate station. Right in front of the gate is a gravel parking space. I just know that someone will call police when a cacher parks there. Bad enough that the building owner didn't give permission, and the CO refuses to understand that it IS private property. But the close placement of a cache to a prime terrorist target per Homeland Security - whether we agree or not - is a problem.

 

But the reviewer said that the cache wasn't dangerous (?) and "However, it should be pointed out that the cache would not have been published had it not met the reviewing and publishing criteria."

 

So I doubt that I'll post any more NAs. It's just not worth the hassle.

 

Hassle? Really? It's an option on a pull down menu. Add in a line or two of text, and it's done. That's not hassle. Hassle is being questioned by property owners because somebody was too lazy/complacent to log an NA log on a cache that needs an NA log