Does this just eat at you?

[+jellis]

Recently I found some caches that are totally crafty and really well done. So many cachers are giving them favorite points and compliments in the logs. Even I think they are fantastic. But should I give them favorite points? Should I praise them? Of course I should. I may not give them favorite points. Why? because most of them are against the guidelines. How? How about caches screwed into trees or tree branches. Dug trenches to lay pipe and possibly on private, unoccupied business property and city parks. Should I report them? yes. Have I? No. Why not? because of past experiences on what happens when you do.

Edited December 11, 2012 by jellis

[+Ambrosia]

You know that you can wait a bit, and then report them privately to a Reviewer.

[+Flintstone5611]

Interesting. I can totally understand your conundrum, but is it that the letter of the law is being overstepped or that you feel guilty loving a cache that breaks the rules. If you are concerned with the rules, report them. If you are torn by your appreciation of their creativity against the letter of the law, I feel for you. I think there will be a strong weigh in on this. Good topic!

[+Flintstone5611]

You know that you can wait a bit, and then report them privately to a Reviewer.

 

Why wait, if you feel it should be reported go for it. If not, move on with your life. Why be cowardly about it?

[+jellis]

I wish I could but so many know me and know how I feel about it. The word is spreading on these caches and are going there to experience them. A geocacher even told him that he shouldn't be screwing them into trees but he doesn't care. He has put out more even more cause he either enjoys the praises or figures no one will report them. But like other caches I've seen, it doesn't take long for others to think how cool they are and start putting out their own like it.

[+Ambrosia]

You know that you can wait a bit, and then report them privately to a Reviewer.

 

Why wait, if you feel it should be reported go for it. If not, move on with your life. Why be cowardly about it?

 

Well, I was just giving her a bit of an out if she's really worried about repercussions. It's harder for some people to cause waves. I understand, I don't like people being upset at me. I posted a needs archived on a cache recently, because the property owner stopped me and was quite upset about the cache. A few people posted notes to the cache page when it was archived, and it made me feel bad. I know that I wasn't the cause of the cache archival ultimately, it was a permission issue, but I still felt guilty.

[+Flintstone5611]

Well, I was just giving her a bit of an out if she's really worried about repercussions. It's harder for some people to cause waves. I understand, I don't like people being upset at me. I posted a needs archived on a cache recently, because the property owner stopped me and was quite upset about the cache. A few people posted notes to the cache page when it was archived, and it made me feel bad. I know that I wasn't the cause of the cache archival ultimately, it was a permission issue, but I still felt guilty.

 

I could see that being an issue with it being your own log. With contacting the reviewers it can remain anonymous and still draw the right attention to it. On the other side of the coin, if it doesn't get a response perhaps it can also be telling about how serious we should be taking our stand. If the reviewers are having a "bigger fish to fry" mentality about it, maybe we need to move on too.

[+J the Goat]

Jellis, I normally agree with most of what you have to say, but in this instance by not reporting the blatant guideline violations, you're part of the problem. You're telling these cachers and others that it's okay to place caches like this.

 

I know you know this, but I just had to put it out there. The respectable thing to do would be reporting them.

[+bjmccacher]

If I'm caching in my home state, I'll report it immediately, but I've found some rather questionable caches in a bordering state and kept my lips zipped, i.e. a cache drilled into a live tree, probably not appropriate, I'd hope the local cachers would say something!

[+Crow-T-Robot]

You know that you can wait a bit, and then report them privately to a Reviewer.

 

Why wait, if you feel it should be reported go for it. If not, move on with your life. Why be cowardly about it?

 

Well, I was just giving her a bit of an out if she's really worried about repercussions. It's harder for some people to cause waves. I understand, I don't like people being upset at me. I posted a needs archived on a cache recently, because the property owner stopped me and was quite upset about the cache. A few people posted notes to the cache page when it was archived, and it made me feel bad. I know that I wasn't the cause of the cache archival ultimately, it was a permission issue, but I still felt guilty.

I've never understood the mentality of blaming the person who logs the NA as the reason a problem cache was archived. If a cache is in violation of the guidelines and gets archived, that's the cache owners fault, not the person reporting the issue.

 

Personally, I feel that every cache owner should be able to stand behind every one of their caches. Not reporting caches that go against the guidelines makes the situation worse, not better. As you've seen, jellis, because of the praise he's recieved, this cache owner is going to keep placing these caches that violate guidelines simply because noone has done the right thing and reported them. If he really is that creative, he can figure out how to create these caches and stay within the boundries of the guidelines.

[+geodarts]

You know that you can wait a bit, and then report them privately to a Reviewer.

 

I tried this after discovering a cache had been placed behind barbed wire on property that was posted with no trespassing signs. Actually, I first wrote a note on the cache page stating that the cache was on posted property and I had chosen not to look for it. The CO told me that he had taken a route that avoided the signs and was not concerned. I contacted the reviewer privately and was told to work it out with the CO. Over the next few months, several cachers left similar notes. Others chose to find the cache. Eventually there was the inevitable confrontation with the angry property owner and the cache was archived.

 

In retrospect, I thought that the "needs archived" route might have been more effective.

[+jellis]

I actually did send messages to the reviewers. I didn't really want to mention it on here because some of these cachers show up on here. I've haven't yet gotten any response from either one and usually they take action pretty quickly especially on trees. We reported one that someone drilled a hole in a redwood tree in a national forest in Tahoe, with pictures and it went down fast. The CO was lucky he didn't get fined big time.

Edited December 11, 2012 by jellis

[+Ambrosia]

I actually did send messages to the reviewers. I didn't really want to mention it on here because some of these cachers show up on here. I've haven't yet gotten any response from either one and usually they take action pretty quickly especially on trees. We reported one that someone drilled a hole in a redwood tree in a national forest in Tahoe, with pictures and it went down fast. The CO was lucky he didn't get fined big time.

Hm. Well, if you haven't heard back from the Reviewers, you could try emailing again (sometimes emails get overlooked), or try a different Reviewer. It doesn't necessarily have to be the Reviewer who published the cache, any of the area Reviewers can help you. I'm sorry you didn't get a response to your emails.

[+Ambrosia]

You know that you can wait a bit, and then report them privately to a Reviewer.

 

I tried this after discovering a cache had been placed behind barbed wire on property that was posted with no trespassing signs. Actually, I first wrote a note on the cache page stating that the cache was on posted property and I had chosen not to look for it. The CO told me that he had taken a route that avoided the signs and was not concerned. I contacted the reviewer privately and was told to work it out with the CO. Over the next few months, several cachers left similar notes. Others chose to find the cache. Eventually there was the inevitable confrontation with the angry property owner and the cache was archived.

 

In retrospect, I thought that the "needs archived" route might have been more effective.

Private property can be a bit tricky. It's hard for a Reviewer if they can't see the area themselves, to know if there's a possible issue. Taking pictures of the area and the signs could be a big help in their decision making (not sure if you did that or not). First, it has to be established that it is private property, and then there's still the assumption that the cache owner should have asked for permission for the cache to be there. So it can be a grey area and can sometimes take more to get the Reviewers involved.

[+Ambrosia]

You know that you can wait a bit, and then report them privately to a Reviewer.

 

Why wait, if you feel it should be reported go for it. If not, move on with your life. Why be cowardly about it?

 

Well, I was just giving her a bit of an out if she's really worried about repercussions. It's harder for some people to cause waves. I understand, I don't like people being upset at me. I posted a needs archived on a cache recently, because the property owner stopped me and was quite upset about the cache. A few people posted notes to the cache page when it was archived, and it made me feel bad. I know that I wasn't the cause of the cache archival ultimately, it was a permission issue, but I still felt guilty.

I've never understood the mentality of blaming the person who logs the NA as the reason a problem cache was archived. If a cache is in violation of the guidelines and gets archived, that's the cache owners fault, not the person reporting the issue.

 

Personally, I feel that every cache owner should be able to stand behind every one of their caches. Not reporting caches that go against the guidelines makes the situation worse, not better. As you've seen, jellis, because of the praise he's recieved, this cache owner is going to keep placing these caches that violate guidelines simply because noone has done the right thing and reported them. If he really is that creative, he can figure out how to create these caches and stay within the boundries of the guidelines.

Well, to be fair, I don't think that anything was directed at me, specifically. It just doesn't take much to make me stress about how people perceive me.

[+Roman!]

You know that you can wait a bit, and then report them privately to a Reviewer.

 

Why wait, if you feel it should be reported go for it. If not, move on with your life. Why be cowardly about it?

 

Well, I was just giving her a bit of an out if she's really worried about repercussions. It's harder for some people to cause waves. I understand, I don't like people being upset at me. I posted a needs archived on a cache recently, because the property owner stopped me and was quite upset about the cache. A few people posted notes to the cache page when it was archived, and it made me feel bad. I know that I wasn't the cause of the cache archival ultimately, it was a permission issue, but I still felt guilty.

I've never understood the mentality of blaming the person who logs the NA as the reason a problem cache was archived. If a cache is in violation of the guidelines and gets archived, that's the cache owners fault, not the person reporting the issue.

 

Personally, I feel that every cache owner should be able to stand behind every one of their caches. Not reporting caches that go against the guidelines makes the situation worse, not better. As you've seen, jellis, because of the praise he's recieved, this cache owner is going to keep placing these caches that violate guidelines simply because noone has done the right thing and reported them. If he really is that creative, he can figure out how to create these caches and stay within the boundries of the guidelines.

Well, to be fair, I don't think that anything was directed at me, specifically. It just doesn't take much to make me stress about how people perceive me.

 

I posted a question on this forum and as a result a webcam cache was archived, I did feel bad but it wasn't my fault and should have been done long ago.

[+Ambrosia]

You know that you can wait a bit, and then report them privately to a Reviewer.

 

Why wait, if you feel it should be reported go for it. If not, move on with your life. Why be cowardly about it?

 

Well, I was just giving her a bit of an out if she's really worried about repercussions. It's harder for some people to cause waves. I understand, I don't like people being upset at me. I posted a needs archived on a cache recently, because the property owner stopped me and was quite upset about the cache. A few people posted notes to the cache page when it was archived, and it made me feel bad. I know that I wasn't the cause of the cache archival ultimately, it was a permission issue, but I still felt guilty.

I've never understood the mentality of blaming the person who logs the NA as the reason a problem cache was archived. If a cache is in violation of the guidelines and gets archived, that's the cache owners fault, not the person reporting the issue.

 

Personally, I feel that every cache owner should be able to stand behind every one of their caches. Not reporting caches that go against the guidelines makes the situation worse, not better. As you've seen, jellis, because of the praise he's recieved, this cache owner is going to keep placing these caches that violate guidelines simply because noone has done the right thing and reported them. If he really is that creative, he can figure out how to create these caches and stay within the boundries of the guidelines.

Well, to be fair, I don't think that anything was directed at me, specifically. It just doesn't take much to make me stress about how people perceive me.

 

I posted a question on this forum and as a result a webcam cache was archived, I did feel bad but it wasn't my fault and should have been done long ago.

Yeah, it happens. Can't let it stop us from doing the right thing.

[+OZ2CPU]

De people ALWAYS seek permission when they place a cache ?

I say from newer to rarely..

 

it is when people "bend" the rules and push the limits a bit

they can show you new stuff and really entertain you,

you liked it, you had fun..

 

do we want to encurage people to directly brake rules ?

NO

 

do we want people to vandalize or modify items out there ?

NO

 

drilling holes in LIVE trees is a NO NO and must be repported !

 

nails and screws in live trees are not alowed,

I do not encurage people to do this, but I also do not repport it,

since there is no one with tree knowhow who can say one little screw or nail ever caused even a little bit

damage to a tree, one the other hand the fun factor and health factor of alot of people walking out

in the nature every day is proven to have a positive influence on peoples health,

so even if you can prove one little geocache even cause weardown or direct damage, it still causes

so much more positive things too..

compare this to many other things, cars cause polution, but also transport you.

 

anyway there are MANY ways to make good and creative caches, and NOT cause damage to live trees

or such, drill into DEAD wood, or even a little piece of own wood you bring from your own garden

will not violate the rules

[+OZ2CPU]

by the way, posting a NA on a cache, where you clearly experianced something is dead wrong is a very good thing to do

always remember this is a family game, and a cache site and the access to it, must be legal and safe,

and if not clearly warned about this on the cache page..

 

I nearly got attacked once by a crasy loose dog and the dog owner did not care a bit,

to me it looked like he live in the house, where the cache was hidded,

so I posted NA

then a feew weeks later other people go out and find it, repports all is perfectly fine

no bad dogs here (ok cool the bad dude and his wild dog is not home all the time)

so cache gets open again...

[+Oxford Stone]

Interesting - GC3VAHZ (The Poplars) is the most visible cache I've yet seen - but only if you walk round the baack of the tree from the pavement. It's a coffee-cup sized box, in a wire holder which is screwed to the tree with 1 or possibly 2 screws. So while I thoguht "that's a nice easy one for beginners / kids", I never thought of it as being out of order. Drilling a hole into a live tree, especially a protected species, is on the other hand a fairly obvious no-no. It's a bit like the rules of the road isn't it - if you apply common sense, driving 1mph over the limit for a second or clipping a white line isn't going to land you in jail [opens a whole extra can of worms...]

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

You know that you can wait a bit, and then report them privately to a Reviewer.

 

This is what I do. I don't post anything about the issue on the cache page. No note, log, DNF, NM, NA, etc. Just an email (with a picture in necessary) to the reviewer.

 

Depending on the issue, it either gets archived, or a note something to the effect "There may be permission issues...CO please contact me to clarify". Usually it still gets archived, since there was never permission granted.

[4wheelin_fool]

Recently I found some caches that are totally crafty and really well done. So many cachers are giving them favorite points and compliments in the logs. Even I think they are fantastic. But should I give them favorite points? Should I praise them? Of course I should. I may not give them favorite points. Why? because most of them are against the guidelines. How? How about caches screwed into trees or tree branches. Dug trenches to lay pipe and possibly on private, unoccupied business property and city parks. Should I report them? yes. Have I? No. Why not? because of past experiences on what happens when you do.

 

The more favorites they get, the more likely the idea will be copied. There are several caches near here that use nails. One cacher got reported and had their creative cache get archived as a result. So, they got upset and then they started reporting all caches that they found that use nails. Another cacher got wind of this and instructed them at an event to stay away from their caches because they may use nails. In the end, the nails do more damage to cacher relations, than to the trees. But then a land manager finds out and gets the image of geocachers being destructive and disrespectful. Next, blanket bans, as well as expensive geocache permits ensue..

[4wheelin_fool]

Interesting - GC3VAHZ (The Poplars) is the most visible cache I've yet seen - but only if you walk round the baack of the tree from the pavement. It's a coffee-cup sized box, in a wire holder which is screwed to the tree with 1 or possibly 2 screws.

 

It has 12 finds and no favs yet. The CO has been caching for 3 years and has only 10 finds. The question - is it a sock? I'm willing to bet that it gets archived, but for lack of maintenance.

[+dprovan]

Suddenly I realize why I have so much trouble with those caches. It never occurred to me to search for hides that broke the rules, although I've found enough of them that I probably should have noticed the trend by now.

 

To answer your question, I typically ignore them other than to make discreet comments in my logs. Once in a while I've taken action because I could tell it was a newbie that just didn't know any better. I have to admit, I don't normally feel worthy to challenge an experienced CO. I count on the big players such as yourself to do that.

[+6NoisyHikers]

I'm in a similar situation right now - a cache that is placed with a 1/2" thick steel rod hammered into a live tree. Several "big name" cachers in the area have found it and favourited it.

 

I haven't contacted a reviwer yet. Instead we opted to send the cache owner (who is relatively new) a gentle email letting them know they had broken a guideline and suggesting ways to rectify the issue. We haven't received a response but the cache was disabled a few weeks later because the camo had been damaged and the bison tube stolen. At this point, we're keeping an eye on this one to see if it comes back in a more appropriate form (if at all).

 

I wrote about this issue on my local geocaching message board and received a lot of supportive replies, including some private messages telling me that it is tough to be the "tattle-tale" but it is an important thing to do. Our hobby depends on it!

[4wheelin_fool]

I'm in a similar situation right now - a cache that is placed with a 1/2" thick steel rod hammered into a live tree. Several "big name" cachers in the area have found it and favourited it.

 

I haven't contacted a reviwer yet. Instead we opted to send the cache owner (who is relatively new) a gentle email letting them know they had broken a guideline and suggesting ways to rectify the issue. We haven't received a response but the cache was disabled a few weeks later because the camo had been damaged and the bison tube stolen. At this point, we're keeping an eye on this one to see if it comes back in a more appropriate form (if at all).

 

I wrote about this issue on my local geocaching message board and received a lot of supportive replies, including some private messages telling me that it is tough to be the "tattle-tale" but it is an important thing to do. Our hobby depends on it!

 

So then the 15 year old reads your e-mail and jumps to the conclusion that you damaged it. Next, you have caches that turn up missing.

[+lamoracke]

I found a nice cache the other day...it had lots of favorite points but I refused to give it one because it had not one but two nails in the tree.

 

I will honestly say and have said it, I have found caches even that local WA reviewers have found that had huge nails in the trees or had huge recesses cut into a stump....and they are still there and with favorites. One of them I did inquire to a reviewer and was told the land manager said it was okay to put a hole in their tree so even though the tree was literally bleeding sap everywhere, it was fine. The one with the recess cut into it, I do not know about land manager on, but I imagine its county or state land.

 

As far as the one I just did, no reviewers have found it yet so perhas its something I could report, but I just implied I was dissatisfied in my log (without being blunt) and did not leave a favorite point. Can only control your own behavior.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

Recently I found some caches that are totally crafty and really well done. So many cachers are giving them favorite points and compliments in the logs. Even I think they are fantastic. But should I give them favorite points? Should I praise them? Of course I should. I may not give them favorite points. Why? because most of them are against the guidelines. How? How about caches screwed into trees or tree branches. Dug trenches to lay pipe and possibly on private, unoccupied business property and city parks. Should I report them? yes. Have I? No. Why not? because of past experiences on what happens when you do.

 

I would have enjoyed the caches, awarded favorite points , and moved on to hopefully find other caches that were " totally crafty and really well done".....but thats just me.

[+Don_J]

I wish I could but so many know me and know how I feel about it. The word is spreading on these caches and are going there to experience them. A geocacher even told him that he shouldn't be screwing them into trees but he doesn't care. He has put out more even more cause he either enjoys the praises or figures no one will report them. But like other caches I've seen, it doesn't take long for others to think how cool they are and start putting out their own like it.

 

Instead of blabbing about it in the forum, you should have privately wrote Groundspeak, or perhaps one of the Southern California reviewers. Now, you can't report them without suffering the unfortunate repercussions from the, "me me me, I don't care how it affects anyone but me" crowd.

[+Don_J]

by the way, posting a NA on a cache, where you clearly experianced something is dead wrong is a very good thing to do

always remember this is a family game, and a cache site and the access to it, must be legal and safe,

and if not clearly warned about this on the cache page..

 

I nearly got attacked once by a crasy loose dog and the dog owner did not care a bit,

to me it looked like he live in the house, where the cache was hidded,

so I posted NA

then a feew weeks later other people go out and find it, repports all is perfectly fine

no bad dogs here (ok cool the bad dude and his wild dog is not home all the time)

so cache gets open again...

 

"must be legal and safe,

and if not clearly warned about this on the cache page"

 

Stop making stuff up. This is a good suggestion, but not required. Change it to "must be legal" and "should be safe". As it is, there are plenty of caches that are not safe for all cachers, and there is no requirement that all safety issues be detailed in the cache description.

Edited December 11, 2012 by Don_J

[+jellis]

Suddenly I realize why I have so much trouble with those caches. It never occurred to me to search for hides that broke the rules, although I've found enough of them that I probably should have noticed the trend by now.

 

To answer your question, I typically ignore them other than to make discreet comments in my logs. Once in a while I've taken action because I could tell it was a newbie that just didn't know any better. I have to admit, I don't normally feel worthy to challenge an experienced CO. I count on the big players such as yourself to do that.

Thanks, you found some of them didn't you. You understand what I mean. It's not just because he screwed possibly 4 screws into a city tree to hold up a "large bird feeder" or to dig a trench and lay pipe and let it grow back so it doesn't look like he did it so he can make a great working cache, but how others figure it is okay because someone has done it, got favorites and praises, and now someone else will want a cache(s) that has favorites and praises and will try the same thing.

But I don't want to be the "bad guy" here. Been there done that and I still have cachers in WA who are angry at me and have labeled me badly for doing the "right thing" It's someone else's turn.

[+jellis]

I wish I could but so many know me and know how I feel about it. The word is spreading on these caches and are going there to experience them. A geocacher even told him that he shouldn't be screwing them into trees but he doesn't care. He has put out more even more cause he either enjoys the praises or figures no one will report them. But like other caches I've seen, it doesn't take long for others to think how cool they are and start putting out their own like it.

 

Instead of blabbing about it in the forum, you should have privately wrote Groundspeak, or perhaps one of the Southern California reviewers. Now, you can't report them without suffering the unfortunate repercussions from the, "me me me, I don't care how it affects anyone but me" crowd.

But I haven't named the caches or the waypoints. There probably many caches out here that are well crafted and against the guidelines and have favorites. And only a few of the local cachers from my area are here like the one who just posted. And though I am blabbing about it, I haven't technically reported it here. Plus here, there is support that shows I am not wrong but right in believing in the guidelines. Didn't some of you also post about the Flat Magnets or the wooden stakes?

[+The_Incredibles_]

Yes, you should complain. And no, it's not easy being the 'bad guy'. Too many people have a habit of looking the other way, whether it's in the geocaching or other things. It's shameful.

 

The real danger with caches like this is they have the potential to ruin the game for everyone. There are plenty of areas where caching has been banned due to people digging when they shouldn't be.

 

I'm not sure what the solution is. I've written a couple of polite emails myself pointing out the guidelines and suggesting alternatives, but all I've gotten back is defensive. I'm not sure what the right approach is.

 

Perhaps a more pro-active approach would be helpful. For instance, someone here created something called 'park-friendly caching' where there are guidelines such as hiding caches within reach of trails and you can register your cache as park-friendly cache. There is a logo which you can put on your cache page that goes along with it. It promotes better cache ownership.

Edited December 11, 2012 by The_Incredibles_

[+mobywv]

Eat at you? Really? Why would it eat at you? Perhaps you're just jealous that those caches are getting more favorite votes than yours? I recently found a cache that was nailed to a tree. The cache owner got permission from the property owner to place the cache. I enjoyed the cache, I gave it a favorite vote. Now if you want to be the cache police, knock yourself out. Just don't expect to make a lot of friends in the geocaching community.

[+Don_J]

I wish I could but so many know me and know how I feel about it. The word is spreading on these caches and are going there to experience them. A geocacher even told him that he shouldn't be screwing them into trees but he doesn't care. He has put out more even more cause he either enjoys the praises or figures no one will report them. But like other caches I've seen, it doesn't take long for others to think how cool they are and start putting out their own like it.

 

Instead of blabbing about it in the forum, you should have privately wrote Groundspeak, or perhaps one of the Southern California reviewers. Now, you can't report them without suffering the unfortunate repercussions from the, "me me me, I don't care how it affects anyone but me" crowd.

But I haven't named the caches or the waypoints. There probably many caches out here that are well crafted and against the guidelines and have favorites. And only a few of the local cachers from my area are here like the one who just posted. And though I am blabbing about it, I haven't technically reported it here. Plus here, there is support that shows I am not wrong but right in believing in the guidelines. Didn't some of you also post about the Flat Magnets or the wooden stakes?

 

No, you are not wrong. The caches should be reported. You have expressed more than once that you feel that if you were to report them, you would be looked at unfavorably in your community. My point was that you could have reported these caches without anyone but you, and who you reported to, knowing.

 

As it is, someone else could report them today, and you will get "blamed" for it. If the concern for repercussions outweighs the concern for the caches themselves, to the point that you had already decided that you were not going to report them, I wouldn't have said anything, to anyone. If that birdhouse attached to the tree with four screws get suddenly archived today, everyone is going to be looking at you. A simple email to Groundspeak, and nothing more, may have actually solved the problem.

[+Don_J]

Eat at you? Really? Why would it eat at you? Perhaps you're just jealous that those caches are getting more favorite votes than yours? I recently found a cache that was nailed to a tree. The cache owner got permission from the property owner to place the cache. I enjoyed the cache, I gave it a favorite vote. Now if you want to be the cache police, knock yourself out. Just don't expect to make a lot of friends in the geocaching community.

 

Cache police is not a term that should be used loosely. Reporting caches that clearly violate the guidelines and have the potential to get the activity banned, does not make one the cache police. It makes them responsible geocachers.

[+mobywv]

Eat at you? Really? Why would it eat at you? Perhaps you're just jealous that those caches are getting more favorite votes than yours? I recently found a cache that was nailed to a tree. The cache owner got permission from the property owner to place the cache. I enjoyed the cache, I gave it a favorite vote. Now if you want to be the cache police, knock yourself out. Just don't expect to make a lot of friends in the geocaching community.

 

Cache police is not a term that should be used loosely. Reporting caches that clearly violate the guidelines and have the potential to get the activity banned, does not make one the cache police. It makes them responsible geocachers.

 

So tell me how a cache nailed to a tree will get the activity banned when the cache owner got explicit permission from the landowner to do so. I'm all ears.

[+geodarts]

Eat at you? Really? Why would it eat at you? Perhaps you're just jealous that those caches are getting more favorite votes than yours? I recently found a cache that was nailed to a tree. The cache owner got permission from the property owner to place the cache. I enjoyed the cache, I gave it a favorite vote. Now if you want to be the cache police, knock yourself out. Just don't expect to make a lot of friends in the geocaching community.

 

I don't think jealousy over favorite votes is at issue. There are certain guidelines that are not waived through permission. I cannot bury a cache even if the property owner likes the idea. I also do not think I can damage a tree even if it is fine with a property owner. The reason for this is that certain actions have larger ramifications for the way that the game is perceived or would lead to similar hides in other areas. There are reasons for the guidelines. Expecting that they will be followed is not acting like cache police. And being concerned about it should enhance one's reputation in the community.

 

Apart from the guidelines, there are hides that I have moved or altered when people have brought concerns to my attention. And I have had CO's do the same in response to things I have pointed out. It is part of what makes us a community.

Edited December 11, 2012 by geodarts

[+Don_J]

Eat at you? Really? Why would it eat at you? Perhaps you're just jealous that those caches are getting more favorite votes than yours? I recently found a cache that was nailed to a tree. The cache owner got permission from the property owner to place the cache. I enjoyed the cache, I gave it a favorite vote. Now if you want to be the cache police, knock yourself out. Just don't expect to make a lot of friends in the geocaching community.

 

Cache police is not a term that should be used loosely. Reporting caches that clearly violate the guidelines and have the potential to get the activity banned, does not make one the cache police. It makes them responsible geocachers.

 

So tell me how a cache nailed to a tree will get the activity banned when the cache owner got explicit permission from the landowner to do so. I'm all ears.

 

I highly doubt that any city recreation department in the State of California is going to give permission for someone to hammer nails into their trees.

[+jellis]

Eat at you? Really? Why would it eat at you? Perhaps you're just jealous that those caches are getting more favorite votes than yours? I recently found a cache that was nailed to a tree. The cache owner got permission from the property owner to place the cache. I enjoyed the cache, I gave it a favorite vote. Now if you want to be the cache police, knock yourself out. Just don't expect to make a lot of friends in the geocaching community.

 

Cache police is not a term that should be used loosely. Reporting caches that clearly violate the guidelines and have the potential to get the activity banned, does not make one the cache police. It makes them responsible geocachers.

 

So tell me how a cache nailed to a tree will get the activity banned when the cache owner got explicit permission from the landowner to do so. I'm all ears.

We are not talking about the cache you found. Though that one could still give cachers ideas it's okay to do it and will start carving, drilling, nailing and screwing into trees. That makes the trees weak and vulnerable to parasites and diseases. So basically they killing the trees even with permission.

[+jellis]

Eat at you? Really? Why would it eat at you? Perhaps you're just jealous that those caches are getting more favorite votes than yours? I recently found a cache that was nailed to a tree. The cache owner got permission from the property owner to place the cache. I enjoyed the cache, I gave it a favorite vote. Now if you want to be the cache police, knock yourself out. Just don't expect to make a lot of friends in the geocaching community.

It's this attitude that also makes it hard for cachers to want to report violations. As you see there are many here who support me on the issue. It's the bury your head in the sand or ignoring the guidelines is what hurts the geocaching community. I am not ignoring it or burying my head. I am just trying to avoid cachers who behave like you.

[+Flintstone5611]

We are not talking about the cache you found. Though that one could still give cachers ideas it's okay to do it and will start carving, drilling, nailing and screwing into trees. That makes the trees weak and vulnerable to parasites and diseases. So basically they killing the trees even with permission.

 

That may be a bit of an exaggeration. A single scree in an oak tree would neither weaken not make it vulnerable. But nonetheless, it is the guideline.

[+mobywv]

Eat at you? Really? Why would it eat at you? Perhaps you're just jealous that those caches are getting more favorite votes than yours? I recently found a cache that was nailed to a tree. The cache owner got permission from the property owner to place the cache. I enjoyed the cache, I gave it a favorite vote. Now if you want to be the cache police, knock yourself out. Just don't expect to make a lot of friends in the geocaching community.

It's this attitude that also makes it hard for cachers to want to report violations. As you see there are many here who support me on the issue. It's the bury your head in the sand or ignoring the guidelines is what hurts the geocaching community. I am not ignoring it or burying my head. I am just trying to avoid cachers who behave like you.

 

Avoid cachers who behave like me? You're the one who indirectly called out the cache owner on the forums. That was real classy on your part.

[+niraD]

We are not talking about the cache you found. Though that one could still give cachers ideas it's okay to do it and will start carving, drilling, nailing and screwing into trees. That makes the trees weak and vulnerable to parasites and diseases. So basically they killing the trees even with permission.

That may be a bit of an exaggeration. A single scree in an oak tree would neither weaken not make it vulnerable. But nonetheless, it is the guideline.

Yep, and regardless of the reality (cf Hungry Trees), the perception of geocachers damaging trees can get geocaching banned by some land managers.

[+NeverSummer]

Waffling on it is not going to help. If the cache is not meeting the guidelines, it should be marked "NA". Or, a Reviewer should be contacted and brought up to speed, at minimum.

 

This kind of feeling of regret is precisely what causes all of the angst about posting NM and NA logs in the first place. They are tools in the toolkit. We should use them properly, and without thinking it might hurt someone's feelings. If we can't self-police, that is when we run into issues with land managers, police departments, etc. Cachers need to have thicker skin when they find out that their cache might have an issue.

[+J the Goat]

Eat at you? Really? Why would it eat at you? Perhaps you're just jealous that those caches are getting more favorite votes than yours? I recently found a cache that was nailed to a tree. The cache owner got permission from the property owner to place the cache. I enjoyed the cache, I gave it a favorite vote. Now if you want to be the cache police, knock yourself out. Just don't expect to make a lot of friends in the geocaching community.

It's this attitude that also makes it hard for cachers to want to report violations. As you see there are many here who support me on the issue. It's the bury your head in the sand or ignoring the guidelines is what hurts the geocaching community. I am not ignoring it or burying my head. I am just trying to avoid cachers who behave like you.

 

Avoid cachers who behave like me? You're the one who indirectly called out the cache owner on the forums. That was real classy on your part.

 

And this was a classy statement? This is the problem with favorite points, people start comparing CO's based on favorite points. You ought to keep your rudeness to yourself.

 

The guidelines are what they are. It shouldn't matter if a land owner give permission for a breach of the guidelines. Those who skirt them the guidelines, or fail to report violations are just furthering the problem. I do understand not wanting to play the bad guy, but ultimately you're the good guy for keeping the hobby within the rules.

[+jellis]

Eat at you? Really? Why would it eat at you? Perhaps you're just jealous that those caches are getting more favorite votes than yours? I recently found a cache that was nailed to a tree. The cache owner got permission from the property owner to place the cache. I enjoyed the cache, I gave it a favorite vote. Now if you want to be the cache police, knock yourself out. Just don't expect to make a lot of friends in the geocaching community.

It's this attitude that also makes it hard for cachers to want to report violations. As you see there are many here who support me on the issue. It's the bury your head in the sand or ignoring the guidelines is what hurts the geocaching community. I am not ignoring it or burying my head. I am just trying to avoid cachers who behave like you.

 

Avoid cachers who behave like me? You're the one who indirectly called out the cache owner on the forums. That was real classy on your part.

By another cacher the CO has been told to stop what he is doing. So how am I calling him out?

And why are you defending violations of guidelines

Edited December 11, 2012 by jellis

[+the4dirtydogs]

I have NO problem reporting caches that are against the guidelines. I also don't care if the cacher in questions knows that I reported him/her. We have guidelines to play by and we all need to play by them. I think you should really bring this to the reviewers attention and let them take care of it. I really don't see a reason to post this problem in the forums because you know you would have the support of the players here. Now do something about it or you will be just like of the rest of the cachers ignoring this major issue. I would say something but I havent found the caches in question. It's funny how the illegal caches receive favorite points and receive logs like, "i have never seen a hide like this". Yeah because they're against the guidelines.

[+jellis]

Eat at you? Really? Why would it eat at you? Perhaps you're just jealous that those caches are getting more favorite votes than yours? I recently found a cache that was nailed to a tree. The cache owner got permission from the property owner to place the cache. I enjoyed the cache, I gave it a favorite vote. Now if you want to be the cache police, knock yourself out. Just don't expect to make a lot of friends in the geocaching community.

It's this attitude that also makes it hard for cachers to want to report violations. As you see there are many here who support me on the issue. It's the bury your head in the sand or ignoring the guidelines is what hurts the geocaching community. I am not ignoring it or burying my head. I am just trying to avoid cachers who behave like you.

 

Avoid cachers who behave like me? You're the one who indirectly called out the cache owner on the forums. That was real classy on your part.

 

And this was a classy statement? This is the problem with favorite points, people start comparing CO's based on favorite points. You ought to keep your rudeness to yourself.

 

yeah I didn't understand part either, since I don't worry if my caches get favorites or not. I and the cachers who find them know some of mine are done well.

I don't carry a drill or shovel to better my caches. And like Geodarts says,if any cacher says one of mine is against guidelines I will either archive it or fix it.

Edited December 11, 2012 by jellis

[RedShoesGirl]

...Drilling a hole into a live tree, especially a protected species, is on the other hand a fairly obvious no-no...

 

how do you know if it is a protected species or not?