Cache in a Rat Bait Station

[+Ma & Pa]

We recently went for a cache that took us a while to find because it was in a rat bait station. We often see these items next to restaurants and other buildings and we ignore them because on the top it says

 

POISON DO NOT TOUCH

 

The cache was not dangerous because it only contained a fake mouse and a small container with a log sheet. I did not think it was an appropriate place for a cache. Any comments?

 

[+kunarion]

on the top it says

 

POISON DO NOT TOUCH

If I were to place that, I'd modify the text somehow so it says something like "Not Poison, OK To Touch".

If it's very clear that you're at the right rat trap, I'd suppose it's OK (but I might skip it if I have concerns). You don't want to accidentally open one that has real bait and real rats.

 

There's no way that actual rats might enter that one, right? No remaining scent from the original bait?

Edited December 22, 2012 by kunarion

[+The A-Team]

Any comments?

If I saw one of those deep in the woods, with some kind of obvious geocaching-related identification (ie. geocaching logo sticker), I'd open it up.

If it was in any kind of area where it may plausibly be a real rat trap, I'd say it's only one step up the bad-idea-ladder from a container with "bomb" written on it. From the looks of the photo, it's in some kind of urban or suburban area, which makes it an exceedingly poor choice of container. It's bad enough that cachers have been trained to dismantle sprinkler heads. Now we're training cachers to open up traps with poison warnings on them?

 

[+K13]

Looks like it NEEDS a Geocaching sticker on it, just to let finders know that it isn't a real rat trap. Maybe a NM log to suggest that it gets a label?

[+The A-Team]

I knew there had to be some guideline to cover this (bolding mine):

2. Other Placement Considerations

1. Select an appropriate location and container.

Think about how your container and the actions of geocachers seeking it will be perceived by the public. Although your cache will be hidden with landowner or land manager permission, concerned passersby who are unaware of geocaching, may view people searching the property as suspicious. Containers that could be perceived as a bomb or another dangerous item should not be placed. To reduce the risk of your cache being perceived as dangerous by non-geocachers, and being permanently archived by Groundspeak, use common sense when selecting hiding places and containers.

I'd say a poison trap would qualify as a dangerous item.

 

The guideline immediately after that one covering labelling also applies.

[knowschad]

The cache was not dangerous because it only contained a fake mouse and a small container with a log sheet. I did not think it was an appropriate place for a cache. Any comments?

I guess I'd first have to ask you how you know that it contained those things? If you found the cache to be so inappropriate, why did you dig into it in the first place?

 

Aside from that, I would have to agree with you that it probably is not appropriate. I have been tempted to dig into a couple of them, but quickly decided that it either wasn't the cache, or that if it was, I was willing to take a DNF for it. Apparently you weren't as willing.

[+*GeoPunx*]

I don't think I would have touched the one in the picture above. Something like that should be clearly marked as a game piece in my noob opinion.

[+Ma & Pa]

The cache was not dangerous because it only contained a fake mouse and a small container with a log sheet. I did not think it was an appropriate place for a cache. Any comments?

I guess I'd first have to ask you how you know that it contained those things? If you found the cache to be so inappropriate, why did you dig into it in the first place?

 

Aside from that, I would have to agree with you that it probably is not appropriate. I have been tempted to dig into a couple of them, but quickly decided that it either wasn't the cache, or that if it was, I was willing to take a DNF for it. Apparently you weren't as willing.

The picture is not the actual cache but is picture I found of the container that was used. I often saw those containers when we cached in California and I never tried to open them, even if it meant a DNF. I do not ever recall seeing one around our area.

 

In this case, we spent about 10 minutes looking around an area where there were no good hiding spots. We had completely ignored the bait station, not even thinking it could be the cache. Finally, I got tempted to check it and I daintily touched it and it easily opened. I guess I tried it because we had never seen one around here, and it seemed out of place.

[knowschad]

The cache was not dangerous because it only contained a fake mouse and a small container with a log sheet. I did not think it was an appropriate place for a cache. Any comments?

I guess I'd first have to ask you how you know that it contained those things? If you found the cache to be so inappropriate, why did you dig into it in the first place?

 

Aside from that, I would have to agree with you that it probably is not appropriate. I have been tempted to dig into a couple of them, but quickly decided that it either wasn't the cache, or that if it was, I was willing to take a DNF for it. Apparently you weren't as willing.

The picture is not the actual cache but is picture I found of the container that was used. I often saw those containers when we cached in California and I never tried to open them, even if it meant a DNF. I do not ever recall seeing one around our area.

 

In this case, we spent about 10 minutes looking around an area where there were no good hiding spots. We had completely ignored the bait station, not even thinking it could be the cache. Finally, I got tempted to check it and I daintily touched it and it easily opened. I guess I tried it because we had never seen one around here, and it seemed out of place.

 

I wasn't asking where you found the picture. My point was that you still went ahead and opened a cache (and I presume, logged a Find) that you are now reporting as possibly inappropriate. Please don't take this wrong, but it strikes me as being a bit like somebody watching an entire movie before declaring it pornographic.

[+Mockingbird559]

Have seen many of these around here while on the hunt.

 

I don't even go near them....cuz they're POISON.

 

Wouldn't want one even if it had a logo or extra markings.

 

Cache happy

[+The_Incredibles_]

Like with sprinkler head and electrical caches, caches like these encourage people to mess with things that are not geocaches.

 

I vote NO. You also have to wonder...if poison was inside the trap as some point, how well did they clean it before making it into a geocache?

[+The_Incredibles_]

I wasn't asking where you found the picture. My point was that you still went ahead and opened a cache (and I presume, logged a Find) that you are now reporting as possibly inappropriate. Please don't take this wrong, but it strikes me as being a bit like somebody watching an entire movie before declaring it pornographic.

 

They went home and thought about it some more. Have you never done that?

[+Ma & Pa]

The cache was not dangerous because it only contained a fake mouse and a small container with a log sheet. I did not think it was an appropriate place for a cache. Any comments?

I guess I'd first have to ask you how you know that it contained those things? If you found the cache to be so inappropriate, why did you dig into it in the first place?

 

Aside from that, I would have to agree with you that it probably is not appropriate. I have been tempted to dig into a couple of them, but quickly decided that it either wasn't the cache, or that if it was, I was willing to take a DNF for it. Apparently you weren't as willing.

The picture is not the actual cache but is picture I found of the container that was used. I often saw those containers when we cached in California and I never tried to open them, even if it meant a DNF. I do not ever recall seeing one around our area.

 

In this case, we spent about 10 minutes looking around an area where there were no good hiding spots. We had completely ignored the bait station, not even thinking it could be the cache. Finally, I got tempted to check it and I daintily touched it and it easily opened. I guess I tried it because we had never seen one around here, and it seemed out of place.

 

I wasn't asking where you found the picture. My point was that you still went ahead and opened a cache (and I presume, logged a Find) that you are now reporting as possibly inappropriate. Please don't take this wrong, but it strikes me as being a bit like somebody watching an entire movie before declaring it pornographic.

 

I knew you werent asking about the picture, and i wasnt telling you where I found it, but others seemed to think it was the actual cache, so I explained that. The rest of my comments relates to the situation regarding our search. My original question relates to the appropriateness of the cache. The fact that I actually opened it does not affect whether or not it is appropriate. One more thing is the fact that I could not have really asked the question if I had not opened it.

 

Anyway, I was just looking for opinions.

[+Ma & Pa]

I wasn't asking where you found the picture. My point was that you still went ahead and opened a cache (and I presume, logged a Find) that you are now reporting as possibly inappropriate. Please don't take this wrong, but it strikes me as being a bit like somebody watching an entire movie before declaring it pornographic.

 

They went home and thought about it some more. Have you never done that?

 

Thank you

[knowschad]

The cache was not dangerous because it only contained a fake mouse and a small container with a log sheet. I did not think it was an appropriate place for a cache. Any comments?

I guess I'd first have to ask you how you know that it contained those things? If you found the cache to be so inappropriate, why did you dig into it in the first place?

 

Aside from that, I would have to agree with you that it probably is not appropriate. I have been tempted to dig into a couple of them, but quickly decided that it either wasn't the cache, or that if it was, I was willing to take a DNF for it. Apparently you weren't as willing.

The picture is not the actual cache but is picture I found of the container that was used. I often saw those containers when we cached in California and I never tried to open them, even if it meant a DNF. I do not ever recall seeing one around our area.

 

In this case, we spent about 10 minutes looking around an area where there were no good hiding spots. We had completely ignored the bait station, not even thinking it could be the cache. Finally, I got tempted to check it and I daintily touched it and it easily opened. I guess I tried it because we had never seen one around here, and it seemed out of place.

 

I wasn't asking where you found the picture. My point was that you still went ahead and opened a cache (and I presume, logged a Find) that you are now reporting as possibly inappropriate. Please don't take this wrong, but it strikes me as being a bit like somebody watching an entire movie before declaring it pornographic.

 

I knew you werent asking about the picture, and i wasnt telling you where I found it, but others seemed to think it was the actual cache, so I explained that. The rest of my comments relates to the situation regarding our search. My original question relates to the appropriateness of the cache. The fact that I actually opened it does not affect whether or not it is appropriate. One more thing is the fact that I could not have really asked the question if I had not opened it.

 

Anyway, I was just looking for opinions.

 

I think I already responded to your question of appropriateness:

Aside from that, I would have to agree with you that it probably is not appropriate. I have been tempted to dig into a couple of them, but quickly decided that it either wasn't the cache, or that if it was, I was willing to take a DNF for it. Apparently you weren't as willing.

[4wheelin_fool]

So geocachers are trained in taking apart actual sprinkler heads, live electrical equipment, and now mousetraps with poison. It sounds like a plot for a bad Adam Sandler movie.

[+hydnsek]

So geocachers are trained in taking apart actual sprinkler heads, live electrical equipment, and now mousetraps with poison. It sounds like a plot for a bad Adam Sandler movie.

...Which begs the question: Are there good Adam Sandler movies?

 

To the OP: I agree with Post 5 - it's a guideline violation and encourages bad and potentially dangerous caching behavior, so I'd probably send the CO and/or the reviewer a private note about it.

Edited December 22, 2012 by hydnsek

[+dprovan]

Yep, that's stupid. I would never have looked close enough to discover it was the cache, but if I knew it was the cache, I'd file an NA without a second thought.

[+Ant89]

I don't know about the states but in the UK these traps are sold UNBAITED so are perfectly safe.

touching the container is perfectly safe even with a 'live' trap, as it is designed to protect anything large from getting to the poison.

These come with a lock which is to prevent the cache from being opened accidently, if the lid does not move, it's not the cache.

 

I don't know about the states but here in the UK all 'live' traps are always secured to a fixed object, ie a lampost, fence, etc. so the fact this one is not secured to any object would draw my attention to the possibilty of it being a cache.

 

As for the labeling issue. I agree a label would be useful. Personally I'd wither go for somthing subtle, such as "Official Geocache Do not disturb 'GCXXXX' written on the lid with a dark permament marker that provides just enough contrast for you to read when your properly looking at it, or a obvious label that hints to it's being a geocache but could well be a brand logo somthing like "Geo-rat-catch"

[+maxx borchovski]

people take kids caching, doesnt this teach younger kids to mess with potentially dangerous stuff.

my vote is that its a poor choice for a container

[+briansnat]

At one time I would investigate rat bait stations as a possible geocache. I figured it was simply a matter of time before someone thought of using one.

 

However some years ago I decided that I was no longer interested in geocaching in the sorts of places that needed rat bait stations. So if I were to encounter one today I'd be pretty sure it's the cache because it would be so out of place.

Edited December 22, 2012 by briansnat

[+SwineFlew]

Not the best idea for a cache.

[+lamoracke]

To be honest, given all the electrical caches, fake sprinklers, business lamps you actually have to take apart, fake doorbells, etc etc, so many other things which would make me a bit uncomfortable to even consider opening or looking for a cache in, am surprised I have not seen a cache in a rat trap / bait thing.

 

Am glad none of the caches I have looked for have stooped to that level yet.

 

However, if it was CLEARLY labeled, then I'd go for it.

[+pixeltash]

 

I don't know about the states but here in the UK all 'live' traps are always secured to a fixed object, ie a lampost, fence, etc. so the fact this one is not secured to any object would draw my attention to the possibilty of it being a cache.

 

 

hmmm, don't go caching round here then as I have never seen one secured to anything, except the ground with gravity! and yes I am in the UK

[+Ant89]

 

I don't know about the states but here in the UK all 'live' traps are always secured to a fixed object, ie a lampost, fence, etc. so the fact this one is not secured to any object would draw my attention to the possibilty of it being a cache.

 

 

hmmm, don't go caching round here then as I have never seen one secured to anything, except the ground with gravity! and yes I am in the UK

 

maybe my area is prone to rat trap theft? strange thing to take though if thats the case?

[+edscott]

I've checked a few rat traps but never scored a find in one. Did get a find in a termite bait station a long time ago. Unfortunately once I get to GZ I find it tough to walk away without trying to make a find.

[AZcachemeister]

If I somehow acquired one (that had never been used) I might be tempted to use it in an out-of-context location.

In any case it would probably not be a very good container.

 

I have more than once considered whether someone could have used one of these when looking for a challenging urban micro, and as we know, that is when we get the evil ideas for our next hide.

I quickly dismissed this idea as inappropriate.

 

If I found one like this, the reviewer would soon know about it.

[+uxorious]

I remember seeing a rat trap once while looking for a cache. I thought to myself, that would be an evil place to hide one, but didn't look any farther at it. Turned out that wasn't the cache, and I did find the real one.

 

However, if it had been the cache, it would have been a DNF. Even if I wondered about it, I would not have checked it out. It would have had to been clearly marked to indicate a Geocache before I would even consider messing with it. Even then I doubt I would. I would probably just take the DNF and move on.

[+dprovan]

I don't know about the states but in the UK these traps are sold UNBAITED so are perfectly safe.

As is often the case, the problem isn't whether a specific cache is perfectly safe, but whether some real rat trap will become a threat because rat trap hides are considered normal. But, admittedly, it's not a fear that someone will actually get poisoned so much as realizing that using a warning label as camo isn't really very clever. In fact, it's almost juvenile.

[+tozainamboku]

I knew there had to be some guideline to cover this (bolding mine):

2. Other Placement Considerations

1. Select an appropriate location and container.

Think about how your container and the actions of geocachers seeking it will be perceived by the public. Although your cache will be hidden with landowner or land manager permission, concerned passersby who are unaware of geocaching, may view people searching the property as suspicious. Containers that could be perceived as a bomb or another dangerous item should not be placed. To reduce the risk of your cache being perceived as dangerous by non-geocachers, and being permanently archived by Groundspeak, use common sense when selecting hiding places and containers.

I'd say a poison trap would qualify as a dangerous item.

 

The guideline immediately after that one covering labelling also applies.

Once again the lack of rationale in a guideline is causing guideline creep.

 

The point of the quoted guideline was to avoid geocaches causing bomb scares. I doubt that a rat trap would get phoned in as suspicious item. It might if the property owner or a worker found it and knew that they didn't leave a rat trap there. But if the cache owner has gotten permission this might be an effective camouflage.

 

I'd agree that the caches should be easily identified by a cacher (perhaps with a geocaching label) to prevent someone from messing with a real trap. We don't have a guideline the prevents caches from being camouflaged as something else, but we do have an ethic that cachers will not deface or destroy private or public property. I'd avoid a rat trap unless I was pretty certain that it was the cache without touching it.

[+edscott]

The rat bait boxes don't provide any immediate danger assuming you do not eat any bait that might be present. I'd put the electrical caches way beyond that in potential danger and TPTB have allowed them to proliferate for several years. With the publicity generated here I'd not be surprised if rat bait boxes become commonplace.

[+cheech gang]

Years ago I had a DNF in an alley in Columbus. When I made a comment about not wanting to disturb the rat bait box I was berated by the owner: "what knid of an idiot would look in a rat bait box?".

 

What's next, fake hypodermic syringes? Probably already done...

Edited December 22, 2012 by cheech gang

[+LightHouseSeekers]

ME: DNF

CO: Did you check the rat-box?

ME: NA

[+The A-Team]

The point of the quoted guideline was to avoid geocaches causing bomb scares.

Okay, I'll give you that one. The labelling guideline still applies, though. If I found a rat bait box without any geocaching identification on it, I'd be contacting the CO, and then a reviewer if necessary.

[+Ma & Pa]

Like with sprinkler head and electrical caches, caches like these encourage people to mess with things that are not geocaches.

 

 

people take kids caching, doesnt this teach younger kids to mess with potentially dangerous stuff.

my vote is that its a poor choice for a container

 

These two comments were the kinds of things going though my head when I posted my original question.

 

OK now for a bit more info.

 

The cacher involved is a dedicated cacher with quality caches and the nicest person you would want to meet. When I posted this item I asked for comments. I really was looking for comments because I had already written to the cache owner and had received s reply.

 

>

REPLY

 

I've considered that. The cache is a premium members only cache.

People will have to get over the mental block of touching it.

I'm expecting a little chatter, but this cache is safe. Adults can judge for themselves, kids aren't usually premium members.

There are far more dangerous caches/hikes out there.

 

Tx for bringing it up though.

I'm just glad I came up with something original for around here.

 

I have since received a phone call from him and he may be re thinking the situation

 

PAul

[+kunarion]

It's a bait box. There should be no rats "trapped" in it. It is possible that a rat may have learned to identify that kind of box as a source of food -- yet not getting sick from real bait yet. And it's possible that there actually is an item that would appeal to said rat. In that very unlikely case, there could be a rat in the box.

 

So if I ever tried it, I'd hide it where no "bait boxes" are or will be, and I'd block the entrance to the box. And I'd include some kind of sign for Geocachers.

 

Edited December 22, 2012 by kunarion

[+T.D.M.22]

Years ago I had a DNF in an alley in Columbus. When I made a comment about not wanting to disturb the rat bait box I was berated by the owner: "what knid of an idiot would look in a rat bait box?".

 

What's next, fake hypodermic syringes? Probably already done...

 

Done. The log was one of those tiny black micros-happened to be the exact same size as the rubber part it the syringe. There where about 75 syringes, 2 decoys and one real cache. It was only up for a day-out of the way of anyone to accidentally find it.

http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMEx_poaGmQ

 

Anyway back on topic-unless it had the geocaching logo or sticker I would never touch it. In fact in Alberta if you are caught releasing a rat you will get arrested-rats are illegal here. So tampering with a rat bait station is a great way to get in trouble-Plus the fact that some municipalities may put them out so you may get questioned if it appears to be city property. Maybe not as big a deal other places but here it is a major issue.

[knowschad]

people take kids caching, doesnt this teach younger kids to mess with potentially dangerous stuff.

my vote is that its a poor choice for a container

Should all dangerous caches be archived because people take kids caching?

[knowschad]

The point of the quoted guideline was to avoid geocaches causing bomb scares.

Okay, I'll give you that one. The labelling guideline still applies, though. If I found a rat bait box without any geocaching identification on it, I'd be contacting the CO, and then a reviewer if necessary.

How many nanos have you seen labeled? How many where a bison tube is stuck into the end of a drilled out stick have you seen labeled? That "guideline" has more holes in it than a colander.

[+The A-Team]

How many nanos have you seen labeled? How many where a bison tube is stuck into the end of a drilled out stick have you seen labeled? That "guideline" has more holes in it than a colander.

From the guidelines:

To avoid confusion and alarm when a cache is discovered accidentally, clearly label it as a "geocache" and include the GC code on the outside of the container.

For a nano, this obviously is not possible. However, if a muggle found an unlabelled nano, I doubt there'd be any alarm, and any confusion would be temporary until they open it up (the nano logs I've seen usually have "Geocaching.com" written at one end).

 

Confusion and alarm are much more likely with a rat bait box, so labelling would go a lot further there. It also alerts cachers that the bait box is safe to touch.

[+The A-Team]

Should all dangerous caches be archived because people take kids caching?

Not all of them, but definitely the ones that teach unsafe or unlawful behaviour, such as poison traps, syringes, or sprinkler heads. I take it you're okay with teaching kids that it's just fine to play with or dismantle these objects because there's the possibility that it may be a geocache? Geocaching is supposed to be a family-friendly activity. Poison traps and syringes are not family-friendly.

 

I'm also stunned by the CO's comment that children aren't usually PMs. I know of many children that are, and many more that go caching with PMs. Making the cache PMO does not mean kids won't be seeking it.

[+Kiwi Nomad]

Like with sprinkler head and electrical caches, caches like these encourage people to mess with things that are not geocaches.

people take kids caching, doesnt this teach younger kids to mess with potentially dangerous stuff.my vote is that its a poor choice for a container

These two comments were the kinds of things going though my head when I posted my original question. OK now for a bit more info.The cacher involved is a dedicated cacher with quality caches and the nicest person you would want to meet. When I posted this item I asked for comments. I really was looking for comments because I had already written to the cache owner and had received s reply. > REPLYI've considered that. The cache is a premium members only cache. People will have to get over the mental block of touching it. I'm expecting a little chatter, but this cache is safe. Adults can judge for themselves, kids aren't usually premium members.There are far more dangerous caches/hikes out there.Tx for bringing it up though.I'm just glad I came up with something original for around here.I have since received a phone call from him and he may be re thinking the situationPAul

 

I am a premium member and I take my children with me caching. No they are not PMs but I am and don't skip PM caches just because they are with me.

 

people take kids caching, doesnt this teach younger kids to mess with potentially dangerous stuff.my vote is that its a poor choice for a container

Should all dangerous caches be archived because people take kids caching?

 

Depends on what you define as dangerous. Climbing a tree, near a cliff, then no they don't need archiving as we/parents can filter by attributes any which are placed in areas not suitable for children to visit.

Caches placed on or in items I wouldn't want my children to touch if I were not there because of their potential danger is not a good idea. It sends mixed messages to put a cache in a container that clearly says 'Do not touch'

 

I would log a DNF on it unless the container was modified in some way to indicate it was a cache.

 

On the other hand I would consider using a modified container for the final of a themed puzzle cache. I'm thinking scrap off the word NOT so it reads POISON DO TOUCH and having a theme about music by who else but Posison. Or scrap off all the letters, relabel it and have a rat themed cache Q1 when was the first rat trap invented ....

[+BAMBOOZLE]

I rarely express anything negative about a geocache but I'm not wild about that choice of container.

[+Mudfrog]

people take kids caching, doesnt this teach younger kids to mess with potentially dangerous stuff.

my vote is that its a poor choice for a container

 

Not that they're the most dangerous places to hide a cache but,,, But i have to wonder, why do so many cachers think LPCs are appropriate hiding spots?

 

First, they are most likely hidden on private property without permission.

Second, they can actually be dangerous, even for adults, given the right circumstances. (ie: finding while a light is energized which has deteriorated/broken insulation)

Third, a cacher hiding or finding these are tampering with, sometimes scratching paint off, sometimes messing up the covers, etc,,,.

 

So, it's ok to teach our kids that finding caches hidden in this manner are ok?

 

By the way,,

 

Walmart cache

[+BAMBOOZLE]

people take kids caching, doesnt this teach younger kids to mess with potentially dangerous stuff.

my vote is that its a poor choice for a container

 

Not that they're the most dangerous places to hide a cache but,,, But i have to wonder, why do so many cachers think LPCs are appropriate hiding spots?

 

First, they are most likely hidden on private property without permission.

Second, they can actually be dangerous, even for adults, given the right circumstances. (ie: finding while a light is energized which has deteriorated/broken insulation)

Third, a cacher hiding or finding these are tampering with, sometimes scratching paint off, sometimes messing up the covers, etc,,,.

 

So, it's ok to teach our kids that finding caches hidden in this manner are ok?

 

By the way,,

 

Walmart cache

 

Caching at 3 AM opens up a whole new ball game. A few local cachers who worked the night shift once got upset with me because twice police stopped them between 2 and 3 AM while caching. At that hour the fact that a cache has permission to be placed doesn't matter to police. The vast majority of caches should not be attempted at night unless you feel like talking to authorities...as a rule we don't cache at night but of the few times we have, over 50 % of the time we have been stopped by police.

[+simpjkee]

I once messed with one of these because I didn't know what it was and thought it was the geocache I was after....it wasn't.

 

I wouldn't use one of these as a cache container as camoflauge, but I might if I did something to make it fun or unique.

 

I appreciate the OP providing updates in the thread and I hope to see some more.

[Clan Riffster]

However some years ago I decided that I was no longer interested in geocaching in the sorts of places that needed rat bait stations. So if I were to encounter one today I'd be pretty sure it's the cache because it would be so out of place.

Yeah, pretty much. I play this quirky hobby as a form of recreation. A way to relax, destress and get back to nature. I can't imagine engaging in a recreational activity in an urban setting which has enough vermin around to justify the use of poison traps.

 

Containers that could be perceived as a bomb or another dangerous item should not be placed.

The point of the quoted guideline was to avoid geocaches causing bomb scares.

Actually, the point of that guideline was to avoid geocachers causing negative reactions.

Bomb scares are not the only negative reaction.

If an item could be perceived as being dangerous, Groundspeak suggests we don't use it.

Poison traps certainly could be perceived as dangerous items.

 

In fact in Alberta if you are caught releasing a rat you will get arrested-rats are illegal here.

When rats are outlawed, only outlaws will have rats...

[knowschad]

How many nanos have you seen labeled? How many where a bison tube is stuck into the end of a drilled out stick have you seen labeled? That "guideline" has more holes in it than a colander.

From the guidelines:

To avoid confusion and alarm when a cache is discovered accidentally, clearly label it as a "geocache" and include the GC code on the outside of the container.

For a nano, this obviously is not possible. However, if a muggle found an unlabelled nano, I doubt there'd be any alarm, and any confusion would be temporary until they open it up (the nano logs I've seen usually have "Geocaching.com" written at one end).

 

Confusion and alarm are much more likely with a rat bait box, so labelling would go a lot further there. It also alerts cachers that the bait box is safe to touch.

That guideline really does not fit a good many geocaches. Yes, it is a good idea for ammo cans and such, but it kind of gets in the way, even for that type of container, when the cache owner wants to go the extra mile in camouflaging the cache. You can put all the matte earthtones you want to, but that large OFFICIAL GEOCACHE GAME PIECE sticker (or stencil or whatever) kind of interferes with the stealth, doesn't it?

[knowschad]

Should all dangerous caches be archived because people take kids caching?

Not all of them, but definitely the ones that teach unsafe or unlawful behaviour, such as poison traps, syringes, or sprinkler heads. I take it you're okay with teaching kids that it's just fine to play with or dismantle these objects because there's the possibility that it may be a geocache? Geocaching is supposed to be a family-friendly activity. Poison traps and syringes are not family-friendly.

 

I'm also stunned by the CO's comment that children aren't usually PMs. I know of many children that are, and many more that go caching with PMs. Making the cache PMO does not mean kids won't be seeking it.

I think teaching kids how to discern real objects from fake objects, safe ones from dangerous ones is a great idea! Just because you let the kid climb around on the jungle gym on the playground doesn't mean you want him climbing the town water tower.

[knowschad]

I rarely express anything negative about a geocache but I'm not wild about that choice of container.

 

In spite of my defending "dangerous" caches, I have to agree. I do find this one to be distasteful.