Trespassing and Vandalism

[+wmpastor]

To the OP,

 

Its reasonable to be mad, but name callings and etc is uncalled for. If I was you, I would handle this in a very professional way.

 

Have a nice day.

 

BTW, your story got many holes and you can get sue for a number of things you did in the last few days.

The fact is that any landscaping needs maintenance in 8 years! The OP's game - if I felt belligerent I'd call it a scam! - is to say "cachers, pay our $1700 in landscaping bills for 8 years." Ain't gonna happen, shouldn't happen, & it would be an injustice if it happened. No connection proven. Neighborhood kids wreck property, not the occasional cacher.

[+wmpastor]

What's important to me is that the searches have been doing very real and obvious damage. Even if very official and explicit permission had been granted, the damage would be inexcusable.

I agree (and I have mentioned that the damage is a no go for me before), but none of us knows whether damages were visible when the majority of loggers visited the cache.

Well, the OP says he's been seeing (and repairing) damage for years, so I'm basing my claim on that.

 

If I visit a cache I will certainly voice concerns if I have any, but in case of this cache it might have happened easily that I just logged a short found it in case I were there and did not notice anything special. That was the point I was trying to make. The OP accuses all loggers of the cache of trespassing and of not reporting the cache.

The OP accusses geocachers as a group of hurting his property, and we're guilty as charged. We can debate among ourselves which individual geocachers are responsible, but that doesn't really make any difference to the OP, and I see no reason why it should.

Absolutely unproven. See my post above. Landscaping needs routine maintenance. Neighborhood kids come there day after day. Cachers coming every now & then don't wreck property. OP thinks he sees a source of $$$$$ to pay for routine maintenance.

[+steamtrain13583]

"Recently saw people trespassing and climbing over our rock wall at the entrance to our Private Subdivision and finally figured it out. After years and years of unsolved damage & vandalism to our entrance sign, lights, lighting system, rock wall and other rock structures (one decorative rock structure covering an irrigation valve was recently pulled apart) we went onto this website and found that one of the more active members had driven past a "Private Drive" sign and trespassed to place his illegal cache"

 

Now how did he know to go to gc.com?

 

"I evidently have a better GPS unit than the idiots searching yesterday because I quickly found the cache and removed it"

 

Obviously knows what to do to find a cache.

 

"We were able to easily find out the cache hider's real name and address (he's not as smart as he proclaimed)"

 

Where does the CO proclaim he's smart?

 

And from the cache page under hints - "A "Georock" hidden on ground level"

 

This gives away that its not in any light fixtures/systems and signs so an average cacher would not need to go near the aforementioned items to find the cache.

 

My conclusion a disgruntled cacher who has a grudge against CO. My 2cents.

[Mr.Yuck]

To the OP,

 

Its reasonable to be mad, but name callings and etc is uncalled for. If I was you, I would handle this in a very professional way.

 

Have a nice day.

 

BTW, your story got many holes and you can get sue for a number of things you did in the last few days.

The fact is that any landscaping needs maintenance in 8 years! The OP's game - if I felt belligerent I'd call it a scam! - is to say "cachers, pay our $1700 in landscaping bills for 8 years." Ain't gonna happen, shouldn't happen, & it would be an injustice if it happened. No connection proven. Neighborhood kids wreck property, not the occasional cacher.

 

Have you looked at this "neighborhood"? This isn't exactly the suburban subdivision with 100 x 300 foot lots and the houses 25 feet apart you might be thinking. This is quite rural, and many of the residents are seasonal, according to the irate homeowner. The road across the street, where the 2nd, lesser discussed archived cache was located, is a dirt road.

 

In other words, little Johnny and Susie who live 500 feet from the cache didn't stroll down a tree lined sidewalk to play in the landscaping. Of course winter weather could have caused all the damage too.

[4wheelin_fool]

I can think of a couple caches here that were hidden up 'private drives' and were promptly archived by our reviewer as no permission was stated.

 

The fact is, damage was done and let's face it, was likely done by cachers seeking this cache. All the cachers who didn't report the damage in their logs *were* idiots and the cache owner was an idiot for not regularly inspecting the area. No matter where you hide your cache, permission or not, you should be inspecting the area regularly for impact.

 

I hope the CO is ready to write a big fat cheque.

 

I don't think that is going to happen. Lets assume Geocachers did intentionally and maliciously destroy the landscaping. It wasn't all of them, and perhaps 10% or less who were careless searchers. The owner would have to first prove that they actually did it. Then he would have to prove that the CO knew that would occur, acted recklessly in hiding it, and as matter of course was responsible. I'm fairly certain that the CO never expected anything to happen, and expected searchers to behave much like he does. That's a lot of proof for only $1700, much of which was spent years ago with receipts that are most likely nonexistent, and well beyond any statute of limitations. If it happened to me, yeah I'd want to strangle him, but legally there is not much that can be proven. He can get a lawyer for $500 to chase after that, but they may not be effective anyhow.

 

The odd part is that the owner immediately assumed cachers did the damage. Not many non cachers would assume as much. That's something that Geocachers discover after a few years. Geocachers are also more sensitive in noticing damage than other people are. Rocks and logs turned over dont bother anyone else, as there is often evidence of a search, but no permanent damage. For all we know, the rocks could have been dislodged by a snowplow. The wires and boxes may have been tampered with by teens who were on vacation and bored.

 

Yeah, I wouldn't have hidden it there, but the CO being responsible? At ANY cache there is a chance that some knucklehead could tear up the place. If I think that is likely, I wouldn't hide anything there. But if it does happen, are we really responsible? An ammo can on state property gets visited by a drunken cacher on a ATV who rips up the landscape at 3AM and hits a tree, requiring a helicopter to the hospital. Am I responsible for that? How about some idiot who rips apart a telephone junction box to find a micro which is 10 feet away and tied to a bush? Or the guy who takes a machete to ground zero? Yeah, it looks bad for the sport, but the person responsible is the person who did it.

Edited May 30, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+kunarion]

how did he know to go to gc.com?

Good question. If I saw vandals in the act, and, rather than contact the authorities at that moment, decided to join Geocaching.com just in case it helps me track down culprits... I'd email Geocaching.com, not start a forum topic. But that's just me.

Edited May 30, 2013 by kunarion

[+SwineFlew]

To the OP,

 

Its reasonable to be mad, but name callings and etc is uncalled for. If I was you, I would handle this in a very professional way.

 

Have a nice day.

 

BTW, your story got many holes and you can get sue for a number of things you did in the last few days.

The fact is that any landscaping needs maintenance in 8 years! The OP's game - if I felt belligerent I'd call it a scam! - is to say "cachers, pay our $1700 in landscaping bills for 8 years." Ain't gonna happen, shouldn't happen, & it would be an injustice if it happened. No connection proven. Neighborhood kids wreck property, not the occasional cacher.

 

Have you looked at this "neighborhood"? This isn't exactly the suburban subdivision with 100 x 300 foot lots and the houses 25 feet apart you might be thinking. This is quite rural, and many of the residents are seasonal, according to the irate homeowner. The road across the street, where the 2nd, lesser discussed archived cache was located, is a dirt road.

 

In other words, little Johnny and Susie who live 500 feet from the cache didn't stroll down a tree lined sidewalk to play in the landscaping. Of course winter weather could have caused all the damage too.

Hes right about this. Its very rural in that area. Its in the mountain (just east of Willamette Pass) and there arent that many people living over there year around. The ski resort at Willamette Pass get 430 in/year. It might be a little less of where the cache is at. Some of the mountains north of there get way more per year. I got a feeling that the plowed up snow might damage the rock wall over the years. Once it get so high, they have to blow it over. This is serious snow country and very close to the birth of Willamette River (one of Oregon's major river). Its a well traveled pass over the mountain between Hwy 97 to I-5. A number of truckers take that route to bypass the Siskiyou Pass on I-5 to save fuel cost. Most of the cachers that found that cache are traveling through the area.

 

If you understand Oregon land use law(s) are, you will understand why you dont see much this type of home development all over Oregon. Its somewhat rare unless its grandfathered in.

 

The cache is somewhat a park and grab of what a number of finders told me since yesterday. Its not anywhere close to the lights and sign. If its a park and grab, the damage in the area would be min. So of what the OP said is blowing smoke and trying to scammed the finders and the CO.

 

The OP sounds like someone from Cal. His attitude is bad. Really bad. (sorry, this is a major pet peeve of mine about my neighbor state to the south)

Edited May 30, 2013 by SwineFlew

[1unhappyowner]

As you know I made a couple of logs and a couple of posts about an Illegally Placed cache on private property. Thank you for all of the kind emails condemning the illegal actions of those involved. Seems that there were fewer of those than the opposite - but by the tone you can tell who is who - and we really appreciated the supportive comments.

 

For those who read something else into all of this, I just don't know what to say other than I feel sorry for you and hope for some devine guidance to come into your lives. For all of the polite, respectful and non-lawyer geocachers, I will give you one last run down:

 

1. Someone from your geocaching community trespassed on privately deeded land and placed a geocache more than 30 feet from the centerline of a private drive (off the easement for you non-lawyers) in our remote subdivision several years ago. In order to place the cache, one would have had to walk behind a stacked rock wall, well inside the perimeter of the private parcel. The rock wall behind which the cache was placed, surrounds our large entrance sign and night time activated lighting system, maintained monetarily by all who own here.

 

2. Over the years the lights at our entrance have been broken, twisted off of their mounts and the power source wiring disabled. A few years ago, one of the local residents, bought and installed, as a donation to us, a new lighting system at a cost of about $1700. (Does this number sound familiar?). This past winter the lights quit working so this spring, two different residents bought and replaced the wiring to the lights which had been cut. This is a remote area, and no one would really be in or near this area unless there was some sort of draw - maybe a inappropriately hidden item announced, and described on the internet? And maybe an inappropriate description on the internet to make it look like there were recreation activities available at the site, which there are not - because it is private property.

 

3. Rocks close to the hiding place of the cache were pulled from the wall and left. Local residents replaced some of them, but since then more have been pulled out. Where did the story come from that we have been paying landscapers to repair this area? WOW. Anyway, rocks don't jump out of walls near hidden caches by themselves even when rained or snowed on. We are glad no one got hurt climbing in and around the rocks. (If a trespassing geocacher got hurt on our private property, I am sure they would not want US to pay for it!)

 

4. This past Sunday on our way out we saw two people aimlessly wandering across the road staring at a hand held - nowhere near the site of the former cache - my wife, at that moment described them as idiots, which I agreed was appropriate. As a listed Synonym it seemed humorous at the time and still does - not necessarily derogatory - mostly affectionately humorous. Someone is going to sue us over that off the cuff description ???[airhead, birdbrain, blockhead, bonehead, bubblehead, chowderhead, chucklehead, clodpoll (or clodpole), clot [british], cluck, clunk, cretin, cuddy (or cuddie) [british dialect], deadhead, dim bulb [slang], dimwit, dip, dodo, dolt, donkey, doofus [slang], dope, dork [slang], dullard, dumbbell, dumbhead, dum-dum, dummkopf, dummy, dunce, dunderhead, fathead, gander, golem, goof, goon, half-wit, hammerhead, hardhead, ignoramus, imbecile, jackass, know-nothing, knucklehead, lamebrain - you get the idea]. This was just an observation of what their actions portrayed to us at that moment in time. When we returned, we then noticed new damage to the area where these people were last seen looking, and yes, another coincidence - they were the last people we saw at that location - a rock structure was completely pulled apart there - did they do it? - as Judge Wapner would say: "After a preponderance of the evidence we can assume that's what happened". By then they were gone and no, we did not "contact the authorities at that moment in time" and give a description of the perps.

 

5. I asked my wife - "What on Earth were those people doing?" She, as smart as she is, said that they were "Geocaching". I said that explains all of that unusual activity here over the past several years. I then did a quick internet search (how did I know to do that?) and of course there is only really one site to look at and I quickly found the cache info. Amazing I was able to figure it out without the help of some of you posters out there - Amazing! Someone wrote "why didn't I ask for the cache to be archived if it was a problem?" I requested it be deleted! And I received a nice email from one of the administrators who said they will sanction the cache hider if there are any more problems. Thank You - yes, this was the appropriate response.

 

6. So, the next day I took my rarely used GPS down to the entrance and quickly found the cache and am holding it to turn over to law enforcement. (Yes, we are contacting the authorities.) Some were amazed that I could be an amateur and find the cache so easily. Think about who and what that statement says - definitions above.

 

7. Now the big adventure is over. As you can see my story is not "full of holes", it is just a recap of what has happened. Oh, and thank your for all of the offers to come repair the damage and thank you for all of the checks pouring in for the costs we incurred - NOT. I will take one of the able body neighbors down to the entrance this next week and restack the rocks once and for all (no paid landscapers). The saga is over. I did have a passing thought that it might be fun to find a PROPERLY PLACED cache in the future, but after all of the recent posts I have been seeing, I don't think I would ever be able to fit into that group. Again, for all of you who saw this for what is was, Thank You for you kind words of support. For the rest of you .... well you know.

Edited May 30, 2013 by 1unhappyowner

[+The_Incredibles_]

I can think of a couple caches here that were hidden up 'private drives' and were promptly archived by our reviewer as no permission was stated.

 

The fact is, damage was done and let's face it, was likely done by cachers seeking this cache. All the cachers who didn't report the damage in their logs *were* idiots and the cache owner was an idiot for not regularly inspecting the area. No matter where you hide your cache, permission or not, you should be inspecting the area regularly for impact.

 

I hope the CO is ready to write a big fat cheque.

 

I don't think that is going to happen. Lets assume Geocachers did intentionally and maliciously destroy the landscaping. It wasn't all of them, and perhaps 10% or less who were careless searchers. The owner would have to first prove that they actually did it. Then he would have to prove that the CO knew that would occur, acted recklessly in hiding it, and as matter of course was responsible. I'm fairly certain that the CO never expected anything to happen, and expected searchers to behave much like he does. That's a lot of proof for only $1700, much of which was spent years ago with receipts that are most likely nonexistent, and well beyond any statute of limitations. If it happened to me, yeah I'd want to strangle him, but legally there is not much that can be proven. He can get a lawyer for $500 to chase after that, but they may not be effective anyhow.

 

The odd part is that the owner immediately assumed cachers did the damage. Not many non cachers would assume as much. That's something that Geocachers discover after a few years. Geocachers are also more sensitive in noticing damage than other people are. Rocks and logs turned over dont bother anyone else, as there is often evidence of a search, but no permanent damage. For all we know, the rocks could have been dislodged by a snowplow. The wires and boxes may have been tampered with by teens who were on vacation and bored.

 

Yeah, I wouldn't have hidden it there, but the CO being responsible? At ANY cache there is a chance that some knucklehead could tear up the place. If I think that is likely, I wouldn't hide anything there. But if it does happen, are we really responsible? An ammo can on state property gets visited by a drunken cacher on a ATV who rips up the landscape at 3AM and hits a tree, requiring a helicopter to the hospital. Am I responsible for that? How about some idiot who rips apart a telephone junction box to find a micro which is 10 feet away and tied to a bush? Or the guy who takes a machete to ground zero? Yeah, it looks bad for the sport, but the person responsible is the person who did it.

 

What are you, a lawyer? I don't know what would happen if/when this is taken to court. However, it sounds to me like cachers are likely to be responsible for the damage. I think the CO should be writing a big fat cheque and also apologizing profusely, because it's the RIGHT thing to do. He put the cache there, he brought people to it, he's morally responsible, IMO for any damage that occurred.

[team tisri]

Personally when I see a sign like that I move to the next cache. There are to many out there to get to worry about one like that. As to those who "assume permission was gotten." You are deludeing yourself to justify your actions. With the exception of public lands where the reviewer knows permission is needed and enforces it NOONE gets permission. It would be better to assume no permission given unless specifically noted in the description.

 

Well if we all felt that way I don't think very many caches would get found. In fact I doubt that you actually adhere to your own policy 100% of the time. Get off your soap box, there are lots of circumstances that allow for no permission to be obtained. People make mistakes, no need to be sanctimonious about it.

 

I don't see it as being sanctimonious. If I'm out caching and the GPS points me past a sign that says it's private I assume it's private and leave it alone.

 

If it looks like the cache is the other side of a private area (i.e. I could cross the private property to get to it, or I could go around the private property while remaining on public property) then I'd decide whether to go around the private area or abandon the search. If it looked like the cache was on private property I'd abandon the search.

 

People make mistakes but ignoring signs that land is privately owned isn't a mistake, it's a wilful act.

 

So how many lamp posts do you own or have checked the permission on?

 

None, I don't like lamp post caches.

 

Even so if a lamp post is in a public area it's not like I'm trespassing to get to it and it's not like I'm doing any damage to the lamp post to lift the skirt. If I can't look without risking damage to something I move on, it's not worth it for the sake of a smiley face.

[Keystone]

I merged together two threads on the same incident. I also tried to dial down the volume a bit. This dial goes to eleven.

[+Flintstone5611]

What are you, a lawyer? I don't know what would happen if/when this is taken to court. However, it sounds to me like cachers are likely to be responsible for the damage. I think the CO should be writing a big fat cheque and also apologizing profusely, because it's the RIGHT thing to do. He put the cache there, he brought people to it, he's morally responsible, IMO for any damage that occurred.

 

Saying it is the right thing to do may be a bit of a stretch. The OP has lied about the damages and exaggerated things well past the truth. They have even started a new thread that mentions the fact that the $1700 is based on a donation from one of the owners for this lighting system that has nothing to do with the cache (as clearly stated on the cache page) and was damaged as a result of cut wiring. Something that I have a hard time reconciling as being any geocacher's fault.

 

Because this person didn't have the sense to talk to someone in the moment they have to make assumptions. Now because GS is so willing to claim responsibility is how they govern there reputation, it doesn't prove anything. I really thing this accusation has been made in haste.

 

As for the CO's responsibility, well I have yet to see a gun shop be accused of armed robbery. The OP was able to find the cache without trespassing or doing any harm. If a muggle with no background can find a fake rock without harming the area or trespassing then I think I can clearly see what the CO had envisioned. Any thing that happened was as a result of juvenile vandals not responsible adults.

[4wheelin_fool]

What are you, a lawyer? I don't know what would happen if/when this is taken to court. However, it sounds to me like cachers are likely to be responsible for the damage. I think the CO should be writing a big fat cheque and also apologizing profusely, because it's the RIGHT thing to do. He put the cache there, he brought people to it, he's morally responsible, IMO for any damage that occurred.

 

What would happen? It would have to be proven he was at fault.

 

• First there would have to be proof that it was indeed caused by geocaching. Being that ground zero is 100 feet or more away from signage and lighting, that would be difficult, as others have pointed out actual ground zero is elsewhere. Thirty feet is the accuracy range of most GPSr units.
  
• The cache is a park and grab. Hint says "A Georock" hidden on ground level". That tells me that geocachers did NOT damage any electrical equipment boxes, or lights. Looking at ground level would NOT cause any boulders to become dislodged.
  
• After proving that it was indeed done by caching, it would have to be proven that he knew damage would occur, or could reasonably expect it. After all, he did not do any of the damage himself. Could he expect the average cacher to damage anything here?
  
• Small claims court may handle it, but it's not clear that he was responsible. They could sue instead and have him pay the lawyers fees if they win. If that's not successful, they will have to pay his lawyers fees instead. Lawyers range from $500 to $1500 for this.
  
• Damage is likely due to a snowplow.
  

 

I suppose that your opinion is biased because you personally would not have hidden a cache there, and you would not want to look for a cache there. However if some moron damaged fencing, trespassed, or trampled flowers at ground zero of this cache, would you be eagerly paying for it? And without knowing for sure if it was a cacher?

Edited May 30, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+coman123]

I'm surprised this thread is not locked or deleted by the mods, the very first entry was rude and defamatory totally violates the T&C of using the forums

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules specifically #2 and #4

 

It's upsetting there was damage, but Come on, lock it or delete it

 

OP should also be warned about his/her wording and contend is his/her comments

 

You're kidding, right? Can you imagine the OPs frustration? They have the right to be hopping mad.

 

I agree, but they DO NOT have the right to break the forum rules.

[Clan Riffster]

1. Someone from your geocaching community trespassed

Not according to Oregon law.

 

What was the term you used?

 

airhead, birdbrain, blockhead, bonehead, bubblehead, chowderhead, chucklehead, clodpoll (or clodpole), clot [british], cluck, clunk, cretin, cuddy (or cuddie) [british dialect], deadhead, dim bulb [slang], dimwit, dip, dodo, dolt, donkey, doofus [slang], dope, dork [slang], dullard, dumbbell, dumbhead, dum-dum, dummkopf, dummy, dunce, dunderhead, fathead, gander, golem, goof, goon, half-wit, hammerhead, hardhead, ignoramus, imbecile, jackass, know-nothing, knucklehead, lamebrain

I believe any one of those could be used to describe someone who continues to insist on something, when they know their statements are false.

[Luckless]

If the law says the person who placed the cache was tresspassing in order to hide it then they were tresspassing.

If the law says a person who looked for the cache tresspassed in order to do that then they were tresspassing.

If you can sue them for that under the law, and you are inclined to do that, then they will get sued.

Cachers, you are ultimately responsible for what you do while caching. Be aware. If it seems like you're on private property, don't go there.

I will always try to get permission before hiding a cache and and if the hide seems questionable I'll note on the cache webpage that permission was given to be there. I also make regular checks on the cache to be sure the area is not being abused. I've removed caches that caused rock walls to have stones removed or caused trees to have branches broken, etc. by cachers who were looking for them.

Things for cachers to bear in mind is that your coordinates might be off. If that's the case you could be looking in an area that is off limits.

If looking for a cache means dismantling property you may want to skip it. I am strongly in favor of always marking a cache container (discreetly of course) so that a cacher will know it is a cache container and not worry about opening the wrong thing that might cause problems. Many cache hiders around here will include on their cache page where not to look, such as a the rock wall, that might cause problems.

I have no problem telling people living in the area where I'm caching what I'm doing. (Of course I don't tell kids because they'll tell their buddies and the cache will disappear.) If I notice a local resident looking at me with distrust I'll go over and tell them to expect to see people caching then ask if they feel the cache poses a problem for them. Most people just want to know. So would I if I were them.

The original poster said it appeared that someone had cut the wires to his lights. This does not seem like something cachers would do. I can think of no instance why they would. They might remove a few rocks from a stone wall, but cut wires- no. Because the original poster lives in a remote area he didn't think he'd be bothered by vandals. Around here vandals are apt to cause trouble to people in remote areas because there are no witnesses.

Please don't judge a group of people by what you read in the forums. Forums always contain discussions that get overheated.

Edited May 30, 2013 by Luckless

[nonaeroterraqueous]

1. Someone from your geocaching community trespassed on privately deeded land and placed a geocache more than 30 feet from the centerline of a private drive (off the easement for you non-lawyers) in our remote subdivision several years ago. In order to place the cache, one would have had to walk behind a stacked rock wall, well inside the perimeter of the private parcel. The rock wall behind which the cache was placed, surrounds our large entrance sign and night time activated lighting system, maintained monetarily by all who own here.

 

Casual observation, here: I get the impression that you're claiming tresspassing on land that isn't actually yours. Did anyone actually tresspass on your land, or are you claiming injury on behalf of someone else?

 

2. Over the years the lights at our entrance have been broken, twisted off of their mounts and the power source wiring disabled.

 

I've seen damage caused by geocaching over the years, including but not limited to landscaping damage, sprinkler damage and overturned stones. Cut wiring is not something I've ever seen, and I cannot see how it would ever come about as the result of caching. Besides which, the sign is too far away. Any electrical in the area of the cache would be underground, and we don't use shovels.

 

3. Rocks close to the hiding place of the cache were pulled from the wall and left.

 

That would be an easy one to believe, but a previous poster posted a picture of your rock wall. Until I saw that picture, I actually believed you, but seriously, those are massive rocks you're talking about.

 

6. So, the next day I took my rarely used GPS down to the entrance and quickly found the cache and am holding it to turn over to law enforcement.

 

You, an inexperienced geocacher, quickly found something that you believe caused those more experienced than yourself to turn the place upside-down in their search? I doubt it. You did it without tresspassing? Could it be found without tresspassing? I think you just disproved your own case.

[+redsox_mark]

Some thoughts:

 

A. I believe there has been unanimous agreement that the cache should not have been placed there, and if any damage was caused by geocachers we condemn that.

 

B. This is a internet forum where we discuss geocaching. Different people will have different opinions or raise different points.

 

C. Some geocachers have agreed with the OP that without question a: The 253 people who found it were idiots b: The 253 people who found it broke the law and c: the damage must have been caused by Geocachers.

 

D. Others (including myself) have been wondering how this happened and have been asking questions, trying to understand. Firstly, most geocaches are hidden in public (or at least publicly accessible) places, and do not cause a problem. But occasionally (as in this case) a cache gets hidden where it should not be. Such a geocache which is an "obvious" problem doesn't usually last 8 years. So why did this one? Are the geocachers in this part of Oregon that different? Or maybe it wasn't that obvious? This includes the discussion of "trespassing" or not.

 

E. Geocachers are people. People are good and bad, and lots of stuff in between. Good people do not vandalize (to destroy or deface property willfully or maliciously). There are people in the world who vandalize. I'm sure there is at least one vandal in the world who also geocaches. But as a group I don't believe Geocachers are more likely to be vandals than any random group of people.

 

F. Geocachers do look for geocaches. This can have some impact on the environment. For example a trail developing where cachers have walked. As caches can be hidden under sticks, under logs, etc they will move such items.

A good Geocacher will do this as sensitively as possible, and put the rocks and sticks back where they found them. So generally this impact is not considered "damage".

 

G. Geocachers can cause inadvertent damage. In this example, the cache container was a fake rock. If that fake rock was hidden near another fake rock (hiding the irrigation valve), then it is possible (even likely) that damage to the fake rock was done by a Geocacher. Of course this would not have happened in the first place if the cache wasn't there.

 

H. Referring back to point E - it seems very unlikely to me that a Geocacher would cut the wires to the sign. I can't see how that could be inadvertent damage. It is more likely that this was indeed vandalizm. Again it could be a rogue Geocacher who likes to vandalize; but I think it much more likely to be done by someone local (who is not a Geocacher).

[+JL_HSTRE]

In Florida, a sign declaring "Private Drive" does not imply that access is forbidden. It merely states that the roadway is privately owned/maintained. So long as there is no gate, public access is perfectly legal.

 

Wow, I had no idea. I thought "Private Drive" meant "this road is private property".

 

However, even if the sign has no real legal meaning, it seems to be a clear indication that the resident(s) do not want strangers. Geocachers are generally best not placed in areas where the locals do not want them around.

 

If I saw a sign that said "Private Drive", I would not go down that road for a geocache unless the cache place specifically mentioned permission.

[+bflentje]

7. Now the big adventure is over. As you can see my story is not "full of holes", it is just a recap of what has happened. Oh, and thank your for all of the offers to come repair the damage and thank you for all of the checks pouring in for the costs we incurred - NOT. I will take one of the able body neighbors down to the entrance this next week and restack the rocks once and for all (no paid landscapers). The saga is over. I did have a passing thought that it might be fun to find a PROPERLY PLACED cache in the future, but after all of the recent posts I have been seeing, I don't think I would ever be able to fit into that group. Again, for all of you who saw this for what is was, Thank You for you kind words of support. For the rest of you .... well you know.[/size]

 

The more you post the more I smell a rat. I would not even begin to debate the possibility of trespassing but everything else about your story is complete rubbish.

 

Here's a subtle example.. who here can spot the anomaly?

 

6. So, the next day I took my rarely used GPS down to the entrance and quickly found the cache

[+kunarion]

The saga is over. I did have a passing thought that it might be fun to find a PROPERLY PLACED cache in the future, but after all of the recent posts I have been seeing, I don't think I would ever be able to fit into that group.

From signing up, to entering coords, to quickly finding a cache, to logging a find, I think you'd make a great Geocacher. Maybe you won't fit in with people who destroy property, but there's no requirement to do either (destroy property nor fit in).

 

Would you mind posting in an ordinary-sized typeface? Your posts are gigantic on my laptop.

Edited May 30, 2013 by kunarion

[+sparklefingers]

 

Here's a subtle example.. who here can spot the anomaly?

 

6. So, the next day I took my rarely used GPS down to the entrance and quickly found the cache

 

That stuck out to me too.

[+kunarion]

In Florida, a sign declaring "Private Drive" does not imply that access is forbidden. It merely states that the roadway is privately owned/maintained. So long as there is no gate, public access is perfectly legal.

 

Wow, I had no idea. I thought "Private Drive" meant "this road is private property".

I thought so, too. I've most often seen such a sign on a driveway that has a couple of houses, or on driveways off roads where it's hard to find a parking spot. So the sign is at minimum saying "this is not a parking lot" (I guess the store was out of "No Parking" signs ). But I also think people buy those signs specially to imply "Keep Out", rightly or not.

 

So if there's a trespassing issue, and if it's your property, and if you want people to keep out, post "No Trespassing" signs. A "Private Drive" sign leaves things open to interpretation.

Edited May 30, 2013 by kunarion

[4wheelin_fool]

7. Now the big adventure is over. As you can see my story is not "full of holes", it is just a recap of what has happened. Oh, and thank your for all of the offers to come repair the damage and thank you for all of the checks pouring in for the costs we incurred - NOT. I will take one of the able body neighbors down to the entrance this next week and restack the rocks once and for all (no paid landscapers). The saga is over. I did have a passing thought that it might be fun to find a PROPERLY PLACED cache in the future, but after all of the recent posts I have been seeing, I don't think I would ever be able to fit into that group. Again, for all of you who saw this for what is was, Thank You for you kind words of support. For the rest of you .... well you know.[/size]

 

The more you post the more I smell a rat. I would not even begin to debate the possibility of trespassing but everything else about your story is complete rubbish.

 

Here's a subtle example.. who here can spot the anomaly?

 

6. So, the next day I took my rarely used GPS down to the entrance and quickly found the cache

 

Wow, they must be really smart to find the cache so quickly while the rest of us ripped out the lighting fixtures to find a fake rock!

Edited May 30, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Redfist]

7. Now the big adventure is over. As you can see my story is not "full of holes", it is just a recap of what has happened. Oh, and thank your for all of the offers to come repair the damage and thank you for all of the checks pouring in for the costs we incurred - NOT. I will take one of the able body neighbors down to the entrance this next week and restack the rocks once and for all (no paid landscapers). The saga is over. I did have a passing thought that it might be fun to find a PROPERLY PLACED cache in the future, but after all of the recent posts I have been seeing, I don't think I would ever be able to fit into that group. Again, for all of you who saw this for what is was, Thank You for you kind words of support. For the rest of you .... well you know.[/size]

 

The more you post the more I smell a rat. I would not even begin to debate the possibility of trespassing but everything else about your story is complete rubbish.

 

Here's a subtle example.. who here can spot the anomaly?

 

6. So, the next day I took my rarely used GPS down to the entrance and quickly found the cache

 

Wow, they must be really smart to find the cache so quickly while the rest of us ripped out the lighting fixtures to find a fake rock!

 

I have ZERO idea what actually happened there to cause the damage. To be honest, none of us (including the OP) *knows* what happened. Some may suspect, but none KNOW.

 

I have found my outside lighting wiring "cut" before. I eventually figured out what happened when I saw the culprit in action. Do you know "who" cut my wires? A rabbit. Darn rabbit chewed the wires. When I looked at each end, it looked like a clean cut.

 

Go figure...

 

I'm no lawyer, but my gut tells me that the only result of bringing the CO to court will be that the OP has to end up paying his lawyer fees. They'll never win for damages. The OP may get fined for trespassing, but the damages part is somewhat laughable.

 

What is really irksome is that it *may* have actually been cachers who caused the damage. If nothing else, this should serve as a reminder to cachers to "do no harm". That should be obvious, but everyone knows that "common sense" isn't as "common" as we'd all hope.

[Clan Riffster]

In Florida, a sign declaring "Private Drive" does not imply that access is forbidden. It merely states that the roadway is privately owned/maintained. So long as there is no gate, public access is perfectly legal.

 

Wow, I had no idea. I thought "Private Drive" meant "this road is private property".

It's all about distinctions.

Roadways can be publicly owned/public access, privately owned/public access and privately owned/private access.

For the latter, the owner(s) needs to install some type of barricade prohibiting access.

 

When we discuss access, from a legal standpoint, the obvious benchmark is, would unauthorized access meet the elements for the offense of trespassing, as detailed in state statute. In the case of a sign stating "Private Drive", given no other signage or blockage, driving past such a sign would not constitute criminal trespass. As noted in my earlier post, such a sign does declare that the roadway is private property. But it does not declare that Joe Public is forbidden to drive there. Your front yard is a similar example. If you have no fencing, signage or cultivation, I can step onto your front yard, knowing that it is private property, and not commit criminal trespass.

 

As noted in my copy/paste of Oregon statutes, their laws are similar.

 

The OP, (assuming he has reasonably high reading comprehension skills), knows that persons driving past the aforementioned "Private Drive" sign are not committing a crime. Though his stubborn insistence to the contrary borders on slander.

[4wheelin_fool]

I asked my wife - "What on Earth were those people doing?" She, as smart as she is, said that they were "Geocaching".

..... So, the next day I took my rarely used GPS down to the entrance and quickly found the cache.

 

Yeah, they are geocachers. Wife figured out quickly that they were Geocaching? and owns a GPS. Most noncachers wouldn't bother to create an avatar and post in a trollish font.

[+The A-Team]

The rock wall behind which the cache was placed, surrounds our large entrance sign and night time activated lighting system, maintained monetarily by all who own here.

While I can agree that the rock wall does surround you entrance sign, there's more to the story that you're conveniently leaving out. Based on a quick measurement using satellite images, the entire length of the rock wall is about 430 feet, and it extends 240 feet along Willamette Highway, 200 feet along Royce Mountain Way, and 100 feet along Blue Sky Way. The cache location is approximately 100 feet away from the sign along the portion beside Blue Sky Way. 100 feet is light years away when searching for a cache, especially one that you've proven yourself is actually pretty easy to find.

 

As far as the damage, I can understand the damage to the rock wall being caused by searching geocachers. I've seen such damage before, so I don't doubt that what you saw was a result of the cache. The damage to the decorative rockwork and irrigation box could potentially be caused by geocachers, but it still isn't clear how close this was to the cache. As for the cut wires, that almost definitely wasn't a geocacher. As far as I can tell, this wiring would be near the entrance sign, which is nowhere near the cache.

[+geodarts]

Roadways can be publicly owned/public access, privately owned/public access and privately owned/private access.

For the latter, the owner(s) needs to install some type of barricade prohibiting access.

 

* * * *

 

The OP, (assuming he has reasonably high reading comprehension skills), knows that persons driving past the aforementioned "Private Drive" sign are not committing a crime. Though his stubborn insistence to the contrary borders on slander.

 

This may be a little off point, but in Oregon, you do not need a barricade. A sign saying saying "Private Road. No Unauthorized Access" would have done the trick. (State ex rel. Juvenile Dept. of Coos County v. Reeves (Or. Ct. App. 1999) 163 Or.App. 497, 500.) Maybe the home owners association needs to change the sign. But in any case, it does establish the property as being "private" even if the public may otherwise drive on the road itself.

 

Although the OP once used the term "criminal trespass" I assume that he is not using that as a term of art and in other posts simply he simply refers to "trespass." You can, of course, trespass without being guilty of criminal trespass, which is why there are civil sanctions if any damage occurs as a result and why there is only a very limited duty of care to trespassers. In this case, it is hard to see how any damages could be proven even if the OP wanted to institute a small claims action.

 

So most of us agree that the cache should not have been placed there. Some of us are willing to accept that rocks may have been moved, although the ones in the picture would have precluded me from ever trying that. Personally, I am going with the rabbit theory about the lighting. But any blame is speculative and I would not want PETA to think that I am unfairly blaming rabbits (or any other animal that may have come across the wiring and given it a chew). I hope the same considerations apply to cachers.

Edited May 30, 2013 by geodarts

[+kunarion]

I can understand the damage to the rock wall being caused by searching geocachers. I've seen such damage before, so I don't doubt that what you saw was a result of the cache. The damage to the decorative rockwork and irrigation box could potentially be caused by geocachers, but it still isn't clear how close this was to the cache. As for the cut wires, that almost definitely wasn't a geocacher. As far as I can tell, this wiring would be near the entrance sign, which is nowhere near the cache.

Are there exposed wires in that spot? It seems like that would be problematic even without rabbits and Geocachers.

 

If rocks have been moved, what would the most direct route be? Maybe Geocachers went straight from the highway, over/through the walls. Not everyone attempts to find a sensible route.

 

But the offending caches are archived, eventually no more “Geocachers” will arrive. This doesn't mean the damage will cease. The damage may be caused by someone/something else. Maybe it helps to rule out one of the causes.

 

Geocachers are ordinary people, so they have various motives. Some are definitely the “No Rules” type that do only what they want regardless of the harm to others, but they are like that throughout their lives, it's not really a “Geocaching” issue.

 

Some of us Leave No Trace. We pick up trash, leave things unmolested, and even report damage, since that helps all of us.

Edited May 30, 2013 by kunarion

[+Crow-T-Robot]

5. I asked my wife - "What on Earth were those people doing?" She, as smart as she is, said that they were "Geocaching". I said that explains all of that unusual activity here over the past several years.

 

Even though I didn't buy most of the OP's story, this was the clincher for me. So, you saw some geocachers near this private property, investigated where you saw them and found some stones moved and immediately condemned geocaching as the reason that your lights and sign have been vandalized. Is that about right? What a load of bullhonkey. Cut wires? I've seen some pretty stupid things done by cachers trying to find a cache but this is a whole new level of stupid and it's simply not believable.

 

I've seen cachers carrying ladders, stepstools, buckets, flashlights, UV lights, mirrors, grabbers, tweezers...even water jugs for those hides that have caches hidden in pipes. I haven't seen it personally, but I know some cachers will occasionally bring along a metal detector. But, I've never seen anyone carry around shovels or wire cutters and I seriously doubt anyone else has, either. It just isn't part of the culture. We don't dig or cut and 98% of looking for caches is done with just our eyes and hands. And this sign was 100' away from the cache? It doesn't add up. Not in the least.

 

If this damage really did happen (ie, you're not just trolling), you need to investigate the residents within your community. Cut wires and broken lights sound a heck of a lot more like bored teenagers than it does geocachers.

[+L0ne.R]

5. I asked my wife - "What on Earth were those people doing?" She, as smart as she is, said that they were "Geocaching". I said that explains all of that unusual activity here over the past several years.

 

Even though I didn't buy most of the OP's story, this was the clincher for me. So, you saw some geocachers near this private property, investigated where you saw them and found some stones moved and immediately condemned geocaching as the reason that your lights and sign have been vandalized. Is that about right? What a load of bullhonkey. Cut wires? I've seen some pretty stupid things done by cachers trying to find a cache but this is a whole new level of stupid and it's simply not believable.

 

I've seen cachers carrying ladders, stepstools, buckets, flashlights, UV lights, mirrors, grabbers, tweezers...even water jugs for those hides that have caches hidden in pipes. I haven't seen it personally, but I know some cachers will occasionally bring along a metal detector. But, I've never seen anyone carry around shovels or wire cutters and I seriously doubt anyone else has, either. It just isn't part of the culture. We don't dig or cut and 98% of looking for caches is done with just our eyes and hands. And this sign was 100' away from the cache? It doesn't add up. Not in the least.

 

If this damage really did happen (ie, you're not just trolling), you need to investigate the residents within your community. Cut wires and broken lights sound a heck of a lot more like bored teenagers than it does geocachers.

 

I like the snow plow theory especially because he also mentions light fixtures being wrenched from their base. Sounds like something heavy with a blade may have hit them, wrenching them and cutting wires.

[+kunarion]

Cut wires and broken lights sound a heck of a lot more like bored teenagers than it does geocachers.

Yes. And I could grant that it's a "Geocaching problem" in a way, if non-cachers (friends of friends) were told there's a "hidden treasure here", and the treasure-hunters got bored and played other games with the landscape. But whoever did that seem to be the damage-causing types anyway.

 

What's the deal with loose wires? Isn't there a code about running power wires in Oregon?

[+geodarts]

I like the snow plow theory especially because he also mentions light fixtures being wrenched from their base. Sounds like something heavy with a blade may have hit them, wrenching them and cutting wires.

 

Sasquatch.

[+redsox_mark]

Now I can be a bit gullible, but I have assumed all along the 1unhappyowner is being honest. Well maybe some of the language and claims a bit exaggerated (by a justifiably unhappy resident), but not a troll.

 

To 1unhappyowner: If you are being genuine, then please understand that sometimes people do come onto these forms and claim to be someone different than they are, just to stir things up. People are just speculating about one possible reason for what seems to be some inconsistency in the story. If you are genuine, then I'm sure this is making you even more upset.

 

And if you are a troll.. you got me...

[+redsox_mark]

I like the snow plow theory especially because he also mentions light fixtures being wrenched from their base. Sounds like something heavy with a blade may have hit them, wrenching them and cutting wires.

 

Sasquatch.

 

A geocaching rabbit driving a snow plow.

[+The_Incredibles_]

What are you, a lawyer? I don't know what would happen if/when this is taken to court. However, it sounds to me like cachers are likely to be responsible for the damage. I think the CO should be writing a big fat cheque and also apologizing profusely, because it's the RIGHT thing to do. He put the cache there, he brought people to it, he's morally responsible, IMO for any damage that occurred.

 

What would happen? It would have to be proven he was at fault.

 

You're too busy thinking about litigation. Whatever happened to people getting together and working things out? My point is, the OP seems to think he's been wronged. I think the CO should at least make an effort to meet with the guy at GZ to survey the damage and work out some sort of agreement. And yes, I think he should be ready with his cheque book.

[+Flintstone5611]

What are you, a lawyer? I don't know what would happen if/when this is taken to court. However, it sounds to me like cachers are likely to be responsible for the damage. I think the CO should be writing a big fat cheque and also apologizing profusely, because it's the RIGHT thing to do. He put the cache there, he brought people to it, he's morally responsible, IMO for any damage that occurred.

 

What would happen? It would have to be proven he was at fault.

 

You're too busy thinking about litigation. Whatever happened to people getting together and working things out? My point is, the OP seems to think he's been wronged. I think the CO should at least make an effort to meet with the guy at GZ to survey the damage and work out some sort of agreement. And yes, I think he should be ready with his cheque book.

 

I hope you don't think that it sounds more reasonable. Whoever did the damage should pay, not the person who placed a cache that the OP was able to retrieve without doing any damage or trespassing. If the people that did the damage would like to make reparations then yes, but not the CO, absolutely not.

[Clan Riffster]

What are you, a lawyer? I don't know what would happen if/when this is taken to court. However, it sounds to me like cachers are likely to be responsible for the damage. I think the CO should be writing a big fat cheque and also apologizing profusely, because it's the RIGHT thing to do. He put the cache there, he brought people to it, he's morally responsible, IMO for any damage that occurred.

 

What would happen? It would have to be proven he was at fault.

 

You're too busy thinking about litigation. Whatever happened to people getting together and working things out? My point is, the OP seems to think he's been wronged. I think the CO should at least make an effort to meet with the guy at GZ to survey the damage and work out some sort of agreement. And yes, I think he should be ready with his cheque book.

 

I hope you don't think that it sounds more reasonable. Whoever did the damage should pay, not the person who placed a cache that the OP was able to retrieve without doing any damage or trespassing. If the people that did the damage would like to make reparations then yes, but not the CO, absolutely not.

Agreed, whole heartedly. It would be way beyond absurd to expect a cache owner to pay for cut wiring, light fixtures wrenched apart, and damaged valve covers occurring over a hundred feet away from an easy to find cache. A moved boulder near ground zero? I might be willing to discuss that. Maybe. But the rest? I can't even type what my response to such a suggestion is, for fear of having mtn-man throw a brick at me.

[4wheelin_fool]

What are you, a lawyer? I don't know what would happen if/when this is taken to court. However, it sounds to me like cachers are likely to be responsible for the damage. I think the CO should be writing a big fat cheque and also apologizing profusely, because it's the RIGHT thing to do. He put the cache there, he brought people to it, he's morally responsible, IMO for any damage that occurred.

 

What would happen? It would have to be proven he was at fault.

 

You're too busy thinking about litigation. Whatever happened to people getting together and working things out? My point is, the OP seems to think he's been wronged. I think the CO should at least make an effort to meet with the guy at GZ to survey the damage and work out some sort of agreement. And yes, I think he should be ready with his cheque book.

 

I hope you don't think that it sounds more reasonable. Whoever did the damage should pay, not the person who placed a cache that the OP was able to retrieve without doing any damage or trespassing. If the people that did the damage would like to make reparations then yes, but not the CO, absolutely not.

Agreed, whole heartedly. It would be way beyond absurd to expect a cache owner to pay for cut wiring, light fixtures wrenched apart, and damaged valve covers occurring over a hundred feet away from an easy to find cache. A moved boulder near ground zero? I might be willing to discuss that. Maybe. But the rest? I can't even type what my response to such a suggestion is, for fear of having mtn-man throw a brick at me.

 

Mtn-man hasn't posted in awhile. You would most likely get impacted from a falling keystone from an archway. I'd like to to blame the OP for that, but ...

[+SwineFlew]

I would love Judge Judy take this case in.

 

I am sure she will tells the OP to grow up and act like an adult.

 

All that name calling is a major turn off. If you wanna fight like an adult, act like one.

[DannyCaffeine]

I'm sorry that this happened to you. You have every right to be uspet.

 

However causing drama on the fourms and yelling in a large font isn't going to help. Its going to make you more frustrated. Contact groudspeak. They will make sure the cache is disabled because it is against the rules to put a geocache on private property that does not belong to the cache placer. If you feel that people vandalized your yard perhaps you should contact the athorites to find out who specifically vandalized and perhaps get them to pay for the damage.

[+FunnyNose]

I've seen some pretty stupid things done by cachers trying to find a cache but this is a whole new level of stupid and it's simply not believable.

 

I didn’t think this was believable until I saw it.

 

 

You have to pull back the metal siding on a building that was for rent.

When I found it I had to PAF as it never occurred to me to do that.

[+The A-Team]

When I found it I had to PAF as it never occurred to me to do that.

The fact that you were able to PAF tells me someone else had previously found it, yet the cache still existed.

People, if you see a cache like this, don't just look the other way. Do something about it!

[+FunnyNose]

When I found it I had to PAF as it never occurred to me to do that.

The fact that you were able to PAF tells me someone else had previously found it, yet the cache still existed.

People, if you see a cache like this, don't just look the other way. Do something about it!

 

Ummm I did right away with info and photos to ironically the same reviewer who archived the cache along Route 58.

 

It didn't get archived till a year later when it went missing.

[+SwineFlew]

When I found it I had to PAF as it never occurred to me to do that.

The fact that you were able to PAF tells me someone else had previously found it, yet the cache still existed.

People, if you see a cache like this, don't just look the other way. Do something about it!

 

Ummm I did right away with info and photos to ironically the same reviewer who archived the cache along Route 58.

 

It didn't get archived till a year later when it went missing.

 

Is it that cache in Portland, over by the airport? If its, I did hit the NA log and it was deleted, it was finally archived after it went missing.

[+The A-Team]

When I found it I had to PAF as it never occurred to me to do that.

The fact that you were able to PAF tells me someone else had previously found it, yet the cache still existed.

People, if you see a cache like this, don't just look the other way. Do something about it!

Ummm I did right away with info and photos to ironically the same reviewer who archived the cache along Route 58.

Sorry, poor wording. I didn't mean to imply that I found fault with anything you did. My frustration was directed toward the finders before you that didn't report the cache, or with the reviewer for not acting on that information if they did.

[+FunnyNose]

When I found it I had to PAF as it never occurred to me to do that.

The fact that you were able to PAF tells me someone else had previously found it, yet the cache still existed.

People, if you see a cache like this, don't just look the other way. Do something about it!

Ummm I did right away with info and photos to ironically the same reviewer who archived the cache along Route 58.

Sorry, poor wording. I didn't mean to imply that I found fault with anything you did. My frustration was directed toward the finders before you that didn't report the cache, or with the reviewer for not acting on that information if they did.

 

And there were numerous concerns about the hide. Here are a few.

 

Building was ripped open when we go there. just an fyi to the stf. who would rip open a siding on a building anyway? no cachers that i know. of course i dont know any who would hide a cache inside of a wall either. but thats just me.

 

but must agree with previous logs that I felt uncomfortable with its location. If permission had been granted for the placement, then it should be included on the cache page. Just saying

 

I got to ground zero late. I was surprised to see the side of the building ripped open; someones wanted an FTF more than I did

 

I agree with a previous cacher, felt like vandals, but made the find. Hope you had permission too

 

Walked by this location and ruled it out as being tout of bounds but then read the logs and realized it had to be there

 

I was able to find it but it made me uncomfortable doing so. I would most certainly believe it to be private property when it's under the building and no way permission could be given when it's up for lease.

Edited May 31, 2013 by FunnyNose

[4wheelin_fool]

When I found it I had to PAF as it never occurred to me to do that.

The fact that you were able to PAF tells me someone else had previously found it, yet the cache still existed.

People, if you see a cache like this, don't just look the other way. Do something about it!

 

Ummm I did right away with info and photos to ironically the same reviewer who archived the cache along Route 58.

 

It didn't get archived till a year later when it went missing.

 

That's an embarrassment to the entire sport, especially when a reviewer looks the other way. The more that find it, the worse it looks. It's antisocial behavior, reinforced with herd like mob thinking. Entire flocks of sheep have been known to jump off of cliffs simply because others have.

 

In 2005 as Turkish shepherds watched on whilst their herd of sheep grazed, one sheep decided that it had enough of the world and jumped to its death. It doesn’t stop there though…

 

the stunned Turkish shepherds looked on, their herd of sheep one by one followed the initial sheep’s actions and jumped to their death as well – a nearly whopping 1,500 of them!

 

It was reported that in the end, 450 sheep died after the mass suicide jump.

 

They were able to save quite a few as those who jumped later were saved as the pile of sheep got higher, therefore the pile became more cushioned.

 

Unfortunately, this mass suicide of sheep had an estimated loss to families of $100,000 – a very significant amount of money as the average GDP per head is around the figure of $2,700

 

Edited May 31, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+The A-Team]

Entire flocks of sheep have been known to jump off of cliffs simply because others have.

I thought that was lemmings?

 

Yes, I used to play that a lot!