NPS Ammo Can

[+Don_J]

Okay, who left the ammo can in the NPS picnic area?

 

News Story

 

All I see is an Earthcache.

[+Ambrosia]

"A new age treasure hunt game"? Odd way to describe it.

[+Don_J]

"A new age treasure hunt game"? Odd way to describe it.

 

I kind of like it. And kudos to them for not calling it a suspicious "device".

[+Ambrosia]

"A new age treasure hunt game"? Odd way to describe it.

 

I kind of like it. And kudos to them for not calling it a suspicious "device".

Newfangled letterboxing. Modern mumbo jumbo gizmos.

[+Mudfrog]

The cache!

[+Dogmeat*]

This happened to me once. Someone called the police stating a person placed "drugs or a bomb" under a light pole skirt. I went into the store, came out to a cop car waiting for me. He was more than nice to me after he saw my military ID, and then had me explain it to him. He seemed quite interested in the game.

[+Dogmeat*]

Wow, I read the post the person made about their experience with the police and everything. I understand they went through some crap, but man. They were pretty aggressive about the whole thing. There's absolutely no need to be rude about it. It's part of the game, unfortunately. If you're seen in the woods poking around and then find a box and fiddle with it, it's gonna cause suspicion.

[4wheelin_fool]

The Park Ranger stated they knew an unauthorized small cache (which is what I was initially looking for and found an Ammo Box instead) was present there but well hidden and let it go but this was an Ammo Box pretty much could be seen by children and of concern.

 

Sheesh, I was only kidding about banning ammo cans in another thread, but in this case it seems to have caused the problem. Two micro throwdowns and 95 finds without any issues, then the CO puts an ammo can out and it causes panic.

[+Dogmeat*]

According to the CO, they did get permission when it was posted, and they simply changed it to an ammo can so that it wouldn't wash away during hurricanes. It's horrible that we have to live in this state of paranoia these days, but at the same time, it's completely understandable. Shame really..

[+Don_J]

Wow, I read the post the person made about their experience with the police and everything. I understand they went through some crap, but man. They were pretty aggressive about the whole thing. There's absolutely no need to be rude about it. It's part of the game, unfortunately. If you're seen in the woods poking around and then find a box and fiddle with it, it's gonna cause suspicion.

 

Especially if it's an ammo can with a target painted on it, in a picnic area next to a NPS Visitor's Center. Talk about a perfect storm.

[+Dogmeat*]

The CO probably should have spraypainted the can at least. If I were to put out an ammo can cache, I would paint it brown with a sharpie stating "THIS IS AN OFFICIAL GEOCACHE" and more into on the inside. If something is going to look that sketchy, you may as well blatantly state what it is.

 

I remembered another case of this happening. My buddy put out a "fake bolt" container in a guard rail post, and the neighbours called the police saying they think someone is trafficking drugs near their house. The police confiscated it, and it turned out the receptionist was a geocacher who explained it to the officers. The officers then explained it to those neighbours, and now whenever people show up they watch gleefully as they struggle with the find.

[+The_Incredibles_]

The CO obviously should have marked it as a geocache, but even if he did, you know, someone could still have called the police.

 

Kudos to the press for describing geocaching accurately. At least they didn't call it "a geocache device left behind" as they did in our area.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

Wow, I read the post the person made about their experience with the police and everything. I understand they went through some crap, but man. They were pretty aggressive about the whole thing. There's absolutely no need to be rude about it. It's part of the game, unfortunately. If you're seen in the woods poking around and then find a box and fiddle with it, it's gonna cause suspicion.

 

I got the same feeling after reading the log. I admit that being questioned and "accused" by the authorities can be nerve-wracking and the ordeal to retrieve the trackables was surreal, but it wasn't as though the CO placed the cache hoping for this exact scenario to happen. State what happened and try to leave emotion out of it. I didn't see any cause to go off on a "geocaching is supposed to be fun" diatribe.

 

My hat does go off to HamFam for the follow-up note. He got a verbal pounding and his reply was humble and gracious. Far too many CO's would have gone nuclear instead.

[4wheelin_fool]

Wow, I read the post the person made about their experience with the police and everything. I understand they went through some crap, but man. They were pretty aggressive about the whole thing. There's absolutely no need to be rude about it. It's part of the game, unfortunately. If you're seen in the woods poking around and then find a box and fiddle with it, it's gonna cause suspicion.

 

I got the same feeling after reading the log. I admit that being questioned and "accused" by the authorities can be nerve-wracking and the ordeal to retrieve the trackables was surreal, but it wasn't as though the CO placed the cache hoping for this exact scenario to happen. State what happened and try to leave emotion out of it. I didn't see any cause to go off on a "geocaching is supposed to be fun" diatribe.

 

My hat does go off to HamFam for the follow-up note. He got a verbal pounding and his reply was humble and gracious. Far too many CO's would have gone nuclear instead.

 

Being detained by the police for nearly 2 hours will likely temper your disposition. He doesn't have any hides, and apparently believes that all geocaches have permission.

 

The CO has little choice but to be humble. The police could have charged him with something, and even if the charges were later dropped, it still would have been a pain to fight.

Edited August 23, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Dogmeat*]

He didn't mention being detained. He said he was pulled over and the only reason he had to go back was to get the tracking bugs. Good for him to go back and get the bugs. I hate seeing trackables go. But at the same time, if he didn't want to go through all that trouble he shouldn't have went back. And then to tear into someone like that.. he really should understand that people with no knowledge of the game are going to see something like that as being suspicious.

 

I had to deal with police a few times. Really, I expect it now when I'm geocaching in public. There's just no need to go off on someone like that as if they meant for it to happen.

[+J Grouchy]

Am I the only one laughing at "Major Wank"...?

[4wheelin_fool]

He didn't mention being detained. He said he was pulled over and the only reason he had to go back was to get the tracking bugs. Good for him to go back and get the bugs. I hate seeing trackables go. But at the same time, if he didn't want to go through all that trouble he shouldn't have went back. And then to tear into someone like that.. he really should understand that people with no knowledge of the game are going to see something like that as being suspicious.

 

I had to deal with police a few times. Really, I expect it now when I'm geocaching in public. There's just no need to go off on someone like that as if they meant for it to happen.

 

Being pulled over by 4 sheriffs deputies, and escorted back to the scene while they are watching through binoculars as you dump it out? That's a lousy place for an ammo can. Tied to a lonely tree in a field next to the road. Muggles can see it from their car. What are they to think it is?

 

(Previous report)

 

HARKERS ISLAND — Two suspects are in custody following a bomb scare Thursday at Shell Point that was apparently a hoax.

 

Bomb squads called to respond were called back shortly after being dispatched when the suspicious package was determined to be harmless.

 

The County Sheriff's Department took two suspects into custody Thursday afternoon for questioning.

 

(Previous report)

 

HARKERS ISLAND — Authorities, including bomb squads from Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point and the Raleigh office of the State Bureau of Investigation, responded Thursday afternoon to a call about a suspicious package at Shell Point.

 

The package appeared to be an ammo box secured to a tree.

 

County law enforcement and Harkers Island Fire and Rescue crew were the first to respond to the scene and access to the area has been restricted.

 

More details as information comes in.

Edited August 23, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Dogmeat*]

And as for the first hand report told by the person involved? Is that all false because the news didn't state it? They voluntarily went back with the purpose to take back the trackables, and opened the cache for the police to see. That's not being detained. That's not being "in custody". According to the person who was actually involved, they were free to go but wanted to go back for the trackables. They weren't even held for questioning. They were pulled over, explained what they were doing, and then they explained it to a few more officers who were, as the man explained, very understanding and helpful.

 

But I mean, it only happened to them so I'm sure their account of the story is false in every sense, right?

Edited August 23, 2013 by Dogmeat101

[+the4dirtydogs]

Am I the only one laughing at "Major Wank"...?

Nope. I thought it was funny too.

[4wheelin_fool]

And as for the first hand report told by the person involved? Is that all false because the news didn't state it? They voluntarily went back with the purpose to take back the trackables, and opened the cache for the police to see. That's not being detained. That's not being "in custody". According to the person who was actually involved, they were free to go but wanted to go back for the trackables. They weren't even held for questioning. They were pulled over, explained what they were doing, and then they explained it to a few more officers who were, as the man explained, very understanding and helpful.

 

But I mean, it only happened to them so I'm sure their account of the story is false in every sense, right?

 

I don't know where you are getting all of this. They were voluntarily escorted back to the area and questioned for an hour and 45 minutes. Whether it was a voluntary detainment or involuntary detainment, they still did what was right by explaining it to them. Being voluntarily escorted back to the area does not necessarily mean that they were free to go from custody. Are you suggesting that if they were unduly annoyed, they should have just left? That behavior would not have the best possible outcome. I was detained by the sandwich shop for 20 minutes, but I should not complain because I could have left?

 

In regards to Harker's Island Cache, GC2AND3 owned by HamFam529, this cache needs to be archived. Actually this cache has been confiscated by the authorities. Someone saw me carry something over to the cache and place it into the box; then called in a bomb scare. When we left the area of the cache, we took a boat ride to the outer banks. We returned and when departing the area did see a mess load of emergency vehicles down the road toward the National Park Visitor's Ctr. A ranger that was riding back with us from the island said there was an older woman that lived near there and in frail health. Did not think anything more of this but after getting about 15 miles down the road toward Moorhead, NC the Carteret Sheriff's Chief Detective pulled us over. Being very cordial he asked me if I brought something into a park and placed it into an Ammo Box. I said I did and explained in detail Geocaching. 3 more Sheriff's and their boss showed up and we repeated what we were doing. They stated that that was National Park Service property and no permission was ever given. They explained that all kinds of authorities were at the site and they normally would have jurisdiction but that was not the case now. They even had an explosive ordinance specialist on site. I explained the I had placed four trackables in the cache and asked if I could have them back. They said the person in charge was not comfortable with this and wanted to blow up the box. I offered to go back and open the cache to confirm to them their sniffer dog was correct and there was no bomb. The order of the day wound up to be that I was escorted voluntarily back to the GZ, walked back to the cache, pulled it from it's hiding place, open it, dumped the contents on the ground in full view and showed the open end of the container facing them while they looked in the binoculars. They then gave me the thumbs up and I walked away. They then allowed me to retrieve the 4 TB's and also stated I could take the rest of the contents but the container will be trashed. All in all, considering todays state of affairs and these hometown hero's including the Carteret County Sheriff and his Deputy's, Carteret County Sheriff's Chief Detective who was beneficial in keeping this in perspective, The EOD & Local Volunteer Fire Dept., everyone was very cordial and friendly. I Thank all law enforcement present for being so understanding and courteous. The Park Ranger stated they knew an unauthorized small cache (which is what I was initially looking for and found an Ammo Box instead) was present there but well hidden and let it go but this was an Ammo Box pretty much could be seen by children and of concern. Another thing of concern to the officers was there was a picture on the ammo box with the words "aim here". Not funny at all. Shame on the CO and the reviewer FOR NO permission was granted for this cache and we spent more than an hour and 3/4 explaining something that should not have been. If this gets deleted, I will report this violation protocol and abuse to higher authorities. Get permission for future caches CO. Do your job reviewer so something like this does not happen in the future and give Geocaching a bad name. Geocaching is suppose to be fun; it shouldn't be aggravating or dangerous to go geocaching or to anyone not geocaching.

 

You were not there at all, but are complaining that they were complaining.

Edited August 23, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Mudfrog]

And as for the first hand report told by the person involved? Is that all false because the news didn't state it? They voluntarily went back with the purpose to take back the trackables, and opened the cache for the police to see. That's not being detained. That's not being "in custody". According to the person who was actually involved, they were free to go but wanted to go back for the trackables. They weren't even held for questioning. They were pulled over, explained what they were doing, and then they explained it to a few more officers who were, as the man explained, very understanding and helpful.

 

But I mean, it only happened to them so I'm sure their account of the story is false in every sense, right?

 

I don't know where you are getting all of this. They were voluntarily escorted back to the area and questioned for an hour and 45 minutes. Whether it was a voluntary detainment or involuntary detainment, they still did what was right by explaining it to them. Being voluntarily escorted back to the area does not necessarily mean that they were free to go from custody. Are you suggesting that if they were unduly annoyed, they should have just left? That behavior would not have the best possible outcome. I was detained by the sandwich shop for 20 minutes, but I should not complain because I could have left?

 

In regards to Harker's Island Cache, GC2AND3 owned by HamFam529, this cache needs to be archived. Actually this cache has been confiscated by the authorities. Someone saw me carry something over to the cache and place it into the box; then called in a bomb scare. When we left the area of the cache, we took a boat ride to the outer banks. We returned and when departing the area did see a mess load of emergency vehicles down the road toward the National Park Visitor's Ctr. A ranger that was riding back with us from the island said there was an older woman that lived near there and in frail health. Did not think anything more of this but after getting about 15 miles down the road toward Moorhead, NC the Carteret Sheriff's Chief Detective pulled us over. Being very cordial he asked me if I brought something into a park and placed it into an Ammo Box. I said I did and explained in detail Geocaching. 3 more Sheriff's and their boss showed up and we repeated what we were doing. They stated that that was National Park Service property and no permission was ever given. They explained that all kinds of authorities were at the site and they normally would have jurisdiction but that was not the case now. They even had an explosive ordinance specialist on site. I explained the I had placed four trackables in the cache and asked if I could have them back. They said the person in charge was not comfortable with this and wanted to blow up the box. I offered to go back and open the cache to confirm to them their sniffer dog was correct and there was no bomb. The order of the day wound up to be that I was escorted voluntarily back to the GZ, walked back to the cache, pulled it from it's hiding place, open it, dumped the contents on the ground in full view and showed the open end of the container facing them while they looked in the binoculars. They then gave me the thumbs up and I walked away. They then allowed me to retrieve the 4 TB's and also stated I could take the rest of the contents but the container will be trashed. All in all, considering todays state of affairs and these hometown hero's including the Carteret County Sheriff and his Deputy's, Carteret County Sheriff's Chief Detective who was beneficial in keeping this in perspective, The EOD & Local Volunteer Fire Dept., everyone was very cordial and friendly. I Thank all law enforcement present for being so understanding and courteous. The Park Ranger stated they knew an unauthorized small cache (which is what I was initially looking for and found an Ammo Box instead) was present there but well hidden and let it go but this was an Ammo Box pretty much could be seen by children and of concern. Another thing of concern to the officers was there was a picture on the ammo box with the words "aim here". Not funny at all. Shame on the CO and the reviewer FOR NO permission was granted for this cache and we spent more than an hour and 3/4 explaining something that should not have been. If this gets deleted, I will report this violation protocol and abuse to higher authorities. Get permission for future caches CO. Do your job reviewer so something like this does not happen in the future and give Geocaching a bad name. Geocaching is suppose to be fun; it shouldn't be aggravating or dangerous to go geocaching or to anyone not geocaching.

 

You were not there at all, but are complaining that they were complaining.

 

The finder threw a tantrum and blamed the CO for not getting permission. He also blamed the reviewer for not doing his or her job correctly. Then he threatened to go to the Jeremy if he didn't get any satisfaction. In his own admission, the finder volunteered to go back to the cache site to show law enforcement that it was a geocache and retrieve the trackables. Sure he was inconvenienced but his log rant was uncalled for.

 

Actually, i do believe that i read where the CO did get permission when he placed the cache. I would also bet that the reviewer had these details when reviewed and was ok with the placement. The thing that changed was size of the container which might not have been the best move on the CO's part. Still it wasn't something that should have cause this kind of aggravation.

[+K13]

We sincerely apologize to NYGuy64 for the trouble that you had go through for this. First of all, we had obtained permission back when we originally put this up in 2010, but I suppose that perhaps their stance has changed. The original, smaller, cache was destroyed in a hurricane, and we tried to use an ammo box so that the container would endure the elements better.

- From the note on the cache page, written by the CO.

 

How did NY___ (finder-with-knickers-in-a-twist) determine that the CO did not have permission when the cache was placed? How did twisted-knickers determine that the reviewer did their job incorrectly? The cache-page rant should not have happened.

[+Dogmeat*]

And as for the first hand report told by the person involved? Is that all false because the news didn't state it? They voluntarily went back with the purpose to take back the trackables, and opened the cache for the police to see. That's not being detained. That's not being "in custody". According to the person who was actually involved, they were free to go but wanted to go back for the trackables. They weren't even held for questioning. They were pulled over, explained what they were doing, and then they explained it to a few more officers who were, as the man explained, very understanding and helpful.

 

But I mean, it only happened to them so I'm sure their account of the story is false in every sense, right?

 

I don't know where you are getting all of this. They were voluntarily escorted back to the area and questioned for an hour and 45 minutes. Whether it was a voluntary detainment or involuntary detainment, they still did what was right by explaining it to them. Being voluntarily escorted back to the area does not necessarily mean that they were free to go from custody. Are you suggesting that if they were unduly annoyed, they should have just left? That behavior would not have the best possible outcome. I was detained by the sandwich shop for 20 minutes, but I should not complain because I could have left?

 

In regards to Harker's Island Cache, GC2AND3 owned by HamFam529, this cache needs to be archived. Actually this cache has been confiscated by the authorities. Someone saw me carry something over to the cache and place it into the box; then called in a bomb scare. When we left the area of the cache, we took a boat ride to the outer banks. We returned and when departing the area did see a mess load of emergency vehicles down the road toward the National Park Visitor's Ctr. A ranger that was riding back with us from the island said there was an older woman that lived near there and in frail health. Did not think anything more of this but after getting about 15 miles down the road toward Moorhead, NC the Carteret Sheriff's Chief Detective pulled us over. Being very cordial he asked me if I brought something into a park and placed it into an Ammo Box. I said I did and explained in detail Geocaching. 3 more Sheriff's and their boss showed up and we repeated what we were doing. They stated that that was National Park Service property and no permission was ever given. They explained that all kinds of authorities were at the site and they normally would have jurisdiction but that was not the case now. They even had an explosive ordinance specialist on site. I explained the I had placed four trackables in the cache and asked if I could have them back. They said the person in charge was not comfortable with this and wanted to blow up the box. I offered to go back and open the cache to confirm to them their sniffer dog was correct and there was no bomb. The order of the day wound up to be that I was escorted voluntarily back to the GZ, walked back to the cache, pulled it from it's hiding place, open it, dumped the contents on the ground in full view and showed the open end of the container facing them while they looked in the binoculars. They then gave me the thumbs up and I walked away. They then allowed me to retrieve the 4 TB's and also stated I could take the rest of the contents but the container will be trashed. All in all, considering todays state of affairs and these hometown hero's including the Carteret County Sheriff and his Deputy's, Carteret County Sheriff's Chief Detective who was beneficial in keeping this in perspective, The EOD & Local Volunteer Fire Dept., everyone was very cordial and friendly. I Thank all law enforcement present for being so understanding and courteous. The Park Ranger stated they knew an unauthorized small cache (which is what I was initially looking for and found an Ammo Box instead) was present there but well hidden and let it go but this was an Ammo Box pretty much could be seen by children and of concern. Another thing of concern to the officers was there was a picture on the ammo box with the words "aim here". Not funny at all. Shame on the CO and the reviewer FOR NO permission was granted for this cache and we spent more than an hour and 3/4 explaining something that should not have been. If this gets deleted, I will report this violation protocol and abuse to higher authorities. Get permission for future caches CO. Do your job reviewer so something like this does not happen in the future and give Geocaching a bad name. Geocaching is suppose to be fun; it shouldn't be aggravating or dangerous to go geocaching or to anyone not geocaching.

 

You were not there at all, but are complaining that they were complaining.

 

... yeah. I was getting my information from what you quoted. Them aggressively ranting. They weren't detained. It wasn't voluntary detainment. They weren't arrested. They weren't in questioning. They were pulled over, asked about it, and that was it. They then asked if they could retrieve the trackables, the police got permission, and it went ahead as stated. You're reading far too deeply into it if you think they were detained. I don't think if they were detaining someone, they would let them freely walk over to an ammo can they suspect is a bomb and fiddle around with it whether they're watching or not.

 

So to go on there bashing the CO, bashing the reviewer, and threatening to go to greater lengths because of all of this is absolutely childish and ridiculous. The CO had approval, the reviewer did their job. The only thing that was wrong was they changed the container (a seemingly victim less action)and the park not keeping a record that a geocache was being posted with permission.

[Clan Riffster]

Just to clarify: in accordance with 4th Amendment case law, they were detained.

As to the rest? I don't think the seeker should be making assumptions regarding permission and reviewing.

[+Dogmeat*]

How so? They were pulled over, they explained what happened, and then explained to more officers as they arrived. That's not detainment. They could have drove off from that spot and continued on with their day. They offered to go back and open the cache.

[+kunarion]

I don't think the seeker should be making assumptions regarding permission and reviewing.

I agree.

 

But I wouldn’t have touched an ammo box painted with a target and the words “Aim Here” hanging in muggleview from a tree. Is it clear on the cache page what the hide style is? If so I’d skip that cache. If not, I’d log a DNF (no touchy), and a NM log “Contacting Cache Owner”. And I’d PM them and ask if they know their “small container” is a large green ammo box with a target and “Aim Here” painted on it. The Cache Owner needs to clarify that it's a problematic design, and if they don't understand that an event such as what happened was likely, the CO is a few Geocoins short of a collection.

 

No more of these “suspicious package” style caches for me. The last one I found was a couple of weeks ago. It was a “pill bottle” under a LPC, in a busy parking lot. But it had military camo and a fuse... a little paracord “tail”(?)... why?! No more of those for me, in this bomb-crazy climate. If I’m seen placing that thing and the description might be “the device seemed to have a fuse” (or “wires coming out of it”), I’m leaving it alone upon discovery. My plan is to avoid the “no, you weren’t detained, simply questioned for 1.5 hours, so what’s the big deal” thing, thanks.

Edited August 23, 2013 by kunarion

[Clan Riffster]

How so?

Case law dictates that once the blue lights come on, a reasonable and prudent person would not feel that they were free to leave. Under the 4th Amendment, this is a seizure.

[+Dogmeat*]

How so?

Case law dictates that once the blue lights come on, a reasonable and prudent person would not feel that they were free to leave. Under the 4th Amendment, this is a seizure.

 

But.. after 15 minutes when they explained what was up...

[+kunarion]

after 15 minutes when they explained what was up...

Some of us prefer to avoid the whole getting ("not detained") pulled over and explaining what is up for 15 minutes. Because after about the third cache in a row of being pulled over, the not-detain gets more and more like actually being detained.

Edited August 24, 2013 by kunarion

[+Dogmeat*]

Well then you have quite the hobby if you're trying to look inconspicuous.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

after 15 minutes when they explained what was up...

Some of us prefer to avoid the whole getting ("not detained") pulled over and explaining what is up for 15 minutes. Because after about the third cache in a row of being pulled over, the not-detain gets more and more like actually being detained.

 

In today's caching world, I think you have to accept that every once in awhile, you're going to be questioned by officers about what you're doing. More often if you just stick to urban caching. But, if you're being questioned all the time, maybe the caches aren't the problem...

[+Don_J]

And as for the first hand report told by the person involved? Is that all false because the news didn't state it? They voluntarily went back with the purpose to take back the trackables, and opened the cache for the police to see. That's not being detained. That's not being "in custody". According to the person who was actually involved, they were free to go but wanted to go back for the trackables. They weren't even held for questioning. They were pulled over, explained what they were doing, and then they explained it to a few more officers who were, as the man explained, very understanding and helpful.

 

But I mean, it only happened to them so I'm sure their account of the story is false in every sense, right?

 

I don't know where you are getting all of this. They were voluntarily escorted back to the area and questioned for an hour and 45 minutes. Whether it was a voluntary detainment or involuntary detainment, they still did what was right by explaining it to them. Being voluntarily escorted back to the area does not necessarily mean that they were free to go from custody. Are you suggesting that if they were unduly annoyed, they should have just left? That behavior would not have the best possible outcome. I was detained by the sandwich shop for 20 minutes, but I should not complain because I could have left?

 

You were not there at all, but are complaining that they were complaining.

 

I'm not sure that I understand the logic here.

 

If some guy driving like a nimrod causes an accident and I stop, render aid, get myself all dirty, wait for the police and give a report. I don't have a right to complain about the person that cause the accident in the first place because I could have simply ignored the whole thing and just left.

 

Regardless of if this guy was legally detained or not, he volunteered to do the right thing, to save the TBs, save the police and the community time and expense for calling out a non local bomb squad, and possibly save the reputation of geocaching in general in the area. To say that he doesn't have the right to complain about what got the whole thing started in the first place simply doesn't make sense.

 

I guess he should have just posted "TFTC"?

[+Don_J]

 

I guess he should have just posted "TFTC"?

 

Just wanted to clarify that my point is that the cache finder had the right voice his displeasure in the situation. I don't necessarily agree with how he did it. The rant did seem to go beyond what was appropriate.

[+kunarion]

after 15 minutes when they explained what was up...

Some of us prefer to avoid the whole getting ("not detained") pulled over and explaining what is up for 15 minutes. Because after about the third cache in a row of being pulled over, the not-detain gets more and more like actually being detained.

 

In today's caching world, I think you have to accept that every once in awhile, you're going to be questioned by officers about what you're doing. More often if you just stick to urban caching. But, if you're being questioned all the time, maybe the caches aren't the problem...

Maybe. But somewhere around here was a Topic about an excessively problematic cache, the kind where people are questioned (and end up on the news). I'm not accepting that anymore. Sure, while caching I might look odd to a passing officer and be asked what I'm doing, no big deal. But I've pretty much had it with the kind of caches that get police called.

Edited August 24, 2013 by kunarion

[+Dogmeat*]

Well that's what I'm saying. Sure, he went through some crap because of it. What I didn't like is him saying the CO didn't do their job, the reviewer didn't do their job, and if nothing was said about it he would go to someone else. All he had to do was message the CO and say "did you have permission to place this cache here?"

 

The CO would have said "Well, yes I did. They must have changed their policy in the last three years."

 

Then the person could have simply said "Well I guess this was all just a big case of misunderstandings" and call it a day. There's no need to attack people about it. It's completely understandable that he'd be upset. It's the way he went about expressing it.

[+kunarion]

Well that's what I'm saying. Sure, he went through some crap because of it. What I didn't like is him saying the CO didn't do their job, the reviewer didn't do their job, and if nothing was said about it he would go to someone else.

A Geocacher went a little overboard in a rant? Impossible!

 

All he had to do was message the CO and say "did you have permission to place this cache here?"

This is a very good idea, especially if the cache was set up as described. If I have any doubts about a cache being a non-detain kind of cache (or even a 15 minute chat with LEO kind of cache), I will skip it. Note that in the above story, "permission" was not the issue that brought half the police force. But if it's a question of permission, and you need to find the cache, ask first.

Edited August 24, 2013 by kunarion

[+Don_J]

after 15 minutes when they explained what was up...

Some of us prefer to avoid the whole getting ("not detained") pulled over and explaining what is up for 15 minutes. Because after about the third cache in a row of being pulled over, the not-detain gets more and more like actually being detained.

 

In today's caching world, I think you have to accept that every once in awhile, you're going to be questioned by officers about what you're doing. More often if you just stick to urban caching. But, if you're being questioned all the time, maybe the caches aren't the problem...

Maybe. But somewhere around here was a Topic about an excessively problematic cache, the kind where people are questioned. I'm not accepting that anymore. I'll skip those instead.

 

At least in my area, there are so many caches to find that it's real easy to skip the ones with the red flags. The first red flag is "stealth required", either with the attribute or explicitly stated in the log. When logs start to talk about, "dodging security" or, "I wonder who watches the camera up on that pole", it goes straight on my ignore list.

 

I've been doing this for 8 years and have found over 6000 caches. I have been stopped by law enforcement 5 times. Once I was given the third degree, 3 times I was asked if everything was okay, "just playing a GPS game, sir", "okay, stay safe". Once I was stopped and asked what would make a good GPS for caching and search & rescue".

 

When I see up thread that someone that has only been doing this for six months with 300+ finds has already been stopped a few times, I have to wonder if they are playing the same game as me.

[4wheelin_fool]

 

Regardless of if this guy was legally detained or not, he volunteered to do the right thing, to save the TBs, save the police and the community time and expense for calling out a non local bomb squad, and possibly save the reputation of geocaching in general in the area. To say that he doesn't have the right to complain about what got the whole thing started in the first place simply doesn't make sense.

 

 

Exactly.

 

I guess he should have just posted "TFTC"?

 

He was upset and spoke his mind. The tone of the note implies that he believes it may get deleted.

 

Shame on the CO and the reviewer FOR NO permission was granted for this cache and we spent more than an hour and 3/4 explaining something that should not have been. If this gets deleted, I will report this violation protocol and abuse to higher authorities. Get permission for future caches CO. Do your job reviewer so something like this does not happen in the future and give Geocaching a bad name. Geocaching is suppose to be fun; it shouldn't be aggravating or dangerous to go geocaching or to anyone not geocaching.

 

If it had happened to me, I would not have been so nice. And don't think I would have given a rat's a** if someone a few thousand miles away who was not there, was upset because he thinks I should not have complained.

 

The Park Ranger stated they knew an unauthorized small cache (which is what I was initially looking for and found an Ammo Box instead) was present there but well hidden and let it go but this was an Ammo Box pretty much could be seen by children and of concern.

 

The CO is claiming that the cache had permission, but the Ranger said it didn't. The Ranger was aware of the previous container, but said it was unauthorized. Who is telling the truth here? Its entirely possible that the Ranger gave permission for the previous container, and then denied it once the bomb squad and 4 deputies showed up. But it's also completely plausible for the finder to believe the Ranger who said it had no permission. In the end, the ultimate responsibility is that of the cache owner.

[+kunarion]

When I see up thread that someone that has only been doing this for six months with 300+ finds has already been stopped a few times, I have to wonder if they are playing the same game as me.

I've figured out where the teen hangouts are around town, places that the cops keep a close eye on. Those are usually bad spots for caches, due to the caches being well known to the hangers-out.

 

But I've placed one set of caches at the edges of a large shopping center. The mall patrol cops show up when a cacher arrives because that's the only interesting thing happening.

[+Dogmeat*]

When I see up thread that someone that has only been doing this for six months with 300+ finds has already been stopped a few times, I have to wonder if they are playing the same game as me.

 

I'm 23 years old and I look about 18 according to what I'm told. The way I look, people are going to think I'm a teenager. If someone sees a teenager lifting up lamp pole skirts as opposed to a 30 year old lifting up lamp pole skirts, I'm sure the "teenager" is going to look more suspicious.

 

But I've only had one personal run in with the police, and it was when a guy happened to see me lift a lamp pole skirt and take an object, and then put the object back. I can definitely see why that looks strange, and when I saw the police pull up, I happily walked over with my GPS and explained what geocaching is, how to do it, and what I did there today. They checked my ID, everything checked out, and I left as well as the police officer. The guy that called the police happened to own a store within that strip mall.

 

I went onto the cache page, logged it, and told them what had happened. The CO took the cache down, and that was the end of it. There's no reason to tell a complete stranger off for something they didn't do.

 

For all we know, the park ranger could be a different ranger than who was there three years ago. That type of thing happens. There's no need to act like an a** to someone over a complete misunderstanding, which is all this was.

[Clan Riffster]

How so?

Case law dictates that once the blue lights come on, a reasonable and prudent person would not feel that they were free to leave. Under the 4th Amendment, this is a seizure.

 

But.. after 15 minutes when they explained what was up...

At that point it would depend on the cacher's beliefs.

Did they feel free to go after 15 minutes?

The log seems to indicate that they did.

[mac367]

I am amazed at how many people are blasting the finder on this one. Read a little more of the logs on the page. The CO replaces the container after their first visit to the cache in 2 years! I am sorry that cache should have been archived when the first container got swept out to sea. The throw down mentality to keep caches alive is ridiculous. If you can't visit your cache for 2 years, please archive. If the location is a good one, someone else will place a new cache. No maintenance issue and a new cache for people to find. Win, Win. The caches logs are NOT historical documents. The Declaration of Independence is a historical document worthy of preservation. A notebook with signatures and dates is not.

Edited August 24, 2013 by mac367

[team tisri]

after 15 minutes when they explained what was up...

Some of us prefer to avoid the whole getting ("not detained") pulled over and explaining what is up for 15 minutes. Because after about the third cache in a row of being pulled over, the not-detain gets more and more like actually being detained.

 

Don't know what US police are like but in my 9 years of caching and 2000+ finds I've encountered police officers three times.

 

The first time was when I was studying a gate in excruciating detail with a friend and we were approached by police. They asked what we were doing so we explained geocaching. They asked why we were wearing hi-vis tops so we motioned to our bicycles and said we just wanted to stay safe on the road. They asked if we had seen anything unusual and we said not, and they went on their way. They were obviously looking for something (that was presumably more sinister than a geocache).

 

The second time was when I was with four other geocachers, two of whom had just climbed down the bank into a river when a police officer went past on a bicycle. He asked what we were doing, we explained geocaching, he wished us good luck finding the cache and went on his way.

 

The third time was when I met another geocacher at the site of a cache and it turned out he was a police officer but not on duty at the time, so I don't suppose that one really counts...

[+kunarion]

after 15 minutes when they explained what was up...

Some of us prefer to avoid the whole getting ("not detained") pulled over and explaining what is up for 15 minutes. Because after about the third cache in a row of being pulled over, the not-detain gets more and more like actually being detained.

 

Don't know what US police are like but in my 9 years of caching and 2000+ finds I've encountered police officers three times.

 

The first time was when I was studying a gate in excruciating detail with a friend and we were approached by police. They asked what we were doing so we explained geocaching. They asked why we were wearing hi-vis tops so we motioned to our bicycles and said we just wanted to stay safe on the road. They asked if we had seen anything unusual and we said not, and they went on their way. They were obviously looking for something (that was presumably more sinister than a geocache).

 

The second time was when I was with four other geocachers, two of whom had just climbed down the bank into a river when a police officer went past on a bicycle. He asked what we were doing, we explained geocaching, he wished us good luck finding the cache and went on his way.

 

The third time was when I met another geocacher at the site of a cache and it turned out he was a police officer but not on duty at the time, so I don't suppose that one really counts...

Me, too. Three times over 4 years.

 

There are some reasons to be asked what you're doing, like:

If someone calls the police due to “suspicious activity”.

If there's a heightened alert today.

If you're in some spot where the cops tend to hang out.

If it's an area they especially monitor.

 

Usually the suspicious activity combined with a “suspicious container” is what results being detained. Once it's shown to be just a box for a game, and no lengthy detainment happens. No newspaper story. Once in a while there's a perfect storm of a cache that is way wrong. Cachers tend to find/log a cache, then go online to mention issues that make it no good to find. But if it's bad, go ahead and skip it. Don't rely on anybody but you, and your common sense.

 

A cache in an NPS picnic area may be fine (as it relates to this Topic). If it's a green ammo can hanging in a tree with “aim here” and a target painted on it (really?!!), all it needs is the phone call, and now there's a problem. This time someone diffused the situation without the bomb squad, so it's not even much of a news story.

 

It's best for each cacher to assess the situation, and decide if it's a cache OK to seek. Because that cache couldn't have been worse if it had “Bad Idea” painted all over it.

Edited August 24, 2013 by kunarion

[+Mudfrog]

 

Regardless of if this guy was legally detained or not, he volunteered to do the right thing, to save the TBs, save the police and the community time and expense for calling out a non local bomb squad, and possibly save the reputation of geocaching in general in the area. To say that he doesn't have the right to complain about what got the whole thing started in the first place simply doesn't make sense.

 

 

Exactly.

 

I guess he should have just posted "TFTC"?

 

He was upset and spoke his mind. The tone of the note implies that he believes it may get deleted.

 

Shame on the CO and the reviewer FOR NO permission was granted for this cache and we spent more than an hour and 3/4 explaining something that should not have been. If this gets deleted, I will report this violation protocol and abuse to higher authorities. Get permission for future caches CO. Do your job reviewer so something like this does not happen in the future and give Geocaching a bad name. Geocaching is suppose to be fun; it shouldn't be aggravating or dangerous to go geocaching or to anyone not geocaching.

 

If it had happened to me, I would not have been so nice. And don't think I would have given a rat's a** if someone a few thousand miles away who was not there, was upset because he thinks I should not have complained.

 

The Park Ranger stated they knew an unauthorized small cache (which is what I was initially looking for and found an Ammo Box instead) was present there but well hidden and let it go but this was an Ammo Box pretty much could be seen by children and of concern.

 

The CO is claiming that the cache had permission, but the Ranger said it didn't. The Ranger was aware of the previous container, but said it was unauthorized. Who is telling the truth here? Its entirely possible that the Ranger gave permission for the previous container, and then denied it once the bomb squad and 4 deputies showed up. But it's also completely plausible for the finder to believe the Ranger who said it had no permission. In the end, the ultimate responsibility is that of the cache owner.

 

I placed a cache a few years ago in the National Preserve near here. I realized there was a National Park Service ban but also knew that the preserve had different guidelines so called the district office to see about getting permission. The district superintendent himself gave me that permission. I was doing a maintenance run a couple of years later and got stopped by another park ranger who told me that caches were not allowed in the preserve. I then called the district office and found that caches were indeed not allowed, but at the same time, the preserve wasn't worried about removing any of the existing caches.

 

It pretty much sounds like this is what may have occurred with the cache in this thread. As stated, the (honest) mistake was probably made when the cache owner replaced the previous container with an ammocan. Even so, this should have never caused this much ruckus.

[+JohnCNA]

Several County Park jurisdictions in my area require registering/permits for caches, clear containers only and require a permit sticker that identifies it as an approved cache. A little red tape, but if it cuts down on expensive and embarrassing-to-the-sport incidents it's worth it. Besides, it's rather nice to go to a FP and know that there is not one single micro or nano in there! :-D

[team tisri]

after 15 minutes when they explained what was up...

Some of us prefer to avoid the whole getting ("not detained") pulled over and explaining what is up for 15 minutes. Because after about the third cache in a row of being pulled over, the not-detain gets more and more like actually being detained.

 

Don't know what US police are like but in my 9 years of caching and 2000+ finds I've encountered police officers three times.

 

The first time was when I was studying a gate in excruciating detail with a friend and we were approached by police. They asked what we were doing so we explained geocaching. They asked why we were wearing hi-vis tops so we motioned to our bicycles and said we just wanted to stay safe on the road. They asked if we had seen anything unusual and we said not, and they went on their way. They were obviously looking for something (that was presumably more sinister than a geocache).

 

The second time was when I was with four other geocachers, two of whom had just climbed down the bank into a river when a police officer went past on a bicycle. He asked what we were doing, we explained geocaching, he wished us good luck finding the cache and went on his way.

 

The third time was when I met another geocacher at the site of a cache and it turned out he was a police officer but not on duty at the time, so I don't suppose that one really counts...

Me, too. Three times over 4 years.

 

There are some reasons to be asked what you're doing, like:

If someone calls the police due to “suspicious activity”.

If there's a heightened alert today.

If you're in some spot where the cops tend to hang out.

If it's an area they especially monitor.

 

Usually the suspicious activity combined with a “suspicious container” is what results being detained. Once it's shown to be just a box for a game, and no lengthy detainment happens. No newspaper story. Once in a while there's a perfect storm of a cache that is way wrong. Cachers tend to find/log a cache, then go online to mention issues that make it no good to find. But if it's bad, go ahead and skip it. Don't rely on anybody but you, and your common sense.

 

I wouldn't describe any of my encounters with the police as "being detained", they just asked us what we were doing, listened to the answers, then went on their way. I did actually remember another situation where I was wanting to look for a cache underneath a bridge only to realise that above me on the bridge two police officers were arresting someone on suspicion of drugs offences. I figured that probably wasn't the best time to be hunting a box right under their noses...

 

A cache in an NPS picnic area may be fine (as it relates to this Topic). If it's a green ammo can hanging in a tree with “aim here” and a target painted on it (really?!!), all it needs is the phone call, and now there's a problem. This time someone diffused the situation without the bomb squad, so it's not even much of a news story.

 

It's best for each cacher to assess the situation, and decide if it's a cache OK to seek. Because that cache couldn't have been worse if it had “Bad Idea” painted all over it.

 

Only the cacher on the ground can decide whether or not to proceed, that's for sure. Personally I hate the caches that are in someone's front garden - even when it says permission is granted there's always the potential to get the wrong house, or find the hard way that permission wasn't actually granted, or the owner is away and the house sitter with the shotgun takes protecting the house very seriously.

[+kunarion]

I did actually remember another situation where I was wanting to look for a cache underneath a bridge only to realise that above me on the bridge two police officers were arresting someone on suspicion of drugs offences. I figured that probably wasn't the best time to be hunting a box right under their noses...

 

I often don't pay all that much attention to what everyone else is doing. Situational awareness, I don't got that. That's part of the plan for finding a Nano in a crowded street, pretending there's nobody else there, because nobody in that crowd is paying pay all that much attention to what everyone else is doing.

 

But I'll probably be busy signing a cache log one day, unobservant, and the cops will drop by and say "Please move along. The Apocalypse has just now happened. Yeah, the Four Horsemen and everything. We're closing this street for... the next thousand years..."

[+*GeoPunx*]

 

But I'll probably be busy signing a cache log one day, unobservant, and the cops will drop by and say "Please move along. The Apocalypse has just now happened. Yeah, the Four Horsemen and everything. We're closing this street for... the next thousand years..."

Not to go off topic, but what I quoted above reminded me of the writings of Terry Pratchett. Very funny.

 

Brian

*GeoPunx*

[+kunarion]

 

But I'll probably be busy signing a cache log one day, unobservant, and the cops will drop by and say "Please move along. The Apocalypse has just now happened. Yeah, the Four Horsemen and everything. We're closing this street for... the next thousand years..."

Not to go off topic, but what I quoted above reminded me of the writings of Terry Pratchett. Very funny.

 

Brian

*GeoPunx*

Cool!