New on here and a problem found.

[ramrunnr]

Hi everyone. Just signed up and like the site. I've been geocaching for a while, just using other sites. I just hate that the reason that I got on here is that I found out that there are a few caches where I work Security and that no one had asked permission to place them there. One of the listings even states to "Watch out for Security".

 

While I was patrolling the property I met two nice ladies and I asked them what they were doing in a wooded area. They informed me that they were geocaching and I said that there shouldn't be any here. They showed me the site on their phone and I pulled it up on my phone and confirmed not only that one, but two more on the property. I had to report the caches to my boss and he is not happy. He wanted me to throw them away, but I talked him into letting me attempt to contact the owners and let them remove them.

 

Geocaching is fun, but we need to make sure that we respect property owners and business and ask for permission before placing caches on private property.

[jholly]

Hi everyone. Just signed up and like the site. I've been geocaching for a while, just using other sites. I just hate that the reason that I got on here is that I found out that there are a few caches where I work Security and that no one had asked permission to place them there. One of the listings even states to "Watch out for Security".

 

While I was patrolling the property I met two nice ladies and I asked them what they were doing in a wooded area. They informed me that they were geocaching and I said that there shouldn't be any here. They showed me the site on their phone and I pulled it up on my phone and confirmed not only that one, but two more on the property. I had to report the caches to my boss and he is not happy. He wanted me to throw them away, but I talked him into letting me attempt to contact the owners and let them remove them.

 

Geocaching is fun, but we need to make sure that we respect property owners and business and ask for permission before placing caches on private property.

All you need to do is go to the caches in question and log a Needs archive and state the reason is that they are on private property and no permission was given. The listings should then be removed. Removing the caches will not stop folks from coming since the listing is still active and some folks may put another cache in it's place. Even with the listings archived (removed) there will be a few stragglers since they are working from caches already loaded in their GPS's.

[+T.D.M.22]

... that no one had asked permission to place them there...

 

You don't know that. A big problem is that there are so many people. Managers, supervisors, normal staff, and in this case security. Then there are people who quit-or the business leaves and a new tenant moves in. So the CO could have permission in the first place, but nobody tells the next person.

 

Anyway even if there was permission, it can be retracted. I would just say that you ask the CO, first. Explain to the CO what the situation is, and ask nicely. Give them a chance to move it. Then if the CO doesn't remove it, you can post a NA log, or talk to the reviewer.

[+Shop99er]

... that no one had asked permission to place them there...

 

You don't know that.

 

Since the OP is Security at the location in question, I rather suspect he DOES know.

 

I would take jholly's approach, and slap an NA log on them.

[+The_Incredibles_]

Removing the caches will not stop people coming. Like others have said, you must post a Needs Archive log on the cache pages.

 

Be aware that even after archival many people will still have the caches on their GPSs. Some people go months between updating their GPSs. So expect the odd person to show up.

[+andyakashrek]

I think the OP has done the right thing in this case as he says he is going to try and contact the CO first, then if there was no permission granted the CO has the opportunity to archive the cache or attempt to obtain permission. If no permission can be obtained and the cache not removed, or the CO does not respond, then a NA post is the way to go.

[+Touchstone]

Thanks for asking. Besides the approach mentioned above, you can also contact Groundspeak directly:

 

Contacting Groundspeak

 

The staff at Groundspeak will either take action directly to contact the cache owners for you, or will contact the local Volunteer Reviewer to do the contacting. Either way, it may be a bit faster to do it that way.

 

In addition, if permission were granted by someone at your business without your knowledge, Groundspeak would also be able to see the archived log entries on the Listings to see if there was any discussion between the Reviewer and the cache owner regarding permission. I suspect with the "watch out for security" note on the Listing pages, that your are correct.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

Removing the caches will not stop people coming. Like others have said, you must post a Needs Archive log on the cache pages.

 

Be aware that even after archival many people will still have the caches on their GPSs. Some people go months between updating their GPSs. So expect the odd person to show up.

 

Correct.

My old Magellan Platinums could hold all the caches I could put on them so on long trips it was not unusual for my data to be 2 months old and I had no smart phone to do a quick check. Also it goes back to folks not reading the cache pages.

[+briansnat]

I'd post the NA AND remove them and explain in the NA that the caches are gone. If you want to contact the cache owners and give them back their containers, that is your business. Unless they are ammo boxes or some other special container I doubt the COs will care about what happens to them.

 

As far as stragglers, you can handle them by posing signs at each cache location explaining that the cache is gone and they are trespassing. That will at least prevent them from tearing up the place looking for non existent cache.

[+T.D.M.22]

... that no one had asked permission to place them there...

 

You don't know that.

 

Since the OP is Security at the location in question, I rather suspect he DOES know.

 

I would take jholly's approach, and slap an NA log on them.

 

No-all he knows is that there was no knowledge of them by the current staff. Like I said, over time, and many people the message could very well get lost. I'll guarantee that the OP/ the supervisors do not know everything that goes on-proof is this exact incident. People aren't perfect. Someone could have said "Ya, go ahead and place a cache." but never told the boss, or anyone else.

 

I was just trying to give the CO the benefit of the doubt. People don't like it when I'm negative here....but I can't be positive either. I'm wrong whatever I do-just like being married...

Edited March 29, 2014 by T.D.M.22

[+NanCycle]

I'd post the NA AND remove them and explain in the NA that the caches are gone. If you want to contact the cache owners and give them back their containers, that is your business. Unless they are ammo boxes or some other special container I doubt the COs will care about what happens to them.

 

As far as stragglers, you can handle them by posing signs at each cache location explaining that the cache is gone and they are trespassing. That will at least prevent them from tearing up the place looking for non existent cache.

 

As usual, the best advice comes from the "inside." I'd suggest adding in the NA logs for clarification, not merely that the caches are "gone" but that they have been "removed by the property owner."

 

The signs should also prevent anyone who can't find the caches from leaving throwdowns--maybe add "Don't leave a replacement" to the info on the signs. After a while, you should be able to remove the signs.

[+tozainamboku]

... that no one had asked permission to place them there...

 

You don't know that.

 

Since the OP is Security at the location in question, I rather suspect he DOES know.

 

I would take jholly's approach, and slap an NA log on them.

I'm sure there have been cases where someone had permission to place a cache but the manager/property owner forgot to tell security or told them but the information was not passed to every security guard (particularly to someone who started the job long after the cache was placed).

 

However, in this case the OP reported to his boss (don't know if that was in security or higher up) so it's a bit less likely that the cache had permission.

 

The OP indicates that he came across the cachers in a wooded area. Even if posted, there are often ways to get into such wooded area where you might not know it is on private property. I also note that the OP did not say anything about trespassing. It may be that frequently finds people taking short cuts or walking dogs in the wooded area. It isn't even clear if his job is to ask them to leave or just to ask them the reason they are in the wooded area.

 

Given this, it is probably that the CO didn't not even realize the area was private. Now, I know some will say that the CO has the responsibility to investigate and area and determine if it is public or private and what geocaching policies may be in place. And this is the ideal situation. But we should be aware that many people simple use their judgment in deciding that they have adequate permission for a cache.

 

Finally, the sky is not falling. The OP has come here for instructions on how best to remove the caches and have the listings archived. He has been given these instruction. The caches have probable already been archived. There are still plenty of caches that people can find. There plenty of land owners and managers willing to give permission. There are even geocachers who work in security who may influence a property owner who is angry to find caches on his property place without permission to change their mind and allow the caches.

[4wheelin_fool]

 

The OP indicates that he came across the cachers in a wooded area. Even if posted, there are often ways to get into such wooded area where you might not know it is on private property. I also note that the OP did not say anything about trespassing. It may be that frequently finds people taking short cuts or walking dogs in the wooded area. It isn't even clear if his job is to ask them to leave or just to ask them the reason they are in the wooded area.

 

Given this, it is probably that the CO didn't not even realize the area was private. Now, I know some will say that the CO has the responsibility to investigate and area and determine if it is public or private and what geocaching policies may be in place. And this is the ideal situation. But we should be aware that many people simple use their judgment in deciding that they have adequate permission for a cache.

 

 

Believe it or not, there are many people who operate on the belief that privately owned commercial property is public, as well as corporate offices, and property owned by homeowner associations.

 

When I started geocaching most containers were regular and indeed on public property. Today the majority are micros on private property presumably open to the public as long as there isn't a residence there. Most people do not obtain permission, but that has never changed.

[+TheHarleyRebel]

If you want to do it anonymously, go to the bottom of the cache page, see what reviewer published it, and report it to them.

[+lamoracke]

If you want to do it anonymously, go to the bottom of the cache page, see what reviewer published it, and report it to them.

 

Given its not a cacher who posted this, but a security officer who created an account for this purpose of this post, doubt he is worried about being anonymous with his archival post.

 

No wrong way to do this...talk to the CO, email the reviewer, use the email to contact Groundspeak, post an archive. All 4 are options.

 

Am not a fan of caches where it says you have to avoid security, have had those kind of ones at malls and its ridiculous to have to try and worry they would not be aware of the cache. There is a difference between discreet to not let a passing jogger notice what you are doing but its another to try and be elusive to security guards.

[+dprovan]

Although there are a lot of unknowns here, given the OP's upbeat attitude, I wouldn't want to rule out the possibility of changing the boss's mind about whether geocaching should be allowed. Even though the existing caches don't have permission, perhaps calm consideration might lead to the property being cacher friendly going forward despite the rude presumption of the caches there now.

 

Of course, that's assuming there's no important reason to keep all strangers off the property. But if the problem is a general one of "undesirables" coming on the property, geocaching might reduce that problem rather than contribute to it.

[jholly]

... that no one had asked permission to place them there...

 

You don't know that. A big problem is that there are so many people. Managers, supervisors, normal staff, and in this case security. Then there are people who quit-or the business leaves and a new tenant moves in. So the CO could have permission in the first place, but nobody tells the next person.

 

Anyway even if there was permission, it can be retracted. I would just say that you ask the CO, first. Explain to the CO what the situation is, and ask nicely. Give them a chance to move it. Then if the CO doesn't remove it, you can post a NA log, or talk to the reviewer.

Of course the CEO of the business could have given permission and simply forgot to pass down the information. But when one of the listings cautions about watching for security I have a strong feeling that there was no permission sought or given. You could email the CO and perhaps get a reply along the lines of buzz off, if you get a reply at all. But when the CO cautions to avoid security on the web page I suspect they are not going to take much action to resolve the situation.

 

And before someone says the reviewer was lax letting this one through, I will give the reviewer the benefit of doubt by assuming it was edited post publication.

 

No, post the NA and let the reviewer and CO sort it out.

[+Manville Possum]

I would think that the "Watch out for Security" was edited after the listing was published, and if the CO went that far I would guess permission was NOT obtained.

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

Here's the bottom line. The OP, although a geocacher, is acting in his/her professional capacity. He/she went out on a limb and suggested an alternative solution to removing them. The initial replies provided a few simple methods for archiving. The OP will do more for local Geocaching by showing the boss that unwanted geocaches can be archived expeditiously than trying to mediate.

[ramrunnr]

Believe it or not, there are many people who operate on the belief that privately owned commercial property is public, as well as corporate offices, and property owned by homeowner associations.

 

Thank you for your replies. The caches are placed at a shopping mall and our corporate office has said that caches are not allowed and need to be removed. As I am a geocacher, I tried to get them approved after the fact for the COs, but I was shot down.

 

I have posted on the logs for the three caches and hope that the COs do the right thing by moving the caches to a permissible area.

Edited March 30, 2014 by ramrunnr

[+The_Incredibles_]

As far as stragglers, you can handle them by posing signs at each cache location explaining that the cache is gone and they are trespassing. That will at least prevent them from tearing up the place looking for non existent cache.

 

A sign is a good idea. I had to move one of my caches once due to an unreasonable and irate property owner. I put up a sign at GZ to let people know not to search as the property owner had threatened to call the police. (The cache was in a public park, but people were searching along the fence-line which bordered the property owner's backyard.)

[+dprovan]

Thank you for your replies. The caches are placed at a shopping mall and our corporate office has said that caches are not allowed and need to be removed. As I am a geocacher, I tried to get them approved after the fact for the COs, but I was shot down.

Bummer. Thanks for trying. And while these caches are dead, don't forget to remind the powers that be from time to time that geocachers shop.

[+TriciaG]

Thank you for your replies. The caches are placed at a shopping mall and our corporate office has said that caches are not allowed and need to be removed. As I am a geocacher, I tried to get them approved after the fact for the COs, but I was shot down.

Bummer. Thanks for trying. And while these caches are dead, don't forget to remind the powers that be from time to time that geocachers shop.

Yeah, because a couple LPC's in a shopping mall lot are worth a geocacher boycott.

[team tisri]

Thank you for your replies. The caches are placed at a shopping mall and our corporate office has said that caches are not allowed and need to be removed. As I am a geocacher, I tried to get them approved after the fact for the COs, but I was shot down.

Bummer. Thanks for trying. And while these caches are dead, don't forget to remind the powers that be from time to time that geocachers shop.

Yeah, because a couple LPC's in a shopping mall lot are worth a geocacher boycott.

 

I suspect the point was more that bringing people to the area might result in them buying something in the mall while they were there?

[+tozainamboku]

Am I reading the script for Mall Cop 2?

 

I'm not sure I understand why the corporate offices has left dealing with these cache to the security guard who discovered that they were there.

 

If the corporate office really doesn't want the geocaches on their property they should contact Groundspeak and state their policy. Not only would this result in having the existing caches archived, but would also result in the local reviewers knowing to get confirmation that permission was granted if someone else places a cache at this mall in the future.

 

It is more likely that the corporate office just doesn't want (or know how) to deal with geocaches. The want the public to see the mall as a place that welcomes the public. I'm sure in the fine print the welcome is restricted to people shopping at the mall, but the corporate office knows that it is difficult to remove someone for non-shopping. They may even have legal restrictions on who the can restrict from the mall. So long as visitors are not engaging is some activity that interferes with shopping they may be inclined to look the other way.

 

The existence of a wooded area on the mall property may be a little different. After all there is no "shopping" purpose to enter a wooded area. I'd be somewhat surprised if people don't take advantage of the woods to walk their dogs or to use them as a shortcut to some adjacent property or public space. The mall may have a reasonable interest in having their security question people as to what they are doing in the woods, while still accepting the public may use the woods so long as they are doing nothing illegal or that would interfere with the operation of the mall as place for shopping.

Edited March 30, 2014 by tozainamboku

[4wheelin_fool]

If there is any type of security in place then it probably is not a good idea to have a cache there. They have to keep an eye out for suspicious acting people, while the listing provides a steady stream of them. Then they also have to determine if each person is geocaching or not, which can be labor intensive. Finally, the logs on the page will give a fair indication of the amount of times security was breached, how often, as well as how easily.

[Mr.Yuck]

I would think that the "Watch out for Security" was edited after the listing was published, and if the CO went that far I would guess permission was NOT obtained.

 

Possibly. But pretty much any cache in a store parking lot that has "watch for muggles" text on the cache page is a blatant admission no permission was obtained. No problemo, getting one approved though. But try and place a cache in a State Park without a permit, and you'd have to be on crack or something.

[+Manville Possum]

But try and place a cache in a State Park without a permit, and you'd have to be on crack or something.

 

Well, yeah. But that is a good thing, strict permission in State Parks.

I never had a problem getting permission to place a geocache in a State Park, but it did take a little over three years to get a permit in Tennessee. Cache ownership is just not what it used to be, I archived another today because of constant muggles. Now you can't even place one in a Mall parking lot without causing problems??