Jump to content

Geocaches + trees?


Recommended Posts

while geocaching I have found many caches that are screwed to trees this is horrid as it is against the rules and can damage the tree, so how should we safely attach caches to trees? What do you think?

 

Actually, I've yet to see anyone (who knows what they're talking about) say that it causes damage. In fact they says it really doesn't cause damage.

 

Aside from that, it's the rule. How too attach caches to trees? Depends. Hang it. Tie it. I suppose you could glue or epoxy it. (Though getting permission to do so may be hard.) You could just set it in a tree. Or you could just not place caches in trees. Each has it's pros and cons, so I guess it would depend on the container.

Link to comment

This is an interesting topic as it falls into my area of training. The fact of the matter is that as long as the material the screw/nail is made from isn't toxic (ie. Copper) Then it'll be fine.

 

The wound caused isn't big enough to let fungal or viral pathogens in and it will callous up fairly quickly aswell.

 

This past weekend i went to a flying fox set up through the tree tops in a conservation area. The platforms were engineered to simply bite into the bark of the trees and eventually the fixtures get swallowed up by the tree. One of the trees with a platform had a health check a few weeks ago and after 7 years it was just as healthy as the day the platform went up.

 

saying all that i do understand why GS introduced the rule.

Link to comment

while geocaching I have found many caches that are screwed to trees this is horrid as it is against the rules and can damage the tree, so how should we safely attach caches to trees? What do you think?

I've attached several Micros using wide double-sided Velcro. Most of those have a magnet on the match tube and the Velcro -- I love it when a cache gets placed right back in its spot. :anicute:

 

I'm planning to hang a "bird house" (a box that looks like a bird house but is not actually for birds, it's a cache container). One suggestion is to hang it from a low branch, and bungee-cord it to the trunk. This one needs to be somewhat secure, not swinging in the wind. If I set that up, I'll post about it.

 

Anyway, no, I'm not gonna be using screws, and have to hope the land owner hears more convincing "It's Safe For Trees" people than "That Is Sooo Bad For Trees" people. Sure I see bird houses (fake and cache) screwed into trees all the time. The local nature sanctuary identifies the variety of trees for visitors by screwing little signs into them. Into the trees, not the visitors.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

This is an interesting topic as it falls into my area of training. The fact of the matter is that as long as the material the screw/nail is made from isn't toxic (ie. Copper) Then it'll be fine.

 

The wound caused isn't big enough to let fungal or viral pathogens in and it will callous up fairly quickly aswell.

 

This past weekend i went to a flying fox set up through the tree tops in a conservation area. The platforms were engineered to simply bite into the bark of the trees and eventually the fixtures get swallowed up by the tree. One of the trees with a platform had a health check a few weeks ago and after 7 years it was just as healthy as the day the platform went up.

 

saying all that i do understand why GS introduced the rule.

For our northern cousins "flying fox" = "zip line"

Link to comment

while geocaching I have found many caches that are screwed to trees this is horrid as it is against the rules and can damage the tree, so how should we safely attach caches to trees? What do you think?

 

Its not horrid, the trees are perfectly fine, they don't have feeling you know.

Link to comment

A screw is not going to hurt a tree, I think back to when I was a kid building tree houses in the woods around my house. We did a lot worse to the tree than a screw. The trees are still doing fine. I think an occasional screw or nail just makes the tree tougher. That's what tree sap is for. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

You can debate ownership and land manager issues all day. But the fact is, just about every DNR state park and state forest naturalist in Minnesota and Wisconsin mount signs and trail markers to trees. I can't imagine these state paid tree huggers would be acting in such manner if it really upset the tree.

 

Even in my own yard I trim limbs and branches ALL YEAR and have yet to have a tree die out on me in 20+ years of home ownership.

Link to comment

You can debate ownership and land manager issues all day. But the fact is, just about every DNR state park and state forest naturalist in Minnesota and Wisconsin mount signs and trail markers to trees. I can't imagine these state paid tree huggers would be acting in such manner if it really upset the tree.

 

I can't imagine that they'd be too happy if a bunch of other people, without any sort of official affiliation to the park or state forest started mounting signs or trail markers on any random tree in the park/forest.

 

 

Even in my own yard I trim limbs and branches ALL YEAR and have yet to have a tree die out on me in 20+ years of home ownership.

 

As the owner of said tree how would you feel about just anyone going onto your property and trimming the tree as they see fit?

 

 

Link to comment

You can debate ownership and land manager issues all day. But the fact is, just about every DNR state park and state forest naturalist in Minnesota and Wisconsin mount signs and trail markers to trees. I can't imagine these state paid tree huggers would be acting in such manner if it really upset the tree.

 

The rule has a lot more to do with park relations than with tree harm. The Minnesota DNR would not look the other way if you (or I) were nailing signs (or geocaches) to their trees, damage be dadgumed.

 

Austin

Link to comment

 

The rule has a lot more to do with park relations than with tree harm. The Minnesota DNR would not look the other way if you (or I) were nailing signs (or geocaches) to their trees, damage be dadgumed.

 

Austin

My point also, a screw or nail is not going to hurt a tree but most land entities would probably frown upon the practice. In this part of the country we worry more about the bark beetle (which can devastate large sections of the forest) than the occasional nail or screw in a tree.

Link to comment

I am not sure why GS has a ban on putting nails in trees, but I am certainly in favour of the ban. I expect that most geocachers don't have a lot of experience with chainsaws and/or have never hit a nail in a tree with a chainsaw or they would be against nails in trees too. When harvesting trees, hitting a hidden nail with a chainsaw can be very dangerous to the operator, not to mention destructive to the chain of the saw. Nails in trees can also cause problems in a portable saw mill too.

Edited by Nonsuch30
Link to comment

I am not sure why GS has a ban on putting nails in trees, but I am certainly in favour of the ban. I expect that most geocachers don't have a lot of experience with chainsaws and/or have never hit a nail in a tree with a chainsaw or they would be against nails in trees too. When harvesting trees, hitting a hidden nail with a chainsaw can be very dangerous to the operator, not to mention destructive to the chain of the saw. Nails in trees can also cause problems in a portable saw mill too.

Unless the nails are aluminum

Link to comment

I thought also the financial side (I did not know about the saw safety issue mentioned above). Where I live, caches could be in a forest which is later harvested. I do not know their processes or machines very well but a nail stuck in the wrong place - broken saw? Ruined quality? I read that sawmills have magnetic metal detectors but if the nail is not magnetic... And the log with metal would still need special treatment to avoid breaking the saw all A quality logs go to.

Link to comment

I am not sure why GS has a ban on putting nails in trees, but I am certainly in favour of the ban. I expect that most geocachers don't have a lot of experience with chainsaws and/or have never hit a nail in a tree with a chainsaw or they would be against nails in trees too. When harvesting trees, hitting a hidden nail with a chainsaw can be very dangerous to the operator, not to mention destructive to the chain of the saw. Nails in trees can also cause problems in a portable saw mill too.

If you were chainsawing down the tree hopefully you would see the geocache attached to the nail and thus avoid damage to the operator, chainsaw and most importantly the geocache!

Edited by TahoeJoe
Link to comment

You can debate ownership and land manager issues all day. But the fact is, just about every DNR state park and state forest naturalist in Minnesota and Wisconsin mount signs and trail markers to trees. I can't imagine these state paid tree huggers would be acting in such manner if it really upset the tree.

 

Even in my own yard I trim limbs and branches ALL YEAR and have yet to have a tree die out on me in 20+ years of home ownership.

 

I totally agree with you. In fact, I started the Hungry Trees thread on this forum. Go to Lilydale and walk the bike trail there. EVERY tree you see there that is larger than 3" in diameter has an aluminum inventory tag nailed to it. And we've seen that in many other areas as well. It was stated in one post above about copper nails being poisonous. My research has shown me that they can be toxic, but it would take hundreds of copper nails to kill one tree. I've seen 3" cables growing right through the center of huge oak trees. I could continue.

 

Nevertheless, you could not hide a cache in Eden Prairie, MN for two years because of one birdhouse cache that was nailed to a tree and discovered by a park person. The guideline has NOTHING AT ALL to do with harming trees. It has to do with private property, permission, and perception All it takes is that one person that hasn't done their research but is in a position of power. In that case, it no longer matters who is right about nails harming a tree, and who is wrong. What matters is who gets to hide a cache, and who doesn't.

Link to comment

Or, find a tree with a hole in it and use the hole. Sometimes trees naturally develop hollow spaces. Or, sometimes nature provides a spot ... my only tree cache is hidden in a hole made by a woodpecker.

Be sure to check the hole first. In a hole at the base of a tree someone put a cache and there was a skunk in it. I recently searched a tree with a hole from an old branch cut. And in it was a nest of baby Western Bluebirds. I posted a note (with tape) not to disturb. The cache was in a different hole.

 

A highly favorited cache in the area was screwed to a tree, the reviewer suggested he rethink it. He did by using cable wrapped in camo duct tape around a branch loosely.

Link to comment

You can debate ownership and land manager issues all day. But the fact is, just about every DNR state park and state forest naturalist in Minnesota and Wisconsin mount signs and trail markers to trees. I can't imagine these state paid tree huggers would be acting in such manner if it really upset the tree.

 

I can't imagine that they'd be too happy if a bunch of other people, without any sort of official affiliation to the park or state forest started mounting signs or trail markers on any random tree in the park/forest.

 

 

Even in my own yard I trim limbs and branches ALL YEAR and have yet to have a tree die out on me in 20+ years of home ownership.

 

As the owner of said tree how would you feel about just anyone going onto your property and trimming the tree as they see fit?

 

Apparently you missed this...

 

You can debate ownership and land manager issues all day.

 

My point is about things hurting trees. I am pretty sure you didn't read ANYWHERE that I condone the behavior. Perhaps you too need to get out and cache more often.

Link to comment

You can debate ownership and land manager issues all day. But the fact is, just about every DNR state park and state forest naturalist in Minnesota and Wisconsin mount signs and trail markers to trees. I can't imagine these state paid tree huggers would be acting in such manner if it really upset the tree.

 

The rule has a lot more to do with park relations than with tree harm. The Minnesota DNR would not look the other way if you (or I) were nailing signs (or geocaches) to their trees, damage be dadgumed.

 

Austin

 

Yep, see post #23.

Link to comment

You can debate ownership and land manager issues all day. But the fact is, just about every DNR state park and state forest naturalist in Minnesota and Wisconsin mount signs and trail markers to trees. I can't imagine these state paid tree huggers would be acting in such manner if it really upset the tree.

 

I can't imagine that they'd be too happy if a bunch of other people, without any sort of official affiliation to the park or state forest started mounting signs or trail markers on any random tree in the park/forest.

 

 

Even in my own yard I trim limbs and branches ALL YEAR and have yet to have a tree die out on me in 20+ years of home ownership.

 

As the owner of said tree how would you feel about just anyone going onto your property and trimming the tree as they see fit?

 

Apparently you missed this...

 

You can debate ownership and land manager issues all day.

 

My point is about things hurting trees. I am pretty sure you didn't read ANYWHERE that I condone the behavior. Perhaps you too need to get out and cache more often.

 

Okay, your point was about things hurting trees. There may even be a thread in the OT forum about hurting trees, so if you want to talk hurting trees outside the context of geocaching perhaps that would be a better place. However, this thread is in the Geocaching topics section, thus things like owner ship and land manager issues *are* relevant, especially considering how often guideline regarding nails/screws in trees in misinterpreted to be about the health of trees.

 

I'll cache as often or as little as I want. Perhaps you need to spend less time reading other geocachers profiles.

 

 

Link to comment

The thread you bumped was active in 2015. At that time, the language about trees that now appears in the Guidelines wasn't there.  In 2015, the Guidelines just said "Caches are placed so that the surrounding environment, whether natural or human-made, is safe from intentional or unintentional harm. Property must not be damaged or altered to provide a hiding place, clue, or means of logging a find."

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...