I just placed a 911 call on GC6F514

[+Darquely]

Never saw a post like this EVER. GC6F514 Got a New cache alert and found this. Called 911 and they blew me off. Hope no-one chases it tonight. If you look at the owner's log they post every cache exactly 1/10 of a mile apart. this disturbs me. Just read the listing. It is disturbing.

Edited April 8, 2016 by Darquely

[+Touchstone]

I don't post NA logs on caches I don't search for. That might explain the response from "911".

[+Darquely]

I don't post NA logs on caches I don't search for. That might explain the response from "911".

You didn't look at the cache did you, JJ?

[+Darquely]

Read this listing, then tell me what you think

[+Crow-T-Robot]

That's a strange write-up for a cache description but why would you need to call 911? Was someones life in danger because this CO is maybe, possibly putting out phantom caches?

[+Darquely]

That's a strange write-up for a cache description but why would you need to call 911? Was someones life in danger because this CO is maybe, possibly putting out phantom caches?

 

Yeah, that's it! Drunk illegal aliens are putting out Phantom caches. Either that, or Criminals are trying to catch GC'ers out in the woods.

[+Darquely]

I am from here. This is a desolate area, aside from rv parks, where people don't move around at all during the night. This is a road that nobody drives on at night. This scared me. read it, and research it. it doesn't look Kosher.

[+Touchstone]

I don't post NA logs on caches I don't search for. That might explain the response from "911".

You didn't look at the cache did you, JJ?

Yes, I read the Description. Let me rephrase my statement: I would not post a NA log type based on a Description (unless it violated the TOU of the site).

 

I hope that clears up any misunderstanding.

 

As an aside, since you seem to be concerned about the area, the same cache owner had a cache about 300 feet away that was active for a very brief time. Leaving the topic of "temporary caches" aside for a moment, the two Finders didn't appear to have any problem with the area. Granted, that was a few years ago, so things might have changed in that time.

[+ChileHead]

I have no idea what the concern is with the cache. What bothers you?

[+T.D.M.22]

Well something has changed. Since this is the description

I MAY HAVE FORGOT TO TAKE A CACHE WITH ME PLEASE TAKE ONE WITH YOU TO THIS CACHE AND {{{ PLEASE SIGN THE LOG }}} DON"T FORGET A WRITING STICK

 

IT COULD BE KINDA EASY OR DIFFICULT I MAY HAVE FORGOT TO TAKE A CACHE WITH ME PLEASE TAKE ANOTHER WITH YOU FOR YOU ; I SO WE DON"T SHORT ONE ANOTHER AND {{{ PLEASE SIGN THE LOG }}}.

 

It wouldn't have been approved like that, so obviously it was changed after itnwas published.

 

So what was it that got you calling 911? The only reason I could think of calling 911 on a cache is because it looks like a bomb. And since you know it's not, you could be held responsible (because you said it was)

 

And what's song with placing cache every 1/10 of a mile? Lots of people do it, and lots look for those type. Just because you don't like it.....

 

So either speak up about it or m it really wasn't that bad.

Edited April 8, 2016 by T.D.M.22

[+Tassie_Boy]

He's got almost 300 caches and you're worried he's staking it out to grab the first finder? Hope he's got plenty of patience.

[+Darquely]

I have no idea what the concern is with the cache. What bothers you?

 

This cache is inviting FTF cachers out into the woods to find a cache that the CO's forgot to bring with them, In the night time, on a desolate road, where they have to cross a barrier on foot, and walk away from the woods. But the CO can't speak english, and the park is closed after 10:00. I Know this area, and it is filled with druggies an scumbags. I would NEVER attempt a cache in this area in the dark....nor even the daytime. I wish I lived in the Liberal world, where nothing happens to innocent people.

[+Manville Possum]

I have no idea what the concern is with the cache. What bothers you?

 

This cache is inviting FTF cachers out into the woods to find a cache that the CO's forgot to bring with them, In the night time, on a desolate road, where they have to cross a barrier on foot, and walk away from the woods. But the CO can't speak english, and the park is closed after 10:00. I Know this area, and it is filled with druggies an scumbags. I would NEVER attempt a cache in this area in the dark....nor even the daytime. I wish I lived in the Liberal world, where nothing happens to innocent people.

 

Are you okay?

[Keystone]

I'd suggest taking your political views and your vivid imagination over to the Off Topic forum. Let's keep this thread focused on geocaching discussions. Thanks.

[+Darquely]

He's got almost 300 caches and you're worried he's staking it out to grab the first finder? Hope he's got plenty of patience.

 

Look at the logs.

[+Darquely]

I'd suggest taking your political views and your vivid imagination over to the Off Topic forum. Let's keep this thread focused on geocaching discussions. Thanks.

 

Whatever... Did I strike a nerve?

[Pup Patrol]

 

 

B.

[+Darquely]

OK, calling it a wrap. Just wanted it on file that if anything happened/happens in Lake worth, TX tonight, I am on record that I tried to intercede.

[+T.D.M.22]

I didn't know They are geocachers.

 

Honestly this is not how one would attack, kidnap, whatever someone else. Too ,any variables, and that means too much can go wrong.

 

If the CO wants to get someone, there are many more ways, that are all more effective, with less that can go wrong.

 

And anyway if the CO is really put there waiting, why wouldn't he just take a container with him? I haven't ever geocache before or anything, but wouldn't it be less likely that someone looks for it knowing it's not there? I mean you put cheese on the mousetrap, not tell the mice to bring it themselves....

Edited April 8, 2016 by T.D.M.22

[+AustinMN]

Never saw a post like this EVER. GC6F514 Got a New cache alert and found this. Called 911 and they blew me off. Hope no-one chases it tonight. If you look at the owner's log they post every cache exactly 1/10 of a mile apart. this disturbs me. Just read the listing. It is disturbing.

 

If any of your assumptions were were correct, the reviewer would almost certainly not have published it. This CO has thousands of finds and hundreds of hides. Calm down, this is not a trap.

 

Your N/A post was really inappropriate.

[+T.D.M.22]

Never saw a post like this EVER. GC6F514 Got a New cache alert and found this. Called 911 and they blew me off. Hope no-one chases it tonight. If you look at the owner's log they post every cache exactly 1/10 of a mile apart. this disturbs me. Just read the listing. It is disturbing.

 

If any of your assumptions were were correct, the reviewer would almost certainly not have published it. This CO has thousands of finds and hundreds of hides. Calm down, this is not a trap.

 

Your N/A post was really inappropriate.

 

I disagree. I think it is appropriate, but that's just because there is no container.

[+Darquely]

Well something has changed. Since this is the description

I MAY HAVE FORGOT TO TAKE A CACHE WITH ME PLEASE TAKE ONE WITH YOU TO THIS CACHE AND {{{ PLEASE SIGN THE LOG }}} DON"T FORGET A WRITING STICK

 

IT COULD BE KINDA EASY OR DIFFICULT I MAY HAVE FORGOT TO TAKE A CACHE WITH ME PLEASE TAKE ANOTHER WITH YOU FOR YOU ; I SO WE DON"T SHORT ONE ANOTHER AND {{{ PLEASE SIGN THE LOG }}}.

 

It wouldn't have been approved like that, so obviously it was changed after itnwas published.

 

So what was it that got you calling 911? The only reason I could think of calling 911 on a cache is because it looks like a bomb. And since you know it's not, you could be held responsible (because you said it was)

 

And what's song with placing cache every 1/10 of a mile? Lots of people do it, and lots look for those type. Just because you don't like it.....

 

So either speak up about it or m it really wasn't that bad.

\

I wish i could send you out to be FTF. I would not go there after dark.

[+Darquely]

Read owners log. All are from Belgium, and Texas. read it in your own way.

[+WarNinjas]

I don't see a problem as well. I am guessing the description will make sense once you find it. Probably a pretty funny one I am sure. I am pretty sure there is a container.

We place out caches in areas I am sure are much more shady then this place. Plus it is for premium members only. Maybe if this was a persons first hide there might be questions...well even then there shouldn't be. No one who has put in that much time and effort into there stats would try and pull something like you are thinking off.

What is the CO going to do when me and a bunch of my crazy Geocaching friends go out for the FTF? Try and rob us? Good luck with that. It also says that it is not kid friendly and I don't see where it recommends going at night. Doesn't sound like someone trying to lure some innocent people to there cache. If I lived closer I would go for the FTF even at night.

[+T.D.M.22]

Well something has changed. Since this is the description

I MAY HAVE FORGOT TO TAKE A CACHE WITH ME PLEASE TAKE ONE WITH YOU TO THIS CACHE AND {{{ PLEASE SIGN THE LOG }}} DON"T FORGET A WRITING STICK

 

IT COULD BE KINDA EASY OR DIFFICULT I MAY HAVE FORGOT TO TAKE A CACHE WITH ME PLEASE TAKE ANOTHER WITH YOU FOR YOU ; I SO WE DON"T SHORT ONE ANOTHER AND {{{ PLEASE SIGN THE LOG }}}.

 

It wouldn't have been approved like that, so obviously it was changed after itnwas published.

 

So what was it that got you calling 911? The only reason I could think of calling 911 on a cache is because it looks like a bomb. And since you know it's not, you could be held responsible (because you said it was)

 

And what's song with placing cache every 1/10 of a mile? Lots of people do it, and lots look for those type. Just because you don't like it.....

 

So either speak up about it or m it really wasn't that bad.

\

I wish i could send you out to be FTF. I would not go there after dark.

 

Then don't. I know it seems like a stupid idea, but it really works.

Edited April 8, 2016 by T.D.M.22

[+Crow-T-Robot]

The first time I took my brother in law out caching with me, the first cache we went to (in a wooded area after dark), he asked me if I was worried that geocaching might be a way for some sicko to wait for people to come along to the cache and then do something twisted. I pulled up the listing and showed him that the cache had been last found about two months ago. Anyone wanting to use geocaching to lure people to a specific spot and do nefarious things to them...is going to die of boredom before anything happens.

 

FTF *might* have a chance at getting people to the cache in a more timely manner, but there would be no way to know who, how many or when they are going to show up. For all the CO would know, the FTF seeker might just be a police officer who is also a geocacher. Or a large group of cachers doing a FTF run. Or maybe a lone cacher does show up, the creep jumps him/her and two minutes later, another cacher shows up. And then a third FTF hound. As said before, waaay too many variables in play.

 

My advice: stop jumping at shadows. If you don't want to go out into some seedy area after dark...then don't. But logging NA's and calling 911 because of some elaborate violent fantasy you've constructed in your mind is all kinds of paranoid.

 

 

Of course, we do have that old geocaching joke: Never mess with a geocacher because we know where to hide the bodies .

[+Tassie_Boy]

He's got almost 300 caches and you're worried he's staking it out to grab the first finder? Hope he's got plenty of patience.

 

Look at the logs.

 

I did, again. And there's nothing in the logs or the description that mention anything about going out at night.

[+JL_HSTRE]

Chasing a FTF in the dark in a bad area after the posted hours? Don't do dangerous, illegal things and bad things are much less likely to happen to you. That applies regardless of whether or not the CO is a crazed rapist/killer. Decisions have consequences.

[+JL_HSTRE]

"IT COULD BE KINDA EASY OR DIFFICULT I MAY HAVE FORGOT TO TAKE A CACHE WITH ME PLEASE TAKE ANOTHER WITH YOU FOR YOU"

 

I agree the cache page shouldn't have text like this suggesting there isn't actually a container present and essentially encouraging throwdowns.

[+AustinMN]

Never saw a post like this EVER. GC6F514 Got a New cache alert and found this. Called 911 and they blew me off. Hope no-one chases it tonight. If you look at the owner's log they post every cache exactly 1/10 of a mile apart. this disturbs me. Just read the listing. It is disturbing.

 

If any of your assumptions were were correct, the reviewer would almost certainly not have published it. This CO has thousands of finds and hundreds of hides. Calm down, this is not a trap.

 

Your N/A post was really inappropriate.

 

I disagree. I think it is appropriate, but that's just because there is no container.

 

You don't know that. Just because the listing says there is no container does not mean there is no container.

 

Do you really think the reviewer would have approved the cache listing if he thought there was no container? Really???

[+Tassie_Boy]

Never saw a post like this EVER. GC6F514 Got a New cache alert and found this. Called 911 and they blew me off. Hope no-one chases it tonight. If you look at the owner's log they post every cache exactly 1/10 of a mile apart. this disturbs me. Just read the listing. It is disturbing.

 

If any of your assumptions were were correct, the reviewer would almost certainly not have published it. This CO has thousands of finds and hundreds of hides. Calm down, this is not a trap.

 

Your N/A post was really inappropriate.

 

I disagree. I think it is appropriate, but that's just because there is no container.

 

You don't know that. Just because the listing says there is no container does not mean there is no container.

 

Do you really think the reviewer would have approved the cache listing if he thought there was no container? Really???

 

It's not unknown for descriptions to be changed after publication, it's not as though the site is set up to electrocute you through your keyboard if you lie.

 

But on the other hand we don't, as usual, know what has gone on on the back end of the cache page prior to publication.

[+Clarkbowman]

Never saw a post like this EVER. GC6F514 Got a New cache alert and found this. Called 911 and they blew me off. Hope no-one chases it tonight. If you look at the owner's log they post every cache exactly 1/10 of a mile apart. this disturbs me. Just read the listing. It is disturbing.

what have you been smoking, calling 911, LOL. The CO has 800 times more finds then you and more hides then your finds, nothing is amiss here other then your fears. Learn this rule. if you dont like the idea of going after a cache. DON'T. There is nothing saying that you have to hunt this cache at night and I'm sure no one is going to make you.

[+hzoi]

IBTL

 

oh, wait, we don't do that anymore.

 

edit: how about...

 

Settle down, Francis.

Edited April 8, 2016 by hzoi

[+geodarts]

Read this listing, then tell me what you think

 

While there are things about the cache description, and others by the same person, that I find a little disturbing, scary, or at least worthy of more than one sigh, generally pressing the ignore button in my app works better for me than 911 calls.

Edited April 8, 2016 by geodarts

[+thebruce0]

Ignoring everything else, the cache description as it stands now I think would be sufficient cause to get reviewer attention, and/or directly contact the CO to ask if there is a cache present. There should be. Whether it published with that text or not, it implies now that there is no cache, and at the very least technically should be flagged as "Needs Maintenance".

 

Secondly, if the park is indeed closed at 10pm and visitors are not welcome, then I interpret that as both private property (thus should have permission) and that the listing should indicate that no searching should be done after 10pm. Another reason either for a Needs Maintenance or Archive. The reviewer may not have known any of this when published - informing the reviewer of these details is up to the CO.

 

This is just merely based on cache listing as it stands now, and any red flag points mentioned in this thread. All else, the way I see it, is subjective.

 

"IT COULD BE KINDA EASY OR DIFFICULT I MAY HAVE FORGOT TO TAKE A CACHE WITH ME PLEASE TAKE ANOTHER WITH YOU FOR YOU ;"

 

...really sounds like he's saying "because someone else is placing the cache, I have no idea what it'll be like". umm...

 

ETA: However... "May have forgot" is confusing. Does that mean it is a puzzle? Is that witty wording to get around confirmation that there is no container there? But it is listed as Traditional with no Field Puzzle attribute.

So many flags on this listing. =/

Edited April 8, 2016 by thebruce0

[+igator210]

Secondly, if the park is indeed closed at 10pm and visitors are not welcome, then I interpret that as both private property (thus should have permission) and that the listing should indicate that no searching should be done after 10pm. Another reason either for a Needs Maintenance or Archive. The reviewer may not have known any of this when published - informing the reviewer of these details is up to the CO.

 

This is sidetracking, but not sure if I understand you correctly....

 

Where I live, just about every park closes during the evening. That doesn't make them private property. That also doesn't mean they have to be archived. It just means to search during daylight hours.

[+thebruce0]

Secondly, if the park is indeed closed at 10pm and visitors are not welcome, then I interpret that as both private property (thus should have permission) and that the listing should indicate that no searching should be done after 10pm. Another reason either for a Needs Maintenance or Archive. The reviewer may not have known any of this when published - informing the reviewer of these details is up to the CO.

 

This is sidetracking, but not sure if I understand you correctly....

 

Where I live, just about every park closes during the evening. That doesn't make them private property. That also doesn't mean they have to be archived. It just means to search during daylight hours.

 

I guess it depends on signage. If it's just a gate that closes to vehicles but pedestrian traffic is still allowed, then that's different than signage stating that access is prohibited after a certain time. Nonetheless, if there is "park closed" signage, then I certainly think it would be prudent to find out the property status and whether it's ok to place a cache there. Since someone is maintaining the open/closed status of the park, it could well fall into 'private property' category (insomuch as plaza parking lots are also considered private property).

*shrug*

[+bflentje]

I have no idea what the concern is with the cache. What bothers you?

 

This cache is inviting FTF cachers out into the woods to find a cache that the CO's forgot to bring with them, In the night time, on a desolate road, where they have to cross a barrier on foot, and walk away from the woods. But the CO can't speak english, and the park is closed after 10:00. I Know this area, and it is filled with druggies an scumbags. I would NEVER attempt a cache in this area in the dark....nor even the daytime. I wish I lived in the Liberal world, where nothing happens to innocent people.

 

Perhaps caching isn't your game?

[+SwineFlew]

I finished reading this...

 

Nothing here. Stop beating on the dead horse.

[+Wet Pancake Touring Club]

Secondly, if the park is indeed closed at 10pm and visitors are not welcome, then I interpret that as both private property (thus should have permission) and that the listing should indicate that no searching should be done after 10pm. Another reason either for a Needs Maintenance or Archive. The reviewer may not have known any of this when published - informing the reviewer of these details is up to the CO.

 

This is sidetracking, but not sure if I understand you correctly....

 

Where I live, just about every park closes during the evening. That doesn't make them private property. That also doesn't mean they have to be archived. It just means to search during daylight hours.

 

I guess it depends on signage. If it's just a gate that closes to vehicles but pedestrian traffic is still allowed, then that's different than signage stating that access is prohibited after a certain time. Nonetheless, if there is "park closed" signage, then I certainly think it would be prudent to find out the property status and whether it's ok to place a cache there. Since someone is maintaining the open/closed status of the park, it could well fall into 'private property' category (insomuch as plaza parking lots are also considered private property).

*shrug*

 

This appears to be on Army Corps of Engineering property Mustang Park, and it is a campground. There is a fee. Nothing about the area looks scary in the least.

[+The A-Team]

Never saw a post like this EVER. GC6F514 Got a New cache alert and found this. Called 911 and they blew me off. Hope no-one chases it tonight. If you look at the owner's log they post every cache exactly 1/10 of a mile apart. this disturbs me. Just read the listing. It is disturbing.

I've read the listing several times, and the only conclusion I can come to is that you had too much to drink last night. Calling 911 for something like this is a waste of taxpayers' dollars and could put other locals in jeopardy while you waste the operator's time.

 

If it were a new cacher and their first hide, I might question the listing and contact the reviewer. However, this CO has 269 hides and almost 5000 finds, so I'm leaning toward this being a "clever" cache and there really is a container there. The fact that they say "DON"T FORGET A WRITING STICK" also leads me to believe there's a Micro or a smaller Small container there. It would have been better if they had put in a "" to help reinforce that they're joking, but what are you going to do.

 

No matter how hard I try, I just can't find any aspect of this cache to be anywhere close to "disturbing". On the contrary, the cache looks to be in a pretty scenic area.

[+MartyBartfast]

Calling 911 for something like this is a waste of taxpayers' dollars and could put other locals in jeopardy while you waste the operator's time.

 

When I read the OP I (as a Brit) thought "I placed a 911 call" was some sort of general colloquialism meaning "I reported it to the authorities", which in this case would mean reporting it to GS. But following the thread it seems that a real call was placed to the Police, and that does look like an over reaction and a wast of police time.

[+Manville Possum]

Calling 911 for something like this is a waste of taxpayers' dollars and could put other locals in jeopardy while you waste the operator's time.

 

When I read the OP I (as a Brit) thought "I placed a 911 call" was some sort of general colloquialism meaning "I reported it to the authorities", which in this case would mean reporting it to GS. But following the thread it seems that a real call was placed to the Police, and that does look like an over reaction and a wast of police time.

 

I would have invited them down to the station to fill out a report if you get my drift.

[+The A-Team]

Calling 911 for something like this is a waste of taxpayers' dollars and could put other locals in jeopardy while you waste the operator's time.

When I read the OP I (as a Brit) thought "I placed a 911 call" was some sort of general colloquialism meaning "I reported it to the authorities", which in this case would mean reporting it to GS. But following the thread it seems that a real call was placed to the Police, and that does look like an over reaction and a wast of police time.

I thought that at first too, but then they repeated their use of "911 call" in the body of their post, and didn't correct anyone else after they criticized making such a call. I'm convinced the OP actually did make a (possibly alcohol-fueled) call to the emergency phone number.

 

Maybe we'll hear their call as part of a news story highlighting the misuse of 911.

[Laserion]

"At night". You keep saying that. Nowhere in the strange description of that cache does it say "search for it only at night". Sure, maybe caches are published at midnight and some people drop their cornflakes and run out the door for that FTF, but "at night" is not a requirement on that cache.

 

Also, who the gris lurks in the bushes a concrete/asphalt parking lot waiting for maybe someone to appear?

 

Although I wonder why it says that a boat is required to that location. Is the only access to that parking lot through the boat ramp just 80 feet east? Google Street View doesn't have anything on the nearby roads leading there (closest point seems to be N 32° 36.620 W 097° 28.250 (Ben Day Murrin Rd) 1.6 miles away.

[+Path Pacer]

This is a really weird thread.

[+Mudfrog]

The cache linked to certainly has a funny description going on there. Wouldn't think a reviewer would publish something like that so i'd say the CO changed it after it was published. But at the same time, i can't imagine why a 911 call would have been made on it.

[+wimseyguy]

Surprised that the CO didn't mention that this is really close to an airstrip too!

 

CO and his missus are a really scary looking couple

 

[+Touchstone]

Surprised that the CO didn't mention that this is really close to an airstrip too!

 

Yep. They call themselves the Thunderbirds, and from the looks of their group shot, they look like a pretty rough crowd too.

 

 

Looks like a pretty rough neighborhood, night or day.

[+noncentric]

This is certainly an odd thread. I think it would be interesting to hear how the 911 operator responded.

 

For context, below is a satellite image of the subject cache (red arrow). These caches are in Mustang Park, which does charge an entry fee and allows camping. The central 5 are owned by the CO that the OP has 'concerns' about, while the most westerly and easterly caches are owned by a different CO that has more fleshed out cache descriptions.

 

I agree that the descriptions/attributes of the 5 central caches could, and probably should, be adjusted to reflect the fees and the location. If there really isn't a container at the cache in the OP, then that is certainly an issue.