Obvious trail to cache location

[+YooperSnowman]

We've all experienced it...you park the car to look for a cache and there is an obvious trail leading directly to the prize.  No technology needed to find it.  So what do you think?

Are these trails harming the environment or just part of the game?  After a year or two, should the CO archive the cache so the site can recover and ask the reviewer if you can move it a bit?  Do trails  attract the attention of muggles?

Thoughts?  Thanks.

 

[+Pond Bird]

Some parks require a 2-year permit and once its expired the cache is archived because of issues like these. If the park or location itself is OK that people need to create geotrails to get to a geocache then don't need to archive cache listings. 

[+barefootjeff]

I guess the answer is "it depends". If the trail is through weeds or other degraded land it probably doesn't matter much, but it's a different story in otherwise undisturbed native bushland. It's something I'm mindful of with my hides and try to place them where access is along existing tracks, rock shelves, sand or, say, a dry watercourse.

[+edscott]

The placement of the cache can be planned to offer several potential routes from multiple attack points thus dispersing the traffic.  Caches a few feet from a trail can easily cause problems, while caches a several hundred feet from a trail will probably have no noticeable access trail.

[+Touchstone]

Informal trails, like you describe, are a pretty big issue in my home State.  I think geocaching is a very small contributor to the problem, in the bigger scheme of things, but I think we as a Community need to be mindful of it and not add to the problem.

[+cerberus1]

Similar to edscott I guess, we see more "obvious"  geotrails when a cache is placed roadside (which usually has little in the way of environmental issues anyway ... it's off a road...), or within feet of a trail, and those may have issues later.

 - Odd then that quite a few park systems are now requiring folks to place caches close to the trail, isn't it? 

In distant hides, there could be several avenues to access (how many have bushwhacked, to find a trail at GZ?), and that often helps the area to heal itself a bit. 

Many "trails" in the woods were created by deer or bear, and had nada to do with humans...   

Edited August 31, 2017 by cerberus1
spllelling

[+SeattleWayne]

Nah, I don't think it's a big deal. Obviously in National Parks or protected areas it would be a concern but I'm sure there are things in place to keep geo-trails to a minimum. It all comes down to good placement by the CO. 

[+Team Microdot]

In the UK some  public footpaths only remain open because geocachers prevent the pathway becoming choked with brambles and other vegetation.

[+Isonzo Karst]

Depends on the environment, as others have noted.

I'm placing in Florida. Back when people found hiking caches, some of mine would have user trail by end winter. Caching would then stop for the heat of summer, and by next caching season, all healed. (These days my caches don't have enough finds for user trail to develop. )  In the desert southwest, I've seen  trail that's not going to heal quickly.  Florida's beach dunes are fragile, but also generally posted, years since I've seen a cache on one.

In areas where there is hunting, I've had to seriously think about usertrail when hiding ammo cans. Hunters will investigate and remove. I've had better luck with that more recently, as more have heard about the game, and I label the OUTSIDE of my caches in hunting areas with both a Geocache label, and   BSA and the BSA logo, and add BSA stuff to the interior. Hunters might take an anonymous geocacher's ammo can, but they seem willing to leave a Boy Scout's can in place. 

[+nextlogicalstep]

I've seen parks in my area where this has caused problems. Park managers obviously weren't aware of the caches, as they've put up barriers to prevent people from going off-trail, but the caches are still out there.

[+Bear and Ragged]

Too often it is a case of 'Follow the arrow' and 'Bushwhack' when, with a little bit of thought, an easier way - leaving no 'obvious' path can be found...

[+NanCycle]

After several people posted that there was nothing to be found near the "obvious geo-trail" near one of my caches, I had to include in the description "Don't be fooled by what looks like a geo-trail, that was there before I placed the cache."

[+Wet Pancake Touring Club]

When I am traveling to an unknown area for a specific cache, I will often scout the territory using Google Earth before heading out. For quite a number of caches, the geotrail is visible from space. Check out Potters Pond. Of course, this is a very popular cache, one of only three or four remaining that was placed in Aug 2000. It gets a lot of traffic.

As for the original question, it would depend on the land manager as to whether they care or not. The multi-cache at Fields Springs State Park in Washington State has an obvious geotrail. Again, visible on Google Earth. In this case, the CO added a waymark for where you should leave the trail to get the cache. This all but guarantees that a geotrail would be formed. As the start point of the multicache is down a hill, the area stands a chance of being damaged by water runoff following the trail and eroding it. But the park definitely knows about this cache, they helped place it as part of a GeoTour. So, its not like they didn't know that a geotrail was going to happen.

Do they attract muggles? Again, this would depend on the nature of the hide. At a rest area in CA on I5, there was a cache located inside a 4" diameter fence post. The trail was obvious, but unless someone thought to lift the post cap, the cache was not visible. How many muggles go around lifting fence post caps?

[+cerberus1]

Similar to NanCycle, we had a "bike it" series on a packed, crushed-stone trail , and one just couldn't be found by some.  Many talked about following the "obvious geotrail" and no luck (some even pitched a throwdown back there...).

Apparently just as many never read the cache description or hint, as "No need to leave the trail to find it.  ____, paper, scissors" should have told them.

It was a fake rock hide-a-key placed under a rock ledge, and I placed it while sitting on a recumbent bike - no need to leave the trail.

That "geotrail" was to a groundhog hole quite a few feet away from GZ coordinates...  

[+nikcap]

On a case by case basis, we all need to be concerned about geotrails.  Different landowners will feel differently about them.  During talk with the State Parks on NJ, Geotrails were a big concern, citing everything from they look bad, are unsafe and cause a liability, on the other hand Delaware wants cache more than 100 ft form the trails as to not create a geo-trail to the cache.  Go figure.

I remember some time ago someone posted that the Kokopelli trail was visible on aerial images.

Recently, this example was pointed out to me.   GC30

[+NYPaddleCacher]

On 9/1/2017 at 7:16 PM, nikcap said:

I remember some time ago someone posted that the Kokopelli trail was visible on aerial images.

I don't know about the Kokopelli trail but there was a discussion here a few years ago about the Alien head geo-art near the ET power trail.  Part of that discussion was that the OP specifically asked people to walk from cache to cache but many were driving in the desert to find them faster.  Looking at satellite images, a distinct trail (often a 2 track) can be seen from cache to cache for much of the artwork.