Jump to content

Has Anyone Considered Disabling Caches Until the Virus Threat is Past


shellbadger
Followers 11

Recommended Posts

Really loving these intimations that people have not been paying sufficient attention or are not "thinking for themselves" and therefore need the bleeding obvious to be reiterated over and over and over.

I suspect it's entirely possible for a rational person to (i) come to the conclusion that non-essential travel for the sake of a mere game is simply not worth it in their particular region in the midst of a once-in-a-century pandemic, and to (ii) decide to [attempt to] reduce their role in encouraging it. Even in the face of the [not particularly] compelling arguments to the contrary, believe it or not!

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1
Link to comment
4 hours ago, IceColdUK said:


I couldn’t find this, but this is what says on the https://www.gov.uk/coronavirus front page:

 

87ECEA80-7897-4538-B038-F1BC1ED57DA9.thumb.jpeg.5bc27c3da06ca8a912e99b476bc4c165.jpeg

 

Unfortunately, we do seem to get mixed messages about what is ‘allowed’, but for weeks the advice has been pretty clear: stay at home.

 

Alas, too many people ignore the advice, preferring to see how far they can stretch the rules to justify their behaviour.

 

 

Here is the url:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/coronavirus-guidance-on-access-to-green-spaces

Link to comment
5 hours ago, on4bam said:

 

Let me rephrase... travelers spread the virus. It only takes one infected person to travel to a "clean" area and have contact with people there to start a new cluster.

 

 

"and have contact with people there"

 

In other words,  spreading the virus is due to having contact with people.  Don't have contact with people and it really doesn't matter if someone travels.  If someone is having contact when people when they travel they're probably having contact with people in their own town.

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

In other words,  spreading the virus is due to having contact with people.  Don't have contact with people and it really doesn't matter if someone travels.  If someone is having contact when people when they travel they're probably having contact with people in their own town.

One doesn't need to have contact with the infected person to be infected. The virus has a life outside of an infected person.  The infected person can deposit the virus on surfaces (geocache container, logbook, swaps etc) and the virus can remain alive for some time - days in the case of hard surface deposits. When the next visiting person handles the container, logbook etc they can pick up the virus on their hands. If they then touch their face, nose, rub their eyes, or put some food in their the mouth that will provide the path for the virus to infect them.

Link to comment
On 4/2/2020 at 1:44 PM, tealeaf said:

Most of my hides are urban, easy to get to and have generous hints so i'm getting a fair amount of traffic, especially from newbies. I've disabled 2. One because it's in a touristy area and the sidewalk to it would be impossible to allow 6ft of distance between a cacher and any muggle using the sidewalk. The other is in a little free library (which is closed) but security cameras still show lots of folks checking for books.

 

I have two caches placed at Interstate rest areas that get found quite often, sometimes multiple times a day. It's clear to me there's a chance people can be in proximity to each other going for them. It's also very clear that the virus can be left with the cache and spread to the next finder if conditions are right. I did the right thing and disabled those caches. I made sure to leave a note stating why they were disabled.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, fendmar said:

I wonder how many CO's will get around to re-enabling their caches after this has all passed.


I’d assume that those that have disabled their caches (myself included) are pretty engaged in the game.  I’d imagine that a majority will still be engaged once this has past.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment

It boils down to this in my mind:

1) This is a game.

2) No one is forced to play it.

3) In this global pandemic, each country and areas within each country are being impacted differently, and have elected officials at the federal, state, and local level responsible for looking after their constituents.

4) There are different govt approaches in place across each country and region (state) that reflects local conditions and local philosophies.

5) Gc hq is allowing local reviewers to set rules around enabling new caches, etc. within local rules.

6) Each geocache participant is responsible for doing what they think is right for them and their families.

7) If someone is uncomfortable with how the caching situation is being handled in their area, see 1), 2), and 6) above.

 

Edited by Clancy's Crew
  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 2
Link to comment
11 hours ago, Clancy's Crew said:

It boils down to this in my mind:

1) This is a game.

2) No one is forced to play it.

3) In this global pandemic, each country and areas within each country are being impacted differently, and have elected officials at the federal, state, and local level responsible for looking after their constituents.

4) There are different govt approaches in place across each country and region (state) that reflects local conditions and local philosophies.

5) Gc hq is allowing local reviewers to set rules around enabling new caches, etc. within local rules.

6) Each geocache participant is responsible for doing what they think is right for them and their families.

7) If someone is uncomfortable with how the caching situation is being handled in their area, see 1), 2), and 6) above.

 

 

On 4/3/2020 at 1:46 PM, MartyBartfast said:

 

I would recommend that you use your own judgement rather than relying on sound bites from politicians.

E.G. Matt Hancock (Health Minister)  said on Question Time last night that driving a short distance to exercise or walk your dog was acceptable.

 

Think for yourself!

 

Edit to add: I've just looked at today's press briefing, and it was actually presented by Matt Hancock and contradicts what he said on Question Time on  TV last night, which IMO reinforces my admonition to not listen to sound bites, but think for yourself.

 

The bolded above, people thinking for themselves, is what presents problems. One person thinks one way, another person thinks another way, and yet another person thinks somewhere in between. One believes the pandemic is real and listens to what has been said about the virus and how it's being spread. Another person believes there is a virus but it's not all that bad and they'll shake it off if they get it. Then there are others who believe the whole virus thing is a hoax and go on about their business as usual. 

 

It'd be one thing if the person who made the wrong decision only affected themselves. Unfortunaely, that's not the way it works with this situation. With this virus, people "thinking for themselves" can cause harm to others around them. 


 

 

 

  • Upvote 8
  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
9 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

It'd be one thing if the person who made the wrong decision only affected themselves. Unfortunaely, that's not the way it works with this situation. With this virus, people "thinking for themselves" can cause harm to others around them. 

Yep, look to someone else to make decisions for you.

Edited by 31BMSG
  • Funny 1
  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
9 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

 

 

The bolded above, people thinking for themselves, is what presents problems. One person thinks one way, another person thinks another way, and yet another person thinks somewhere in between. One believes the pandemic is real and listens to what has been said about the virus and how it's being spread. Another person believes there is a virus but it's not all that bad and they'll shake it off if they get it. Then there are others who believe the whole virus thing is a hoax and go on about their business as usual. 

 

It'd be one thing if the person who made the wrong decision only affected themselves. Unfortunaely, that's not the way it works with this situation. With this virus, people "thinking for themselves" can cause harm to others around them. 


 

 

 

Is it any wonder people try to think for themselves when there is so much conflicting information around them, even from their leaders? We look to our leaders for guidance but what is one to do when they are in conflict within.

Link to comment

IMO, in order of importance (and all of very high importance)

1. Obey your local health and safety regulations, whether city, county, province/state, or country. Keep updated; include any location you may be traveling to, if allowed; especially if orders include staying home if you are sick.

2. Understand how the virus works, what actions are actually relevant to the spread of the virus. (eg don't overreact or horde, especially unnecessarily, or contribute to increased panic that can cause people to do things specifically counter to #1)

3. Keep yourself clean for your own health and for the health of others (it's not just about getting the virus, but also giving it since you may not know if you even have it)

4. Do not panic, do not overreact, do not spread false information, try to be kind and courteous even to those who may disagree, because people are scared and compassion goes a long way.

5. Follow your conscience if there's no clear answer. (eg, stay at home if you want - but don't assume that every person the planet is required to do the same let alone vilify those who don't)

Does geocaching fit the above? Certainly can, just with a bit more conscious effort to be safe. Assuming of course it's not explicitly denied at #1, or an essential component of the activity is denied at #1, or it's chosen to be put on hold at #5.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
9 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

The bolded above, people thinking for themselves, is what presents problems.

Bizzare

 

9 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

The bolded above, people thinking for themselves, is what presents problems. One person thinks one way, another person thinks another way, and yet another person thinks somewhere in between. One believes the pandemic is real and listens to what has been said about the virus and how it's being spread. Another person believes there is a virus but it's not all that bad and they'll shake it off if they get it. Then there are others who believe the whole virus thing is a hoax and go on about their business as usual. 

 

It'd be one thing if the person who made the wrong decision only affected themselves. Unfortunaely, that's not the way it works with this situation. With this virus, people "thinking for themselves" can cause harm to others around them. 

YOU. MUST. ASSIMILATE,   who do I report to master?

Edited by 31BMSG
  • Funny 1
  • Surprised 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
15 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

IMO, in order of importance (and all of very high importance)

1. Obey your local health and safety regulations, whether city, county, province/state, or country. Keep updated; include any location you may be traveling to, if allowed; especially if orders include staying home if you are sick.

2. Understand how the virus works, what actions are actually relevant to the spread of the virus. (eg don't overreact or horde, especially unnecessarily, or contribute to increased panic that can cause people to do things specifically counter to #1)

3. Keep yourself clean for your own health and for the health of others (it's not just about getting the virus, but also giving it since you may not know if you even have it)

4. Do not panic, do not overreact, do not spread false information, try to be kind and courteous even to those who may disagree, because people are scared and compassion goes a long way.

5. Follow your conscience if there's no clear answer. (eg, stay at home if you want - but don't assume that every person the planet is required to do the same let alone vilify those who don't)

 

Good list.  Personally, I'd put #4 as #1, but that's just my opinion. :)

Link to comment

The pattern of recent acitivity in my area (judging from project-gc) is quite interesting. A small number of complete newcomers are finding their very first half-a-dozen finds. Typically traditional caches in peri-urban parkland. I see few familiar names logging anything.

Anyone driving far from their own neighbourhood now risks a fine of some $1600 in the absence of a good reason. Uttering "we've just been out caching, officer" to the constabulary would likely make for a very unattractive cost to smiley ratio.

One interesting outcome is that presentations at hospital emergency departments have declined by about 20%. Fewer injuries resulting from recreational activities is the main factor, it seems. This has, however, been offset by a slight increase in the number of burns amongst people preparing more of their own meals. :)

  • Funny 2
Link to comment
8 minutes ago, BendSinister said:

One interesting outcome is that presentations at hospital emergency departments have declined by about 20%. Fewer injuries resulting from recreational activities is the main factor, it seems. This has, however, been offset by a slight increase in the number of burns amongst people preparing more of their own meals. :)

 

The scary part here is that there seem to be less people going to the hospital emergency with hart problems and cerebral hemorrhages. Even with "common" appendicitis people tend to wait to go to hospital.

 

We still go out caching but only on foot and on out bikes in an approx. 5Km radius. Driving somewhere (without a good reason) will get you a €250 fine.

The good news is, it seems to work, the curve is flattening and the number of deaths will probably follow that trend in the next few days.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

Received a few logs on mine reassuring me they were "wearing gloves".

 

Not sure people realise the risk is going to frequently visited areas like petrol stations, shops to get some lunch etc.

 

Problem is for every 9 sensible geocachers there will be one who sees it as a normal day out.

 

And for every on sensible geocacher, there will be 9 people who see an extra car on the road and think things must be going back to normal.

 

Still very torn about this.

  • Funny 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, BethDaddyKaty said:

Received a few logs on mine reassuring me they were "wearing gloves".

 

Not sure people realise the risk is going to frequently visited areas like petrol stations, shops to get some lunch etc.

 

Problem is for every 9 sensible geocachers there will be one who sees it as a normal day out.

 

And for every on sensible geocacher, there will be 9 people who see an extra car on the road and think things must be going back to normal.

 

Still very torn about this.

If people are worried about finding caches, it helps to check when it was last found and to find caches that haven't been found previously for at least a week. This doesn't guarantee that someone didn't find it just before you, but it increases the odds they haven't. The danger of relying on gloves is that you can still touch your face. I use hand sanitiser between caches instead. I am also tying my hair back, or trying to as it's a bit short for this (going to grow it until this is over, so it's easier to tie back), to reduce the number of times I touch my face, to wipe hairs away.

As for petrol station, I carry a supply of plastic bags and I wear one over my hand to hold the petrol nozzle, and then throw it. My newspaper is delivered in a plastic bags and I have been storing these to reuse for years (as I avoid taking new bags), so have plenty.

  • Surprised 1
Link to comment

Even though our reviewer has been publishing caches that meet certain guidelines, I have held off on submitting a couple of my caches for publication that would require just about every cacher to drive to the area via the interstate in order to begin the hike to where the caches are located.  We are currently under a shelter in place order, meaning non-essential travel is strongly discouraged.  However, I'm not going to disable my current ones unless they're not accessible, like the two I have in closed libraries right now.

Link to comment
49 minutes ago, coachstahly said:

However, I'm not going to disable my current ones unless they're not accessible, like the two I have in closed libraries right now.

I discovered one of my caches behind a blocked, barricaded road today. It was to stop people accessing a nature reserve. And possibly a sneaky, back road over the border and to the coast. I wanted to check my cache had survived the recent bushfires. Checking it will have to wait now. And it was only 700 metres the other side of the barricade. So close; so far:(.

Link to comment

I've been out again today after 5 days (March 26 th before that). We try to ride our bikes on 25-40Km tours along quiet roads, nature reserves and along waterways. Today we started early (@10:30) as most people tend to go out after lunch. We planned a route along several caches that were not found (or better, not logged online) for 3 days or longer. Just a few were found 2 days ago and one was found yesterday evening (but we didn't know that when we left home). Normal practice was getting to the cache, check the logs on the GPS, take cache, log, place back, clean hands. On the ones found 2 days or less we did the same but I put on latex gloves to take the cache, log and place back.

On the way up it was very quiet cycling along the water and when we reached the farthest point (a little after noon) we cycled back along almost empty paths and streets as we knew most people tend to follow the cycling paths along the water. In all we didn't see a lot of people during our 36Km ride.

I'm sure going the a shop is a higher risk than going outside and find some caches.

 

BTW, as for "non-essential driving", a guy in Belgium has been caught (and fined) 5 times driving to friends but is now probably regretting it, his BMW is sitting in a police compound until further notice... :lol:

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
17 hours ago, BethDaddyKaty said:

Received a few logs on mine reassuring me they were "wearing gloves".

Not sure people realise the risk is going to frequently visited areas like petrol stations, shops to get some lunch etc.

 

Isn't that silly, like them wearing gloves means anything to a CO's cache...  :) 

Yesterday after my walk,  I watched a woman inside CVS  buying things on sale (good sale on Jif too :-). She dutifully had her gloves on.

She left the same time as me, and handed something from the bag to her teen kids in the car,  hopped in the drivers seatand took her mask off still wearing the gloves she wore touching items in the store.

 

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

Yesterday after my walk,  I watched a woman inside CVS  buying things on sale (good sale on Jif too :-). She dutifully had her gloves on.

She left the same time as me, and handed something from the bag to her teen kids in the car,  hopped in the drivers seatand took her mask off still wearing the gloves she wore touching items in the store.

Ah, yes... the magic sanitation gloves. Put them on, and everything is instantly sanitized. :rolleyes:

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 2
Link to comment
2 hours ago, on4bam said:

We planned a route along several caches that were not found (or better, not logged online) for 3 days or longer. Just a few were found 2 days ago and one was found yesterday evening (but we didn't know that when we left home). Normal practice was getting to the cache, check the logs on the GPS, take cache, log, place back, clean hands.

If you're worried about touching a cache container that someone else has previously touched, this chart may help put things in perspective.

 

2020-04-10_120719.jpg.300287198320e428dacbfc69b4f5e0b2.jpg

 

After 21 hours the virus will have 1/8th the concentration of the original contamination. After 49 hours it's 1/128th. 

Carry hand sanitizer and use it after touching anything anyone else might have touched. Of all the things we have to worry about these days touching a geocache is pretty low on my list. 

 

 

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, MtnGoat50 said:

If you're worried about touching a cache container that someone else has previously touched, this chart may help put things in perspective.

 

Not worried at all. In theory the virus can survive 3 days on plastic in lab conditions. Other materials and conditions are less. I just follow "worst case scenario" but in real life what's the chance to touch a cache out in the elements that was touched by an infected person having the virus still active even after only a few hours?

Latex gloves and hand sanitizer have been in our geocaching backpack for years.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
5 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Isn't that silly, like them wearing gloves means anything to a CO's cache...  :) 

Yesterday after my walk,  I watched a woman inside CVS  buying things on sale (good sale on Jif too :-). She dutifully had her gloves on.

She left the same time as me, and handed something from the bag to her teen kids in the car,  hopped in the drivers seatand took her mask off still wearing the gloves she wore touching items in the store.

 

 

I unfortunately had to go to cvs yesterday myself. The parking lot was littered with 6 pairs of discarded gloves.  Come on people!

  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
58 minutes ago, MNTA said:

I unfortunately had to go to cvs yesterday myself. The parking lot was littered with 6 pairs of discarded gloves.  Come on people!

Ah, yes... the biodegradable, self-composting, magic sanitation gloves. Put them on, and everything is instantly sanitized. Take them off and throw them on the ground, and they instantly biodegrade into 100% healthy organic compost. :rolleyes:

  •  
  • Funny 1
Link to comment
22 hours ago, niraD said:

Ah, yes... the biodegradable, self-composting, magic sanitation gloves. Put them on, and everything is instantly sanitized. Take them off and throw them on the ground, and they instantly biodegrade into 100% healthy organic compost. :rolleyes:

And how many people know the right way to take the gloves off so the outside is never touched by your hands?  As a first aid instructor it's something we teach to prevent blood contact.

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Jester said:

And how many people know the right way to take the gloves off so the outside is never touched by your hands?  As a first aid instructor it's something we teach to prevent blood contact.

Yeah, I've learned how to take gloves off safely in my first aid and emergency response training, but most people have no clue that they should even care about that.

 

Then again, most people think they're magic sanitation gloves, so...

Link to comment

Geocaching is just a game, another way to get exercise.  Having stated that, here is one view of the risk in going out and finding geocaches, assuming your federal, state and local rules allow you to go exercise this way.

 

Some geocaching risks (ignoring extreme caching)...

1) Driving to the cache site... 

2) Passing people on the hike to the cache site who may have the virus...

3) Touching the physical container...

 

I think of the overall virus risk as a series of very small risks, that, taken together, could cause exposure.  There is a concept in statistics called joint probability, which is (very) simply that the possibility of a potential outcome is the result of the joint possibilities of a series of steps necessary to get to that outcome.  The probability of being being exposed to Covid19 while caching includes the probability of being  exposed to the disease on the hike to the cache, and a whole bunch of really small probabilities of virus exposure via the container.

 

For the last part, for example, in order to get the virus from the container, the virus had to be placed on the container by a sick person.  And, you had to find the container in a timeframe where the virus is still active enough to pose a threat.  And you have to get the virus on your body.  And you have to touch a mucus membrane and transfer the virus into your body (e.g., nose, mouth, eyes).  THEN, you are likely to be infected.  So how likely is that combination of events, all necessary to cause infection of a geocacher?

 

In our area, we have one of the highest RATES of infection in Pennsylvania, at around 500 infections, cumulative, per 100,000 people.  So, over the course of the pandemic, 500 people out of 100,000 have gotten the disease so far.  If we use that as a proxy for current infections (probably too high, given that the rate is stabilizing, people are recovering, etc.) 0.5% of people in our area have the infection.  So how many of those people are out and about, and asymptomatic and spreading the virus?  How many are geocachers, geocaching?  How many actually touched the cache we are concerned with?  How much of the virus they left is still on the container by the time we touch it?  What is the probability that we touch a contaminated container and then touch our face?

 

The sum of the probabilities of all of those events All happening is really, really, really, really small.  Not zero.  If you go out geocaching today and don't use common sense precautions like cautiously driving to the site, wearing masks while hiking to the cache, using necessary ppe and sanitizing after touching the cache, you could be injured or get the disease.  I suspect that the chance of injury in an auto accident going to the cache site  is higher than the chance of exposure to the virus when touching a cache, if you use common sense precautions.

 

So, how to avoid any probability of getting injured or exposure to the disease while geocaching?  Don't geocache, it's a game.  Get your exercise climbing the stairs in your house or apartment (while avoiding others, washing your hands, and not touching your face; sound familiar?) or some other way.  Just don't slip on the stairs while exercising.

 

As for our team, understanding the risks and taking the appropriate precautions, we will continue getting part of our exercise geocaching, as long as our local rules allow.

  • Upvote 5
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
46 minutes ago, Clancy's Crew said:

In our area, we have one of the highest RATES of infection in Pennsylvania, at around 500 infections, cumulative, per 100,000 people.  So, over the course of the pandemic, 500 people out of 100,000 have gotten the disease so far.  If we use that as a proxy for current infections (probably too high, given that the rate is stabilizing, people are recovering, etc.) 0.5% of people in our area have the infection. 

Agree entirely with your point about stacked events and probabilities, but the one sentence above has issues.  Your area may have 500 REPORTED cases, but from everything we are hearing, untested (and hence, unreported) asymptomatic cases represent a significant number, and would have to be added to the 500.  I'm not sure the figures currently in use (I've seen everything from 20 to 50% of actual cases are asymptomatic) are of much help, but again indicates a significant portion of the population that would have to be added whenever stats like this are generated. 

Edited by ecanderson
Link to comment
22 minutes ago, ecanderson said:

Agree entirely with your point about stacked events and probabilities, but the one sentence above has issues.  Your area may have 500 REPORTED cases, but from everything we are hearing, untested (and hence, unreported) asymptomatic cases represent a significant number, and would have to be added to the 500.  I'm not sure the figures currently in use (I've seen everything from 20 to 50% of actual cases are asymptomatic) are of much help, but again indicates a significant portion of the population that would have to be added whenever stats like this are generated. 

Any statistics provided in the uncertainty of a pandemic are suspect.  However, even if you double the cumulative reported cases to use as a proxy and make the total cases 1%, the joint probability of the entire process is minuscule.  Plus, my area is showing higher rates than others, so other areas are have an even lesser probability.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
9 hours ago, Clancy's Crew said:

Geocaching is just a game, another way to get exercise.  Having stated that, here is one view of the risk in going out and finding geocaches, assuming your federal, state and local rules allow you to go exercise this way.

 

Some geocaching risks (ignoring extreme caching)...

1) Driving to the cache site... 

2) Passing people on the hike to the cache site who may have the virus...

3) Touching the physical container...

 

I think of the overall virus risk as a series of very small risks, that, taken together, could cause exposure.  There is a concept in statistics called joint probability, which is (very) simply that the possibility of a potential outcome is the result of the joint possibilities of a series of steps necessary to get to that outcome.  The probability of being being exposed to Covid19 while caching includes the probability of being  exposed to the disease on the hike to the cache, and a whole bunch of really small probabilities of virus exposure via the container.

 

For the last part, for example, in order to get the virus from the container, the virus had to be placed on the container by a sick person.  And, you had to find the container in a timeframe where the virus is still active enough to pose a threat.  And you have to get the virus on your body.  And you have to touch a mucus membrane and transfer the virus into your body (e.g., nose, mouth, eyes).  THEN, you are likely to be infected.  So how likely is that combination of events, all necessary to cause infection of a geocacher?

 

In our area, we have one of the highest RATES of infection in Pennsylvania, at around 500 infections, cumulative, per 100,000 people.  So, over the course of the pandemic, 500 people out of 100,000 have gotten the disease so far.  If we use that as a proxy for current infections (probably too high, given that the rate is stabilizing, people are recovering, etc.) 0.5% of people in our area have the infection.  So how many of those people are out and about, and asymptomatic and spreading the virus?  How many are geocachers, geocaching?  How many actually touched the cache we are concerned with?  How much of the virus they left is still on the container by the time we touch it?  What is the probability that we touch a contaminated container and then touch our face?

 

The sum of the probabilities of all of those events All happening is really, really, really, really small.  Not zero.  If you go out geocaching today and don't use common sense precautions like cautiously driving to the site, wearing masks while hiking to the cache, using necessary ppe and sanitizing after touching the cache, you could be injured or get the disease.  I suspect that the chance of injury in an auto accident going to the cache site  is higher than the chance of exposure to the virus when touching a cache, if you use common sense precautions.

 

So, how to avoid any probability of getting injured or exposure to the disease while geocaching?  Don't geocache, it's a game.  Get your exercise climbing the stairs in your house or apartment (while avoiding others, washing your hands, and not touching your face; sound familiar?) or some other way.  Just don't slip on the stairs while exercising.

 

As for our team, understanding the risks and taking the appropriate precautions, we will continue getting part of our exercise geocaching, as long as our local rules allow.

I have not disabled any of my 70+ caches pretty much for the reasons outlined above. In our state unnecessary travel is prohibited. But, as in many places you can travel to a place for exercise keeping in mind social distancing.

We, in Australia, are fortunate that our federal government acted quickly to the the viral threat. We have passed the peak, As of today we have had 61 deaths of a population 25 million, a little less than the population of New York and New Jersey combined.

We have very few cachers in my local area (Hunter Region), I'm guessing maybe a 100 - 200 of a population of about 500,000. My caches don't get found very often but since the movement restriction there have been a few finds but only by locals as all holiday destinations are a no go. Risk or, "sum of probabilities" of picking up an infection of any type from a geocache in these parts is almost nil.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On ‎3‎/‎13‎/‎2020 at 12:35 PM, ecanderson said:

Caching could well be one of the safest forms of entertainment left to some folks.  Outdoors, no crowds.  Pay a little attention to handling things is all.  If really concerned, gloves are still widely available most places.  I certainly wouldn't be disabling any of mine, though I can see where people with 'library caches' and similar in some parts of the world probably won't see very many finders in the near term.

I've seen an actual uptick in my cache finds over the last month.   I hope the trend continues after we're through all this.    This weekend was cache maintenance weekend and I found myself enjoying every minute of it. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
10 hours ago, justintim1999 said:

I've seen an actual uptick in my cache finds over the last month.   I hope the trend continues after we're through all this.    This weekend was cache maintenance weekend and I found myself enjoying every minute of it. 

 

I saw some increased activity on my more remote caches in late March, when the social distancing and work-from-home-if-you-can recommendations first started, but since the restrictions were tightened at the beginning of April it's been deathly quiet. I've had just one log on my caches this month and that was on one close to a motorway rest area.

Link to comment

Apologies if this has already been suggested - I've not got time to go through the whole thread - several people in our area are disabling caches and saying "and I'll delete any logs until covid is over", which gets VERY mixed responses. So I can see scope for a "disabled and locked" status making it impossible to log online.*

Possible useful scenarios other than pandemics:

- for people like me and bethdaddy - riverside caches where approach in winter is dangerous. And other seasonal scenarios

- sporting event, eg marathon, trailbiking

- procession / carnival / protest

- crime scene

- construction work

 

*there will of course still be people who seek the cache and backdate their find after the lock is lifted...

 

Worth it?

Link to comment
46 minutes ago, Oxford Stone said:

 

Worth it?

 

No - in fact, it would be a terrible idea. There are tens (hundreds?) of thousands of cache owners out there, each with their own different personal opinions and preferences about anything under the sun and moon; if each one gets to allow or disallow a find as they wish at any particular point in time, it will lead to absolute chaos. The point of rules is that they are the same for everyone, and they have worked pretty well for 20 years.

Edited by G.O. Cash
emphasis added
  • Upvote 2
  • 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...
Followers 11
×
×
  • Create New...