Are we the cache police?

October 24, 2003

If a cache is approved, that for some reason should not have been WHO's responsibility is it to see the cache is either moved to a proper location or Archived.

If a cache is placed on private land, Wilderness, National Forrest, or in a dangerous location, Is it appropriate for another cacher to contact the cache placer, question his choice of location and if necessary recommend the cache be moved or archived.

I believe It is the responsibility of ALL Geocachers. To police our sport. Admin’s cannot check and verify all caches. In many cases they are not familiar with specific locations such as property lines and boundaries.

I believe all geocachers need to lead out in this matter and help identify Illegal caches and work with the cachers and Admin’s to see they are moved or Archived.

I would like to hear what everyone else thinks on this subject.

We'll See ya on the Trail

5.9k · October 24, 2003

Your sentence structure is simply abysmal.

If it does not present an immediate safety hazard, email the cache owner, then step off. If it ain’t yours, leave it be.

http://fp1.centurytel.net/Criminal_Page/

1.2k · October 24, 2003

You know, I don't even know where to begin.

And after a few minutes more thought, I think I will just avoid this one and stay in the good graces of TPTB.

Oh, wait, in order to STAY in their good graces, I'd have had to actually BE in their good graces first, righ? LOL.

"Afghanistan was a battle. Iraq was a battle. The war goes on."

24.7k · October 24, 2003

The first responsibility is the cache owners.

After that it denerates quickly into quagmire.

But if the owner neglects their job the landowner can authorize whoever the heck they want to act as the geo police. So can the site as long as it's known up front that if you your cache is rejected it will be removed if you don't make other arrangments.

Someone in actual authority has to tell Joe Geocachers it's ok to get the cache. Actual authority is not presumed authority which a lot of people seem to like.

October 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Scout Master:
I believe It is the responsibility of ALL Geocachers. To police our sport.

Is the cache owner currently active? Then it may be a bad idea to use your regular caching account for the vigilante work. The offended cache owners may get very personal sometimes (personal experience).

Also from the personal experience, it seems to be unethical to suggest that a cache should be arhived if you haven't made a very good effort to find it first. To the seekers, much is forgiven.

Altho' again, the finders moved my FerguFalls cache twice. The chosen location looked dangerous to them. The misplaced container was then flooded, mangled by muggles, and finally lost. Should I forgive this to the finders, too? Sic transit geolitter

9.4k · October 24, 2003

If a cache has been approved and you believe it shouldn't have been, log a note using the 'This cache should be archived' button. You can state your case in your log as to why it should be de-listed. This type of log goes to 5(?) approvers for review, so the cache owner can't just delete your log to keep it quiet.

If the cache is archived by the 'review board', it is up to the cache owner to remove the cache. Geocaching.com is only a listing service and is not responsible for removing rogue caches. Check out this thread. It deals with the issue of collecting archived caches.

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

2.1k · October 24, 2003

Agree with saxman there. I would also rather there be a way that when you click on this cache should be archived to do it anonymously. I think when someone does suggest one for archive, that depending on the owner, it may cause some flack. I guess a way around that would to just email an approver and tell them the problem.

Brian

www.woodsters.com

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

October 24, 2003

I disagree, Woodsters. If anyone says a cache of mine should be archived, I want them to put their name behind it.

____________________________

- Team Og Rof A Klaw

All who wander are not lost.

October 24, 2003

I think that we as a group should be self-policing. I don't like using the "this cache should be archived" option, and have only used it twice--one was where to coordinates lead to someone's backyard, and the account was no longer valid, and one was where I found a butter tub without a lid with a few bits of waterlogged paper that used to be a log book that I disposed of. If I find a cache on a Minnesota State Park or somewhere else where physical caches are banned, I'll put links to the local guidelines in my log and leave it up to the cache owner to do the right thing, and so far, they've done the research and either disproved me, or collected their cache and archived it.

"There comes a time in every rightfully constructed boy's life when he gets an urge to seek for buried treasure"--Mark Twain

2.3k · October 24, 2003

"Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges."

A. Bedoya

It had to be said.

Remember, wherever you go- there you are!

5.9k · October 24, 2003

I think everybody should mind their own business.

This has come up before, some nitwit screamed that a cache was unsafe, it wasn't. He just couldn't think "outside the box" and see a different approach.

If you don't like a cache, skip it and move on.

http://fp1.centurytel.net/Criminal_Page/

2.1k · October 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Team Og Rof A Klaw:
I disagree, Woodsters. If anyone says a cache of mine should be archived, I want them to put their name behind it.

____________________________

- Team Og Rof A Klaw

_All who wander are not lost._

I can understand that klaw. But unfortunately people won't archive caches that need to be for that reason. Just the same as people won't post on the forum, because they are afraid of backlash. But I do understand your viewpoint, I do think I would want to know as well.

Brian

www.woodsters.com

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

24.7k · October 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by 15Tango:
......If I find a cache on a Minnesota State Park or somewhere else where physical caches are banned, I'll put links to the local guidelines in my log and leave it up to the cache owner to do the right thing...

Excellent approach.

October 24, 2003

i agree with criminal. if you believe there is a problem, email the owner and move along. by the way, national forest is not forbidden territory, at least not in n.c. -harry

1.6k · October 24, 2003

Don't do anything other than tell the cache owner or approver unless the cache owner or approver tells you to...

On the other hand, I see a great t-shirt opportunity...

"Geo-Police"

"Geo-SWAT"

"Geocache Tactical Rescue Squad"

----

Extra batteries for GPS, don't leave home without 'em.

2.7k · October 24, 2003

My only thought is if you really saw a problem, let the approver know privately thought email.

It's up to them to make the call. Maybe they'll have someone local go and check it out and report back. Who knows.

But blasting it in the forums is not the 'best' approach.

---------------------

It wasn't me.

2.1k · October 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by New England n00b:
But blasting it in the forums is not the 'best' approach.

That I definitely agree on...to much of that going on.

Brian

www.woodsters.com

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

October 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Criminal:
I think everybody should mind their own business.

This has come up before, some nitwit screamed that a cache was unsafe, it wasn't. He just couldn't think "outside the box" and see a different approach.

If you don't like a cache, skip it and move on.

http://fp1.centurytel.net/Criminal_Page/

I agree

4.1k · October 24, 2003

Just what we need is a bunch of fanatics running around and checking caches for safety violations or some other imagined problem. We have several caches placed where cachers are expected to use common sense!! One is at a 'sinkhole' with sheer walls. We really expect people to stay back from the edge by at least three feet or more. If someone chooses to sit on the edge I'm afraid there is not much that can be done to prevent them from doing so.

We did post a warning on the cache page warning parents to keep an eye on their kids when at the site.

In order to enjoy the amazing scenery of the area you do need to pay attention to your surroundings no matter where you go. You do watch for ticks, snakes, etc. right?

Just remember your definition of dangerous may be different from the cache owner so a note on the log page should suffice. That way others can see your opinion and decide for themselves.

If you feel it's too dangerous just don't do it.

The 2oldfarts

*******************************************************

It's hard to remember that your primary objective is to drain the swamp, when you're up to your a$$ in alligators.

October 24, 2003

I would email the cache owner only if I thought something might pose a real danger to another cacher, and if a log entry saying something like "fun cache, but you might want to watch out for..." wouldn't be appropriate. If for no other reason than to make sure I didn't miss something by not "thinking outside the box".

I think the attitude of the email would have to be non-confrontational to be any help at all.

___________________________________________________________

If trees could scream, would we still cut them down?

Well, maybe if they screamed all the time, for no reason.

Click here for my Geocaching pictures and Here (newest)

October 24, 2003

Maybe post a warning as part of your log entry, and email the owner of the cache requesting he put the warning in the description so it'll stay near the top, and you can delete the note.

Something like "Note to night cachers and blind persons... the sheer cliff has slipperry mud leading to it for the last few feet. Use appropriate caution".

Or "If you hear the farmer who owns the land this cache was placed on shooting at you, duck... his 30.06 has a pretty long range and he almost hit me twice".

But not "What kind of idiot places a cache where my little darlings would get ravaged by a mosquito!"

--- OR ---

The person who approved the cache is listed on every cache page, and you can click on his/her name and send an email describing the problem if you would prefer to remain anonymous.

1.4k · October 24, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Scout Master:
If a cache is approved, that for some reason should not have been WHO's responsibility is it to see the cache is either moved to a proper location or Archived.

If a cache is placed on private land, Wilderness, National Forrest, or in a dangerous location, Is it appropriate for another cacher to contact the cache placer, question his choice of location and if necessary recommend the cache be moved or archived.

/snip

We'll See ya on the Trail

The OP wasn't asking about trashed/plundered/forgotten/discarded caches, If I read this correctly.

Simply because a cache is on private land, or in the wilderness, or on the moon, doesn't mean it should be archived. More than a few of my caches meet that description, and are perfectly valid. When I submitted them I included that permission was granted by the land owner/manager, along with more details that would not be posted on the cache page.

To constantly re-validate the cache to a stream of second guessing geocops, and the online log littered with archival requests, would be a royal pain.

If it's trashed or plundered.....email the owner. If it's abandoned, adopt it. If you disagree with it's placement/clue/rating/contents ...leave it alone and go to the next cache.

"Me transmitte sursum, Caledoni!"

2.1k · October 25, 2003

I've noticed no input on this from the approvers or TPTB. I don't think the OP meant the fact of going around in search of things like this, but when you come across one that is in question. At least that's the way I read it. Many people that replied to leave it alone and mind your own business. So does this meant that the "This should be archived" should be removed? Or are there specific other reasons than the ones he included that it be used for?

I've had experience with one that was on private land. Before going after it, I read the finds and notes of others and some mentioned the private property issue. I emailed the profile of the said cache and it was not the owner of it of course as they responded and told me. They didn't know if the cache was even still there and haven't checked on it in over a year. They were merely watching over the cache. They never responded about the private property issue. I emailed again and never heard back. I posted a question as to what I should do, if anything. Upon recommendation I did nothing until I decided to check it out myself. While hitting other caches one day, I was going to be near this one, so I proceeded to it and verified that it was on private property and htat you would have to park and cross on private property to go get it. It didn't look like a good idea. Later on, I posted a note on the cache page about this and left it at that. A while later, weeks, I noticed it had been disabled by the owner.

Brian

www.woodsters.com

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

1.6k · October 25, 2003

I know at times people are very reluctant to select the option that says "needs archived", and provide their reasoning that led them to select that option, but sometimes, it has to be done.

Having said that, I agree with Criminal, in that the cache owner should be contacted as a first step whenever possible.

38.2k · October 25, 2003

There is no such thing as a cache that is too dangerous. Only one that's improperly rated. If you find a cache that involves a cliff scramble rated at 1 or 2 stars, it might be a good idea to send a note to the cache owner asking him to re-consider his rating.

As far as caches that are obviously poorly placed (private property without permission, national parks, etc...), they should be addressed. Our sport gets enough bad press as it is. We don't need to feed the perception that we're just a bunch of clueless, ex-couch potatos, obliviously tramping all over the planet with our GPS'. A private note to the owner is the best way to go about it, rather than going straight to the "archive this cache" button. Give the owner a chance to address your concerns, before taking it further.

quote:
To constantly re-validate the cache to a stream of second guessing geocops, and the online log littered with archival requests, would be a royal pain.

A simple note on the cache page stating that you have permission for the cache should keep this to a minimum.

"You can't make a man by standing a sheep on his hind legs. But by standing a flock of sheep in that position, you can make a crowd of men" - Max Beerbohm

[This message was edited by BrianSnat on October 25, 2003 at 06:30 AM.]

1.9k · October 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by canadazuuk:
I know at times people are very reluctant to select the option that says "needs archived", and provide their reasoning that led them to select that option, but sometimes, it has to be done.

i have no problem clicking that button. However i also try to emai the owner BEFORE i do click it. Just seems like a professional courtesy to do so before you get the admins after the cache owner.

I really am thankfull for this option to recomend a cache for archival if the owner is mia. before to do this you had to email contactatGroundspeak.com and that being not as convient i dont think happened as often as it should have, well at least not by me.

Now where did I set my GPS??? planetrobert.net

October 25, 2003

quote:
I've noticed no input on this from the approvers or TPTB.

I'm on the receiving end of the "Needs Archived" logs, as are a number of other approvers, and of course the cache owner.

The first thing I do is read the log. A surprising number of them are smilies logged as "Needs Archived" in error. I don't even bother going to the cache page on those because invariably the error has been found and the log already reentered as "Found it".

For those that have text implying it's something more than "too many skeeters to be safe" I'll next look at the cache owner's profile. If he hasn't logged onto the site in about three months and there's a string of other negative logs I'll archive it. I do try to include in the archive log the fact that I'd be happy to unarchive it if the cache is replaced by the cache owner.

If safety or location (NPS, private property) is not an issue and the cache owner is active I'll leave it to him to deal with it.

It also gets a bit touchy if the cache is still there but in poor shape and the cache owner is inactive. Then I won't archive it but ask the next finder to remove it and e-mail me to archive it after he's done so. I'd hate to archive a cache and have that result in geolitter.

As to whether to post "Needs Archived" or just e-mail the owner off line, that's a hard one for me to answer for you. If it's someone who's still active and safety or other serious issues aren't a factor I'd just e-mail him, rather than risk publicly embarrasing him into maintaining his cache better. Other's may do it differently, especially if the cache owner hasn't responded to previous hints.

erik - geocaching.com admin

9.4k · October 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:
I've noticed no input on this from the approvers or TPTB.

You forgot about my thread already? Remember, it was the one where you posted 4 or 5 long replies IN A ROW???

Jeremy weighed in on page 1 a couple of times. Go back and reread it before bagging on TPTB.

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

3k · October 25, 2003

Never mind.

4.5k · October 25, 2003

To protect finders, permission should be gotten and posted on the cache page for placements on private property.

However, what do you think about caches placed in woods own privately but opened to the public? (no fee, just enter the area.) Should permission be required?

ALan

9.4k · October 25, 2003

If there is a land-use policy requiring permission, then yes, the hider should obtain permission. Ideally, they would post that permission on the cache page if it doesn't spoil the hunt. You see, some multicaches could be anywhere in a 100 square mile area that posting which park or recreation area it is in would give away too many details. This is why no one should remove a geocache without attempting to contact the cache owner first. They might have permission and you just don't know it.

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

2.1k · October 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Team GPSaxophone:

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:
I've noticed no input on this from the approvers or TPTB.

You forgot about http://ubbx.Groundspeak.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=5726007311&f=4016058331&m=34760079 already? Remember, it was the one where you posted 4 or 5 long replies IN A ROW???

Jeremy weighed in on page 1 a couple of times. Go back and reread it before bagging on TPTB.

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

Sticking up for TBTP...lol

Well i wasn't baggin on them. My comment was nothing against them. It was a statement as there was nothing here that anyone of them (admins - TBTP/Approvers) have responded here. I was just considering their input here would be nice. My above comments were not on the process of removing a cache (as the other thread was about), but in response as to whether someone should archive them or not. People stated "mind your own business, it's my cache". Do the admins think that is the correct way of dealing with it or not? Obviously not, as Erik weighed in on it.

Brian

www.woodsters.com

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

9.4k · October 25, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:
Sticking up for TBTP...lol

I don't get the humor in this statement

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

5.9k · October 25, 2003

quote:
SNIP
Having said that, I agree with Criminal, in that the cache owner should be contacted as a first step whenever possible.

That's the only step. If you don't like it, move on.

http://fp1.centurytel.net/Criminal_Page/

Are we the cache police?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation