Cache up a tree...

5.9k · April 17, 2003

OK, here's the poop. A couple local cachers have placed a cache up in a tree, about 25'. The tree in question has plenty of branches for holding on to, and I (at 39 years old) had no problem getting to it. It was strenuous and tiring. It was not unsafe. This is the cache, you can read my log entries. The cacher asking it be archived is one of the local cachers that I admire, so you can see the problem this creates.

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

April 17, 2003

I vote in November, but not on the forums.

I agree with criminal. We are still a free country. If you think you cannot handle it, then don't try it.

The ratings were fine, as I would probably get this cache in half the time than criminal . I had to do that to you....

I'm game for even more difficult ones, even though I have not encountered any.

It's like this: If you're scared, than say you're scared. Heck, an old man by the username I will not discuss (criminal) even bagged this one. HUH? Great find criminal!!

1.4k · April 17, 2003

No reason to archive a cache because not everyone can get to it. That is the point of the dang rating system. If this were the case all the caches that involve the use of scuba or climbing/repelling gear would need to be archived. If you can't do it fine, don't tell anyone else they can't go climb a tree.

---Real men cache in shorts.

1k · April 17, 2003

I voted to leave it the way it is. I would also suggest that each person who posted a log to the cache page remove all references (and the photo) that give away the location. I don't understand why experienced cachers would include such blatant spoilers.

I think that particular information was intended by the hider to be kept secret unless one chooses to decrypt the hint.

Worldtraveler

April 17, 2003

Leave it!!! It's properly rated. The guy who wants it archived should learn the rating system and only do the ones he's comfortable doing and leave the more difficult ones to those of us who enjoy the tough ones. His way of thinking really bugs me. Just because he's uncomfortable with it, nobody else should be? Geez these people...

April 17, 2003

One odd thing I noticed when looking at the profile of the cache hiders...

...if they're moving to Hawaii, just how are they going to maintain this cache?

George

3.5k · April 17, 2003

quote:
The cacher asking it be archived is one of the local cachers that I admire, so you can see the problem this creates.

I'm glad to hear you say this, it gives us some perspective, especially coming from you (and yes, I mean that in a good way). The first thing I did when I read the original post was to check the cacher's profile page (oh how I wish that was easier to do!). I could see that this wasn't just some casual cacher complaining about a 1/1 he couldn't get to.

Having said that, I vote to keep it. But, I have to wonder if there's something he saw at the cache that others haven't, or something from his own experience that bothered him. Hard to tell from this far away.

Bret

"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field.

When a man found it, he hid it again." Mt. 13:44

April 17, 2003

I've got one of those: Wired! v2.0 and as long as the fair warning is there, such caches are perfectly fine.

The usual rule of thumb applies here: if you don't like them or can't do them, then don't do them.

April 17, 2003

I am in the area of the cache, and I might want to try it, when I get to the tree, I'll decide then whether or not I'm up for it. The terrain rating is 4 stars, sounds like it's a 4 star. If it's more dangerous than it looks (like the tree is coated with grease higher up) that might be a problem, but if the risk involved is easy to assess from the ground, what's the problem? I voted 'leave it the way it is'.

_________________________________________________________

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

2.8k · April 17, 2003

I am not even going to look at the cache page.

Keep It!!

There have been at least two (Tree Hugger and Tree Hugger II) here in the PDX area of Portland. There was some discussion of whether it was appropriate - especially since part of the challenge was for each cacher to move the cache higher! (I was first finder both times - whew!).

There were a few logs along the lines of got to the cache site, saw where it was and went home. Nobody said every cache is for everyone. I think this one even had the blessing of the local park supervisor.

1.2k · April 17, 2003

I have to agree with Criminal, and vehemently disagree with those that advocate this cache be archived. It sounds great to me, and if I was closer I'd hit it the first chance I got. Upon arrival at the site of the cache I'd make a judgement as to whether my fat butt could make it up the tree, and if not, then I would go hunt an easier one. That's the gist of it folks. I would not try to get the cache archived just because I couldn't get to it, I wouldn't even THINK of that. That's why this kind of thinking just goes right over my head I guess. In my business I'm responsible many time for people's safety, but I certainly can't be everywhere at all times. Therefore, each person has to use some good old common sense ( and yes, I'm aware that it's not all that common..lol) and judge each situation as to whether you're own capabilities are up to the cache. Easy as pie.

Sigh, I used to SCUBA as well, but lost all my gear in my last divorce, so now I can't go get those SCUBA caches.... oh well.

"Trade up, trade even, or don't trade!!!" My philosophy of life.

5.3k · April 17, 2003

I also voted to leave it. Not all caches should be easy. That is why there is a system to rate them.

I have had people complain about two of mine because they could not find them. One person photorgraphed one. ANother person where one could be found, They felt they were to hard, so I deleted the post.

April 17, 2003

We have a similar treed cache near here...I had a nice chuckle when I read the logs. One cacher wrote, "Had a great hike, went home to get a ladder, and hiked again."

This cache was quite a hike indeed, I believe at least a mile from the parking area with a steep downhill and then a steep uphill climb. I can't imagine carrying a ladder that whole way! Pictures of the area

Anyhoo, as our hero returned to the cache, he ran into another group of cachers who described him as, "by far the most prepared cacher I have had the pleasure of meeting." Is that the understatement of the year or what?! What a riot!

It's true!

So the moral of the story is: schlep a ladder out if you want the cache that bad. No need to ruin it for everyone else.

April 17, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by nincehelser:
One odd thing I noticed when looking at the profile of the cache hiders...

...if they're moving to Hawaii, just how are they going to maintain this cache?

George

Leave it. I'll look after it for them...

Just remember. Getting there is half the fun...

3.5k · April 17, 2003

lol, here's an idea for you, Criminal.

Since it sounds as though you like this cacher, hold an impromptu "Cacher in the Tree" event cache. Get plenty of the other locals together, harness the guy and get in up and down the tree. Could be fun.

By the way, we also have a similar cache here in the flatlands of Illinois. I don't think it's nearly as high, but the tree is similar looking. I had the pleasure of being the first finder and it was my first solo cache.

Oh, it was also on my 13th wedding anniversary. Yeaah, I was feelin' lucky that day!

Bret

"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field.

When a man found it, he hid it again." Mt. 13:44

April 17, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Criminal:
OK, here's the poop. A couple local cachers have placed a cache up in a tree, about 25'. The tree in question has plenty of branches for holding on to, and I (at 39 years old) had no problem getting to it. It _was_ strenuous and tiring

Glad to see you searching for your 'roots'. Find any bananas? Speaking of which, where's that Toe guy? Must have seen his shadow.

1.8k · April 17, 2003

I went to get this cache, and found it, but there's no way I was going up that tree. I certainly think it's possible, and I'd give myself an 80% chance of making it up there without falling, but that 20% would hurt too much.

It's a good cache; I'd keep it. I also don't plan on going back to get it without some type of special equipment (like an extension ladder, if I can figure out how to get it through all the branches).

WWJD? JW RTFM.

April 18, 2003

Had to happen sooner or later, i guess, so i agree with criminal that this shouldn't be archived.

(by the way, here is portland's version of this one.)

The problem with putting difficult caches in urban areas such as these is that people will actually look for them without being prepared for what the little rating stars actually mean. I've done some 2/2 caches in more rural areas that, i'm sure, are much scarier than the cache in question. Of course, the amount of people looking for them is much smaller.

In fact, the only serious injury i've ever incurred while geocaching was with a1.5/1.5 cache. Of course, it was out in the middle of nowhere.

My point is as follows: If this cache were in, say, Plush, OR, then the people that would normally try to find it wouldn't have a problem with it. But because it's in suburban Tacoma, you're bound to get the folks that are hesitant in attempting it.

April 18, 2003

I recently attempted a multi that had an interesting placement for one of the stages. The hider had tied the container (a small thermos) to a length of rope then tossed the rope over a branch of a tree that was pretty high up. He then pulled the rope until the container was nearly as high in the air as the tree branch and simply tied the rope to a lower portion of the tree. This type of technique may be useful in resolving this situation. TO make it more difficult to find you could use fishing line.

April 18, 2003

I read the question,but not the replies.

I voted to leave it as is.If the hazards

are not intentionally hidden then I say

we each draw our own line to how much

sanity/'intestinal fortitude' we have.

Seatrout

April 18, 2003

I voted other because I think its rating gives you a clue in the difficulty. I checked out the clue and had to smile. I would probably go to this one just to see it! My concern is with a few criticisms about one of the cachers posting it as a find even though they didn’t actually climb the tree. Being an individual sport/hobby I believe that decision was theirs to make. Not ours to arm chair quarterback. That should be between him and the owner of the cache. BTW, he has now changed it to a not found.

April 18, 2003

That is what the rating sysytem is for.Leave it for the dedicated.It might be wise to specify though in your hint that you may need to bring you spiked climbing shoes.

1.6k · April 18, 2003

Okay, I'm gonna out myself. Some of us aren't into the hike, I can walk around the block to get exercise. Not into it for the scenery, here in the Lowcountry of SC, your view is about 100' of forest, no sweeping vistas, etc. unless you're on the beach. It certainly isn't just to be outdoors, unless you like the slight burning feel of DEET.

No, call me silly if you will, but it's adventure. Caches-under-a-bush don't really turn me on, they're only another increment in my find count and one more off my nearest list. It's the when the fedora comes out that I really start to enjoy caching. Using mind and body to recover the "treasure," that's what I like about caching.

Take that away and, quite frankly, the GPS would probably start gathering dust.

CR

2.9k · April 18, 2003

That would not be a good cache for BIG people.

There is a cache simular, in that you scoot your butt up an angled downed tree to about 10 feet off the ground, then stand up on that, then grab the black cache box.

Butt Scootin' Boogy GC120B (it is now archived)

April 18, 2003

I voted leave it. Nobody has been given any guarantee to be able to find every cache. Some caches are physically challenging, others mentally challenging, and some are easy. The are no upper limits to how much effort reaching a simple logbook should take, other than those limits we each impose on ourselves. If the cache surpasses your own personal limits, then don't go for that cache, plain and simple ... and don't whine and moan about it either.

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

"We never seek things for themselves -- what we seek is the very seeking of things."

Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)

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

20.7k · April 18, 2003

It looks fine to me. We should all know our limits. If I am not capable of safely making the find, I'll skip it (Or I'll make the attempt and die, but it's still my decision.)

On a side note, I can't wait to make my second attempt at GEO's Wired! v2.0.

April 18, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by sbell111:
If I am not capable of safely making the find, I'll skip it (Or I'll make the attempt and die, but it's still my decision.)

Same here! This cache looks great! There are some underwater caches that Tracy and I will never attempt- no scuba training. It is up to every cacher to know her/his limit and live within it.

April 18, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Team Tecmage (R&T):

quote:
Originally posted by sbell111:
If I am not capable of safely making the find, I'll skip it (Or I'll make the attempt and die, but it's still my decision.)

Same here! This cache looks great! There are some underwater caches that Tracy and I will never attempt- no scuba training. It is up to every cacher to know her/his limit and live within it.

As a "Neocacher" I have to agree that this should stay. We won't try for caches we don't feel capable of acquiring, whether underwater, in the air or wherever. If we hike to a location and don't feel like climbing a tree to get the cache, we had a nice hike anyway! That's a major reason why we're getting involved in this activity - it gives us a motivation for going to places where we've never been and seeing some new sights. That said, I've only chickened out on one tree climb in my entire arboreal life (that was more than 30 years ago!), so I'd probably at least try to get my ancient bones up there. If I don't make it, it is certainly not the fault of the cacher!

MiTuCats

"Roads? Where we're going we don't need .... roads" --Dr. Emmett L. Brown

4.8k · April 18, 2003

I probably wouldn't try this cache because my small size makes it hard for me to climb trees. But that doesn't mean others shouldn't have a shot at it. I say leave it.

April 18, 2003

Maybe a 'solution' to the problems of SCUBA, Tree Caches, and others that some of us will pass on (Even Virtuals and Locationless) is a way to 'Personally Archive' them.

Add to option to "Log a Find" etc, the option to "Archive" or maybe "Hide" the cache so it does not show up on the radar screen??

20.7k · April 18, 2003

The ability to hide (or ignore) caches has been requested fairly often.

April 18, 2003

I vote for the ability of a personally

ignore flag on those caches you do not

intend on finding(to keep them off of

your caches pending list).

Seatrout

2.7k · April 18, 2003

I voted leave it as it is. I personally probably will not attempt this cache. It might be safe to somebody who's confident of their tree climbing/balance skills, but I know my limits and will leave this one be. I might go by it and take a look at it out of curiousity. I think I responded to an email listserve on this and I suggested that hte rating to go to 4.5.

April 19, 2003

I live in the city the cache is placed in. Personally, I think it should be left as is. I will be attempting to find it the first chance I get. There is a 50/50 chance I will log it as a find, or be in traction for the next 6 months.

April 19, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by SeaTrout:
I vote for the ability of a personally

ignore flag on those caches you do not

intend on finding(to keep them off of

your caches pending list).

Seatrout

Great idea, there are some caches near me that I have no intention of ever hunting.

_________________________________________________________

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

24.7k · April 19, 2003

That's how geo wars get started. A cache in a tree is fine. Some people climb them. Some dont. I won't do a scuba cache. Nor will I wallow in mud, or dig in a pig poke to find one.

We all have limits. Just because one person found theirs (and had enough brains to NOT exceed them) and didn't like it is no reason to archive a cache.

=====================

Wherever you go there you are.

April 19, 2003

Just found a similar cache this weekend. Clinging to a branch 25 feet in the air while programming the coordinates to the next stage into my Vista. I'm in my forties - last time I climbed a tree was 20+ years ago. This was the most fun I had all day. Archive this cache? Don't you dare!!! If you can't do it, bring along someone who can and share the fun.

There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary numbers, and those who don't.

April 20, 2003

Did Kenny's tree today. It was fun and fairly easy. Hope it stays around for a long time!

5.9k · April 21, 2003

Zingerhead hit that nail squarely on the head. Bring someone with you that can climb the tree!

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

April 21, 2003

I'd leave it (and encourage others like it). It's up to each seeker whether to hunt the cache.

There's some I just wouldn't go after (although I wouldn't have trouble with the tree), but I wouldn't want to stop anyone daring (or ingenious) enough to place a cache like this.

There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home. - Ken Olsen, President, Digital Equipment, 1977

1.7k · April 22, 2003

Tomorrow I will be 78 and never got that old by making a lot of mistakes. I voted to leave the cache as is. I don't have to find them all. There are some caches I just don't do. I am sure I could climb the tree. I climb towers for my amateur radio antennas but wear a safety belt. Dick, W7WT Bremerton, Wa.

5.9k · April 22, 2003

Dick, for some reason climbing a tower (w/o safety equip) would be scarier to me than climbing a tree. Not sure why, may be the metal.

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

April 23, 2003

The cache page indicated that this tree is in a park. I can see it now! . . . someone will fall out of the tree, hurt themselves and then try to sue the state or city. Then the media will pick up on the story and geocaching will get bad publicity. The tree huggers will come out and claim that geocachers are damaging the trees, and on, and on . . . .

RandMan

April 25, 2003

i dont see why everyone is so concerned with caches in trees. someone could be searching for a ground level cache and very well slip on a slug on a rock hit your head and require an air evac, then sue the city or state to cover the cost of the evac. evironmentalist will protest because you squished the last of an endangered slug, the paint on the cache container contained heavy metals that leached into the nearby stream. then the media picks up on it and geocachers are painted as a group of careless litterbugs that ignore the "stay on trail" signs... geocaching should be about the adventure, fun. know your limit and don't fall out of a tree and ruin it for everyone else.

2k · April 25, 2003

There is a similar cache in my area, though not quite so high up. When my caching partner and I found it I being older and lighter climbed the tree and retrieved the cache. It was fun. I was unable to trade since I was hanging on to the branches to tight. There is not way I would archive this cache. Everyone has to decide for themselves if they want to go after the more difficult caches.

April 29, 2003

I placed a cache in a tree also. About

20ft up. I simply attached it to a rope

and then the rope was slung over a high

branch with the anchor end coming down the

tree. Now all anyone has to do is spot cache

and slowly allow pulley rope to lower the cache

down.

Many trekers have found it ,lowered it and

raised it back up without a problem.

My two cents worth,

psyopwak

April 29, 2003

We have a couple around here that are attached to a fishing line strung over a branch and tied down on a couple of screws in the tree. You really have to look for the container, which is a camo painted 18oz peanut butter jar snugged up in the branches. You can't see the fishing line unless you are really close to it.

Cache up a tree...

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

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