Peak Register vs. GeoCache

March 24, 2002

I was over at the wilderness website today to see if the infamous "Lance" had returned, or if anyone had responded to my post (I'm Bud). Neither...

http://www.wilderness.net/forum/OpenThread.cfm?forum=1&ThreadID=99

Tomas Watson asked a very interesting question, though. Paraphrasing -- "How is a geocache any different than a peak register?" I'm not a climber, but I am guessing that a peak register is signed at the top of a mountain much like a trail register at the bottom (?).

The reason I bring this up is I believe this is something we can mention when we are discussing geocaches with park personnel. Caches are very much like registers and registers are something they understand. Comparing the two gives them something to wrap their minds around.

Thoughts

[This message was edited by geospotter on March 24, 2002 at 06:34 AM.]

March 24, 2002

It seems reasonable, but I think I heard some stuff here in the forums that some peak registers were being removed as well. I don't have any first hand knowlege of this, Texas is too flat!

If this is true, it might not be the best comparison.

Just a thought.

Scott / Brokenwing

http://www.cordianet.com/geocaching

March 24, 2002

dadgum! I hate it when people post without doing a forum search first!

Sorry, I see that this has already been discussed.

http://opentopic.Groundspeak.com/0/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1750973553&f=3000917383&m=8890922483

geospotter

3.5k · March 24, 2002

Why do you hate it? I always learn something new each time a topic returns.

I would truely like to see register type caches (logbook only) in certain areas where it is not proper to leave a 'tupperware garage sale on a hill'. I always loved peak registers. You don't see them too often anymore.

March 24, 2002

Summit registers are becoming a thing of the past...but I'm not sure who is responsible. I have placed small caches containing only a logbook and pencil on 4 peaks in my area. Of the four, only one HAD a registry and when I placed the cache it was no longer there. Since then, my cache has been reported missing as well on that peak.

Whether this is the act of a die-hard nature enthusiast or an official act of the Forest Service, I'm not sure. I only know of one registry still in existence in my area, and I won't name it here because I hope it stays there for a very long time. I logged it for the first time 10 years ago and there were entries in it that dated back to the 40's and 50's. It's a peice of history that should stay there!

I guess what we need to find out is the official stance that the Forest Service is taking on this. If they are the ones removing them from the peaks, then of course the argument suggested won't hold much weight.

Tyler Slack's Geocaching in Utah

March 24, 2002

I second EraSeek:

quote:
I would truely like to see register type caches (logbook only) in certain areas where it is not proper to leave a 'tupperware garage sale on a hill'. I always loved peak registers. You don't see them too often anymore.

My guess is that peak registers continue to be popular in areas where hiking clubs abound. For some club members, signing the register is a motivating factor in making it to the top.

Perhaps drawing a comparison between peak registers and geocaches is indeed a concept the NPS would be able to grasp....

24.7k · March 24, 2002

I third the motion. Kill old topics and bring them back again. Keep the forums moving.

March 25, 2002

Just my two cents. I wouldnt go comparing geocaching with any aspects of rock climbing when it comes to the authorities. Unfortunately, climbers get even worse press than geocachers. Every land manager seems to think that we go up to rock faces with tools and drill out rock, placing bolts all over the place. In reality, most new climbers dont do anything like that. With cams and chock blocks, very little damage is done to crags anymore (unless setting a permanent route) My point is that trying to sell geocaching by suggesting that we only want the same privilages as climbers could easily backfire, based on our long standing reputation.

But that is just my opinion

March 25, 2002

I'd have to second the recommendation to not associate geocaching with climbing when dealing with land managers. We historically have a bad rep, and still have a minority of morons who seem to make it their mission in life to reinforce it.

As a group, we like to complain about land managers and pat ourselves on the back as an environmentally sensitive group, but I can trace most high profile access issues back to the reckless acts of a few climbers.

As long as I'm complaining - Cranky Joe's suggestions for young climbers (Off Topic):

#1 - Leave the chalk indoors. It leaves a mess, builds up and makes holds slicker, leaves 'beta' for the climbers that follow, and is largely a placebo. Wrist bands, a wipe cloth, and a little antiperspirant work better - and it is possible to climb 5.12 with neither.

#2 - Before you bolt it, top rope it with friends and make sure it is a 5 star classic. The world does not need another mediocre clip-n-go route.

#3 - Even if it is a 5 star classic, think twice before you rap bolt it. You could always top rope it with slack or solo it if you need the extra thrill. Bolts scar the rock and take away some of the challenge of route finding.

#4 - If you just *have* to bolt the thing, try to conceal your placements, use camflauged hangers, and bolt to last. Hiding the placements and using hard to see hangers makes the route more challenging and less visibly offensive to non climbers. Bolting to last just makes sense, why drill a hole and drop in a junker? Put in a bomber stainless 1/2" in good rock and use the same bolts when you climb it with your grandkids.

(For the record, I've placed some junkers by hand, on lead. In hindsight, I wish I'd rapped after the first ascent and put in something more durable and bomber)

Now, on topic I've notice summit logs vanishing, but none of the rangers I've asked know about anything systematic or official.

-jjf

March 25, 2002