Caches In Forests And E.l.f

June 25, 2004

While at work today I was presented with a question/rumor about caches located in forest lands. My friend was out with a buddy of his that does mapping and was informed that the E.L.F group is begining to make a deal about caches located on forest lands. Has anyone else heard anything on this? Or is it a bad rumor?

1.6k · June 25, 2004

Isn't ELF the people who are setting hummer dealerships in california on fire?

June 25, 2004

Yes. They are the group thats big on saving the world and enviroment, yet they set fires and polute the air . I understand where they are coming from if it's true, but I dont think we are destroying any lands.

1.6k · June 25, 2004

Oh wow, I'm an idiot...

you said ELF was "making a deal"

I thought you meant as in actually making a deal to allow or disallow caches (which they would have no authority over)

But in reality you were saying something to the extent of make a fuss...

I'm an idiot, and didn't read fast enough. But, anyway, what you heard is probably true, if the higher up ELF members have heard about geocaching, you better believe that they're pretty ticked off..

June 25, 2004

I guess the word "Deal" is not a good description to use. I should change that to E.L.F is upset about caches being left on forest lands.

38.2k · June 25, 2004

I don't think the USFS pays much attention to the wackos at ELF, other than trying to hunt them down and arrest them for some of their eco-terrorism.

If it does become an issue with ELF, then they will probably take things in their own hands and start stealing caches, but they aren't certainly aren't going to get the ear of government agencies.

Isn't ELF the people who are setting hummer dealerships in california on fire?

They also burned down the new ski lodge at Vail a few years ago, set fire to numerous lumberyards and firebombed a tree farm. Hmmm, makes sense. Set fire to a lumberyard in the name of saving trees, so they have to cut down more trees to replace them.

Yes. They are the group thats big on saving the world and enviroment,..

No they aren't. They are using terrorist type tactics to push their socialist agenda and bring us back into the stone age. Most environmental groups, even pretty radical ones like Earth First and Greenpeace want nothing to do with them.

Edited June 25, 2004 by briansnat

June 25, 2004

MAybe Santa should make them work harder on making better toys for the good boys and girls. Like a bio-degradeable ammo can that if left in the forest over a year will decompose.

June 25, 2004

I think the whole cache hating thing started when I mistakenly destroyed one of their cookie making factories by heaving an ammo box into the hollow tree.

22k · June 25, 2004

I formally declare no association with said wacko group. I am already a member with several other wacko groups and I really don’t have the time to join another.

June 25, 2004

If anything, cachers are taking more "trash" out than they are putting in. If a cache attracts ten people per month into a forest environment and one of them decides to pick up trash, the environment is already better off then when it started. The E.L.F. likes to make uninformed, quick judgements which, in the long-run, bring more destruction than aid.

June 25, 2004

I think the whole cache hating thing started when I mistakenly destroyed one of their cookie making factories by heaving an ammo box into the hollow tree.

Thanks I laughed so hard I have to go potty!!!

24.7k · June 25, 2004

Given the E.L.F. reputation I'd say their hating caches is good publicity.

1.8k · June 25, 2004

I think the whole cache hating thing started when I mistakenly destroyed one of their cookie making factories by heaving an ammo box into the hollow tree.

So, if we just turn you over to them, maybe they'll leave us cache in peace?

The world's full of inconsistencies: like those people who cut down trees and use lots of ink solvents to print non-pollution pamphlets.

9.4k · June 25, 2004

I think the whole cache hating thing started when I mistakenly destroyed one of their cookie making factories by heaving an ammo box into the hollow tree.

So, if we just turn you over to them, maybe they'll leave us cache in peace?

The world's full of inconsistencies: like those people who cut down trees and use lots of ink solvents to print non-pollution pamphlets.

Or the ones that put bumper stickers on their cars that say something like "stop pollution".

It's even better when it's on an older car (what they usually drive) since those pollute more as they wear out

1.4k · June 25, 2004

ELF is indeed a nasty bunch of hypocrites. If they oppose geocaching, it wouldn't surprise me if their actions expanded to torching Army navy stores and firebombing Garmin HQ to put the skids on geocaching supplies. As far as McToys go, ALF and PETA are already on the case. At this rate, future caches will consist of biodegradable paper containers filled with granola bars (honey free of course, can't be exploitin no bees).

The Hummer dealership fire put approximately 3 times the toxins into the air than those hummers would have expelled through their exhaust pipes in their lifetime.

Moral of the story...you don't have to be bright to be a whacko.

June 26, 2004

I think the whole cache hating thing started when I mistakenly destroyed one of their cookie making factories by heaving an ammo box into the hollow tree.

So, if we just turn you over to them, maybe they'll leave us cache in peace?

I believe there is a bounty on my head. It wouldn't have been quite so bad if I hadn't captured the survivors and exploited them as a trade item for Leprechauns hamster caches.

I also rented them out to plumbers for clearing blocked drain pipes till PETE ( People for the Ethical Treatment of Elves ) stepped in. Darn it, my profit margin was huge !!!

1.8k · June 26, 2004

I believe there is a bounty on my head. It wouldn't have been quite so bad if I hadn't captured the survivors and exploited them as a trade item for Leprechauns hamster caches.

I also rented them out to plumbers for clearing blocked drain pipes till PETE ( People for the Ethical Treatment of Elves ) stepped in. Darn it, my profit margin was huge !!!

I think we may be in danger, in this thread, of 0ff-topic closure. So, in an effort to reinstate the topic: It seems to me that Sierra Club and ELF, etc. are more a Western problem. Don't hear a lot here in Ohio. Occasional wetland issue which runs from ridiculous to good. Any horror stories?

6.4k · June 26, 2004

So, in an effort to reinstate the topic: It seems to me that Sierra Club and ELF, etc. are more a Western problem. Don't hear a lot here in Ohio. Occasional wetland issue which runs from ridiculous to good. Any horror stories?

Not sure if this is good or bad (hehehe), but the Sierra Club actually approves of and endorses responsibly placed geocaches.

June 26, 2004

You would think E.L.F. would have better and bigger things to tackle besides geocaching. I know I could think of several, more important issues endangering our enviroment than an ammo can filled with trinkets.

June 26, 2004

So, in an effort to reinstate the topic: It seems to me that Sierra Club and ELF, etc. are more a Western problem. Don't hear a lot here in Ohio. Occasional wetland issue which runs from ridiculous to good. Any horror stories?

Not sure if this is good or bad (hehehe), but the Sierra Club actually approves of and endorses responsibly placed geocaches.

I am not usually a big fan of the Sierra Club do to some bad experiences with two different groups so I had to check this out. Here is what I found and they actually link back to Geocaching.com

Sierra Club Cache Page

Edited June 26, 2004 by Cache Viking

1.2k · June 26, 2004

<snip> if the higher up ELF members have heard about geocaching <snip>

There are no higher-up ELF members. The elves are organized in parallel cells.

http://earthliberationfront.com/about/

June 26, 2004

The elves are organized in parallel cells.

sounds a lot like al Qaeda to me...

38.2k · June 26, 2004

The elves are organized in parallel cells.

sounds a lot like al Qaeda to me...

You aren't too far off base and its probably only a matter of time before they get involved in targeting human life, or at least, acting in total disregard for it.

2.2k · June 26, 2004

the trouble with people like this is that they don't target the big things or do stuff openly as they're cowards. why go for a big organisation when you can cause trouble for a group of people who respect the countryside. same with any of these terrorist groups. don't do anything constructive or go for the real villains, that's too hard and they might get hurt(poor little dears) much easier to mess with us.

1.2k · June 26, 2004

the trouble with people like this is that they don't target the big things or do stuff openly as they're cowards. why go for a big organisation when you can cause trouble for a group of people who respect the countryside. same with any of these terrorist groups. don't do anything constructive or go for the real villains, that's too hard and they might get hurt(poor little dears) much easier to mess with us.

Huh?

"Causing trouble for a group of people who respect the countryside", is that not just hearsay?

On the other hand, taking on the logging corporations or setting a Walmart on fire (which are things they do) - is that not "going for a big organization?

And is chaining themselves to trees not something they do in the open?

And since you lump them together with "any of these terrorist groups" - would you want those other terrorist groups to target something bigger than the Pentagon, next time?

Call them anything you like. Cowards they're not. they risk they're life, and they face the consequences. Some of them got killed. None of them have killed.

Cowardice is the targeting of civilians from a great safe distance, on orders of a president who acts as if he is beyond the rule of national (and beyond the reach of international) law.

What gratuitous nonsense, nobby.nobbs!

1.8k · June 26, 2004

You aren't too far off base and its probably only a matter of time before they get involved in targeting human life, or at least, acting in total disregard for it.

If I read their page correctly, no one is responsible to anyone, each determines his own actions...so, therefore, no person or council determines the correctness of anyone's actions, and no person or council sets consequences...anarchy, funded privately? Or are funds solicited and dispelled? What if someone acts on wrong information?

38.2k · June 26, 2004

Cowardice is the targeting of civilians from a great safe distance, on orders of a president who acts as if he is beyond the rule of national (and beyond the reach of international) law.

Yeah, that would be cowardice, but that coward is now sitting in jail awaiting trial by the very civilians he targeted.

Edited June 26, 2004 by briansnat

June 26, 2004

ELF already acts with disregard to human safety. The accepted practice of "spiking" trees creates a danger to those whose job it is to clear them. The practice of burning whatever displeases them puts the lives of fireman and other rescue workers at risk.

Though I detest urban sprawl and a Wal-Mart in every town, I see no real purpose to this "organization". The way they are set up, they ARE terrorists, striking blindly at random targets, issuing anonymous press releases, and if someone gets hurt by their actions, the injured are so much "collateral damage" to ELF.

In my own area, ELF has spiked trees, burnt a crane and a National Forest research lab. The lab had years of invaluable forestry records that provided data for preserving the very resources ELF claims to want to protect.

Yep, they seem to be a bunch of real brainiacs to me.

2k · June 26, 2004

2.7k · June 26, 2004

Being a volunteer with the USFS we have been instructed to just log any encounters with any member of E.L.F. And report it to the authorites who's job is law enforcement. I personally would like to just stay away from them and just

enjoy a day in the hills.

June 26, 2004

For more information on the various domestic terrorist groups like ELF and the sierra club, go to:

http://www.activistcash.com

1.8k · June 26, 2004

For more information on the various domestic terrorist groups like ELF and the sierra club, go to:

http://www.activistcash.com

thanks for that.

June 27, 2004

Isn't ELF the people who are setting hummer dealerships in california on fire?

I remember that I have a picture of one of the burned out H2s and I think it pretty funny.

June 27, 2004

I don't think we shoud confuse the Sierra Club with ELF (formerly Earth First!), since to oppose the former could cause us some REAL problems. Personally, I'm glad that the SC likes this activity--this endorsement could be all we need to get the ban lifted in NRA's. OTOH, ELF is an force to be taken seriously. They have been networking with other groups recently, such as the ALF, and have been responsible for acts of violence, including the burning down of a BLM wild horse and burro facility within the last couple of years. I'm all for reasonable efforts to preserve the environment, but,IMO, these ppl have been duped into doing the dirty work of some other *political* group, and are too emotionally involved to see the obvious. If anyone has any evidence that they are going to sabotage our caches, please make it known. Hopefully this was just a rumor.

2.2k · June 27, 2004

no i don't think that burning down walmart stores is taking on big companies. when they stand up for what they believe in without resorting to violence or threats that endanger others then i'll think differently.

they are cowards otherwise why be the anonymous bully? if you need to resort to violence you've lost the argument which is a shame because lots of these organisations are actually arguing for things that other people would agree with.

protecting the forests, looking after the animals and so on. i agree with this and would be willing to stand up for my beliefs but not by putting other peoples life in danger. trying to get what you want in a democracy via violence=terrorist.

1.2k · June 27, 2004

no i don't think that burning down walmart stores is taking on big companies. when they stand up for what they believe in without resorting to violence or threats that endanger others then i'll think differently.

they are cowards otherwise why be the anonymous bully? if you need to resort to violence you've lost the argument which is a shame because lots of these organisations are actually arguing for things that other people would agree with.

protecting the forests, looking after the animals and so on. i agree with this and would be willing to stand up for my beliefs but not by putting other peoples life in danger. trying to get what you want in a democracy via violence=terrorist.

Fair enough. Then let me hear you speak out here against the people here who lump them together with the Sierra Club.

I agree with you in principle that when you resort to violence, you lost the debate. But this only applies when there is a debate in the first place. In a situation where corporations wield huge financial power and use it for backing candidates of both parties that are sympathetic to their interests, then a debate which reflects the variety of feelings of the population never takes place, and democratic process is just a sham. Ever wondered why so many people don't bother to vote in this country?

Anyway, when David hides his identity in order not be crushed by Goliath, this does not make him a coward, quite the contrary.

The rest of what you say in your last message is perfectly reasonable. Maybe our positions aren't all that much apart. Perhaps I picked on your message rather than on someone else's because it just appeared to be the culmination of the mob action going on here. I read that people in this forum delegitimize a perfectly democratic and non-violent organization such as the SC, and label it a terrorist organization. If this reflects mainsteam opinion, then I am not surprised that some genuinely concerned and otherwise peaceful people will give up on fair democratic debate and cross the line.

If that's what you want to achieve, then argue with those who take away your liberties and make democratic process impossible, not with me. You have my full support.

Edited June 27, 2004 by Shunra

38.2k · June 27, 2004

Anyway, when David hides his identity in order not be crushed by Goliath, this does not make him a coward, quite the contrary.

If they believed what they were doing was right, they should be proud if it and not hide in the shadows. When the founding fathers here had their little revolt against the English crown they proudly signed their names to a certain document fulling knowing there was a good chance it would lead to a hangman's noose.

These people are little different from the cowards who chop off the heads of innocent people while wearing masks and those KKK morons who terrorized people while wearing hoods. If they are so darn proud of what they are doing, let the world see who they are.

1.2k · June 27, 2004

Anyway, when David hides his identity in order not be crushed by Goliath, this does not make him a coward, quite the contrary.

If they believed what they were doing was right, they should be proud if it and not hide in the shadows. When the founding fathers here had their little revolt against the English crown they proudly signed their names to a certain document fulling knowing there was a good chance it would lead to a hangman's noose.

Good point. But then the Amierican insurrectionists only did that when they had the support of a critical mass, and when the war had been underway for more than a year. Moreover, all their public communications and discussions were done by using aliases such as 'the farmer', or other names borrowed from antiquity. Their agents in Britain, actively involved in sabotage work, sure didn't leave signatures either. Thinking of it: would you want the identity of CIA agents to be revealed?

The activists who threw the tea into the sea in Boston (which is the exact equivalent of ELF activities) not only concealed their identities (which made perfect sense), they also dressed up as like Indians, in order to make someone else pay the price. Do we have common ground here that that was a cowardly act?

Anyway, while I'm not reneging on my secondary point about alleged cowardice, I would rather that the focus stayed on my main point, which is that when you lump organizations like the ELF together with non-violent democratic organizations like the Sierra Club who still haven't given up on democratic process in the US, you're undermining that very democratic process, which will lead to consequences.

And here, the comparison with the founding fathers is apt.

Daniel

1.2k · June 27, 2004

BTW, Briansnat, shoud we in your opinion ban our forum aliases, too?

2.2k · June 28, 2004

i can only comment on what i'm reading here as i'm in england and don't know the full details of what these groups get up to. however, throwing tea into a river does not threaten peoples lives. setting buildings on fire and spiking trees does. it also tends to make reasonable people turn against the organisation so they're never going to get popular support.

i do understand that it's very difficult if not impossible to deal with the influence that money can and does buy. i still can't agree to the acts of violence though. the people they have an argument with are the managing directors not the lumberjacks or firemen and so on.

getting things changed takes a long time and sacrifice. this also gets support from the public but it involves standing up for what you believe and arguing your case. not trying to scare people into doing what you want. easier said than done i know.

1.2k · June 28, 2004

i can only comment on what i'm reading here as i'm in england and don't know the full details of what these groups get up to.

Your countrymen were trying to tax them. The pesky uppity colonials didn't like it. They would agree to be taxed by their own institutions for purpose on which they would decide by themselves. But they wouldn't agree to be taxed, just in order to fill the holes in the budget of an irresponsible spendthrifty British aristocracy. Some of them would even agree to be taxed by the Brits, in return for representation in parliament and a say in the allocation of the funds. Now THAT was something the Brits would obviously not accept, because that would create a dangerous precedent, for middle- and lower-class Brits were sympathizing with the colonials and demanding to be represented as well. The Brits decided to crack down rather than to be reasonable, and the result was that those colonials had to chose whether they had the critical mass to resist, or not. Some of them made the gamble, and won. The result is American independence.

Others decided to play it safe. The result is Canadian independence.

What was the question again? :mad:

however, throwing tea into a river does not threaten peoples lives. setting buildings on fire and spiking trees does.

So if throwing tea into the bay justified masks, the activities of the ELF certainly do!

BTW, spiking tree only threatens people's lives if they insist on cutting them down anyway. In American parlance, this is currently referred to as a preemptive strike, and generally considered legitimate among Americans.

it also tends to make reasonable people turn against the organisation so they're never going to get popular support.

Maybe they should hire you as a consultant. Personally, I agree with you. In their opinion, they probably figure that their successes will gain them respect and legitmacy. They're taking a gamble too.

i do understand that it's very difficult if not impossible to deal with the influence that money can and does buy. i still can't agree to the acts of violence though. the people they have an argument with are the managing directors not the lumberjacks or firemen and so on.
getting things changed takes a long time and sacrifice. this also gets support from the public but it involves standing up for what you believe and arguing your case. not trying to scare people into doing what you want. easier said than done i know.

That's pretty much what I personally think as well. I'm against violence of any sort. I've lived for 16 years in Palestine, and I know what violence does. But being against it doesn't mean I don't understand it, or that I don't understand what moves people to commiting acts of desperation.

If you cut off peaceful course of action, whichever way you do it, even by merely suggesting that it is illegitimate as some people (I belive including you) have done on this forum, frustration and violence will be the result.

38.2k · June 28, 2004

BTW, Briansnat, shoud we in your opinion ban our forum aliases, too?

If you were using them to hide behind while doing something illegal, or immoral, sure. Most of us aren't though and we even include photos of ourselves along with where we live in our profiles.

Caches In Forests And E.l.f

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

Join the conversation