Is Graffiti Acceptable?

February 16, 2005

I took my son looking for a multi stage cache tonight and was suprised by where we found the first stage. It was coordinates and www.geocaching.org written in black marker on a dock in a park. Second stage... written on a boardwalk. Is this a normal and accepted way of doing this? Personally I see it as nothing more than graffiti.

21.9k · February 16, 2005

Simple answer: hiders shouldn't do that.

From the newly-updated Geocache Listing Requirements/Guidelines under the "Off Limit" section:

Caches may be quickly archived if we see the following (which is not inclusive):

Caches on land maintained by the U.S. National Park Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges)

Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate.

Caches that deface public or private property, whether a natural or man-made object, in order to provide a clue or a logging method.

Caches placed on archaeological or historical sites. In most cases these areas are highly sensitive to the extra traffic that would be caused by vehicles and humans.

Caches hidden in close proximity to active railroad tracks. In general we use a distance of 150 ft but your local area’s trespassing laws may be different. All local laws apply.

Caches near or on military installations.

Caches near or under public structures deemed potential or possible targets for terrorist attacks. These include but are not limited to highway bridges, dams, government buildings, elementary and secondary schools, and airports.

February 16, 2005

Gotta agree with Keystone Approver (and not just because he approves my caches!) <G>

I have one multi cache where I use metal tags with the coordinates for the next stage stamped into the metal. They're nailed to, well, let's just say they're not nailed to anything living (don't want to give any of the fun away!). I got permission from the Park Manager specifically to do this. I told him exactly what I was doing and where I was doing it. The tags are discreet and unobtrusive. When they're removed there will be two small nail holes per tag in spots where nobody will see them.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...4f-a4c3497e16cc

9.4k · February 16, 2005

I personally find it offensive - especially when they mark this web site in permanent marker. :mad:

February 16, 2005

I personally find it offensive - especially when they mark this web site in permanent marker.

we have a bad enough time with the public thinking we bury treasure, now we go prancing around with a gps defacing property.

just a bad idea all around.

6.5k · February 16, 2005

Is this a normal and accepted way of doing this?

No it is NOT normal, and no its not acceptable. It is even prohibited, see Keystone's post.

February 16, 2005

Exactly the kind of activity that I wrote about in a post today in the Northwest forum. (Some) people doing what they think they can get away with.. Shame, shame!! Doesn't seem to put this sport in a good light for positive expansion of the sport. Now, the website has a bad name.. I don't know where this location is, but maybe some members should go out and try to clean it up as much as possible. Better yet, the guy who put it there.

3.3k · February 16, 2005

So which approver is going to archive this cache for violating the rules? It's too bad that no one has ever said anything sooner about this cache.

February 16, 2005

I don't mind it, because usually its very discreet. I've found four or five caches that incorporate this method.

February 16, 2005

In general i like graffiti when its artistic or has a good message. Just writing some coordinates on a boardwalk isnt either. they should think of a better way to hide their multis.

38.2k · February 16, 2005

Its generally a bad idea because its doesn't look good for us, sets a bad precedent and is against the site's guidelines. That being said, a small set of coordinates discreetly written with a sharpie out of the sight of passersby is hardly same as spray painting Jeremy '05 on the side of a bridge.

Edited February 16, 2005 by briansnat

1.6k · February 16, 2005

We've done caches where the co-ords were just one more thing written on a bench. Usually one of the cleaner things too.

Wulf

February 16, 2005

So which approver is going to archive this cache for violating the rules? It's too bad that no one has ever said anything sooner about this cache.

It's hard to know sometimes when approving caches. The page could simply state the coordinates to "stage two" without the mention of a container or their location. I don't find the approver at fault at all, they have a hard job to do.

when you archive a cache you try to go back and retrive the contents to avoid littering. in this case it would be hard to remove the coordinates without use of sandpaper (if it is permenant marker) and that would just be a bigger mark on geocaching.

one of those darned if you do, darned if you don't kind of things

3.9k · February 16, 2005

I've seen a few done with srap paint. One was inside a drainage pipe the other was underneath an over pass. They both only listed coordinates and didn't mention GC at all.

In both cases I don't see a problem. Neither were in view of the public...as a matter of fact they would take going to a place that is very unlikely that the general public would go to.

El Diablo

February 16, 2005

Such a bad idea on so many levels. Defacing public or private property. There are so many ways to play the game that there is no need to deface anyone's property.

3.8k · February 16, 2005

...hardly same as spray painting Jeremy '05 on the side of a bridge.

What have you got against Jeremy? :mad:

5.8k · February 16, 2005

I guess my idea of carving the coordinates into a freshly laid sidewalk is out the window. It's a good thing I wasn't really gonna do it

2.3k · February 16, 2005

I've seen a few done with srap paint. One was inside a drainage pipe the other was underneath an over pass. They both only listed coordinates and didn't mention GC at all.

In both cases I don't see a problem. Neither were in view of the public...as a matter of fact they would take going to a place that is very unlikely that the general public would go to.

El Diablo

The problem is that NOW it is against the guidelines.

Caches may be quickly archived if we see the following (which is not inclusive):

Caches on land maintained by the U.S. National Park Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges)

Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate.

Caches that deface public or private property, whether a natural or man-made object, in order to provide a clue or a logging method. Caches placed on archaeological or historical sites. In most cases these areas are highly sensitive to the extra traffic that would be caused by vehicles and humans.

Caches hidden in close proximity to active railroad tracks. In general we use a distance of 150 ft but your local area’s trespassing laws may be different. All local laws apply.

Caches near or on military installations.

Caches near or under public structures deemed potential or possible targets for terrorist attacks. These include but are not limited to highway bridges, dams, government buildings, elementary and secondary schools, and airports.

So from this point forward it is a problem.

9.4k · February 16, 2005

...hardly same as spray painting Jeremy '05 on the side of a bridge.

What have you got against Jeremy?

No kidding. The elections are in '08 by my calendar.

6.4k · February 16, 2005

So from this point forward it is a problem.

Wasn't it always?

Yup, thru the powers of Mr.Peabody and the wayback machine, I see that even a few years ago the guidelines said:

At this spot, the hunter looks for numbers or information already appearing on the marker or on some part of the marker or site (geocachers NEVER deface public or private property). The geocacher is then able to manipulate these numbers using instructions posted on the cache page to continue the hunt.

Not quite as abvious as it is now, but it was still in there.

2.7k · February 16, 2005

Is Graffiti Acceptable?

Are you saying I can't use my Palm Pilot now?

*ducking and running*

I've seen examples of this, and it has always made me uncomfortable, even if the landowner said it's ok. Years after the cache is archved, those numbers (usually partial) are still gonna be marking up that park chair in teh middle of nowhere.

I've even seen cache seekers write their names on the back of steps (evidently thinking it was OK because someone wrote numbers on the step). I *REALLY* hate that.

6.7k · February 16, 2005

We have one here that has the coords for a multi stage etched in the paint of a hand-rail, I didn't like that when I first found it and told the owner so.

We have a number, including two of mine, that include stickers on the back of signs...this way I can remove all trace when the cache is retired. One of my multis has 4 stages that are American flag vinyll stickers in unobtrusive almost invisible places, with the coords written in small letters in one of the white bars.

We also use small slivers cut from a business-card-size magnet, painted the appropriate color, to write coords on where a magnet will stick. Done right this is nearly invisible even to experienced cachers, and can be removed without a trace.

I can't imagine many places that you would want to put coords that a piece of tape, magnet or a removable sticker wouldn't work better.

Ed

3.9k · February 16, 2005

I've seen a few done with srap paint. One was inside a drainage pipe the other was underneath an over pass. They both only listed coordinates and didn't mention GC at all.

In both cases I don't see a problem. Neither were in view of the public...as a matter of fact they would take going to a place that is very unlikely that the general public would go to.

El Diablo

The problem is that NOW it is against the guidelines.

Caches may be quickly archived if we see the following (which is not inclusive):

Caches on land maintained by the U.S. National Park Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges)

Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate.

Caches that deface public or private property, whether a natural or man-made object, in order to provide a clue or a logging method. Caches placed on archaeological or historical sites. In most cases these areas are highly sensitive to the extra traffic that would be caused by vehicles and humans.

Caches hidden in close proximity to active railroad tracks. In general we use a distance of 150 ft but your local area’s trespassing laws may be different. All local laws apply.

Caches near or on military installations.

Caches near or under public structures deemed potential or possible targets for terrorist attacks. These include but are not limited to highway bridges, dams, government buildings, elementary and secondary schools, and airports.

So from this point forward it is a problem.

I understand the spirit of the guidelines. What I don't see a problem with is that someone crawled into a drainage pipe and wrote coordinates. Do you really feel like that is defacing public property? The stuff that flows through there is the real disgrace.

I'm sorry but I don't see a problem with that type of "defacing". You are talking about a storm drain and the underneath of an overpass, neither visible to the public.

Rules and guidelines are good...but they have exceptions....common sense.

El Diablo

2.2k · February 16, 2005

slippery slope to allow even subtle ones where do you draw the line?

however, on way t oa cache recently i saw

" don't look at the sun on a thursday or your chips will go cold"

very prophetic. :mad:

3.9k · February 16, 2005

slippery slope to allow even subtle ones where do you draw the line?

Good question. There is obvious defacing of public property, such as is being discussed here. Spray painting, writing coords in obvious places.

There is also the subtle defacing, such as placing a key holder on a guard rail, on a light pole, or a street sign. Placing fake outlets or sprinkler heads, or even fake rocks. Where do we draw the line?

My thoughts are that we draw it at common sense. They are called Guidelines...not rules, or laws.

El Diablo

3.3k · February 16, 2005

It's hard to know sometimes when approving caches. The page could simply state the coordinates to "stage two" without the mention of a container or their location. I don't find the approver at fault at all, they have a hard job to do.

I wasn't blaming the Approver. It would be impossible for him to find out about the grafitti unless, he actually found the cache, or a "friend" let him know about the issue.

We have a number, including two of mine, that include stickers on the back of signs...this way I can remove all trace when the cache is retired. One of my multis has 4 stages that are American flag vinyll stickers in unobtrusive almost invisible places, with the coords written in small letters in one of the white bars.

We also use small slivers cut from a business-card-size magnet, painted the appropriate color, to write coords on where a magnet will stick. Done right this is nearly invisible even to experienced cachers, and can be removed without a trace.

I can't imagine many places that you would want to put coords that a piece of tape, magnet or a removable sticker wouldn't work better.

Those are awesome and discreet ideas for waypoints. In my case my only multicache starts with a magnetic micro with coords written inside. Nothing is vandalized with magnets.

I have seen one mulit where the coordinates were written on dyma label stickers, and attached to a power transformer. They could be pealed off if needed, but I would prefer the magnetic approach.

February 16, 2005

I took my son looking for a multi stage cache tonight and was suprised by where we found the first stage. It was coordinates and www.geocaching.org written in black marker on a dock in a park. Second stage... written on a boardwalk. Is this a normal and accepted way of doing this? Personally I see it as nothing more than graffiti.

Unfortunantely I've seen this in a few caches that I've done. As others have mentioned it is not acceptable.

If you feel motivated you might try removing the coordinates yourself. I suggest covering the graffetti from another pen, say a highlighter! :mad:

1.1k · February 16, 2005

Hummmmm then the placing of a film canister or even final cache would be a defacement as it is putting something in place that would not naturally occure there or be put there by the property manager. Okay I am being devils adviocate. I do agree that it is WRONG to destroy something like a hand rail by scratching into it. So basically this mean all marker should be removeable with out leaving a trace?????

cheers

February 16, 2005

Second stage... written on a boardwalk

I've wondered about this. There are hiking trails around here that have trail marker posts covered in writing. It seems, that hikers will write names/dates/and time to complete legs of a hike, on the posts. I had thought of "hiding" coords for a multi among the names. I guess I don't really see anything wrong with this practice. I have seen these "hiker's posts" elsewhere as well and I guess it is a common practice. To randomly write something where there isn't any graffiti might not be so good. :mad:

Shades of gray, I guess.

8.9k · February 16, 2005

It was coordinates and www.geocaching.org written in black marker on a dock in a park.

I personally find it offensive - especially when they mark this web site in permanent marker.

Shouldn't be a problem. The site's not Geocaching.org :mad:

3.8k · February 16, 2005

I have seen a cache that uses (pre-existing) graffiti as a clue.

Any thoughts on this? :huh: :mad:

6.7k · February 16, 2005

If you're gonna do that you might as well use the graffiti on bathroom walls as clues as well - "In what year did BillyBob nail Betty?"

I think we can all find better ways to do this!

We tell newbies to find a few, see how the game works, and that'll help them be good hiders - we can't turn around then and adopt an anything goes attitude and expect the game not to degrade rapidly.

3.8k · February 16, 2005

From the Geocachers' Creed

Don’t break the law or rules of an area, or encourage others to do so, when placing or seeking a cache.

Do not damage, or interfere with the function of, buildings, structures, or signage.

Follow Leave No Trace ethics whenever possible.

Good advice. But this one even goes beyond the guidelines for this site.

20.7k · February 16, 2005

I have seen a cache that uses (pre-existing) graffiti as a clue.

Any thoughts on this?

I don't really have a problem with it. Might be a good multi-CITO cache.

Personally, I would never use graffiti. I always have to click for the little keyboard page on my palm. :mad:

Just as an aside, I realize that the joke I made above was not really the truth. If TPTB have any questions regarding this, I'd be happy to discuss it with them and make changes as necessary.

20.7k · February 16, 2005

From the Geocachers' Creed...

I guess Juggler was wrong.

February 17, 2005

ya, the hikers carving their names into posts is normal and you'll see the same on disc-golf courses for aces

I was thinking about permanent markering a stage of a multi on the underside of a wooden rail between two slats on the under side....in such a way that the only way to see the cords would be to lean over the rail and look back and up between the rails with a flashlight....can this really be called defacing? what if i did it in a woodier color marker ?

1.4k · February 17, 2005

I have had this argument on these forums before now, but please allow me to once again play Devil's advocate. I'm a law enforcement officer and a geocacher. If I caught you defacing public property I would face quite a quandry. On one hand, I'm sworn to uphold the law and on the other hand I would want you to be able to create your multicache.

If I caught you defacing public property, you might be able to talk yourself out of going to jail, but would you be able to do the same with an officer that has no idea what geocaching is all about?

Yes, I realize that not too many people will see writing GPS coordinates on the inside of drainage pipes in culverts, but is it really worth risking jail or a fine?

Anyways, it's just something to ponder. I don't want to add any fuel to the fire or discuss laws from one place to another since these can and will vary.

Happy geocaching!

Edited February 17, 2005 by jeff35080

24.7k · February 17, 2005

I can come up with all the exceptions to the rule but none for why it should be allowed as a general rule.

But me in the no camp.

February 17, 2005

Would it be out of the question to come up with... (invent?) a method for displaying coordinates that we can all agree on as standard practice, that doesn't deface anything, is easily recognizable, is made of such a material that in itself cannot be vandalized, disfigured or tagged to obliterate the message on it or inadvertently removed? Thereby insuring that the message inferred is to those who are in the know about it and others would probably leave it alone... not knowing what it is?? :rolleyes:

February 17, 2005

By not being easily removed,,, I mean that it can be easily removed but only by the hider of the cache..

February 17, 2005

When I wrote that post about establishing a way to mark the cache site in an unobstrusive way I was thinking in the back of my mind ... using a padlock with instructions or coordinates written on the back... that is removable by the cache owner. I was advocating disregard of the existing rules of the game, but merely suggesting a standard method to illiminate destruction of public and/or private property. This is an open topic.. and I appreciate all input and ideas.

I assume that you mean you want an idea to remove the 'graffitti' on an aluminum culvert on your land and not remove the culvert itself.. which would involve a backhoe. I would suggest a sand blaster for removing paint on an aluminum culvert.

February 17, 2005

Oooppsss!! I mean I wasn't advocating disregard of existing rules..

2.7k · February 18, 2005

I have not yet established a cache, but when I do, my rules will be:

1. If it is on my land, I'll do whatever I want, up to and including planting flower beds that give a clue visible from 40,000 feet in the air.

2. If it is on sombody else's private land, I will get clearance for any kind of writing or signs that I plan to use at the same time I get clearance to place the cache.

3. If it is on public land, leaving litter on public land us normally forbidden. I will find the written policy that grants an exception for caches, and follow that policy. If I can't find a policy, I'll either put my cache somewhere else, or get clearance from a person with authority over the land. In that case, I'll also get clearance for any sign or writing I think is necessary at the same time.

PS: I have a grafitti problem with an aluminium culvert on my land. Does anyone know any easy way to remove it?

The culvert or the graffiitti? just kidding. There is an excellent spray paint remover that janitors at schools are very familiar with (I can't remember the name), If you call a school in your area, chances are the maintenance crew can lend you a hint or two. Or google "Spray Paint Remover". Alteratively, keep overpainting the culvert gray.

24.7k · February 18, 2005

A padlock, a sticker etc. would all work. The are not permanent. However it's not that simple either. You can't just put the padlock on a school fence and not have someone wonder. Discression would be in order and it would depend on the circumstances.

February 18, 2005

We've found things that had clues using other people's graffiti. i.e. Look for the words "Joe + Shannon" carved into the cliff. But, have yet to find anything where the hider made their own graffiti. And, as has been said already, graffiti would give cachers a bad name.

February 23, 2005

Chalk on cement. In a culvert or on a wall.

Not permanent but still would be classified as grafitti.

Well?

4.8k · February 23, 2005

I follow the "leave no trace" ethic when I'm out in the backcountry, and I try to practice the same when I'm caching. It's usually easy to find a surface I can either velcro or put something magnetic on that using a permanent marker seems unneccesary. I'd rethink the multi if I had to resort to something like that. I like the idea of having the option of dismantling the multi if it's run its course.

2.7k · February 23, 2005

Chalk on cement. In a culvert or on a wall.
Not permanent but still would be classified as grafitti.

Well?

I would think not permanent enough for a long lasting hide.

5.3k · February 23, 2005

There are so many ways to hide clues, velcro, magnets, micros containing hints, any one who defaces property with a marking pen to set up a cache must be the king of the clueless people.

February 23, 2005

Chalk on cement. In a culvert or on a wall.
Not permanent but still would be classified as grafitti.

Well?

I would think not permanent enough for a long lasting hide.

Cache maintenance my friend. This is done on a great hide I've done. Thought it was very thoughtful oof the cache hiders. The places where they have written cordinate finds would NEVER be seen by the general public. Besides cachers, none but a handful would see them.

Is Graffiti Acceptable?

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

Link to comment

Link to comment