[GeoStL] Re: Archive this geocache?

As always, it's great to examine the issue from every point of view, but
I have to disagree with the placement of a cache that might knowingly
endanger the cacher. 

1) I believe we should be able to assume that we can hunt an approved
geocache without first checking for permission. Maybe the owner of this
cache thought he/she was placing it on public property and was mistaken.
If that's the case, I think the owner is responsible for correcting the
mistake. He/she should either get permission from the land owner, or move
the cache to another location, or achive it. I don't think it's right to
try to place the responsibility on the cache hunter for determining if a
cache is legal to visit. The cache owner should do that before placing
the cache. Or, if the situation changes after the cache is placed, which
may have happened here, the owner should make corrections.  

2) Whether or not this neighborhood crank/bully really owns the property
is almost irrelevant, in my opinion. He's still there, making threats.
That's probably not going to change. 

3) Discussion, of course, is different than action. We had issues earlier
this year with a cacher who took it upon himself to remove caches that
were environmentally insensitive, or something like that. If that person
had discussed it first with the SLAGA community, in this forum, the
matter might have been resolved to everyone's satisfaction. IMO it never
hurts to discuss any issue relevant to safe and enjoyable geocaching.
Please, let's not say we can't discuss an issue here.

Finally, geocache owners have rights -- and responsibilities. We can't
protect the cache hunter from every possible hazard, nor should we try. I
don't believe, however, that we have the right to deliberately expose
folks to known safety hazards when they hunt our caches. 

Thanks for listening,

Know Future

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 19:27:58 -0700 (PDT) Dan Henke
<thunder_monk@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
I have read the thread on this cache and would like to offer my opinion
for what it is worth.

First a lot of people are making an assumption that permission was not
sought and received....we don't know whether it has or not but would it
not be more appropriate to assume that it HAS been given rather than
taking a negative view. It probably should be noted in the cache
description that it has been sought and received but it is NOT required
that it be and most caches do NOT have that in the description. 

Secondly from the log I read the irate land owner said "he owns the land
around and behind " but he never says he owns the cemetery and chances
are he does not...I have run into property owners both in surveying and
caching and other activities that will tell you that they own the land in
question even though they don't just to keep people away from "their"
land. I could sight several examples but that would take way too much
space in this email.

Third ....I don't like discussions on archiving someone else's cache but
as it has been brought up I will say this.....NO ONE forces anyone to do
any particular cache...it is entirely up to the searcher and if they take
the time to read logs etc on a cache and it looks dangerous to them then
they can pass on the cache. If they feel strongly about it then they
should contact the owner privately and discuss it with him/her/them but
it still should be left up entirely to the owner of the cache and not
subject to a discussion on the forums or newsgroups. I don't know about
any of you but when a cache of mine is criticized without an email to me
first I take it personally.....I try to put a lot of thought and things
into each cache and as the owner there may be things about the cache I
just don't put into my cache description either because I don't feel it
is relevant or because it will make the cache find to easy. 

I ran into a similar situation on a cache I did a couple of years ago
where an irate land owner threatened to call the police because I was
"trespassing" on "his" property.....I was not and the cache was on very
public land but this owner did not like people around his property so he
just told everyone he owned the public park property as well. I sent an
email to the cache owner and told him of the situation and he then had
the option to make whatever adjustments he wanted to to the description
or to archive or whatever he wanted but it was the owner's right to make
those changes and not have them dictated to him by someone else.

I am a firm believer in the "rights" of the owner to set up his/her cache
in whatever manner that is desired otherwise all caches would be the same
and the fun of something new and different would be gone. Just because
one person or even a group of people don't like the way a cache is done
or put together doesn't mean they have the right to demand a
change....they do have the right however to do or not to do this cache.

Just my humble opinion 

Dan (Thunder)


Know Future <know_future@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Last week Geo Jim described a tense encounter with an unfriendly
landowner while hunting the Chapman's Ball (GCKBKH) geocache. I was
surprised at the lack of comments in this forum. My question is this:
given the possibility that future visitors could be subjected to verbal
abuse and even physical violence, doesn't it seem prudent to consider
archiving this cache? I'd like to hear your thoughts.

Know Future


August 7 by Geo Jim (949 found)
"Pretty easy find and a nice peaceful place. Thanks for the cache!
One of the local landowners came by and told me how he doesn't much care
for hunters on his land, people drinking back there and "geo-catchers". I
just nodded and said, "Yeah.." at the right times. And thought of
"Deliverance" as I tried to hide my 'Geocaching 101' tee shirt.."

Note: this doesn't begin to describe the incident -- KF



JURA BAR QBBE PYBFRF NABGURE QBBE BCRAF

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


JURA BAR QBBE PYBFRF NABGURE QBBE BCRAF

Other related posts: