[GeoStL] Re: HTM#1 Witches Cemetery

  • From: "Jim Bensman" <jbensman1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 23:08:59 -0500



That was a thought provoking message.  I think you have a good point.  I
think at the very least, caching needs to be sensitive to the points you
made, but I think there can be ways to do them that are not disrespectful.
I?ve been in some neat cemeteries looking for caches.  (And don?t forget
that time you turned into a ghost :-))  I would also point out how our
society tends to disrespect native American burial and sacred sites.  So I
would include them in the same category.


I also agree with your point on how caching can damage sensitive sites.  I
think sometimes cachers (this is NOT directed at you Dan) only think about
where they place their cache instead of where cachers will likely look.  In
sensitive areas (if a cache is appropriate), there should be clear
directions or hints to make it real easy to find to minimize the risk of




I noticed the log talked about a no trespassing sign.  When I have seen no
trespassing signs, I respect them and do not go for the cache.  I think a
cache page needs to specifically address such a sign if permission is
granted.  IMHO, whenever a cache is on private property, I think the cache
page should indicate this and that permission has been granted.  


I hear you about the cost of driving ? but the real problem is not the price
of gas.  The problem is our government will not force the car manufactures
to make our vehicles more efficient (?CAFÉ Standards?).  If your truck was
twice as efficient, you would need half as much gas.  The main reason why
the prices are going up is the demand for gas.  If cars were more efficient,
there would be less demand (and less pollution) which would result in lower
gas prices.  We have the technology to make vehicles get vastly greater
mileage and we have lots of smart people that can invent more ways.  While
Illinois Senators vote for higher CAFÉ standards, your Senators keep voting
against them.  If I were you, I would write them about this.    We are not
going to drill our way out of the mess, we need to use American ingenuity to
invent our way out.   


Jim Bensman
"Nature Bats Last" 


From: geocaching-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:geocaching-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bernie
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 9:52 PM
To: geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [GeoStL] Re: HTM#1 Witches Cemetery


 I'm happy to hear that you are thinking of archiving this cache. I don't
believe I have done it. The search engine in GC.com sucks so bad that I
could not find it.
 Dan, my thoughts have nothing to do with you or your cache. These are just
personal feelings. I have always felt that caches in cemeterys should not be
allowed and yes I have done a few of them in my travels. I think it is
disrespectful to the dead and their loved ones trump sing around looking for
a cache. There are so many other places where we can play our game. I have
expressed my feelings about this in several of my logs.
 As far as old historic rock walls or foundations. Well, if each cacher only
wiggles loose one rock or stone or worse yet, removes only one or two rocks,
what will the wall look like down the road. I have seen quite a bit of
damage to some walls. They can not be replaced and are lost forever. Don't
be mad, just a couple of my personal thoughts.  Bernie.

Dan Henke wrote: 

To all SLAGA members:


Here is a note I posted on the above mentioned cache:


In answer to the previous DNF note I thought I would defend myself against
the slightly veiled accusations. 

1st: This is an OLD cemetery that is not maintained very well or at all by
the locals. The rundown appearance is part of the mystique of the place. It
was NOT caused by geocachers.

2nd: The wall was in the shape it is in now when I placed the cache and has
not changed much in the time the cache has been in place. IT was NOT torn
down by geocachers looking for the cache. I am sure some rocks were moved
but in the case of the wall it did nothing to destroy it.

3rd: Yes I did get permission to place the cache there and as to the damage
caused by cachers please see the first two points.

4th: I am tired of being dumped on about this cache...it is in a very cool
and historic location....you see some very interesting and exotic
country....there is an old fashioned country store there that is almost
worth the trip in itself which is why I set the cache in the first place.
The cache itself is almost secondary to the things you see on the way and
while you are in the neighborhood. 
The cache is difficult yes but is not anymore difficult than some others I
have done...you DO NOT have to destroy anything to find it....it is located
under a couple of rocks in the wall but in almost every case I have checked
on it there was a portion of the cache visible if you look close enough.....

5th: I am seriously thinking of archiving this cache as it has proved too
difficult for a lot of people and it is too far away for me to maintain it

So if you have had this one on your to do list ...you might want to do it



As stated in the log I am thinking VERY seriously about archiving this
cache....it is difficult to maintain and with the price of gas going as high
as it is I do NOT want to have to drive 45 to 50 minutes out of my way to
check on a cache I am sure is there but just not found.

So for those of you who have not found it yet you might want to consider
going for it soon.


Dan (Thunder)


Start your <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=34442/*http:/www.yahoo.com/r/hs>  day
with Yahoo! - make it your home page 

**************************************** Our WebPage! Http://WWW.GeoStL.com
Mail List Info. //www.freelists.org/list/geocaching Mail List FAQ's:
**************************************** To unsubscribe from this list: send
an email to geocaching-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the
Subject field

Other related posts: