Replicated from the GGA EZBoard:

Gossamyrrh
Magnificent Poster
(4/2/02 1:04:22 am)
Clover Leave- it has to be said

I don't know about the rest of you, but I feel that the cache "Clover Leave" is a neat idea, but in a potentially dangerous location. The cache is in Cobb County- one of the TWO counties we are allowed to cache in. An accident at this cache site would give the opposition all the arguement we need for shutting down geocaching in Georgia or anywhere else.

Why was this cache approved?

~~~~~~~~~~~~
LoCache
Administrator
(4/2/02 9:18:08 am)
Re: Clover Leave- it has to be said

I am checking this one out too...it certainly sounds a bit dangerous from what I have read so far.

I also just read about a woman who was killed on I75 today while trying to cross the Interstate on foot. She parked her car on the right shoulder and was crossing over to the median in Cobb County. I doubt it was related to this cache, but my first thought was "OH MY GOD!"

I will post more here after I check in to it.

Geo

~~~~~~~~~~~~
LoCache
Administrator
(4/2/02 9:37:01 am)
Re: Clover Leave- it has to be said

I just read all the logs for the cache and no one seems to say anything about it being dangerous, and Erik - one of our SC members - even took his daughter on this one.

I will keep an eye out for it, and might email the owner, but so far is seems like it SOUNDS more dangerous than it is.

Geo

~~~~~~~~~~~~
AJLacy
Awe-Inspiring Poster
(4/2/02 9:39:49 am)
Breaking the law?

I think you have to break the law to find it. I had an old Georgia Driver's manual here and it says:

Stopping: Stopping on the expressway is prohibited. You will find service areas and rest signs at frequent intervals; use them. Stopping on the roadway shoulder is permitted only in an emergency. If it is necessary to stop, raise the hood to indicate difficulty. Don't walk along the expressway in search of help.

Neutiquam erro.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gossamyrrh
Magnificent Poster
(4/2/02 11:11:05 am)
Re: Breaking the law?

Like I said, I think it's a neat idea, but in a bad location. More than one person has commented on the legality of the issue.

I have had discussions with the cache owner, and he doesn't seem to think there is a problem. He commented that nobody is forced to hunt the cache and we should be responsible for our own actions.....I agree with him on the latter, *however* I don't think the powers-that-be would.

I'm not saying that I'm not guilty of geocaching-wrongdoing, either. I've done my share of bushwhacking (most of them), trespassing (Under the Treetops), stomping and climbing on things that I shouldn't have (Hawg, Anna's Ruby, Fern City Swimming Hole, Band of Brothers come to mind, but I'm sure there's more) and not seeking permission for a cache's placement (both of mine).

I understood that the GGA was formed to foster better relations between "us" and "them". I understood that one of the GGA's goals was to better educate individuals on acceptable caching practices. I love you to death, Erik....but I think your seeking the cache, *especially* as a SC member, sets a bad example. I'd like to think it was just a mistake....we all know that a new cache listing has the same effect as a Siren's call.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
kretzb
Registered Geocacher
(4/2/02 1:58:48 pm)
Re: Breaking the law?

I have visited this cache. I think it can be approached in a safe manner. The issue of parking on the highway is well taken. Here is a link to the applicable code section:

the link

Subparagraph (a)(1)(I) would apply. I don't think the police would have a problem unless an accident occurred.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
erik88l r
Administrator
(4/2/02 9:45:03 pm)
Re: Breaking the law?

Goss - I'm flattered that you love me to death. In this case it might be more appropriate to say that my love of geocaching could result in my death.

Actually I don't feel that danger is as much an issue here as the fact that it is illegal. Because you can probably park 30 feet off the road may make it reasonably safe, but still illegal. For that reason alone I would agree with Goss's sentiments that it's not a good idea for this cache to continue to lure geocachers out there. It's only a matter of time before a police officer or HERO worker stops to 'help'.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Da Rebel
Super Poster
(4/2/02 11:32:51 pm)
Re: Breaking the law?

Not this particular cache, but kinda similar. I recently found a cache that, after I logged it, I found was actually on NPS property.

Cache Page

I deleted my find and sent a note to the owner to ask him to check. After a few days with no response, I sent a note to Jeremy to ask him to check it out a bit.

Cost me a cache find point, but didn't want my geonick associated with an illegal cache.

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything." - Mark Twain

~~~~~~~~~~~~
llh
Unregistered User
(4/8/02 12:51:07 am)
hmmm...

Hello everyone,

I'm the evil mastermind who placed Clover Leave #1 on orders from the devil.

I was informed about this thread by an interested friend, and to be honest, while I'm flattered that my first cache has garnered so much interest, I am concerned that much of the conversation in this thread has turned out to be negative. From the logs, of those WHO'VE ACTUALLY VISITED THE CACHE, you'd never know there was such a problem. It seems that everyone who's been there has enjoyed it, in fact specifically mention how creative and great they thought the location was. Maybe these geocachers just always leave positive feedback in the logs. Is it bad etiquette to complain?

I have to admit, I don't view the safety issue with this cache as some of you do, particularly Gossamyrh. I thought my email exchange, with the active Sgt. G, ended amicably and with the agreement to disagree. However, I'm not particularly surprised that her pursuit didn't stop there.

From what I've seen on geocaching.com, mine probably qualifies for the "barely dangerous" category of caches out there, so I'm really confused now about the attention Gossamyrrh has given this. I would like to think that my unwillingness to comply with the attempted order (disguised as a suggestion) to move the cache wasn't taken personally, but somehow it's found it's way into everyone's time anyway.

So in conclusion, I'd be happy to move the cache if it truly would damage the standing of geocaching in GA. But I have some concern about the locations of the rest of these caches if that's the case. Between private land, national and state parks and other wilderness areas, it sure seems that there is a significant amount of caches placed "illegally", and visited regularly, including some placed by the originator of this thread. Physician...

I really don't see the danger aspect, other than the poison ivy of course (which by the way wasn't yet "blooming" when I placed the cache, sorry folks ), that would make me seriously consider moving the cache. I would absolutely comply if it's truly illegal to have placed a cache in that spot. But so far I've only been told that it's illegal to park along the road, not to have placed the cache. And I'm not trying to split hairs, I promise. Like I told the sarge in my emails, ...

"The default nature of this hobby, and all the warnings that Jeremy has posted on the site are everyone's disclaimer. This hobby is something I must take on or leave alone solely at my own risk. I could be looking for the easiest cache ever placed, approaching from a totally ridiculous direction or get lost trying to find it, and still fall off a cliff and die. Whatever "idiot" (her word) who decides to disregard my warning would/will do so with other caches and get hurt there too. People need to be accountable for their own actions. I've placed a cache, and people are free to try to find it or pass it by.

If someone decides to hunt this cache good for them. There's already been...really positive comments...so it can't be that hard. But I'm not going to hold everyone's hand and tell them whether they should or shouldn't do it. It's a very easy and safe cache for my comfort level. You don't feel that way and that's completely fine."

That said, it would be unfortunate to have found a very fun hobby only to have some, even "well-meaning", locals of our number ride my choices so closely that this ceases to be fun.

Thanks for your time, but sorry to have taken it on this subject. (And yes, I'm irritated so please notch the edge in this post down a few for me while you read to account for my not taking the time to cool off)

Thanks again,
llh

P.S. I was considering a virtual cache accessible only by sea kayak along the coast near Savannah, but I suppose I'd be responsible for all drownings in the area, so I'll reconsider (see the "Isles of the Hooch" series).

~~~~~~~~~~~~
llh
Unregistered User
(4/8/02 12:56:56 am)
hmmm...

The second posting was an exact duplication of the first posting and was deleted by mtn-man with permission from llh.

Edited by: the mtn man at: 4/9/02 12:21:51 am

~~~~~~~~~~~~
erik88l r
Administrator
(4/8/02 11:56:01 am)
Re: sorry for the double post, now triple I guess...

I think there's a nut loose on the "add reply" button on your keyboard

Seriously, you bring up some good points - there is a disclaimer on geocaching.com and we do make our own decisions on which caches to hunt. There is one I won't go to based on the description and the logs I've read of others who've been there, but some aren't daunted and happily scale that cliff.

I logged your cache and am still suffering from the poison ivy rash on my arms, but I've been guilty of putting a cache in what later turned out to be poison ivy too. That's life. I later relocated that cache, but because I'd mistakenly thought it was in a Ga. State park which started banning them, after I'd laboriously pulled up all the poison ivy near the cache.

The only suggestion I could make is to be sure that potential hunters of this cache have all the information to ensure that they can make an informed decision. Perhaps a link to this thread or a synopsis of the concerns expressed here would help. I generally print out cache pages without logs to save paper and make the hunt more challenging - I'd hate for someone else to do that and not really know what they were getting into.

~erik~

~~~~~~~~~~~~
AJLacy
Awe-Inspiring Poster
(4/8/02 12:54:32 pm)

Re: sorry for the double post, now triple I guess...

Quote:
-------------------------------
But so far I've only been told that it's illegal to park along the road, not to have placed the cache.
-------------------------------

But how could you have placed a cache herewithout parking on the road? To me that is like saying a cache in on approved public property, you just have tresspass on this man property to get to it.

Also I don't know of another cache where the hunter definitely has to break a law to find the cache. But considering the number of speeders in that area, breaking a traffic law doesn't seem to bother people. As for me (legal or not) I don't have an interest in visiting the area of the cache, I would much rather do a couple mile hike to see a waterfall (like I did this weekend) instead of looking at an interstate. so it can stay or go.

Neutiquam erro.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
lmoseley
BigDog
(4/8/02 3:35:16 pm)
ezSupporter

Re: sorry for the double post, now triple I guess...

Speaking for myself only (and not as a representative of the GGA)...

Every person has an obligation to know and understand the law. Every person has an obligation to obey that law. When the law is violated, our society has given certain groups of people the right and duty to take appropriate action. The GGA is *NOT* one of those groups.

Every time a person goes geocaching, that person has an obligation to examine the location and other relevant circumstances, to make a decision for him/herself whether s/he can place or seek that cache safety and legally, and to act accordingly. No other person or group can, or should, make that determination for them.

--------------------------------
Resist authority!
Desist, authority!


Edited by: lmoseley at: 4/8/02 3:47:00 pm

~~~~~~~~~~~~
fisherKings
Registered Geocacher
(4/8/02 4:07:45 pm)
clover

Poison Ivy?!?!

DOH.

Sushi of the fisherKings

~~~~~~~~~~~~
llhGA
Registered Geocacher
(4/8/02 5:53:47 pm)
Ok, that poison ivy is shin deep now...

You know what, that's such a cool place for a cache, those of you who have been there know what I'm talking about, but the poison ivy might be enough for me to move it.

The danger? Nah. I can think of other ways to get to it on foot if you'd rather not break the law, but each is more dangerous than a 5 minute "emergency" stop on the side of the road. (When I check the cache, I park SE of the cache, and I'm in and out in under 2 minutes, I've timed it).

But poison ivy? I'd hate to move it for a natural obstacle like that. I don't know folks, I'm really on the fence about this but because of the "coolness" of the location I'm still leaning to the stay side at this point.

Good input (for the most part) so far, any more?

llh

~~~~~~~~~~~~
lmoseley
BigDog
(4/8/02 6:50:43 pm)
ezSupporter

Re: Ok, that poison ivy is shin deep now...

I just looked at AJLacy's satellite photo of the site with the cache location pinpointed. Without any comment about any other aspect of the situation, that is a cool photo effect!

--------------------------------
Resist authority!
Desist, authority!


Edited by: lmoseley at: 4/8/02 7:18:10 pm

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Brad Webb
gpsfun
(4/8/02 8:20:06 pm)
ezSupporter

Re: Ok, that poison ivy is shin deep now...

It sure is a neat photo! I've bookmarked that site!

~~~~~~~~~~~~
AJLacy
Awe-Inspiring Poster
(4/8/02 9:00:43 pm)
Re: Lostoutdoors.

Topo's there are better than topozone too. If Erik had looked at this he would have known which side of the river the cache was on. Where as Topozone shows it in the wrong place and has that band in the middle of it.

Neutiquam erro.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
tjbowers
a.k.a. Jess
(4/8/02 9:03:15 pm)
Re: Ok, that poison ivy is shin deep now...

I've had a problem with poison ivy at a few caches. It's not that I mind a challenge, but, anyone who's had a bad case in the past becomes a little shy around it. (Just ask Erik ;-)

tjb
"It's got to be the going, not the getting there, that's good"
--Harry Chapin

~~~~~~~~~~~~
erik88l r
Administrator
(4/8/02 9:26:12 pm)
Re: Ok, that poison ivy is shin deep now...

I find it amazing that the satellite photo was taken when I was at the cache. You can see my bright red rash right there at the cache coordinates!

~~~~~~~~~~~~
fisherKings
Registered Geocacher
(4/9/02 12:11:38 am)
poison ivy

Having visited the cache (twice) and also being highly allergic to poison ivy in the past...I am totally surprised that I did not get it....I do remember wondering about those little three-leaved plants that I was stepping on....is that stuff....? nevermind...gotta find the cache.

Seriously, I never felt unsafe at the cache due to the slower speeds of the passing vehicles and the distance that I parked from the road ...I would not have taken my children though...and I did feel a little uncomfortable wondering what I would tell any official type that might have shown up...still I enjoyed it.

Sushi of the fisherKings

Edited by: fisherKings at: 4/9/02 12:18:43 am

~~~~~~~~~~~~
LoCache
Administrator
(4/9/02 8:43:23 am)
Re: poison ivy

I haven't been, as I mentioned before. If I didn't have any concerns about the authorities I might be more apt to go...it's an interesting spot, but I am sort of more interested in slightly more scenic spots for caching. I weighed it out like this:

Pros = Cool spot, creative, easy.

Cons = possibly (or definitely) illegal, potentially dangerous, definitely a possibility of Law Enforcement Officials showing up, poison Ivy (not too big a concern for me personally), lack of a good hike and scenic view.

With the above in mind, I think I'll pass personally. And in the end, this is really what each of us needs to do...figure it out for yourselves whether it's worth it or not.

Geo

PS - I also seem to be a magnet for authorities....maybe it's the long hair....but if anyone would get stopped by The Man, it would be me! ;-)

~~~~~~~~~~~~
llhGA
Registered Geocacher
(4/9/02 4:02:49 pm)
Re: poison ivy

Well, Jeremy has archived the cache off the site due to a "warning...from a concerned geocacher". Hmm, wonder who that was.

I'm certain it wasn't the originator of this thread that wrote him to complain, since it would have exhibited an incredible lack of class and a sense of revenge more acute than I dare imagine. So I have no idea who might have written.

I'll recover the cache and maybe at some point place it somewhere else. Likely by invitation only, and not on the site.

P.S. Some live in worlds smaller than others, and some can't stand, and wouldn't brave it, otherwise.

llh

~~~~~~~~~~~~
AJLacy
Awe-Inspiring Poster
(4/9/02 5:52:53 pm)
Re: poison ivy

Quote:
-------------------------------
Well, Jeremy has archived the cache off the site due to a "warning...from a concerned geocacher".
-------------------------------

I would have expected Jeremy to name names. If I felt strong enough to contact Jeremy, I would have told you first that I was going to do so. As I mentioned this cache had very little interest to me and but I thought people should be aware of the potential impact of going to it. Beyond that it was everybody's choice.

Neutiquam erro.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
the mtn man
and puppymonster
(4/9/02 9:10:26 pm)
Re: Clover Leave -- it needs to be over

Well, this has become about as bad as it could. It is a shame. I wish that llh would not be discouraged and rethink his opinion on placing caches in the future. There are so many good places to put caches. This just turned out to not be the best place. It is also a shame that it came down to someone having to report the cache to Jeremy. The law is pretty clear, and I am glad that I was not ticketed for breaking the GA law sited above. Yeah, I also visited the cache, so I guess that I should have been berated too. I think it was unfair to single out Erik because I am also an SC member. I was just as much at fault, but one thing I am not is the cache police. I am the first to admit that now that I have been reminded of the law that I should not have gone after it. It is what it is, and I would not search for another cache like this again. But personally I cannot force the cache placer to remove his cache. I can explain the reasons why it should be removed and that is about all I can do. Jeremy could not force him to remove the cache, but he can make the page unavailable for people to view on his site. It goes back to Best Practices for all, I guess. This has been a good learning experience, and it is good no one was ticketed or injured.

Onward cachers, let's go out an place a better cache tomorrow.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
erik88l r
Administrator
(4/9/02 10:42:44 pm)
Re: Clover Leave -- it needs to be over

Hey, I didn't feel singled out
I'm sorry to see that someone asked Jeremy to archive the cache - that's not the way I'd have wanted it to end. I had hoped that we could discuss it as a group this Saturday. Mtn-Man is right though, there are a lot of good places out there for caches.

Some further thoughts - there are other caches out there that are in questionable locations. Many of the Chattahoochee caches are in parks administered by the NPS, which is supposed to be a no-no. However the precedent there was set by the APE cache, so we'd like to think that if a corporation got the OK, it's OK for us too. I have one on private property, but I justify it (to myself at least) as civil disobedience against a developer who hasn't followed thru on a promise to homeowners to create a park in exchange for building a mall. As others use the area w/o any problems I'm not too worried, but it is private property. Seems like there's still one in a state park, though I may be mistaken as I haven't visited it yet. I think we can all come up with caches that theoretically shouldn't be, but as long as we derive enjoyment from seeking them we let them be.....

~erik~

Edited by: erik88l r at: 4/10/02 7:59:35 am

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gossamyrrh
Magnificent Poster
(4/10/02 8:02:23 pm)
Re: Clover Leave -- one more comment

Good Lord....no wonder my ears have been itching....

1) I did email Jeremy about the cache, but I did not ask him to archive it. I discussed the cache with several others in the geocaching chat room, and all of them felt the same as I did. It may well have been one of them.

2) My main concern has been the legality/visibility factor. If the cache is located in a "legal" spot, am I able to approach it without breaking any laws? This can attract more than just the park ranger's attention.

3) I recognize that we are all responsible for our own actions, but unfortunately not everyone else does. This is the point that the cache owner doesn't want to consider.

4) I'm sorry if I stepped on your toes, llh. I understand you are angry, but my stance on the matter remains unchanged. You can butt heads with me all you want...I have a pretty thick skull ! I think you are stubborn and opinionated- just my sort of person. If I ever meet you, 1) I will chastize you with a rolled up newspaper 2) I'll buy you a beer.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
llhGA
Registered Geocacher
(4/11/02 12:28:33 am)
Re: Clover Leave -- one more comment

Ok. I'm calm now. The clincher was cutting away the knee deep poison ivy, that has grown enough to choke the whole area in under a week, while removing the cache. I'll find another place, but I like the thinking or location feature clue caches, so I think I'll add a little challenge more than just finding it with coordinates. We'll see what I come up with.

1) Whatever, mom. :P
2) I don't drink, but we'll get a coke.

No hard feelings Goss. Probably see you all Saturday. llh

~~~~~~~~~~~~
LoCache
Administrator
(4/11/02 8:12:17 am)
Re: Clover Leave -- one more comment

Now THAT'S what I like to see. Amicable endings to rough subjects!

It's nice to see cachers great attitudes prevail! I have been a part of many groups and such (particularly online type stuff) where the people just digress in to prehistoric behaviour and that's that. It's nice to see that the Geocaching community, which I have always thought was a HIGHLY peaceful and friendly one, has once again remained cool!

Geo

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Da Rebel
Super Poster
(4/11/02 4:22:42 pm)
Re: Clover Leave -- one more comment

Ahh, did someone mention beer?

I too am glad this got resolved amicably. Bravo to all for keeping it civil!


"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything." - Mark Twain

~~~~~~~~~~~~
erik88l r
Administrator
(5/14/02 9:26:05 am)
Re: Clover Leave -- one more comment

We are not alone in debating these situations. Here's a similar case faced by the folks in Nashville at a cache I visited without incident last year:

web page