Controversy - Who's responsible?

[Yurt]

Putting the advice in the hint seems to ensure that people read it though! (present company excepted of course!)

[SecretSquirrel-BJC]

I would like to say a lot more...however this will have to suffice

I joint-FTFed a cache recently where the micro GZ was 10 to 15 metres out from the published coordinates - 3GPSrs pointed to the same spot.

Even though we tried to be as gentle as possible, and replace things as we found it, 45 min searching by 3 people had an effect which I wasn't happy with. We had walked on everything in a 5-10m radius, poked in every hole, lifted every rock, moved and replaced every bit of debris etc on the ground. We were very careful but it still had an adverse effect and hopefully our logs gave a tip to search further away from published listing.

Because of this, I didn't enjoy the gz and the find because the length of the search was not proportional to the cleverness of the hide - just the inaccuracy of the listing coordinates

As a hider and finder, one thing I have learned is that you have to expect that many finders will not treat the hides with the care and respect that you do.

Whilst finders need to be responsible and take care, I think hiders need to anticipate the likely adverse effects and understand that certain hides (such as nanos in the bush and garden beds) are much more likely to cause environmental damage

I also then decided that I wouldn't be racing out on an FTF again for this hider because I didn't want to be put in that position again

[Richary]

As a hider I try not to put the thing where it will be in an environmentally sensitive area. My first ever one was in a spot that would show an obvious cache trail after a few finders, but luckily it wasn't in a sensitive area. Since then I have learned a bit more about what makes a suitable hide.

As a finder I try not to add to any damage in the area, and hope that if it is in a sensitive spot there is enough info. As mentioned earlier in the thread I have seen the "not in the ferns" or similar in the description - which is where it should be. I don't always read hints before I search unless it is a fair hike from where I can park the car.

I think as hiders who have hopefully found a few before hiding, we should stop and realise the problems caused by a bad hide, inaccurate coordinates and so on. And try to place the caches with sensitivity - same as considering whether a playground or outside a government building is the most appropriate hide.

The responsibility comes down to both hiders and finders. But at the same time as hiders we need to accept that especially newer finders may not be as careful with lack of experience.

[Big Matt and Shell]

My thought is that both a responsible but I would suggest that it is the hider that is slightly more responsible as they are the person that brought the subsequent finders to the location. This pretty well sums up my thoughts,

...hiders should also consider the consequences of their hide and the sort of behaviour (and possible damage) likely it is likely to produce.

but...

But I think what can work in those circumstances is a "not-hint". This can save a lot of random searching that could damage an area. An example would be "it is not hidden amongst the ferns" or "it is no more than 3 metres from the path".

This assumes that people read the hint up front. If they search for 20 minutes before resorting to the hint, this serves no purpose. Same as any comments in the listing about don't look here. We have tried it on some of our caches but even we don't read every listing when we are on the run, most of the time we read it when we are typing our logs.

[Philipp]

It's also the responsibility of the hider to hide an appropriate cache-box. A micro in the woods/bush just calls for destruction. If you hide a regular the collateral damage will be less.
The original idea of micros was to put caches into urban / high-muggle areas and not into the open nature.

[Big Matt and Shell]

So going back to the cache I DNF'd on the weekend with a brush cutter to find the cache might not be considered kosher???

[pprass]

So going back to the cache I DNF'd on the weekend with a brush cutter to find the cache might not be considered kosher???

Ha! I have been known to use a machete in some of my caching expeditions recently - but lantana is a bit of a weed around here.

We have placed a "no-hint" or a note in the cache page such as "THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO NEED TO STEP INTO THE GARDEN BED TO ACCESS THIS CACHE and still found that some cachers trample the vegetation. Lets face it - unless you ban placing a cache within 10 metres of anything delicate or sensitive, you will get some sort of damage.

[caughtatwork]

I rarely read the cache page, so I miss all your messages saying where I should not look.
I wouldn't doubt that a lot of people for a traditional head straight to GZ and start looking.
Then they read the cache, then the logs, then the hint.
Putting a warning to stay out of the ferns in the description is pointless and doesn't work (hence this discussion).
Don't hide caches in or near environmentally sensitive areas and keep everyone happy.

[Yurt]

Maybe placing caches in the middle of patches or privet or lantana would get us onside with the bush care groups!

[SA_ParrotHead]

I think a lot of damage is done by people leaving the cache once it is found.
People will take different approaches to get to a cache but once found the path of least resistance is often used to get out. Thus trails appear not from searching but leaving when the area no longer is of interest to the searcher.

[noikmeister]

I use the technique that if I want people to read the description I make it a multi or a puzzle. I recently put out a puzzle cache with a boring story about a game of cricket that you then had to answer questions about to get the coordinates of GZ. It was sort of a rebellion against people not reading the description because it irks me.

[MtnLioness]

I agree with Parrothead, arriving at a cache and seeing a GeoTrail is a little disheartening but more often than not, it is the most easiest way into the cache. (not to mention it leads Muggles right to it out of curiousity)
I try to be careful and not step on everything in my way but I have been with other people, walking in front of me who crush fern and other soft plants without even noticing them! (much to my dismay)

[caughtatwork]

I agree with Parrothead, arriving at a cache and seeing a GeoTrail is a little disheartening but more often than not, it is the most easiest way into the cache. (not to mention it leads Muggles right to it out of curiousity)
I try to be careful and not step on everything in my way but I have been with other people, walking in front of me who crush fern and other soft plants without even noticing them! (much to my dismay)

Shoot them in the back

[Rainbow Spirit]

Maybe we should all tread a little bit more lightly, I was with Satanas666 at a Sydney cache a few days ago , and he set off a fox trap, right next to the cache.....no harm done to him, and one more fox on the run...

[o'cholio]

That's funny - I usually end up unnecessarily bush-bashing towards the cache, then finding the "correct" way out! Usually takes about half the time to get back

Our two cents' worth: we found a number of nano caches in the bush recently, and none of them were (in our opinion) in environmentally-sensitive areas. But one such area appeared to have been the victim of a temper tantrum and large, rather heavy logs were strewn about all over the place, with the overall effect looking like a bomb had hit the joint.

In saying that, we'll probably have to sit on the fence with this one . Yep, hiders can minimise the harm but (to placate the left-handers out there) some cachers are all thumbs and occasionally are bad-tempered. Then there's the "pride" in not even using the hint, let alone the description (GAFF levels). At the end of the day, as a hider, there's only so much you can do.