Caches on buildings

[rediguana]

The following article has appeared in the newspaper in Greymouth today possibly linking the presence of a geocache to muggle vandalism (it sounds to me like muggles have found the cache, and things have perhaps gone downhill from there).

Moneydork, as President of the GPS Society, has the contact details for Mr Devlin in the article, and plans to contact him tomorrow to discuss this case further.

The cache has now been archived.




A point I would like to make, is that this is a good reason why caches should not be placed in, on, or under buildings unless explicit permission is obtained. And yes, I realise that the damage in this specific was most likely caused by non-geocachers - perhaps based on the graphic text in the logbook that was passed onto police.

[One-Fang]

Almost all caches are somewhere where, if you can't find it and you're the furious type of hot-headed person who might, you can destroy stuff in your attempt to get to it. I've seen caches on buildings that aren't somewhere I can image would easily be vandalised in this manner, and caches on/under constructed non-building things (like bridges) that would be easily vandalised in this way. I'm not sure "on/under buildings" is a terribly useful guide.

Should we prize a building/structure more highly than a garden? Is it okay to trample plants but not to rip a board? No, it's not okay to do either, and I don't think you're saying that it is, but we do need to realise that ALL caches have potential for destruction in the area, and cache owners need to carefully consider this for all placements, and cache finders need to remember this when hunting.

I think focusing on buildings goes along the same lines as telling people not to text while driving. Sure, there's a definite risk, but it's not the only one. How about we educate people not to drive while distracted, and to be careful with all cache placements and findings?