[Az-Geocaching] It's not as bad as we have been told

[Brian Cluff]

I just got off the from with a guy named Brad that is affiliated with
the State trust land managment.  He is currently in possession of the
"Sign from the past III" cache that was taken.
The conversation that we had was very positive and he really likes the
idea of geocaching and actually wants to promote it, to the point that
he wished that he could donate money to geocaching.
The only thing that he asks is that everyone gets a permit before
entering the last (which we should already know) that they we don't put
caches on archeology sites.  If caches are put on any archeolory site
they will be confiscated and the owner will have a month to pick it up.
He personally isn't pointing a finger at geocaching for any damage to
the above site, since he doesn't know for sure that we did or would do
any damage to any site.... (very cool!)
For caches that might be put on an archeology site that we don't even
know that it's an archeology site they will check things out and if it's
just near a site and we aren't causeing any damage they will probably
just leave it there, since it could be better to keep the site a secret
than to let us know it exists by taking the cache.
All in all, it sounds like the news paper blew things waaaaaay out of
proportion and gave us a bad name in doing so.

Anyway, I just wanted to let people know of the situation in reality. 
Plus he asked me to pass on their rules that they would like us to
observe... so pretty much what it amounts to is caches as usual minus a
couple of caches that point out some history, but all in all good news.

Brian Cluff
Team Snaptek