> Some of the caches, including mine, have been temporarily disabled, but > most of them haven't. During private e-mail conversations with some of the > cache owners, I have gotten everything from "just sneak in and find the > cache" to "a note should be good enough because I don't want to temporarily > disable the cache" to "if people are too stupid to know not to go there > then they deserve what they get." > It goes completely against the ethos of the responsibility of placing a cache not to be temporarily disabling a cache when the area is off limits. I can't believe that you have actually gotten those types of responses from cache owners. The first and last one in particular show a distinct disregard for what is currently happening in the state. As I remember, the ability to temporarily disable a cache hasn't been around from the start, so it is possible that some cache owners don't know that feature is available: that I'll grant. It's also possible that the cache owner didn't think of diabling the cache till the threat passes, and some cache owners are no longer active and monitoring the situation or their caches. However, to encourage sending someone into a restricted area, after it being pointed out to them that the areas are closed, shows that the person cares little for the future of this sport or how the public percieves it. Sorry if that sounds rough but that's the way I see it. Darren Team Imperial Eagle