I'm sure this reporter wanted to talk to a few of us, like she did with
Brian. I received two Emails from her asking that I call her. I don't trust
reporters, as they often have a hidden agenda. After reading the article, I
don't think anything I would have said would have changed the article.

Part of me agrees with the article, in that geocaches shouldn't be hidden
"at" an archeological sites. However, I really appreciate being taken to
these sites. I find them interesting. If a cache is going to be located near
a sensitive area, I would prefer to have a cache hidden nearby, with a
mention of "check out the petroglyphs 400' to the SW" (or something along
these lines). We've seen this on a few caches. A virtual cache would be my
second choice.

I hate to say it, but we also can't 100% say that a geocacher wouldn't
vandalize an archeological site. Being an open, un-regulated game, any
person can seek a cache. I seriously doubt any of the cacher's I've met
would ever destroy our lands, but I've only met a couple dozen caching teams
in Arizona. What's stopping someone from getting the coordinates to a
location, going out there, throwing beer cans all over the trail, driving
off the trail, and shooting up a ruin? No - I don't like it one bit either.
But it could happen.

It's the old adage - "One rotten apple can ruin the whole bunch".

However, this problem isn't unique to geocaching. Many good, legal 4WD
trails get closed because some "rotten apples" throw trash all over and
don't stay on the trails. Many ghost town's are mentioned in numerous books
telling people where they are and "rotten apples" have gone out and
destroyed them.

I have mixed feelings on public land issues. I feel public lands should
remain open for access by the public. However, the public needs to respect
the land (which can't be enforced without closing access). I constantly
wonder how anyone who enjoys the outdoors would trash it. But we all see it,
all the time.

Larry Farquhar
Team "Wyle E"
www.happy-wanderers.com