>From: "Brian Casteel" <bcasteel@uccinc.net>
>Reply-To: listserv@azgeocaching.com
>To: <listserv@azgeocaching.com>
>Subject: RE: [Az-Geocaching] FW: National Public Lands Day - Thank you!
>Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 08:47:22 -0700
>Notification/tracking numbers will be
>assigned, with a life cycle being granted to caches in a single location,
>then moved or archived to minimize new trail creation.
I have always said that a life limit on caches would be a good idea.
However, there are some pros and cons to that, all of which have been
mentioned on here in the past. I agree that life limiting caches would keep
off trail destruction to a minimum. I have seen many caches that are off
trail where there is a very well defined 'trail' leading right to the
cache... and ending right there! Other caches, however, are placed in rocky
locations where there is no deterioration of the terrain when hiking to it.
Other caches yet are placed in very remote areas where very few geocachers
will ever visit... a cache that maybe only gets 7 or 8 visits a year,
shouldn't have the same life limit as a cache that gets 40 or 50 visits a
year. There has to be a way to differentiate between them and to realize
that some caches can last longer with no effect on the surrounding terrain
while other caches can have a heavy effect on the land around it after just
a few months.
Scott
Team Ropingthewind
(text/plain)