[Az-Geocaching] Re: Susperstition caches

[Scott Sparks]

I've read many good posts concerning the removal of caches from the 
Superstition Wilderness Area in the past few days; too many to quote. 
So, if I plagiarise anyone, let me offer my apologies beforehand. I 
would like to add my .02 cents, even if just to support what others have 
already stated.

  First off, the _excuse_  that the Ranger District/Forest Service (or 
whoever the concerned agency is)  has reportedly used claiming that they 
are trying to reduce the creation of new trails is just that-- an 
excuse. And a poor one at that.  Someone wrote (here) that they spoke 
with an official at the Mesa Ranger office about making some of the 
caches virtuals and they said that was okay.  Sorry, but unless the 
virtual is for a location right on the trail, or can be seen from the 
trail, then a cacher would still need to leave the trail to log a 
virtual find.  So, their (the Ranger District's) B.S. excuse just 
doesn't hold water.   And, speaking of "damaging" the environment, for 
crying out loud, I've seen one group of well-intentioned cub scouts or a 
single Sherrif's Posse on horseback do more damage to the wilderness in 
a day that a whole herd of geo-cachers could do in a year. (Do 
geo-cachers travel in herds? :-) )

  The second excuse I've heard is they will confiscate any property left 
unattended for a specified period of time.  I haven't seen an official 
number yet so I'm not sure how long it is. I've heard from 24 hours to 
14 days.  (Anyone know the truth?)  Anyway, I understand this regulation 
and have always considered it a "litter" issue.  I personally am 
appalled when I come across not just typical "trash" type litter in the 
Wilderness Area, but also things like clothing, backpacks and other 
equipment, unused food items and other items that were obviously 
abandoned because the person who carried it in was either too lazy to 
carry it back out or too lazy to stop and pick it up when they (or their 
pack animal) dropped it.  Heck, we once happened upon an entire 
encampment that had been abandoned on Black Top Mesa.  This included 
large military style canvas tents that were left behind and weeks worth 
of canned provisions.  The stuff was strewn about over an area of 
several hundred yards, either by natural forces or the critters who make 
their home there.  The stuff had obviously been there for some time but 
they weren't the kind of thing you would miss when you were packing up 
to leave camp and head back to civilization. At any rate, I support the 
removal of abandoned property, if it is causing a problem to the 
environment or is an eyesore.  I don't think a cache hidden off-trail, 
out of site could be considered either.  For a Ranger to make a 
concerted effort to track something down that, if he hadn't been 
instructed by his/her superiors, he wouldn't even have known existed. 
 That's sort of like your homeowner's association telling you you can't 
paint the _interior_ of your house a certain color.  Of course, they 
never would have known what color the interior of your house was if your 
nosy neighbor hadn't reported it.  Again, I think the confiscation of 
abandoned property rule, as the Ranger District has applied it to 
caches, is pure hogwash.

  A couple of people have alluded to the fact that the Rangers will 
allow caches, as long as they have some control over it.  This is what 
it all boils down to, IMHO-- CONTROL!!  As is typical with any gov't 
agency charged with overseeing _anything_ on behalf of the public, if 
they don't have an iron fisted  control over it, then they ain't happy. 
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  I don't want to 
sound like an anarchist or a conspiracy nut, and I don't want to start 
on a rant... so I'll just quit this line of discussion as it stands.

I've seen posted here several times that the Rangers "may" allow caches, 
but only with prior consent;  in the same breath they state that there 
is currently no procedure in place for doing so.  I've also read that 
they have no official policy on geocaching.  If that's true, then they 
have no legal pretext to stop the placement of caches in the lands under 
their jurisdiction.  They can only remove caches when they search them 
out and find them.  This prompts, in my mind, a few possible avenues of 
attack for the geocaching community. 1) Stop placing caches on _PUBLIC_ 
lands, sit back and wait for a few representatives to educate and hash 
it out with the bureaucrats, which will drag on for years, and in the 
end will inevitably result in further restrictions on our beloved 
sport/hobby/obsession.   Any descendant of virtually any tribe of 
American Indians will probably tell you, "Yeah! That's the way to do it. 
We were pascifists and look what it did for our people!"  2) Flood the 
Wilderness with 'out of the way' caches faster than the Rangers can 
track them down.  In the end, they might just give up and let us have 
our fun as long as we don't do any "real" damage.  Again (using the 
analogy of the American Indian, in the interest of parity) ask any 
descendant of any of the "warring" tribes and they'll probably tell you, 
"Yeah! That's the way to do it! We fought back and look what it did for 
our people!"  3)  Continue hiding caches in the Wilderness but don't 
post the coordinates directly.  Use posted coordinates that are 
_outside_ the Wilderness with prerequisite cache legs that lead you to 
the final destination or puzzles whose solutions lead you to the final 
destination inside the "sacred ground."  Perhaps this will lead to an 
"out of sight,out of mind" policy. Look what it did for the American Eskimo!

As for the Ranger District's sudden interest (or disinterest) in caches 
placed in lands under their jurisdiction, there's no doubt in my mind 
that it all started because of  either the previous bad press we've 
received or a small number of complaints received from well-intentioned 
but mis-informed (ie. nosy busybody) citizens.  Some higher up official 
has picked on the scent and is using it as a political stepping stone 
because he/she feels he/she is doing the general public a favor (at the 
same time garnering future votes or political appointment.)  I can't 
understand why the Ranger District isn't begging us to place caches on 
their/our lands. After all, for every herd (see paragraph 2) of 
geocachers that enters the Wilderness at one of the popular entrances, a 
minimum of $4 in parking fees will be generated.  In a time where the 
state legislature is considering slashing budgets all over the place, 
you'd think they'd be happy for every penny they can get.



But then again, I could be wrong.


Fuggit.  Who wants pie?

-- Sprocket

(with apologies to Dennis Miller.)