document.write(""); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write(" "); document.write("
COMMENTS
"); document.write(" Carl / Cornishchough wrote:"); document.write("

");document.write("Here in VA, while cemetaries are open to the public, they are generally private property maintained in perpetuity by a private trust. As such when hiding a cache we are required to obtain the permission of the trust to place a cache on cemetary land. A 'work around' that has been used here, is to place the cache on the nearest public right of way, with a secondary waypoint associated with the cache pointing to the monument of interest. There are many Civil War burial plots and monuments inside of cemetaries in this area. For an example of this, check the cache View to a Memorial.... at geocaching.com .");document.write("

"); document.write(" July 2, 2009, 7:15 PM"); document.write("
"); document.write(" Brian wrote:"); document.write("

");document.write("I noticed your photographer had no issues with using a head stone as a prop to promote the original article and your editors thought it just dandy to publish it. I wonder how the the family of that person might have felt if they knew their loved one's head stone was being used to sell newspapers.

What a hypocrite.");document.write("

"); document.write(" June 25, 2009, 7:21 PM"); document.write("
"); document.write(" Geo Narcissa wrote:"); document.write("

");document.write("Here's a link to a story that came out recently about a cemetery in New York State that is working with geocachers to catalogue the GPS coordinates of graves to make them easier to find.

http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2009/may/29/0529_gps/

The people who find geocaching in cemeteries offensive are CHOOSING to be offended by an activity that is done without intent to offend. That attitude is the responsibility of the person who holds it, not the geocachers.

These cemetery caretakers and the newspaper acting as their advocates need a serious attitude adjustment - you're alienating decent, active, community-minded people with this attack.");document.write("

"); document.write(" June 24, 2009, 1:55 AM"); document.write("
"); document.write(" HeadHardHat wrote:"); document.write("

");document.write("It is very obvious to see the heated discourse on both sides of this subject. People in general want the respect that is their due. For the general public and those who wish peace for those who are layed to rest must realize a public place is open for others to visit.

For geocachers who wish nothing but simple respect for doing what is legal and to bring others to places like a cemetery to learn from our history hurts no one. Geocachers do not enjoy slanted articles making them the bad guys in these situations without just cause. It always makes a better read when the author does their research and it is quite plain when they do not.

With all of that aside the rules of geocachers are clear. Geocachers are to get permission from the owners of the property to place geocaches on that site. If it is okay with the owners (not the caretakers but the owners) to place the geocaches then this argument is over.

If you stick with the rules there is no reason for fighting. Nuff Said.");document.write("

"); document.write(" June 23, 2009, 11:09 PM"); document.write("
"); document.write(" TripCyclone wrote:"); document.write("

");document.write("The title of your editorial is 'Respect, cooperation needed in geocaching flap.' Those first two words are important. We would like to find a respectful end to this and cooperate WITH both JCCA and JCSO. Mr. Smith realized that there are two sides to this story and was willing to give both sides a chance to speak. I have to say great job on allowing Mr. Smith to post the follow up.

However, what's even more interesting is how quickly you turn around and repaint a picture of geocachers as inconsiderate towards the feelings of others.

You are quick to point out an attempt at contacting the organization that runs geocaching and how you got no response. Yet another person contacts them and gets a quick response that they post as a comment to the original article. Odd. If you had talked to the staff member you claim was not used because you don't use staff members as sources, you might have learned that the same organization doesn't hide the caches. They just help provide a system to organize it all. It's the geocachers themselves who place and maintain the geocaches. Talking to that staff member would have helped in learning that the best people to contact about the local caches would be the local geocachers. That staff member would have also been a valuable person in helping to contact THOSE people.

You say that it doesn't matter if we are learning something and clean up after ourselves. I would think those are positive aspects. You also say '...or if they thought the cemeteries were public property,...'. It's not a matter of thought. Texas has an open cemetery law, allowing anyone entry into all cemeteries for the purpose of visiting cemeteries.

You mention the possible generational gap, especially those of a certain age. However, you forget that it isn't so uncommon for picnics and celebrations to be held in cemeteries, a practice that was even more common when that 'certain age' group you refer too were younger.

Then you finish: 'Many of the geocachers’ goals are good — learning, respect for the environment, making exploring the outdoors fun — but instead of jumping to defend themselves or attack a reporter, they should consider carefully who they’re offending and whether giving that offense is worthwhile.'

So you're saying that we shouldn't defend ourselves about a one sided article? Seems you are doing exactly that in your article. I don't recall seeing any threats in the comments left on that article, yet your final paragraph reads exactly that...a threat. And why shouldn't we comment that the reporter didn't get both sides of the story the first time? In today's day and age, reporters are forced to push out articles quickly. It wouldn't surprise me if less than a day was spent actually researching material for the article. I'm pretty sure if the article had been more accurate and included interviews from both sides of the story, you would have seen less defensive responses.

You warn use about offending the wrong people. Well, you're insulting comments have offended me, and if they have offended me, I'm sure they have offended a rather large community of geocachers. Plus, you've just gone and thrown another wrench into that 'respect, cooperation needed' that you advertise in your title. I believe that makes you a hypocrite.");document.write("

"); document.write(" June 23, 2009, 1:28 AM"); document.write("
"); document.write(" DanF wrote:"); document.write("

");document.write("'commentators seemed to have missed a salient point: Neither the JCCA nor the Johnson County Sheriff’s Office want the caches in the cemeteries they care for.'

'This should be enough reason to put the caches somewhere else. It doesn’t matter if geocachers are learning history, or if they thought the cemeteries were public property,'

Excuse me, but it is my understanding that, in Texas, cemeteries ARE public property. We didn't just think that up.

Given that, what the JCCA or the Johnson County Sheriff’s Office want is no more relevant than what the geocachers want.

Your article called us 'gamers'. That is a very inflammatory term with connotations that do not reflect reality. I, for one, am nearly 60 years old. Most cachers that I know are within 10 years of my age, one way or the other. Many are retired. The only teenagers that I know of that cache, and there are very few of them, cache with their parents or grandparents. We are taxpaying, socially responsible adults and I, for one, found this article to be reprehensible.

Yes, a few geocachers from Texas are trying to work this out. The rest of us are not ignoring the issue... we're merely trying to stay out of the way. Believe me... many eyes are watching what's happening down your way, and at this point, it is not very flattering.

DanF from Minnesota");document.write("

"); document.write(" June 22, 2009, 11:37 PM"); document.write("
"); document.write(" John wrote:"); document.write("

");document.write("Once again, painting geocachers as bad people - 'attacking', 'protesting'. All I saw on the original article were thoughtful and eloquent descriptions of the hobbie and how it is probably more beneficial to have these people visiting cemetaries than not.");document.write("

"); document.write(" June 22, 2009, 9:28 PM"); document.write("
"); document.write(" Geo Narcissa wrote:"); document.write("

");document.write("This editorial is ridiculous and insulting.

As I'm sure many other geocachers have already pointed out, the people complaining about the geocaches are not the ones with the authority to prohibit them from those lands. Texas has an open cemeteries law!

It is not difficult to sign up for a free account and look up geocaches anywhere in the world. Has anyone from your paper made an attempt to contact the cache owners? And, btw, I wrote to you previously and offered to help you make contact with geocachers in your area.

I suspect that the geocaches these people are complaining about were hidden with permission, and that is why Groundspeak volunteers are not inclined to respond to complaints from people without any authority.

This is just a theory, but if it is correct, then these cemetery groundkeepers - and not the geocachers - are the ones in the wrong.

Another geocacher I've spoken to turned up something at Texas's historical society that PROMOTES education games like scavenger hunts INSIDE graveyards, in order to facilitate learning.

There's a whole other side to be told here, and you're still not telling it. Get on the ball.");document.write("

"); document.write(" June 22, 2009, 7:11 PM"); document.write("
"); document.write(" PJ Merrill wrote:"); document.write("

");document.write("I would suppose you could have gone to www.geocaching.com and checked out the forum section and asked for comments. That said, some of my most memorable caches have involved the search in a cemetery, as you do learn a lot of history. Most of these have been 'virtuals' were you search the cemetery to provide answer(s) to a question(s) (one involved a grave of a horse of a Civil War officer). Another search required that we get different info from gravestones inside an old cemetery in Derry, New Hampshire in order to find a traditional 'cache' just outside the cemetery itself.");document.write("

"); document.write(" June 22, 2009, 3:39 PM"); document.write("

");