ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 I am tired of submitting caches that have no problem in the area that they are placed except for supposed 9-11 concerns. I understand true concerns around 9-11 supposed re-attack areas. I am talking about caches that have no REAL concern of being a problem, but because the supposed local (but not in state) approver looks on a map with no REAL idea of the area you can't get your cache approved. What can be done to help alliviate this problem as caches that would be very much enjoyed and highly visited by cachers (others I have show this to be true) just run into roadblock after roadblock for no reason that if a TRUE local (in area to look at placement or know the area) would approve.
+Mopar Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 How about a real example, instead of generic accusations?
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 Pushing Tin Sky Harbor N 33° 26.561 W 111° 59.622
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 The pushing tin sky harbor cache is one im trying to fight out right now, but I have had others in the past.
Keystone Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 This cache was discussed by all the volunteer reviewers in our separate forum, so it is not just a case of a single reviewer not liking this location. I don't know that you need to be "local" to look at this spot and wonder whether there might be a concern with airport security. The same photo of the Pittsburgh Airport would dictate the same result as this location at the Phoenix Airport. Groundspeak has received too many incident reports for caches at or near airports, many of them being much farther away from the active runway than this location. Some people may recall the episode where a member of the Otter & Lemur team was detained by police and FBI for questioning after finding a cache near LAX in a parklike area where people jog and walk their dogs. This location is even closer to the runway than the LAX example. Pretend you're a cache reviewer. Look at this image. Would you list a cache there, when the guidelines say "no caches at or near airports?"
+StarBrand Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 (edited) Gotta trust that the reviewers generally know what they are doing. The picture shows your idea and I see why it is being denied. Edited August 25, 2005 by StarBrand
+Artemis Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 Please note the information of the Phoenix Police asking caches not be replaced when the original cache was over 300' further from the airport runway then the new one would be. The white line around the outside of the image is the boundary of Airport property according to the County records, Google Maps, Yahoo maps. Enjoy
+Artemis Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 From the guidelines: Please be advised there is no precedent for placing caches. This means that the past approval of a similar cache in and of itself is not a valid justification for the approval of a new cache. If a cache has been posted and violates any guidelines listed below, you are encouraged to report it. However, if the cache was placed prior to the date when a guideline was issued or updated the cache is likely to be “grandfathered” and allowed.
Keystone Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 Gotta trust that the reviewers generally know what they are doing. The picture shows your idea and I see why it is being denied. Starbrand, the images and discussion in my post, and in the post by Artemis, the Arizona reviewer, both relate directly to the OP's "Pushing Tin" cache at the Phoenix Airport.
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 Well nice pic, wanna post the one I sent to reviewers to so all can have both sides?
+Mopar Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 (edited) Dude, you're kidding right? Do you really need a cache hide your stats so bad you want to cause all sorts of bad press and legal hassles for other cachers? Check out this thread that looks like it was about the same as yours except it was hidden at LAX. Do you REALLY want to submit your fellow cachers to that? Good call by the cache reviewers in my opinion. Edited August 25, 2005 by Mopar
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 ok now you show to pics one not even showing the same as the other???? can you approvers even agree wich map your using????
Keystone Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 Well nice pic, wanna post the one I sent to reviewers to so all can have both sides? Sure, it's the same spot but with pretty crayon coloring. I happen to like the one with the cute little airplanes in the photo, but here's yours, just to be fair:
+Artemis Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 ok now you show to pics one not even showing the same as the other???? can you approvers even agree wich map your using???? Actually they are the same place and information. Please look at them and you will notice the second one is only zoomed in. Sorry it was not obvious enough for you to identify as such.
+4leafclover Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 ok now you show to pics one not even showing the same as the other???? can you approvers even agree wich map your using???? looks to me to be the same map...the second is simply a closer view. What is so important about this location, that you can't place the cache some place else?
Keystone Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 ok now you show to pics one not even showing the same as the other???? can you approvers even agree wich map your using???? They're at two different zoom levels. Same spot. You really ought to try Google Earth. It's almost like being there!
+4leafclover Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 Well nice pic, wanna post the one I sent to reviewers to so all can have both sides? Sure, it's the same spot but with pretty crayon coloring. I happen to like the one with the cute little airplanes in the photo, but here's yours, just to be fair: is that a PARK I see in the upper left corner?
+Yamahammer Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 ifishaz, If your picture has the right coordinates indicated, I don't see why you can't post it. But remember the guidelines. But I gotta tell ya, 9/11 was not a dream or fiction. It was real and it was/is a nightmare. Concerns by anyone should be addressed on the side of caution.
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 no it was not the same pic notice the road???? zooming in doesnt put the cache on the other side of the road does it?????
+Stunod Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 no it was not the same pic notice the road???? zooming in doesnt put the cache on the other side of the road does it????? Both markers are just north of the road...
+4leafclover Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 no it was not the same pic notice the road???? zooming in doesnt put the cache on the other side of the road does it????? son, you need to look a little closer at the tow pics. note the white circles in both pics?
+Artemis Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 no it was not the same pic notice the road???? zooming in doesnt put the cache on the other side of the road does it????? Um, the center of the box is on the same side of the road on both images. Sorry
+briansnat Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 (edited) Its a fact of life that places like airports are terrorist targets and are under close scrutiny by the police and other authorities. Someone standing near a runway with a stinger missile can do a good bit of damage and the idea is not all that far fetched. Because of this, these areas are under constant surveilance. A geocacher wandering about these sensitive areas will attract attention. Our activity, by its very nature, makes us look suspicious. Geocachers have been stopped in public parks by the police just because we look suspicious. Skulking around potential terrorist targets with a GPS is only asking for trouble. If course you aren't breaking any laws, but its mighty inconvenient to be hauled in for questioning. Its not being a "9-11 fraidy cat" its called having some common sense. It's just idiotic to place caches in areas that have heavy security. With all the great places out there to hide caches, I don't understand why some people insist on hiding their caches next to airports, on bridges, dams, etc... Edited August 25, 2005 by briansnat
+Mopar Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 no it was not the same pic notice the road???? zooming in doesnt put the cache on the other side of the road does it????? Does that really matter? Either side of the road is airport owned property, it seems. Did the property owners give you permission to place a cache there?
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 what my pretty crayoned on map shows; Red line is end of airport property. Yellow is parking lot. Blue is my work (Allstate cab company. 4008 E. Air lane). Orange is other businesses. Black is cache placement at base of a tree in parking lot. Also that park is actually Phoenix greyhound dog racing park (gambling site), but the maps the approvers use also say its part of the airport.
Keystone Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 no it was not the same pic notice the road???? zooming in doesnt put the cache on the other side of the road does it????? All three pictures place the cache at the same spot; north of the road and south of the big building with the white roof. But one side of the road vs. the other makes no difference. Heading over to the park that 4leafclover noticed..... now, that would make a difference!
+Yamahammer Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 And we walk around with a GPS'r doesn't make us any less suspicious! It actually makes one of us stand out more in those sensitive areas.
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 Hey mopar = ITS MY WORK PARKING LOT, yes I got permission to place it.
+4leafclover Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 no it was not the same pic notice the road???? zooming in doesnt put the cache on the other side of the road does it????? All three pictures place the cache at the same spot; north of the road and south of the big building with the white roof. But one side of the road vs. the other makes no difference. Heading over to the park that 4leafclover noticed..... now, that would make a difference! *snickers* I love greyhounds.
+Cow Spots Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 Dude. In both cache locations, you could probably throw a golf ball and hit the runway. You want to complain to someone, complain to the Department of Homeland Security. I'm sure they'll listen.
+Artemis Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 what my pretty crayoned on map shows;Red line is end of airport property. Yellow is parking lot. Blue is my work (Allstate cab company. 4008 E. Air lane). Orange is other businesses. Black is cache placement at base of a tree in parking lot. Also that park is actually Phoenix greyhound dog racing park (gambling site), but the maps the approvers use also say its part of the airport. Please clarrify that the Red Lin is your drawing of the fence. I have shown you the parcel information from the Phoenix Assessors office that shows this is City proporty for the Airport and the buidling you work at is leased from the city and is on city property owned and used for the airport. You might want to check with your boss and see if they are willing to confirm they do not own the property. Not that it really matters as the cache is still 214.31 feet from the runway of an international airport.
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 no the second supposed zoom map shows the cache on the fence line of the taxi way, the first map shows it in the parking lot of my work, get a clue I KNOW THE AREA. your zoom map shows it differently
+4leafclover Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 I sitll want to know what is so special about his work parking lot , that the cache HAS to be there? And I think the greyhound park is still an okay location....
Keystone Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 no the second supposed zoom map shows the cache on the fence line of the taxi way, the first map shows it in the parking lot of my work, get a clue I KNOW THE AREA. your zoom map shows it differently There is no need to be rude and to use phrases like "get a clue." Artemis already has a clue. You don't get to be "Goddess of the Hunt" if you're clueless.
+Artemis Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 no the second supposed zoom map shows the cache on the fence line of the taxi way, the first map shows it in the parking lot of my work, get a clue I KNOW THE AREA. your zoom map shows it differently No The Second map shows a Red Arrow FROM the cache location TO the runway. Follow the line back to the end of it at the north and please note the square with a small plus sign in it. This is the coordinates, the red line is a distance marker.
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 the parking lot is used by locals to watch planes land and take off every day of the week any local would know that a cache in its placement would not cause any problem. also once again 9-11 has cost you your freedom, personally if you thow a golf ball at a plane I am on I will feel safe.
+4leafclover Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 and that box looks like it is in the exact same place to me, in both google maps. The arrow drawn in the second is depicting the distace of from the cache to the property line of the airport. At least that's what it looks like to me.
+Lil Devil Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 So let's see here. First, you yourself archived one of your caches because it was 530 feet from therunway, and the police asked you to remove it, as you wrote in this log which I'll quote here: Well, it was inevitable to happen in this new era we have found our country in after 9-11. I was contacted by the Phoenix Police at the airport and told that they had the cache in custody ( lol ) and they request it not to be replaced. I will be retrieving the cache from them today and all items will be moved to a new cache. I hope to find a place that will give visitors a view of planes coming in and out of Skyharbor. I hope those of you who got to visit Pushing Tin enjoyed it while it was there. I love watching planes from there, but I guess the days of free movement around airports are over. So then you move the cache around the corner to a spot that is only 230 feet from the runway, and then you complain when it isn't listed? You're the one that needs to get a clue.
+4leafclover Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 the parking lot is used by locals to watch planes land and take off every day of the week any local would know that a cache in its placement would not cause any problem. also once again 9-11 has cost you your freedom, personally if you thow a golf ball at a plane I am on I will feel safe. I'm sure the police are very confident what the locals do and do not know....
+4leafclover Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 ok got the red line idea... do I smell that a "clue" was gotten? no one is trying to be pissy, but lordy...why is this place so important?
+AtoZ Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 I think we need to just get on with it. Maybe find another place for you cache that is not so close to a sesative area. There has to be a bit of sense when placing a cache. You should know that ALL airports are now sensitive areas. FInd another spot or another cache listing service. But if you don't care for your fellow cacher then go ahead and place it. cheers
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 the cache i removed was on the fence line and i removed it seeing the problem as it was in an area that caused suspicion, i do have a clue, also the park everyone suggest would be not allowed as it to is shown to be airport property. plus the theme and idea of the cache is to see the planes not the dogs.,
Keystone Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 There are spots near most major airports where people park to watch the planes take off and land. I used to take my daughter to the one near Pittsburgh International Airport. But I'd never dream of putting a cache there, what with all the signs and security patrols, not to mention the listing guidelines. Pretend you're a law enforcement officer patrolling past this parking lot. You see four groups of people. Three groups are sitting in their cars, with wide-eyed kids enjoying an ice cream cone while watching big jets take off. The fourth group is poking around the parking lot guardrails, signs and other spots, holding GPS receivers and other electronic equipment. Which of those groups might prompt you to stop and ask questions?
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 my question is why should i get a new area when this one is fine????
+Cow Spots Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 if you thow a golf ball at a plane I am on I will feel safe. In case it wasn't self-evident : 1) I don't have any intention of throwing a golf ball at a plane. 2) If you're wandering around that close to an airport with a GPSr, you will most likely attract negative attention. It has apparently already happened to cachers at this airport. Your own cache looks like was confiscated, and now you're wanting to place another one even closer?!? 3) A miniature container this close to an major international airport is a bad idea. An ammo can would, of course, be an even worse idea. Why intentionally set up a situation where a cacher could go to the airport, possibly at night, creeping around the area with a GPS receiver, poking around? Sometimes the negative consequences of our actions far outweigh the need to drop an Altoids tin.
Keystone Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 A reviewer far wiser than me recently said, "Not every place needs a cache." This is one of those places.
+Artemis Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 my question is why should i get a new area when this one is fine???? If my word is not enough, and the guidlines of Groundspeak are not enough, then the overall response of other cachers saying this is a bad place should be enough to say this place is 'Not Fine' ?
+4leafclover Posted August 25, 2005 Posted August 25, 2005 my question is why should i get a new area when this one is fine???? like it or not...IT ISN'T. you've been told, and it's been explained to you why. No one like the aftermath of 9-11...but you deal with it. If this is the only way it affects you, you are pretty darn lucky. Can one not see the planes from the greyhound place? Or make a note on the cache page to stop by where you originally wanted to place the cache. I think they will get the idea.
ifishaz Posted August 25, 2005 Author Posted August 25, 2005 ++++Pretend you're a law enforcement officer patrolling past this parking lot. You see four groups of people. Three groups are sitting in their cars, with wide-eyed kids enjoying an ice cream cone while watching big jets take off. The fourth group is poking around the parking lot guardrails, signs and other spots, holding GPS receivers and other electronic equipment. Which of those groups might prompt you to stop and ask questions? ++++ Pretend I am a US citizen, not breaking the law, not causing trouble, trying to go about a legal activity?..... o-wait thats not pretend, its real.....
Recommended Posts