Jump to content

Illegal &/or Dangerous Caches


MomToo!
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

Maybe I should start posting

of my more dangerous cache placement missions.

 

Can't tell exactly where you were on that particular trek but I will say this...

 

One of the county forest preserve districts here in Illinois recently placed a moratorium on cache placements on their lands... and one reason specifically given was because of someone using a machete to bushwack their way to a cache site.

Link to comment
I dont know for sure but after 9/11 I can garantee you most of the bridge caches are illegal.

 

You're right - You don't know for sure. In fact, you could have just left it as "I don't know". You also shouldn't "garantee" something you know nothing about.

I spent 35+ yrs in law enforcement and over 26 yrs in the military doing security assessments and involved heavily in post-9/11 security plannings at a statewide level involving some high security type installations and buildings. I have never seen any law, federal or state, or ever heard of such, that makes anything similiar to bridge caches illegal. Now, if you want to do a bit of research and back up your "garantee" then please post the federal or state statute that you believe covers such illegality.

 

As far as the "dangerous" part, I believe others have covered that well. No one forces anyone to seek any cache that the seeker may feel is too dangerous. If you think it's too dangerous for you, then by all means pass it up. There is no law forcing you to seek any specific cache. And that I can positively "garantee".

 

Sounds like someone is being too much Mom Too.

 

From the State of California Vehicle Code:

 

 

Trespass Prohibited

 

23332. It is unlawful for any person to be upon any portion of a vehicular crossing which is not intended for public use without the permission of the Department of Transportation. This section does not apply to a person engaged in the operation, maintenance, or repair of a vehicular crossing or any facility thereon nor to any person attempting to effect a rescue.

 

And I will go so far as saying, I WILL bet that most other states have similar statutes on the books. I guess if we get caught though we can just tell em that some guy who is a geocacher and used to be a cop told us it was all okie dokie.... that and a 100 dollars bail money will get ya outta jail. :ph34r:

 

Why are you speaking for our state. :P

You don't live here. :P

Link to comment
One of the county forest preserve districts here in Illinois recently placed a moratorium on cache placements on their lands... and one reason specifically given was because of someone using a machete to bushwack their way to a cache site.

I wouldn't think of using a machete in a preserve area. Well, I might think of using one, but wouldn't put that to action.

 

This cache is in an unregulated area where the grass grows back within a day or two. :ph34r:

Link to comment

I just got a call from the friend that MomToo! and I have in common, and they said they have read this entire thread and verified that...well, I'll just leave it at this: they agree with the vast majority of posts in response to hers here so far. Quite the...uh, interesting lady.

 

:P You two should go out to dinner.

:ph34r: This thread is great. I love the entertainment. I really like the fact that we've heard from all parties involved including the person who pulled the cache and now is a geocacher (welcome Watercop). You couldn't ask for better drama out of an adventure.

Link to comment

As far as the "dangerous" part, I believe others have covered that well. No one forces anyone to seek any cache that the seeker may feel is too dangerous. If you think it's too dangerous for you, then by all means pass it up. There is no law forcing you to seek any specific cache. And that I can positively "garantee".

 

<snip>

 

From the State of California Vehicle Code:

 

 

Trespass Prohibited

 

23332. It is unlawful for any person to be upon any portion of a vehicular crossing which is not intended for public use without the permission of the Department of Transportation. This section does not apply to a person engaged in the operation, maintenance, or repair of a vehicular crossing or any facility thereon nor to any person attempting to effect a rescue.

 

And I will go so far as saying, I WILL bet that most other states have similar statutes on the books. I guess if we get caught though we can just tell em that some guy who is a geocacher and used to be a cop told us it was all okie dokie.... that and a 100 dollars bail money will get ya outta jail. :P

 

If you really look for it, there is probably a law in California that says we can't even discuss this subject with out a lawyer present. :ph34r::P

Edited by grey_wolf & momcat
Link to comment

I just got a call from the friend that MomToo! and I have in common, and they said they have read this entire thread and verified that...well, I'll just leave it at this: they agree with the vast majority of posts in response to hers here so far. Quite the...uh, interesting lady.

 

That's my fear, that there's one in every crowd. So if I err on the side of caution I might get turned down, but their minds can be changed and you'll have foiled the town cache cop.

 

And her issues are not about caching anyway.

Edited by Kacky
Link to comment
One of the county forest preserve districts here in Illinois recently placed a moratorium on cache placements on their lands... and one reason specifically given was because of someone using a machete to bushwack their way to a cache site.

I wouldn't think of using a machete in a preserve area. Well, I might think of using one, but wouldn't put that to action.

 

This cache is in an unregulated area where the grass grows back within a day or two. :P

 

Just great. Its taken us years to dispell the notion that geocaches are buried. Now we're going to have to fight the perception that we use machetes. :ph34r:

Link to comment

And I will go so far as saying, I WILL bet that most other states have similar statutes on the books. I guess if we get caught though we can just tell em that some guy who is a geocacher and used to be a cop told us it was all okie dokie.... that and a 100 dollars bail money will get ya outta jail. :ph34r:

 

For one your statute says "not intended for public use ". In IL if it's not intended for public use the the IL DOT would not be maintaining it. It would be a private bridge maintained by a private entity.

You can look in the IL statutes and you won't find such. We aren't in CA here of which I am extremely happy. :P

Oh yeah, that's retired cop who is still doing homeland security consulting.

Edited by Wadcutter
Link to comment
Now we're going to have to fight the perception that we use machetes. :grin:

We all have our challenges. There does seem to be a mildly popular misconception that machetes are evil. What may have appeared to be actual cutting and slashing of grass in my silly Recon Cache Teaser video was actually me just laying the grass aside with the broad side of the blade (machetes have three distinct striking surfaces...too much detail for here). And the dead branches I did whack...well, they were already dead. I'm tempted to make a great comparison to some false beliefs about guns here, but we don't want to derail the legitimacy and fact-based issues of the OP's intentions, now, do we?

 

Rest assured that the machete usage depicted in my video represented no permanent damage to any native species of tree, grass, or plant life of any kind.

Link to comment

Speaking of machetes, I have not used one for caching, yet, but there have been occasions where a path through poison oak had to be cut through, due to overgrowth from all the rains we got here in California for the past 2 years. In many cases, one can't blame the hider for that.

 

People who are allergic usually choose not to hunt it, post a minor complaint with a DNF or a note, then get over it. No need to report it to "the authorities" to have the cache archived or pulled. (The owner can do so using his own good judgement)

 

Let's not make fun of "CacheCops" as they serve their purposes sometimes. What we want to avoid are "CacheGestapos". :grin:

Link to comment

And I will go so far as saying, I WILL bet that most other states have similar statutes on the books. I guess if we get caught though we can just tell em that some guy who is a geocacher and used to be a cop told us it was all okie dokie.... that and a 100 dollars bail money will get ya outta jail. :grin:

 

For one your statute says "not intended for public use ". In IL if it's not intended for public use the the IL DOT would not be maintaining it. It would be a private bridge maintained by a private entity.

You can look in the IL statutes and you won't find such. We aren't in CA here of which I am extremely happy. :(

Oh yeah, that's retired cop who is still doing homeland security consulting.

 

The statute is not saying that the BRIDGE itself is 'not intended for public use', it specifies 'portions of the bridge that are not intended for public use'... you could claim ignorance to the judge all you want but you'd be hard pressed to convince him that you really thought that the UNDERSIDE of the bridge structure was INTENDED for public use.

 

Great that you are doing homeland security stuff... but I find it hard to believe that someone wouldn't be hauling you off to jail if they found you scurrying around the steel undergirders of the I-80 bridge crossing the Mississippi.... you might eventually win it in court but it sure would be a major hassle just for a lousy geocache.

 

If nothing else, it sure won't give geocaching much of a good image to general public.

Edited by Audion
Link to comment

Great that you are doing homeland security stuff... but I find it hard to believe that someone wouldn't be hauling you off to jail if they found you scurrying around the steel undergirders of the I-80 bridge crossing the Mississippi.... you might eventually win it in court but it sure would be a major hassle just for a lousy geocache.

 

Next time you're coming across the I-80 bridge on the Mississippi take a look below. Or the I-70 bridge either. Doesn't matter which one. What you'll see are fishermen, hiking trails and other public recreation areas.

Link to comment

Let me see if I got this right, because all I've got to work on is the cache page and your post here....

 

You single-handedly brought a cache to the attention of a LEO who yanked it for the safety of all who might have hunted it after you? A cache whose page spells out the risks involved? A cache someone placed and maintained and posted for us to enjoy? A cache found by tens of happy cachers who left notes and :rolleyes: faces, with several thank yous?

 

I'll thank you not to do that again, if I've got this about right.

 

Gee, your vehicle looks oddly simular to Pablo Mac's

 

The cache did NOT spell out the specific risks to this particular cache, the owner refused to admit the cache was

1) dangerous, the terrain rating did not fit the cache and the owner refused to adjust the rating

2) a. illegally placed within 25 feet of a federally protected water treatment facility and water spillway

b. required either Illegally trespassing on federal and city properties and could be reached only by boat or by illegally scaling a bridge, either way you could not reach the cache without breaking the law and the cache owner REPEATEDLY lied about this fact on the cache logs.

 

The City enlisted the aid of "Environmental Services staff" whom followed their own GPS, located the cache and removed it BECAUSE IT WAS ILLEGAL and they specificlly stated in their letter to me that it was also DANGEROUS and that the owner of the cache had been very "apologetic" (to them) about having broken the law and placed others in harms way and risk of arrest.

 

I did report the DANGEROUS and ILLEGAL cache to geocaching June 2005, but nothing came of it, not until the City of Albany went after the cache and contacted the website and cache owner themselves. People with children went after this cache not knowing the circumstances and others reported serious injury attempting this cache, while still others posted logs stating they would not violate the law to find the cache.

 

Hey, my conscience is clear and I feel absolutely justified in my actions and reporting it here. If the owner will blatenly LIE when confronted with the truth and continue to subject others to illegal activities and dangerous locations then I have no problem outing him. ALL the man had to do was ADMIT he was lying and warn people that it could be dangerous and illegal, so they did not enter blindly into the search, but he REFUSED to tell the truth and even went so far as to make up LIES about where the cache was and was not located. I have the backing of the City of Albany and Environmental Services staff, THEY thought it was DANGEROUS and Illegal enough to REMOVE IT and take action against the owner.....

I have been an Emergency Management Director for over 10 years and know of no law ( local to me or federal) that would apply here. If the cache was DANGEROUS each cacher has the right to stop. I have looked at a location and chose not to go after the cache.

 

I feel that this could have been handled better than to try to distroy thr rep. of another cacher.

Link to comment
Now we're going to have to fight the perception that we use machetes. :rolleyes:

We all have our challenges. There does seem to be a mildly popular misconception that machetes are evil. What may have appeared to be actual cutting and slashing of grass in my silly Recon Cache Teaser video was actually me just laying the grass aside with the broad side of the blade (machetes have three distinct striking surfaces...too much detail for here). And the dead branches I did whack...well, they were already dead. I'm tempted to make a great comparison to some false beliefs about guns here, but we don't want to derail the legitimacy and fact-based issues of the OP's intentions, now, do we?

 

Rest assured that the machete usage depicted in my video represented no permanent damage to any native species of tree, grass, or plant life of any kind.

 

Bet it leaves a heck of a geo-trail though

Link to comment

Caches are allowed to be dangerous, as long as they are marked as so. I wonder what the OP would think about GCTA5E or any of the other caches in that series.

 

However, caches are not allowed to be placed illegally, and if one is found to be on an illegal spot, it should be archived, but only after the placer has been attempted to be contacted to discuss the cache.

Link to comment

Caches are allowed to be dangerous, as long as they are marked as so. I wonder what the OP would think about GCTA5E or any of the other caches in that series. ..

Please be advised that the final "hot" stage of GCTA5E, aka Psycho Urban Cache #9 - Hot Glowing Tribulations, was placed with the full approval of, and assistance from, the relevant local authorities in the county and state (not Maryland) where that final stage is located. In fact, the local sherrif for the out-of-state county helped me to carry the final stage ammo can into the containment building during one of my four cache placement trips out of state for the final stage, and has met with several of the subsequent cache seekers. And, that cache was fully approved for publication by not only the MD reviewer at geocaching.com, but also by the reviewer for the (undisclosed) nearby state in which the final stage is located, and also by a number of reviewers worldwide who were consulted by these two reviewers during the review process. We also employ stringent safeguards to ensure that only qualified seekers, with proper experience, skills, training and gear, ever gain access to the waypoint coordinates for the final stage.

 

Yes, it is true that several seekers, including Mocadeki, claim to have suffered some mild to moderate illness symptoms for several days (in one case, perhaps a week or a tiny bit longer) in the aftermath of their foray to the final stage site (yes, they were each wearing Tyvek protective bunny suits and DC-powered respirators), but each of those finders remains on excellent terms with us, and each reports that they would do it (i.e., the hot final stage venture) over again "in a heartbeat", and none of them bear any blame nor ill will toward Sue or myself, nor toward anyone else about their mild and brief illnesses. It is also true that one of the past finders of that cache is currently hospitalized, but the cacher's doctors feel that the condition for which they are hospitalized has nothing to do with their cache hunting experience at the final stage of GCTA5E nor with radiation exposure, nor with exposure to the onsite toxic chemical waste.

 

Frankly, even as the hider of the GCTA5E cache, in which role I visited the out-of-state final stage site at least four times, I must admit that any hazards and tribulations encountered during the process were quite mild compared to some of the things which I had to endure while seeking either of the following caches:

  • Blood & Guts in Virginia
  • Quantum Leap
  • there are at least four more extreme caches which I have found which I would like to add here, but their owners have asked me to cooperate with them in keeping their caches at a very low profile.

or which sekers have faced when tackling the locally-infamous Out, Done. cache, located near Harisburg, PA, which Sue and I plan to tackle soon.

or when I placed... oh... never mind...

Edited by Vinny & Sue Team
Link to comment
Bet it leaves a heck of a geo-trail though

Actually, no. I was out there with my machete a week ago today, and just now returned from another visit to upgrade a couple of items in the cache container, and my week-old "geo-trail" was all but invisible.

 

An experienced machete-user can temporarily clear a walkable path through heavy brush that will close back up as quickly as if someone walked through with no clearing tool. The person who uses a clearing tool, be it machete or hiking staff or whatever, will suffer fewer scrapes and hidden obstacles than the person who just strolls through with no brush defense tool.

Link to comment

Pablo Mac doe NOT put out illeagle caches. As far as dangerous goes, I have been hurt on way easier caches than his. Danger is in the eyes of the cacher. If you have a problem wuth Pablo's caches, then DON'T do them. There is a button on EVERY cache page that says ignor this cache. But to open up a discussion in the forums about something that others outside the area cant see for themelves is just rude. As far as the cache goe that you brought up to tart all of this, I and the rest of Team Geogold have done it. It is on City of Albany right of way. He even tells you NOT to go to the waterway. The cache is not that dangerous either if you do what your supposed to do, BE CAREFUL. If he hadn't already archived this cache, I would tell people to do it.How many caches have you placed?? Part of this GAME is to look for AND place caches. If you would place caches, you would see how difficult it is to place them. But like I said before, this is only a game, and if you don't like how a peron plays it, then don't play with them, but don't chastize them for their cacher either. I am a cacher that enjoys waiting for new caches , looking for caches, and have always enjoyed finding caches put out by Pablo Mac. BTW, he does put a disclaimer on his caches. So be fair to other cachers, even if you don't like the caches they place.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...