Pending Cache...

September 10, 2006

This is the I-95 and Route 32 interchange in Columbia MD. Iv'e been waiting for approval for a couple of days. Does anyone have any idea if there is a problem with this? You can guess where I wanted to place the cache - but I couldn't get it in the center the brush was way to thick.

38.2k · September 10, 2006

Looks awfully close to a bridge to me. That alone would be reason for it to be turned down. Also the reviewer will probably ask if it can be found without stopping on the highway or ramp.

Edited September 10, 2006 by briansnat

7.3k · September 10, 2006

I thought that you couldn't have caches inside of clover leafs. Can you get to the cache without crossing one of those roads?

6.4k · September 10, 2006

Wow! I woulda never thought the DOT would have given permission for a cache there! Good job!

September 10, 2006

Unless there is an unusually tremendous pile of road kill animals, or a car filled with nuns that went off the road five years ago and nobody knows about it but you, why would you want to place a cache there to begin with ?

September 10, 2006

I thought that you couldn't have caches inside of clover leafs. Can you get to the cache without crossing one of those roads?

There is one way in without crossing any roads - that's the beauty of this cache.

September 10, 2006

Wow! I woulda never thought the DOT would have given permission for a cache there! Good job!

Because it's a unique location. And it's a bear to get to.

September 10, 2006

Replied to the wrong post

Unless there is an unusually tremendous pile of road kill animals, or a car filled with nuns that went off the road five years ago and nobody knows about it but you, why would you want to place a cache there to begin with ?

Because it's a unique location. And it's a bear to get to.

September 10, 2006

Wow! I woulda never thought the DOT would have given permission for a cache there! Good job!

Because it's a unique location. And it's a bear to get to.

So you are saying that DOT did give permission for this hide, or were you answer the question above about why it is an interesting hide.

[stirring of the pot]Please tell me this is not a micro.[/stirring of the pot]

September 10, 2006

Wow! I woulda never thought the DOT would have given permission for a cache there! Good job!

Because it's a unique location. And it's a bear to get to.

So you are saying that DOT did give permission for this hide, or were you answer the question above about why it is an interesting hide.

[stirring of the pot]Please tell me this is not a micro.[/stirring of the pot]

Wrong post. I did not ask permission

September 10, 2006

[stirring of the pot]Please tell me this is not a micro.[/stirring of the pot]

No, it's an ammo can in plain sight.

Edited September 10, 2006 by WyattEarp

September 10, 2006

[stirring of the pot]Please tell me this is not a micro.[/stirring of the pot]

No, it's an ammo can in plain site.

Truth be told, I would love to hunt for it then. That actually sounds like a really cool idea. Good luck getting it approved.

7.3k · September 10, 2006

I have one similar, but on a smaller scale. It's inside of a clover leaf kinda, but you can do about a mile round trip to get to it without crossing any roads. It's beside a large boulder in a big natural area. I love it. Not sure that any of the cachers who have done it think that it's that spectacular, but oh well. Maybe because it's at the end of a tough multi.

7.2k · September 10, 2006

Wrong post. I did not ask permission

The cache will not be listed until you get permission. I will point you to this web page, which you went to when you entered the new cache.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/

If you look at the upper right, where you clicked to enter the new cache into the system, the first line says:

Please make sure to obtain permission from the landowner or land manager and read the guidelines for reporting a cache (last update 11/02/05) prior to placing your geocache.

Clicking the link there that takes you to the guidelines, then going down to the "Off Limits" area, you will see this written as the very first line, once again:

By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location.

It sounds like you have some problems with this cache.

September 10, 2006

You should consider that there is always more than one way to skin a cat. I can imagine someone will be bold enough to just pull over, put the flashers on and have a go at it, and then log it on line like it was a bear to get to. Unless a drunk driver wipes them out and they join the nuns.

2.4k · September 10, 2006

Wow! I woulda never thought the DOT would have given permission for a cache there! Good job!

Probably the same permission the DOT gave for all the rest area caches, or the chain stores gave for the parking lot micros.........

September 10, 2006

Wrong post. I did not ask permission

The cache will not be listed until you get permission. I will point you to this web page, which you went to when you entered the new cache.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/

If you look at the upper right, where you clicked to enter the new cache into the system, the first line says:

Please make sure to obtain permission from the landowner or land manager and read the guidelines for reporting a cache (last update 11/02/05) prior to placing your geocache.

Clicking the link there that takes you to the guidelines, then going down to the "Off Limits" area, you will see this written as the very first line, once again:

By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location.

It sounds like you have some problems with this cache.

-----------------

Honestly, I agree with one of the later posters. I honestly can't see anyone contacting the DOT for permission to place caches at rest stops, or in most cases, in guard rails along US routes or State routes on what is normally considered public property. I think, if there is a legitimate way in here, and it is made very clear that it is NOT accessable from the highway, and maybe even have a waypoint marked in there where you would start your journey using the correct route, that it would be ok. But then again, reviewers tend to be strange creatures - sometimes they approve things that sound like they shouldn't be, and sometimes they don't approve things that make perfect sense for a cache. Good luck!

September 10, 2006

Honestly, I agree with one of the later posters. I honestly can't see anyone contacting the DOT for permission to place caches at rest stops, or in most cases, in guard rails along US routes or State routes on what is normally considered public property. I think, if there is a legitimate way in here, and it is made very clear that it is NOT accessable from the highway, and maybe even have a waypoint marked in there where you would start your journey using the correct route, that it would be ok. But then again, reviewers tend to be strange creatures - sometimes they approve things that sound like they shouldn't be, and sometimes they don't approve things that make perfect sense for a cache. Good luck!

I agree.

The hint describes the route to the cache via a county park.

I really would like to get it closer to the center of the intercahnge - for symetry.

September 10, 2006

Honestly, I agree with one of the later posters. I honestly can't see anyone contacting the DOT for permission to place caches at rest stops, or in most cases, in guard rails along US routes or State routes on what is normally considered public property. I think, if there is a legitimate way in here, and it is made very clear that it is NOT accessable from the highway, and maybe even have a waypoint marked in there where you would start your journey using the correct route, that it would be ok. But then again, reviewers tend to be strange creatures - sometimes they approve things that sound like they shouldn't be, and sometimes they don't approve things that make perfect sense for a cache. Good luck!

I actually did contact the DOT concerning a cache placement that was located on a stop sign. They basicly said that they could not issue an official permit due to liability reason but that it was not forbidden either (the ole' I won't ask, you don't tell and we all will be happy...) Their biggest concern was saftey and laibility. As long as you dont have to go near the highways, and you can get to it by another route, I would be willing to bet DOT would allow you access to their land. Just my thoughts on the matter.

2.5k · September 10, 2006

Honestly, I agree with one of the later posters. I honestly can't see anyone contacting the DOT for permission to place caches at rest stops, or in most cases, in guard rails along US routes or State routes on what is normally considered public property. I think, if there is a legitimate way in here, and it is made very clear that it is NOT accessable from the highway, and maybe even have a waypoint marked in there where you would start your journey using the correct route, that it would be ok. But then again, reviewers tend to be strange creatures - sometimes they approve things that sound like they shouldn't be, and sometimes they don't approve things that make perfect sense for a cache. Good luck!

I agree.

The hint describes the route to the cache via a county park.

I really would like to get it closer to the center of the intercahnge - for symetry.

I don't think I've ever been to that location, I hope it gets approved soon so that I can visit!

September 10, 2006

The recommended route is the hint?

IMHO, knowing that interchange I'd put that in the cache description. Otherwise you're going to have people parking on the shoulder and jumping the guardrail to get to it.

I've got the horrible memory of what happened at the next exit northbound... when the light at the interchange was out. Not the same scenario, but interchanges are really dangerous, and I think I'd rather take my chances with a rattler or bear.

September 10, 2006

The recommended route is the hint?

IMHO, knowing that interchange I'd put that in the cache description. Otherwise you're going to have people parking on the shoulder and jumping the guardrail to get to it.

I have to agree with this. If there is only safe one route in, it should be described in some general way in the cache description, even if only to mention where the parking area is and the fact that there is a way in without crossing the road.

I have a cache where you have to cross a river from the parking area. High bluffs and private property block any other access. I clearly state this, along with the best methods of river crossing, in the cache description.

AR_kayaker

September 10, 2006

I have to agree with this. If there is only safe one route in, it should be described in some general way in the cache description, even if only to mention where the parking area is and the fact that there is a way in without crossing the road.

Or, if he does get permission, to remove the chance of someone stopping in traffic and winning themselves a darwin award, make it into a multi, start the chain at the place where you need to start, and have the stages lead you in.

7.3k · September 11, 2006

I hope you wrote a long detailed reviewer note.

2.5k · September 12, 2006

Am I just being boring and pedantic, but isn't your avatar actually Doc Holiday and not Wyatt Earp at all?

(mmm, Val Kilmer, droool)

September 12, 2006

Am I just being boring and pedantic, but isn't your avatar actually Doc Holiday and not Wyatt Earp at all?

(mmm, Val Kilmer, droool)

Very good. Your paying attention. :laughing:

I just couldn't put up "The Computer That Wore Tennis Shoes" as Wyatt.

22k · September 12, 2006

September 12, 2006

Clicking the link there that takes you to the guidelines, then going down to the "Off Limits" area, you will see this written as the very first line, once again:
By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location.

It sounds like you have some problems with this cache.

If everyone followed this rule to the letter, you could probably delete 50% of all Geocaches.

Take National Forests. Those that do allow caches almost always have a "One Year Limit", then it has to be moved. Most have a form that needs to be filled out and sent in to get permission. I'd bet that most of 'em have never been listed with the USFS.

September 12, 2006

Yeah - I have a similar image of the real Wyatt - I just thought Val played an incredible Doc in Tombstone.

Edited September 12, 2006 by WyattEarp

September 12, 2006

Take National Forests. Those that do allow caches almost always have a "One Year Limit", then it has to be moved. Most have a form that needs to be filled out and sent in to get permission. I'd bet that most of 'em have never been listed with the USFS.

I don't know about "almost always" and "Most", but the Georgia National Forests neither have a "one year limit" nor a form. They provided the extra requirements (i.e. beyond normal gc.com guildlines) to the GC reviewers and they try to make sure these requirements are met. I can't say anything other states NF.

5.9k · September 12, 2006

Take National Forests. Those that do allow caches almost always have a "One Year Limit", then it has to be moved. Most have a form that needs to be filled out and sent in to get permission. I'd bet that most of 'em have never been listed with the USFS.

I don't know about "almost always" and "Most", but the Georgia National Forests neither have a "one year limit" nor a form. They provided the extra requirements (i.e. beyond normal gc.com guildlines) to the GC reviewers and they try to make sure these requirements are met. I can't say anything other states NF.

Washington is quilted with National Forests and has none of those limitations.

September 12, 2006

If everyone followed this rule to the letter, you could probably delete 50% of all Geocaches.

Take National Forests. Those that do allow caches almost always have a "One Year Limit", then it has to be moved. Most have a form that needs to be filled out and sent in to get permission. I'd bet that most of 'em have never been listed with the USFS

I would say more like 95%.

Edited September 12, 2006 by GerbilMafia

September 12, 2006

Take National Forests. Those that do allow caches almost always have a "One Year Limit", then it has to be moved. Most have a form that needs to be filled out and sent in to get permission. I'd bet that most of 'em have never been listed with the USFS.

I don't know about "almost always" and "Most", but the Georgia National Forests neither have a "one year limit" nor a form. They provided the extra requirements (i.e. beyond normal gc.com guildlines) to the GC reviewers and they try to make sure these requirements are met. I can't say anything other states NF.

I've been in contact with my local NF - they don't have a policy at this time and it's kind of a Don't Ask, Don't tell kind of thing.

I searched for other NF policies on the internet and the first 5 that I found all had a policy where there was a 1-year limit before it was moved. Here's some of the information I found:

http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/superior/r...ion/geocaching/

http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/allegheny/...ion/geocaching/

http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/boone/recreation/geocaching.shtml

http://www.mi-geocaching.org/modules.php?n...isting=manistee

http://users.conwaycorp.net/lunsford/misc/...Application.pdf

Here's the form that they lilke to use:

http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/superior/r...ration_Form.htm

September 12, 2006

Washington is quilted with National Forests and has none of those limitations.

We're lucky enough here in Washington and Idaho to not have to worry about it...yet.

I do know that the Forest Service had a draft document for the entire network back in 2004, and in it there was a note that they would have to be moved every year.

They dropped it for now and are leaving it up to the local Rangers.

September 12, 2006

Take National Forests. Those that do allow caches almost always have a "One Year Limit", then it has to be moved. Most have a form that needs to be filled out and sent in to get permission. I'd bet that most of 'em have never been listed with the USFS.

I don't know about "almost always" and "Most", but the Georgia National Forests neither have a "one year limit" nor a form. They provided the extra requirements (i.e. beyond normal gc.com guildlines) to the GC reviewers and they try to make sure these requirements are met. I can't say anything other states NF.

I typed that wrong - I meant "Those that have a policy on geocaches almost always have a "one year limit"... etc...

20.7k · September 12, 2006

The recommended route is the hint?

IMHO, knowing that interchange I'd put that in the cache description. Otherwise you're going to have people parking on the shoulder and jumping the guardrail to get to it.

I have to agree with this. If there is only safe one route in, it should be described in some general way in the cache description, even if only to mention where the parking area is and the fact that there is a way in without crossing the road.

I have a cache where you have to cross a river from the parking area. High bluffs and private property block any other access. I clearly state this, along with the best methods of river crossing, in the cache description.

I disagree. It should not be approved unless there is a legal way to get to the location. That being said, I don't think that the legal access needs to be spoonfed to players. Finding the one legal way in is a big part of the fun for caches like this one.

3.9k · September 12, 2006

Yeah - I have a similar image of the real Wyatt - I just thought Val played an incredible Doc in Tombstone.

Wyatt, I am rolling.

September 12, 2006

Am I just being boring and pedantic, but isn't your avatar actually Doc Holiday and not Wyatt Earp at all?

(mmm, Val Kilmer, droool)

Heh. Being even more boring and pedantic, no, the avatar's not a photo of Doc Holiday; it's a photo of Val Kilmer playing the role of John "Doc" Holliday (note speeling) in the movie "Tombstone". :anibad:

Agree on the drool, at least in that role, btw. <G>

5.9k · September 12, 2006

Washington is quilted with National Forests and has none of those limitations.

We're lucky enough here in Washington and Idaho to not have to worry about it...yet.

I do know that the Forest Service had a draft document for the entire network back in 2004, and in it there was a note that they would have to be moved every year.

They dropped it for now and are leaving it up to the local Rangers.

Although, if people keep calling and asking them for permission we'll have limits before you know it!

September 12, 2006

Washington is quilted with National Forests and has none of those limitations.

We're lucky enough here in Washington and Idaho to not have to worry about it...yet.

I do know that the Forest Service had a draft document for the entire network back in 2004, and in it there was a note that they would have to be moved every year.

They dropped it for now and are leaving it up to the local Rangers.

Although, if people keep calling and asking them for permission we'll have limits before you know it!

They are already looking into "limits", and "they" don't know anything about Geocaching, or at least the ones in my neck of the woods.

Why let uninformed, ignorant people make the decisions for us? It's just a matter of time before all of the National Forests will have geocaching policies, and I for one would rather have a "Geocacher-Friendly" policy.

5.9k · September 12, 2006

Did you see what happened with the State Parks in WA? :anibad:

7.3k · September 12, 2006

Although, if people keep calling and asking them for permission we'll have limits before you know it!

Thank you

September 12, 2006

Did you see what happened with the State Parks in WA?

No, fill us on, perhaps on a new thread?

September 12, 2006

I don't see how you can get to it without crossing any roads. I have built alot of hyways and I don't belive you can get to it without crossing a road. Maybe you can though, I've never been there so who knows. [ :anibad: ]

Edited September 12, 2006 by jadeskyline

September 12, 2006

Did you see what happened with the State Parks in WA?

You're missing my point. The locals here at the FS know about Geocaching. I didn't "introduce" it to them. I personally know the Archeologist (who is semi-against it) and the Ranger (who doesn't know much about it at all) and talk to them each probably once a month or so.

What I am trying to do is educate them as to the positive benifits of Geocaching. If they were to make a policy on their own, it just might be something like the State Parks have....

September 12, 2006

Although, if people keep calling and asking them for permission we'll have limits before you know it!

Thank you

Pretending that a federal agency with no policy is going to remain that way forever is just shortsided. There WILL be a day soon where they will all have something written down about Geocaching.

3.9k · September 12, 2006

This is the I-95 and Route 32 interchange in Columbia MD. Iv'e been waiting for approval for a couple of days. Does anyone have any idea if there is a problem with this? You can guess where I wanted to place the cache - but I couldn't get it in the center the brush was way to thick.

I personally like the idea of geocaches hidden in the dense forest/underbrush usually found inside the cloverleafs of urban and suburban highway interchanges, because to me they are an ideal use for otherwise-forgotten urban wasteland and neglected infrastructure. And, such caches can take you to fascinating places! However, that is just my two cents -- I have no idea what geocaching.com (or any of the other listing services, for that matter) thinks of such things, and whether a reviewer would publish it! But, I wish you the best with this one!

Oh, and if you do put it "on the air", please be sure to list and describe suggested parking and a suggested approach route on the cache listing page!

Thanks!

Edited September 12, 2006 by Vinny & Sue Team

2.7k · September 13, 2006

Well, i reckon it dont really matter if it gets listed now, does it?

The photo is good enough to go find it if it is there. If you want to respect the listing service, it probably should be pulled (and noted here) until it gets approved.

20.7k · September 13, 2006

I don't see how you can get to it without crossing any roads. I have built alot of hyways and I don't belive you can get to it without crossing a road. Maybe you can though, I've never been there so who knows. []

I thought the same thing, until I went after this local cache:

While the cache page does suggest parking on the interstate, there is an alternative access road for those that don't mind a muddy hike or own a good 4x4.

6.7k · September 13, 2006

And therein lies the problem! A placement like this requires very detailed parking and access details be listed, and anyone straying from them can be in / cause trouble.

As far as the Google and other satelite imagery maps, they're generally way off.

A search of my mailing address or my coords both put me about seven houses down the street from where my house is... in opposite directions!!

Ed

Pending Cache...

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment