Denied a cache placement location

[MouseFart]

OK, here's the deal. I have had a location rejected twice by a reviewer, due to it's location being too close to a railroad. Now, granted there is a railroad there, but has been abandoned and out of service for many years. The first time I posted the cache, I had forgotten about the railroad rule and it was denied.

 

I posted it a second time and explained the condition of the railroad and I got the same reply that it was denied and for me to refer to the placement rules for cache locations. I have included a couple of pics of this, so what do you think? I would email these to the reviewer, but have no idea who they are to do so.

 

 

 

[+egami]

The rule as I see it reads:

 

# Caches hidden in close proximity to active railroad tracks. In general we use a distance of 150 ft (46 m) but your local area’s trespassing laws may be different. All local laws apply.

 

I would get a letter from the railroad company and include it along with the ruling. It would seem to me that is a valid location.

[+Mopar]

The guideline about a railroad isn't just a safety issue. It's also a property issue.

Sure looks like those tracks are abandoned I agree, but who owns them?

It also doesn't look like a linear park or rails-to-trails either. If the railroad still owns them, it's still private property and it's still trespassing to be there without permission.

[+TrailGators]

Also email the reviewer a link to this post to show the photos. You should be able to find your local reviewer by checking the bottom of almost any local cache listing.

Edited March 7, 2007 by TrailGators

[+egami]

Also, there is a good chance the railroad right of way has been bought out...check with the county office (someone at the courthouse will know). More than likely they can tell you who owns that property.

[+welch]

I posted it a second time and explained the condition of the railroad and I got the same reply that it was denied and for me to refer to the placement rules for cache locations. I have included a couple of pics of this, so what do you think? I would email these to the reviewer, but have no idea who they are to do so.

How did you find out the cache was declined? I mean they must have either emailed you, or posted something to the submited page (like an archive note, or other note) right?? Assuming they did that you should either have their email address, or the account so you can use gc.com blind email feature.

[+Mopar]

Texas law defines railroad property as a train, locomotive, railroad car, caboose, work equipment,

rolling stock, safety device, switch, or connection that is owned, leased, operated, or possessed by railroad;

or a railroad track, rail, bridge, trestle, or right-of-way owned or used by a railroad. Under the same code

section, it is unlawful for anyone to enter or remain on railroad property without the consent of the owner,

knowing that it is railroad property. An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor unless the

person causes bodily injury to another, in which event the offense is a felony of the third degree. Tex.

[Penal] Code Ann. §28.08(A) (1999).

 

So, abandoned or not, as long as the railroad owns or leases the right of way it's against the law to be there without permission from the railroad. You're going to have to prove to the reviewer that the railroad has turned that property over for public use.

[+StarBrand]

Fairly odd for a RR company to leave the metal rail in place and just abondon it forever. Any idea when the line was last used? Who owned it? Is there an active line nearby?

 

I am fairly certain the reviewer is acting out of an abundance of caution for proprty rights but that looks really old and forgotten. Get the pictures to him and maybe include a photo of the placement in relation to the tracks. Might help.

[MouseFart]

I found the submitted cache request that I sent in for approval and sent this link to the reviewer. I also misled something in this post. I have had two denied and was thinking it was this one twice, I am wrong. This submission was only denied the first time. I did not submit it twice.

 

The second denial was a cache placement that I placed too close to another existing cache. Sorry for the confusion. I will update this if I hear from the reviewer.

 

Thanks.

[+TexasGringo]

I had one declined on an old unused railroad...they even removed the tracks...so, I moved the cache.

 

Then in a multi-cache...I had one declined because I was 15 feet too close to a railroad...so, I moved the cache.

[+egami]

Fairly odd for a RR company to leave the metal rail in place and just abondon it forever. Any idea when the line was last used? Who owned it? Is there an active line nearby?

 

I am fairly certain the reviewer is acting out of an abundance of caution for proprty rights but that looks really old and forgotten. Get the pictures to him and maybe include a photo of the placement in relation to the tracks. Might help.

 

Having worked directly with the railroad I can tell you this is more common that you might suspect.

[+chuckwagon101]

UHHHHH-HUHHHH!! And just where will YOU be when I am out locating your cache

.

all excited about the abundance of McToys and Auto Sales keychains......

.

And here comes roaring down the track.....sage brush flying!!....cactus petals exploding!!..

.

A great big old LOCO motive aimed right for my southern exposure!!

 

Yeah, it's gonna be toooo late to tell the reviewer that the DOG DONE ATE MY HOMEWORK!!

[+Prime Suspect]

Fairly odd for a RR company to leave the metal rail in place and just abondon it forever.

As a member of the Rails to Trails Conservancy, I can tell you it's quite common. It's like pulling teeth to get the RRs to relinquish their right-of-ways.

[+briansnat]

Fairly odd for a RR company to leave the metal rail in place and just abondon it forever.

As a member of the Rails to Trails Conservancy, I can tell you it's quite common. It's like pulling teeth to get the RRs to relinquish their right-of-ways.

 

Yep, there is one long abandoned line in NJ that looks like a lot like the the one in the OP's photos. Hasn't been used since the 60's. Now the RR is talking about resurrecting the line. It's going to cost billions of dollars to do so and it won't be ready for use until about 2018, but it looks like it's going to be done. They stopped using the line many years ago but still owned the land.

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

Fairly odd for a RR company to leave the metal rail in place and just abondon it forever.

As a member of the Rails to Trails Conservancy, I can tell you it's quite common. It's like pulling teeth to get the RRs to relinquish their right-of-ways.

 

Not in this area. When they close a line they pull the rails and ties immediately and give te right of wayys to the city or sell it to the landowners.

[+Harry Dolphin]

In New Jersey, at least, the rails are pulled on abandoned rail lines fairly quickly, because the railroads are taxed on the rails in place. Though I have seen one that looked like the one in the photos supplied. On the other hand, most of the comuter lines in Jersey are owned by NJ Transit, which, being a state entity, does not pay taxes, so the abandoned section west of High Bridge, for instance, still has rails. Brian is probably thinking of the proposed revival of the Lackawanna Cutoff by NJ Transit. I can assure you that there are no rails there. (Yes, I've hiked parts of it.) It was abandoned by the Erie Lackawanna. Being a private entity, it pulled the tracks quickly due to tax reasons.

As Mopar points out, the problem in OP's case might well be private ownership.

[+Lil Devil]

I would email these to the reviewer, but have no idea who they are to do so.

Ignoring all the other issues in this thread, by far the best way to communicate to a reviewer about a particular cache submission, is to post a "note to reviewer" on the cache page itself, and upload your pictures to that note.

 

Even if you do email them, most reviewers will just turn around and post them to a note on the cache page anyways. It's always easiest to keep all correspondence right there with the cache.

 

Edit to add that reviewer notes are automatically deleted when a cache is published.

Edited March 8, 2007 by Lil Devil

[+briansnat]

Brian is probably thinking of the proposed revival of the Lackawanna Cutoff by NJ Transit. I can assure you that there are no rails there. (Yes, I've hiked parts of it.) It was abandoned by the Erie Lackawanna. Being a private entity, it pulled the tracks quickly due to tax reasons.

 

That is what I was thinking about. I was hiking it two weeks ago and there are indeed no rails there.

[MouseFart]

OK, reviewer just left me a message regarding this location. Here is the response:

 

March 7 by Prime Reviewer (0 found)

I don't show this as being an abandoned track. It appears to be part of the South Orient line, which is still an active company. It's a trespassing issue, as much as it is a safety issue.

[view this log on a separate page]

 

So, it will be a no go for this one. And it was going to be a really good one too !!!.......... Guess that danged old train will be whizzing by here any old time now.....