Bridge out ahead!

October 2, 2008

I placed a cache just east of a bridge that was just closed for 45 days for repairs. The cache is about 300 yards down the road from the beginning of the bridge. Two days later (today) I went back to upgrade the cache container. Only to find the road is now blocked .62 miles east of the cache. With no real legal parking near the new road block to compound the issue. So I went back into the listing and added the following....

::::WARNING::::>>> Today I went to upgrade the cache container. Only to find the road block has been moved .62 miles east on Manatee Ave. This means you can no longer drive to the cache. I'm not even sure about where to park if you wanted to hike into it.'m going to rise the difficulty rating till the road is reopened. Also added "Significant hike" to the attributes. This is still accessible by small boat or kayak.

Do you feel that this is significant for now? I don't want to archive the listing due to that its still accessible by small boat or kayak.

Thanks!

Edited October 2, 2008 by Y2KOTA

3.2k · October 2, 2008

I placed a cache just east of a bridge that was just closed for 45 days for repairs. The cache is about 300 yards down the road from the beginning of the bridge. Two days later (today) I went back to upgrade the cache container. Only to find the road is now blocked .62 miles east of the cache. With no real legal parking near the new road block to compound the issue. So I went back into the listing and added the following....

::::WARNING::::>>> Today I went to upgrade the cache container. Only to find the road block has been moved .62 miles east on Manatee Ave. This means you can no longer drive to the cache. I'm not even sure about where to park if you wanted to hike into it.'m going to rise the difficulty rating till the road is reopened. Also added "Significant hike" to the attributes. This is still accessible by small boat or kayak.

Do you feel that this is significant for now? I don't want to archive the listing due to that its still accessible by small boat or kayak.

Thanks!

I would disable the cache, if for no other reason than safety concerns, until the repairs are done.

October 2, 2008

You're covered for most cachers. The coords-only folks may still get tripped up by the construction, but that's the risk they take by not reading the page. The only other approach would be to deactivate the cache until the bridge reopens.

1.2k · October 2, 2008

Disable it for now...

9.2k · October 2, 2008

I would disable it. For most people, you're just wasting their time and gas to leave it active.

October 2, 2008

I would disable it. For most people, you're just wasting their time and gas to leave it active.

"most people" really need to learn, then, to check the logs just prior to leaving.

That's akin to saying people should disable their cache if the co-ords change since it was initially placed.

change the terrain difficulty up, so that it's noted that special equipment (canoe, kayak, etc) are currently necessary, and make sure it's clearly noted in the log.

3k · October 2, 2008

If the cache isn't damaged, I wouldn't disable it. I would make a note in the description for the time being to point out the obstacle. Definitely up the terrain rating, too. We've been there...

edit 4 2 spel

Edited October 2, 2008 by fox-and-the-hound

October 2, 2008

OK, I've upped the Terrain and Difficulty rating and adjusted the Attributes.

3.9k · October 2, 2008

You're covered for most cachers. The coords-only folks may still get tripped up by the construction, but that's the risk they take by not reading the page. The only other approach would be to deactivate the cache until the bridge reopens.

What Mule Ears wrote would, in my mind, have been valid four years ago. Today, with the advent and ascendancy of paperless cachers who actually BRAG that they never bother to read cache listing pages, I would simply disable it for awhile till the roadblock disappears!

24.7k · October 2, 2008

Leave it. A warning on the cache page is fine.

Consider. If you had placed the cache just now and listed it the cache would be approvable, and the "I cache blind and love it" folks would still have all the same problems.

38.2k · October 2, 2008

Do you feel that this is significant for now? I don't want to archive the listing due to that its still accessible by small boat or kayak.

Thanks!

I think that's fine. As long as the cache is accessible from some direction and you note the situation on the cache page, no reason to archive it.

October 2, 2008

We've got a few of those around here, insane winter storms from over 2 years ago still have a hwy closed, with a couple caches over a mile from the gate.

They still get found. Heck, we're supposed to be caching for the exercise anyways.

3k · October 2, 2008

Today, with the advent and ascendancy of paperless cachers who actually BRAG that they never bother to read cache listing pages, I would simply disable it for awhile till the roadblock disappears!

Serves them right for not bothering to read the cache description. There's a certain amount of responsibility on the part of the seeker to assess whether they'll be able to find a cache and laziness on the part of a seeker should not be part of the equation in disabling a perfectly good cache.

9.5k · October 2, 2008

You're covered for most cachers. The coords-only folks may still get tripped up by the construction, but that's the risk they take by not reading the page. The only other approach would be to deactivate the cache until the bridge reopens.

What Mule Ears wrote would, in my mind, have been valid four years ago. Today, with the advent and ascendancy of paperless cachers who actually BRAG that they never bother to read cache listing pages, I would simply disable it for awhile till the roadblock disappears!

I disagree. With the advent and ascendancy of those braggers that never bother to read the cache listing pages, that's the risk they take for not reading. They can choose to continue to look for it or not when they get there. Not reading the cache page means they don't get to be spoonfed special treatment.

Edited October 2, 2008 by TotemLake

October 2, 2008

But if the cache is only accessible by boat it should be rated a 5. Most people if they don't read the web page to check terrain ratings. A boat is special equipment.

Team Taran

3k · October 2, 2008

A quick look at the map shows it's only going to be hard to reach from one direction. Is the road still open from the other direction? It looks like you might have to drive a bit out of your way, but that it's still accessible.

October 2, 2008

The only thing that might stink about the changing of the terrain and difficulty is that when the bridge is fixed and all of a sudden a 4/5 becomes a 1/2 again (or whatever it was), some people might get irritated that they had to do it the one way and others the other. I figure, personally, that's part of life, but ya know some people will get crazy.

Just playing Devil's Advocate.

October 2, 2008

Don't know way I didn't list the cache itself, GC1GRXZ. You can see what I mean, the bridge to the west of the land is closed.

3k · October 2, 2008

Don't know way I didn't list the cache itself, GC1GRXZ. You can see what I mean, the bridge to the west of the land is closed.

It looks like you can just drive around on 684 and approach from the other side though. That wouldn't even merit changing the terrain rating.

1.6k · October 2, 2008

The only thing that might stink about the changing of the terrain and difficulty is that when the bridge is fixed and all of a sudden a 4/5 becomes a 1/2 again (or whatever it was), some people might get irritated that they had to do it the one way and others the other. I figure, personally, that's part of life, but ya know some people will get crazy.

This would REALLY annoy the people who are trying to fill out the D/T grid for "Well Rounded Cacher" challenge caches. Some combinations, like 4/5, are fairly rare; if I managed to find one I wouldn't be happy to loose it because a bridge was built making access easier (and yes, I know that the 4/5 quoted above was just an arbitrary number).

This also would offend people who are trying to keep a high difficulty and/or terrain average by only going after higher-rated caches.

Of course, simplying reading the description would solve both these problems for potential seekers...

Personally I would leave the D/T rating alone, post an "Owner Maintenance" log, and add the new info to the description.

October 2, 2008

Another complication: The cache is unfound. Diasabling it might not prevent a determined FTF hound from finding and logging it anyway. Then the owner/OP has another dilemma... Maybe that's a good thing, though, in that it might pull some forum bandwidth away from questions of Good versus Evil.

1.2k · October 2, 2008

Disable it for now...

To clarify my statement...I read the post (quickly I must add) and assumed there was contruction workers and/or equipment around the area of the cache...

If it is "clear" from a direction and construction people aren't going to be near the cache where cachers could get into trouble (for being in some sort of construction zone)...I would say leave it...

1.4k · October 2, 2008

I have a cache out on a remote forest service road. It was pretty much a drive to, but the drive was about 13 miles.

During the winter floods the main FSR into it washed out, and it became a 13 mile hike. (each way.) I upped the terrain and added a note to the cache page explaining the problem.

Three people got it the first year the road was out!

You can drive to within about 3mi. on another FSR now, and I changed the cache page to note that. You still have to cross a river where the bridge is out, and the road up now has a number of trees fallen across it. However, I hope to leave it active until the road in is repaired, and the bridge reconnected. At that time I will change the terrain back.

I don't care how others play the game, but if someone doesn't want to check the cache page before going after one of my caches that is not my problem.

October 2, 2008

Here in NEPA, we don't need no stinking bridges!

Bear's Bonsai (GC1BK9V)

14k · October 2, 2008

We've got a few of those around here, insane winter storms from over 2 years ago still have a hwy closed, with a couple caches over a mile from the gate.

They still get found. Heck, we're supposed to be caching for the exercise anyways.

That's what I was thinking. While I can understand that a terrain difficult change might be in order, the fact that one can no longer "drive to the cache site" hardly seems to a reason to disable the cache.

There is actually a whole series of caches in my area which are located on or near old unused (at least by motor vehicles) bridges.

October 2, 2008

Think I'm going to leave it up and running. 2 other caches within a few 1000 feet are boat/kayak only. So it not like its the only one around. In fact I'm hoping to go kayaking so to get the 2 soon.

3.2k · October 4, 2008

Think I'm going to leave it up and running. 2 other caches within a few 1000 feet are boat/kayak only. So it not like its the only one around. In fact I'm hoping to go kayaking so to get the 2 soon.

I think they made it better. Archive it after they fix the bridge so the latecomers don't get a cheap smilie :rolleyes:

October 4, 2008

Is this the warning sign at the bridge?

October 4, 2008

Is this the warning sign at the bridge?

1.9k · October 4, 2008

Is this the warning sign at the bridge?

OSHA at work! :rolleyes:

5.3k · October 4, 2008

I would disable the cache, if for no other reason than safety concerns, until the repairs are done.

I wouldn't. It you disable the cache, the automated system Groundspeak uses may archive it for you. I think the warning is sufficient.

(Gratuitous aside: way to go, GC.com, for punishing people for being responsible and disabling caches!)

1.5k · October 4, 2008

the automated system Groundspeak uses may archive it for you

There is no automated system. There's a human operated system (not done everywhere.) Some reviewers routinely screen for long disabled caches. If the cache owner is responsive and explains why the cache is disabled it can generally ride the disabled list for a long time.

7.2k · October 4, 2008

Not reading the cache page means they don't get to be spoonfed special treatment.

Yep. As long as the cache is properly sized, typed, and categorized then there are times where one may not need to read the cache page.

8.9k · October 4, 2008

Not reading the cache page means they don't get to be spoonfed special treatment.

Yep. As long as the cache is properly sized, typed, and categorized then there are times where one may not need to read the cache page.

I beg to disagree, and this very cache points to that! People not reading a cache description have no right to complain when things don't work out as they'd liked!

Another instance where reading the description would be helpful...went to an event not too long ago where the location needed changed a few days befoer the event. People who simply downloaded the info and never checked back were left wondering while the rest of us had a great time! Sometimes, info changes, the smart thing to do is read the description instead of going at it blindly!

7.2k · October 4, 2008

Not reading the cache page means they don't get to be spoonfed special treatment.
Yep. As long as the cache is properly sized, typed, and categorized then there are times where one may not need to read the cache page.
I beg to disagree, and this very cache points to that! People not reading a cache description have no right to complain when things don't work out as they'd liked!

You're right. Folks don't have the right to complain if the cache is properly sized, typed, and categorized. Of course, I don't expect a guaranteed find, either. However, if you rate it as one thing and it turns out to be something different then one has every right to complain.

Another instance where reading the description would be helpful...went to an event not too long ago where the location needed changed a few days befoer the event. People who simply downloaded the info and never checked back were left wondering while the rest of us had a great time! Sometimes, info changes, the smart thing to do is read the description instead of going at it blindly!

What has this got to do with reading the cache page? If they had read the cache page before the change they still would have gone the wrong spot, right? If they had blindly followed the GPS to the event with the proper coords they would still have gotten there, right?

Anyway, I was agreeing with TL, I don't need to be spoonfed info. I don't need someone to hold my hand and point at the cache. If you need to warn me about that tiger trap then maybe you should make the cache a multi or puzzle.

9.5k · October 4, 2008

Been a while since I saw a near violent agreement.

October 4, 2008

Today, with the advent and ascendancy of paperless cachers who actually BRAG that they never bother to read cache listing pages, I would simply disable it for awhile till the roadblock disappears!

Paperless caching does not equal caching blind. That's 2 very different things.

I cache 100% paperless. I pull out my Palm Tungsten e2 which has the cache page of every cache in my state (minus the pictures) saved on the memory card. Most of the time, I read the cache page before I ever get out of the car. I often read it before I leave the last cache I just found.

Caching blind (which I have done before) is completely different. Try not to confuse the two.

Edited October 4, 2008 by Okiebryan

8.9k · October 4, 2008

Not reading the cache page means they don't get to be spoonfed special treatment.
Yep. As long as the cache is properly sized, typed, and categorized then there are times where one may not need to read the cache page.
I beg to disagree, and this very cache points to that! People not reading a cache description have no right to complain when things don't work out as they'd liked!
You're right. Folks don't have the right to complain if the cache is properly sized, typed, and categorized. Of course, I don't expect a guaranteed find, either. However, if you rate it as one thing and it turns out to be something different then one has every right to complain.

Another instance where reading the description would be helpful...went to an event not too long ago where the location needed changed a few days before the event. People who simply downloaded the info and never checked back were left wondering while the rest of us had a great time! Sometimes, info changes, the smart thing to do is read the description instead of going at it blindly!
What has this got to do with reading the cache page? If they had read the cache page before the change they still would have gone the wrong spot, right? If they had blindly followed the GPS to the event with the proper coords they would still have gotten there, right?

Anyway, I was agreeing with TL, I don't need to be spoonfed info. I don't need someone to hold my hand and point at the cache. If you need to warn me about that tiger trap then maybe you should make the cache a multi or puzzle.

October 6, 2008

If the cache isn't damaged, I wouldn't disable it. I would make a note in the description for the time being to point out the obstacle. Definitely up the terrain rating, too. We've been there...

edit 4 2 spel

up the terrain rating... LOL good one :-)

October 6, 2008

Leave it, if you've noted the terrain on the cache page and noted that you need a canoe/kayak then that is fine, if people don't read the cache page or go paperless that is the risk they take. A cache near me was visited by someone who failed to read the cache page, it was underwater and you needed diving equipment to reach it! That was their problem, not the cache setters.

October 13, 2008

Issue solved. :lol: The site was plowed down due to the nearby construction at GZ. Had to temporarily disabled A needle in a pine needle stack till they open the bridge.

Bridge out ahead!

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

Join the conversation