Jump to content

Shock Danger of Electrified Objects (Lampposts, etc.) Revisited


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

The OP specifically mentioned
utility power transformers, utility power distribution boxes
and this is the aspect of the opening post I have been addressing.
Very well.

 

The transformer boxes that are accessible to cachers are on the ground. They are very well insulated from the public. They have to be as you don't want the guy mowing the grass around it to be electrocuted, right? The stuff that not insulated to way up off the ground so folks can't easily touch it. Otherwise, it would be only a few feet off the ground--no need for such long poles.

 

Cachers should never hide any cache or any any stage of a cache on any power utility equipment.
I agree in part. First, any cache that can be hidden on a piece of power distribution equipment is probably not much of a cache. Second, you can read numbers off a transformer from a distance so I wouldn't be so quick to ban such a stage.
Link to comment

I agree in part. First, any cache that can be hidden on a piece of power distribution equipment is probably not much of a cache. Second, you can read numbers off a transformer from a distance so I wouldn't be so quick to ban such a stage.

 

The issue is a lot simpler for me. If a cache or a stage of a cache is hidden on distribution equipment it is dangerous. When a stray voltage incident occurs on a transformer on the ground the danger is magnified tremendously and such incidents are very rare, but real.

 

I am required to use a voltage tester even on wooden poles and wood is a very poor conductor. I have never encountered a wooden pole where a few simple steps failed to mitigate the potential difference that created the warning. I don't know of any other worker who has ever encountered a wooden pole where they could not mitigate the potential difference. I am pretty certain that no one who works for my company has ever encountered a wooden pole where they could not mitigate the difference and continue working. The public can touch any ofthese poles any time they wish, they do not need training and they do not need a tester. It doesn't change the fact that every year people who are required to touch them, the workers, are killed in incidents involving the secondary and wooden poles, it is why I am required to use the tester.

 

You see the real issue is death, plain and simple. If you contact secondary voltage, and there is no visible evidence that you are doing so, the end result is death. Even workers who are trained get killed. I have no objection to lamppost caches or caches that are made from electrical equipment, especially where the handling of such items is normal.

 

I do think that any cache that is placed on the utility distribution equipment has been placed without permission and it represents a hazard, there is a low chance of such a hazard existing but it is a fatal hazard. Discussing these types of issues in the forums is good, people may not be aware of the potential dangers.

Link to comment

It's really hard to discuss that issue with you since most of us have no clue what you mean by 'utility distribution equipment'.

 

Also, I don't think that it's appropriate to mandate change solely because worse case scenario is death, especially when you factor in the very, very, very low likelyhood of this scenario.

Link to comment

It's really hard to discuss that issue with you since most of us have no clue what you mean by 'utility distribution equipment'.

 

Also, I don't think that it's appropriate to mandate change solely because worse case scenario is death, especially when you factor in the very, very, very low likelyhood of this scenario.

 

The electric utility uses a range of equipment to deliver power to households and businesses. The requirements for businesses and households are generally low voltage (less than 750 volts) but the utility has to step down the voltage prior to it reaching the service panel. Industrial settings may require higher voltages but the limit for most houses is 240 Volts and that is usually what you find inside a common electrical panel, two conductors a ground and a return. Amperages vary but most households use services in the 100 to 200 amp range.

 

All the equipment that is used by the utility company carries voltages that are much higher than the usual business or household will require, higher voltages offer efficiencies to the utility. Typically the voltage on the power pole behind your house is 14,400 volts. This is stepped down by an transformer, usually connected directly to the pole, it looks like a steel can.

 

The grid that is electrified by the utility includes power lines, elevated transformers and ground pad transformers. The possibilities for a stray voltage incident extend to grounding wires, guy wires, the poles, the masts that support wires and just about anything not made of a very good insulator that might come into contact with the secondary or the primary. Primary voltages can be much much higher than the secondary.

In my line of work we require 3 phase, 120/208 Volt, 600 AMP service. The electric utility delivers 14,400 Volts, usually to a ground pad transformer right outside a facilty. That ground pad transformer turns the 14,400 volts into a 120/208 600AMP service, the transformer is safe unless there is a stray voltage incident.

 

This is where the danger lies, in contacting anything that is energized by the primary or secondary, it will be the last thing you do. I am not mandating change, I am telling you outright that even though the percentage of a stray voltage incident are very very low there is a 100% chance of dying if you are involved in such an incident with the voltages used in the distribution grid.

 

A cool looking magnetic decal attached to a transformer that is stepping down 14,400 volts is for the most part perfectly safe. The chance of the transformer case being energized is probably even smaller than you think it is, it is more than uncommon, it is very rare, I am not arguing that.

 

You can fall down a cliff and survive, you can get bitten by a snake and survive, spider bites are a walk in the park, you can get in a serious automobile accident and walk away, you can dive into dark water and come back up - what you cannot do is contact the voltage that is distributed by the electric utility and survive.

 

Any cache that is hidden on equipment owned by a power utility is hidden without permission in a location that is for the most part safe, but when it isn't safe because a stray voltage incident has developed, it is invariably fatal.

 

I mentioned that the first step for geocachers is simply awareness. If a geocacher has a magnetic decal attached to a transformer owned by the utility company maybe they will read this thread and reconsider that hide. I am not mandating change, I am simply giving others the benefit of power awareness training that I have been given. In that respect every post serves the same purpose, geocachers are informed and forum participants can get their yah yahs out. <_<

Link to comment

It's really hard to discuss that issue with you since most of us have no clue what you mean by 'utility distribution equipment'.

 

Also, I don't think that it's appropriate to mandate change solely because worse case scenario is death, especially when you factor in the very, very, very low likelyhood of this scenario.

 

The electric utility uses a range of equipment to deliver power to households and businesses. The requirements for businesses and households are generally low voltage (less than 750 volts) but the utility has to step down the voltage prior to it reaching the service panel. Industrial settings may require higher voltages but the limit for most houses is 240 Volts and that is usually what you find inside a common electrical panel, two conductors a ground and a return. Amperages vary but most households use services in the 100 to 200 amp range.

 

All the equipment that is used by the utility company carries voltages that are much higher than the usual business or household will require, higher voltages offer efficiencies to the utility. Typically the voltage on the power pole behind your house is 14,400 volts. This is stepped down by an transformer, usually connected directly to the pole, it looks like a steel can.

 

The grid that is electrified by the utility includes power lines, elevated transformers and ground pad transformers. The possibilities for a stray voltage incident extend to grounding wires, guy wires, the poles, the masts that support wires and just about anything not made of a very good insulator that might come into contact with the secondary or the primary. Primary voltages can be much much higher than the secondary.

In my line of work we require 3 phase, 120/208 Volt, 600 AMP service. The electric utility delivers 14,400 Volts, usually to a ground pad transformer right outside a facilty. That ground pad transformer turns the 14,400 volts into a 120/208 600AMP service, the transformer is safe unless there is a stray voltage incident.

 

This is where the danger lies, in contacting anything that is energized by the primary or secondary, it will be the last thing you do. I am not mandating change, I am telling you outright that even though the percentage of a stray voltage incident are very very low there is a 100% chance of dying if you are involved in such an incident with the voltages used in the distribution grid.

 

A cool looking magnetic decal attached to a transformer that is stepping down 14,400 volts is for the most part perfectly safe. The chance of the transformer case being energized is probably even smaller than you think it is, it is more than uncommon, it is very rare, I am not arguing that.

 

You can fall down a cliff and survive, you can get bitten by a snake and survive, spider bites are a walk in the park, you can get in a serious automobile accident and walk away, you can dive into dark water and come back up - what you cannot do is contact the voltage that is distributed by the electric utility and survive.

 

Any cache that is hidden on equipment owned by a power utility is hidden without permission in a location that is for the most part safe, but when it isn't safe because a stray voltage incident has developed, it is invariably fatal.

 

I mentioned that the first step for geocachers is simply awareness. If a geocacher has a magnetic decal attached to a transformer owned by the utility company maybe they will read this thread and reconsider that hide. I am not mandating change, I am simply giving others the benefit of power awareness training that I have been given. In that respect every post serves the same purpose, geocachers are informed and forum participants can get their yah yahs out. <_<

That was an, ummm, informative post, but I still have no idea what 'utility distribution equipment' is. If I were roaming around outside, I would not be able to identify the equipment that you are discussing.

Link to comment

That was an, ummm, informative post, but I still have no idea what 'utility distribution equipment' is. If I were roaming around outside, I would not be able to identify the equipment that you are discussing.

 

I like to use lots of words, they are free. <_<

 

You make a good point, it is pretty hard to identify distribution equipment owned by the utility.

People inclined to hide a magnetic decal on the side of a steel box probably have the same problem you are describing, they aren't aware of any danger because they do not know what they are doing.

This is what I have been saying, "awareness" is crucial to "survival" when working with high voltages, you don't get to make mistakes.

Link to comment

It's really hard to discuss that issue with you since most of us have no clue what you mean by 'utility distribution equipment'.

 

Also, I don't think that it's appropriate to mandate change solely because worse case scenario is death, especially when you factor in the very, very, very low likelyhood of this scenario.

 

The electric utility uses a range of equipment to deliver power to households and businesses. The requirements for businesses and households are generally low voltage (less than 750 volts) but the utility has to step down the voltage prior to it reaching the service panel. Industrial settings may require higher voltages but the limit for most houses is 240 Volts and that is usually what you find inside a common electrical panel, two conductors a ground and a return. Amperages vary but most households use services in the 100 to 200 amp range.

 

All the equipment that is used by the utility company carries voltages that are much higher than the usual business or household will require, higher voltages offer efficiencies to the utility. Typically the voltage on the power pole behind your house is 14,400 volts. This is stepped down by an transformer, usually connected directly to the pole, it looks like a steel can.

 

The grid that is electrified by the utility includes power lines, elevated transformers and ground pad transformers. The possibilities for a stray voltage incident extend to grounding wires, guy wires, the poles, the masts that support wires and just about anything not made of a very good insulator that might come into contact with the secondary or the primary. Primary voltages can be much much higher than the secondary.

In my line of work we require 3 phase, 120/208 Volt, 600 AMP service. The electric utility delivers 14,400 Volts, usually to a ground pad transformer right outside a facilty. That ground pad transformer turns the 14,400 volts into a 120/208 600AMP service, the transformer is safe unless there is a stray voltage incident.

 

This is where the danger lies, in contacting anything that is energized by the primary or secondary, it will be the last thing you do. I am not mandating change, I am telling you outright that even though the percentage of a stray voltage incident are very very low there is a 100% chance of dying if you are involved in such an incident with the voltages used in the distribution grid.

 

A cool looking magnetic decal attached to a transformer that is stepping down 14,400 volts is for the most part perfectly safe. The chance of the transformer case being energized is probably even smaller than you think it is, it is more than uncommon, it is very rare, I am not arguing that.

 

You can fall down a cliff and survive, you can get bitten by a snake and survive, spider bites are a walk in the park, you can get in a serious automobile accident and walk away, you can dive into dark water and come back up - what you cannot do is contact the voltage that is distributed by the electric utility and survive.

 

Any cache that is hidden on equipment owned by a power utility is hidden without permission in a location that is for the most part safe, but when it isn't safe because a stray voltage incident has developed, it is invariably fatal.

 

I mentioned that the first step for geocachers is simply awareness. If a geocacher has a magnetic decal attached to a transformer owned by the utility company maybe they will read this thread and reconsider that hide. I am not mandating change, I am simply giving others the benefit of power awareness training that I have been given. In that respect every post serves the same purpose, geocachers are informed and forum participants can get their yah yahs out. <_<

That was an, ummm, informative post, but I still have no idea what 'utility distribution equipment' is. If I were roaming around outside, I would not be able to identify the equipment that you are discussing.

 

The green box outside the window where I work (on the ground on a concrete pad) where the squirrels find a way inside each winter to warm up. They do warm up, fast. We loose power for a few hours. The squirrel is too fried to eat.

Link to comment

Just my two bits on lamp post caches are this. Given the staggering number of people that use cross walk signals attached to metal poles, electrified, I see a much greater chance and likelihood that one of those types of poles would fail over a lamp post that doesn't see much action on a daily basis. As for panels or box's the fact you would need to 'pry' or use tools should be a hint to walk away. Bottom line is you can't legislate, guideline, or make a rule for stupid.

Link to comment

 

That was an, ummm, informative post, but I still have no idea what 'utility distribution equipment' is. If I were roaming around outside, I would not be able to identify the equipment that you are discussing.

 

Then perhaps you really need to be careful around anything that appears to have anything to do with electricity, or line up your next of kin with a good lawyer.

Edited by edscott
Link to comment

It's really hard to discuss that issue with you since most of us have no clue what you mean by 'utility distribution equipment'.

 

Also, I don't think that it's appropriate to mandate change solely because worse case scenario is death, especially when you factor in the very, very, very low likelyhood of this scenario.

 

The electric utility uses a range of equipment to deliver power to households and businesses. The requirements for businesses and households are generally low voltage (less than 750 volts) but the utility has to step down the voltage prior to it reaching the service panel. Industrial settings may require higher voltages but the limit for most houses is 240 Volts and that is usually what you find inside a common electrical panel, two conductors a ground and a return. Amperages vary but most households use services in the 100 to 200 amp range.

 

All the equipment that is used by the utility company carries voltages that are much higher than the usual business or household will require, higher voltages offer efficiencies to the utility. Typically the voltage on the power pole behind your house is 14,400 volts. This is stepped down by an transformer, usually connected directly to the pole, it looks like a steel can.

 

The grid that is electrified by the utility includes power lines, elevated transformers and ground pad transformers. The possibilities for a stray voltage incident extend to grounding wires, guy wires, the poles, the masts that support wires and just about anything not made of a very good insulator that might come into contact with the secondary or the primary. Primary voltages can be much much higher than the secondary.

In my line of work we require 3 phase, 120/208 Volt, 600 AMP service. The electric utility delivers 14,400 Volts, usually to a ground pad transformer right outside a facilty. That ground pad transformer turns the 14,400 volts into a 120/208 600AMP service, the transformer is safe unless there is a stray voltage incident.

 

This is where the danger lies, in contacting anything that is energized by the primary or secondary, it will be the last thing you do. I am not mandating change, I am telling you outright that even though the percentage of a stray voltage incident are very very low there is a 100% chance of dying if you are involved in such an incident with the voltages used in the distribution grid.

 

A cool looking magnetic decal attached to a transformer that is stepping down 14,400 volts is for the most part perfectly safe. The chance of the transformer case being energized is probably even smaller than you think it is, it is more than uncommon, it is very rare, I am not arguing that.

 

You can fall down a cliff and survive, you can get bitten by a snake and survive, spider bites are a walk in the park, you can get in a serious automobile accident and walk away, you can dive into dark water and come back up - what you cannot do is contact the voltage that is distributed by the electric utility and survive.

 

Any cache that is hidden on equipment owned by a power utility is hidden without permission in a location that is for the most part safe, but when it isn't safe because a stray voltage incident has developed, it is invariably fatal.

 

I mentioned that the first step for geocachers is simply awareness. If a geocacher has a magnetic decal attached to a transformer owned by the utility company maybe they will read this thread and reconsider that hide. I am not mandating change, I am simply giving others the benefit of power awareness training that I have been given. In that respect every post serves the same purpose, geocachers are informed and forum participants can get their yah yahs out. :rolleyes:

most informative post of the bunch. definitely raised my awareness for placing caches near electrical equipment. I still think placing an LPC, however mundane and unrewarding the find, should not be banned purely from the 1/1,00000000000000000 or whatever chance of electrocution argument. I'm also against the argument that placing these types of caches trains people to be unsafe around electrical equipment, or that these types of caches should be disallowed because of the 35% of people with no common sense. If you're dumb enough to pry open an electrical box or stick your hand in there, then you get this year's Darwin award. Same goes for sticking your hand in a tree, hole, or stump, regardless of cache 'attributes'. You decided there was a low enough risk to warrant the sticking of your hand, and you accepted the possible consequences of said hand-sticking.

That being said, I don't believe in placement of LPC's because of the lack of reward in finding them. That doesn't mean my group doesn't still hunt them, we just make it a joke as to who has to get out of the car. I'll personally never hide them, but don't believe others should be barred from hiding them, as some LPC finders might find them rewarding.

I will say this thread has increased my level of awareness when placing stages of a multi or hiding a cache near dangerous electrical currents.

Edited by djwhitey
Link to comment

Just my two bits on lamp post caches are this. Given the staggering number of people that use cross walk signals attached to metal poles, electrified, I see a much greater chance and likelihood that one of those types of poles would fail over a lamp post that doesn't see much action on a daily basis. As for panels or box's the fact you would need to 'pry' or use tools should be a hint to walk away. Bottom line is you can't legislate, guideline, or make a rule for stupid.

 

When you are using a crosswalk button (even one that is malfunctioning) you are not removing the cover and exposing the wires inside to potentially being touched. You are doing that when you remove the access panel on a lamp post.

 

As for panels or boxes the fact that you would need to pry or use tool to open them some of the caches listed in this search tell the finder that a screwdriver is needed to open the cache. Also in the What's in your geocaching bag topic screwdrivers and other tools using for prying are often listed. An Inctructables on how to geocache states "Other people have hidden Geocache boxes under roofs and inside metal poles that require a screwdriver to get out."

Link to comment

Wow, this is an interesting one. I am new to geocaching, but have been installing street lights for the past 20+years.

 

A little fact about street lights, without spending some time on the system it is hard to know if voltage is present at the base or not. Some poles have the photocell at the feedpoint, some are controlled at the fixture.

 

I'm not saying I havn't done it but you should never stick your hand into a base without rubber gloves on. Mice love steet light bases for homes and chew on the insulation creating a major hazards to us. Also, alot of street light run at a much higher voltage than at a house. This increases the danger greatly

 

Skirt hides don't bother me a bit, but please stay out of the bases. Everytime the wires are disturbed it is just another chance for the insulation to get cracked or rubbed off.

 

I don't like sticking my hands in a base and I get paid for it! :rolleyes:

Link to comment

most informative post of the bunch. definitely raised my awareness for placing caches near electrical equipment. I still think placing an LPC, however mundane and unrewarding the find, should not be banned purely from the 1/1,00000000000000000 or whatever chance of electrocution argument. I'm also against the argument that placing these types of caches trains people to be unsafe around electrical equipment, or that these types of caches should be disallowed because of the 35% of people with no common sense. If you're dumb enough to pry open an electrical box or stick your hand in there, then you get this year's Darwin award. Same goes for sticking your hand in a tree, hole, or stump, regardless of cache 'attributes'. You decided there was a low enough risk to warrant the sticking of your hand, and you accepted the possible consequences of said hand-sticking.

That being said, I don't believe in placement of LPC's because of the lack of reward in finding them. That doesn't mean my group doesn't still hunt them, we just make it a joke as to who has to get out of the car. I'll personally never hide them, but don't believe others should be barred from hiding them, as some LPC finders might find them rewarding.

I will say this thread has increased my level of awareness when placing stages of a multi or hiding a cache near dangerous electrical currents.

 

There is a list of attributes for hazards like cliffs, falling rocks, poison plants, thorns, and abandoned mines. How would you feel about an attribute for shock hazards in the area. It could look like this: a8ade53c-22f7-4f45-adf3-7db96375c8fd.jpg

 

I got the image idea from the EDF Energy Power Up! website where they have a Spot the Hazard flash animation. A lamp post is one of the hazards.

Link to comment
...I still have no idea what 'utility distribution equipment' is. If I were roaming around outside, I would not be able to identify the equipment that you are discussing.
From, Wikipedia, I found a nice article. They had this picture:

532px-Electricity_grid_schema-_lang-en.jpg

I see utility poles depicted in this picture more than once. Transformers are mentioned several times in the article. Perhaps this would be a good start on objects to avoid?

padphoto.jpgUtility_Pole-Chelmsford-MA-20041114-orig-DSCN0462.jpgws1210_g.gif

Link to comment

Just my two bits on lamp post caches are this. Given the staggering number of people that use cross walk signals attached to metal poles, electrified, I see a much greater chance and likelihood that one of those types of poles would fail over a lamp post that doesn't see much action on a daily basis. As for panels or box's the fact you would need to 'pry' or use tools should be a hint to walk away. Bottom line is you can't legislate, guideline, or make a rule for stupid.

 

When you are using a crosswalk button (even one that is malfunctioning) you are not removing the cover and exposing the wires inside to potentially being touched. You are doing that when you remove the access panel on a lamp post.

 

As for panels or boxes the fact that you would need to pry or use tool to open them some of the caches listed in this search tell the finder that a screwdriver is needed to open the cache. Also in the What's in your geocaching bag topic screwdrivers and other tools using for prying are often listed. An Inctructables on how to geocache states "Other people have hidden Geocache boxes under roofs and inside metal poles that require a screwdriver to get out."

 

Last I checked crosswalk poles are still made of metal with even more repetitive use by even greater numbers of individuals on a daily basis over lap poles. It stands to reason there is a far greater chance of an electric shock given the numbers. As a general rule in our group we avoid caches that require tools to access them. It tends to cut down on dangerous situations immensely. That and common sense. Something that all the guidelines, rules, and regulations can't provide to a individual lacking such.

Link to comment

I'm thinking that if these items were as dangerous to be around as some in this thread would have us believe that they would not place them immediately adjacent to sidewalks and on playgrounds. In stead, they would be surrounded by fences topped with razor wire to keep the public safe from their danger.

Link to comment

Just my two bits on lamp post caches are this. Given the staggering number of people that use cross walk signals attached to metal poles, electrified, I see a much greater chance and likelihood that one of those types of poles would fail over a lamp post that doesn't see much action on a daily basis. As for panels or box's the fact you would need to 'pry' or use tools should be a hint to walk away. Bottom line is you can't legislate, guideline, or make a rule for stupid.

 

When you are using a crosswalk button (even one that is malfunctioning) you are not removing the cover and exposing the wires inside to potentially being touched. You are doing that when you remove the access panel on a lamp post.

 

As for panels or boxes the fact that you would need to pry or use tool to open them some of the caches listed in this search tell the finder that a screwdriver is needed to open the cache. Also in the What's in your geocaching bag topic screwdrivers and other tools using for prying are often listed. An Inctructables on how to geocache states "Other people have hidden Geocache boxes under roofs and inside metal poles that require a screwdriver to get out."

 

Last I checked crosswalk poles are still made of metal with even more repetitive use by even greater numbers of individuals on a daily basis over lap poles. It stands to reason there is a far greater chance of an electric shock given the numbers. As a general rule in our group we avoid caches that require tools to access them. It tends to cut down on dangerous situations immensely. That and common sense. Something that all the guidelines, rules, and regulations can't provide to a individual lacking such.

 

The issue isn't about the pole being a pole but what you are doing to the pole. If you are accessing the maintenance panel of a lamp pole and you are not taking the same precautions that electrical maintenance people do then you are putting yourself at an increased risk of being hurt or even killed.

 

You wouldn't climb a cliff face looking for a cache without climbing gear to keep you from falling to your death. You wouldn't go caching in an area where there is active hunting without wearing bright orange to reduce you change of being mistaken as game. Electrical hazards should be treated in a similar way. If you are going to expose yourself to increased danger then take increased precautions or don't expose yourself to those potential dangers. As a cache hider, if you know that the danger is present, then you should make caches aware of the situation. A new attribute for electrical hazard would be an appropriate way of doing this.

Link to comment
If you are accessing the maintenance panel of a lamp pole and you are not taking the same precautions that electrical maintenance people do then you are putting yourself at an increased risk of being hurt or even killed.

LPCs aren't hidden inside the access panel with the wiring, they're under the skirts with the bolts.

 

I don't think Sbell, or anyone else, is suggesting that it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage IS. They're saying it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage ISN'T, even though some folks are saying there's a slim chance there could be a short or some other problem that could make touching the pole or skirt cover deadly.

 

As for a fake electrical box teaching someone that it's okay to open real electrical boxes, I call a BS on that too. Folks don't find caches in fake stumps and then go cutting down trees looking inside real stumps (and missing the cache under the pile of sticks by the next tree over). People don't find ammo cans that have been cammo'd with moss glued all over them, and then start pulling up every patch of moss they see at the next cache hunt. I've heard of caches being hidden with a fake snake on it, or near it, so is anyone here worried that this teaches cachers that the next snake they see is fake too and it's okay to just grab it?

Link to comment
When you consider risk, you have to balance the goal against the risk. What is the actual risk? How likely is it to occur? How bad could it be if it did? And is the goal worth taking the risk? What can you do to minimize the risk?

 

Risk management involves considering all of these things -- just because something is unlikely to happen does not mean that it is safe to disregard it entirely. Especially when the actual severity is high (such as death).

True, but risk assessment is much more that that. You also should look at the risks you normally take without question and see if you're over-reacting. For example, some people have allergies to peanuts that are deadly, and so if you eat a peanut without knowing you have this allergy or not, you're taking some risk right? It's a very small risk, but the actual severity is high (such as death).

 

So let's suppose a cacher drives his motorcycle (some would say this is a high risk, especially compared to driving a car, which itself is a very risky thing to do) to a trail head to go for a cache. He meets a friend and they carry a canoe and some rope through the woods (more risk here when you consider ticks and Lyme disease) to a big lake to row to an island (the chance of them sinking and drowning is unlikely, but again, the severity is high [such as death]). Then they hike up to the top of a large hill (risking a twisted ankle on the rocks, falling down the side, and more Lyme disease carrying ticks) where they use the ropes and harnesses they brought to repel down a cliff to get to a cache (more risk of falling, possibly onto a tree with ticks on it). After they're done, they go through most of these risks again to get home and log their Find on their computer during a thunderstorm (and face a risk of lightening strikes while using the computer).

 

What would you say to this person that went to dinner that night, but refused to try a dish, simply because it was prepared with peanut oil, when they have no reason to believe they're even allergic to peanuts? They're just not willing to take the risk because they could die if it turns out they are.

 

This person is clearly over-reacting in my opinion.

 

It's the same with LPCs or caches hidden on or near transformers (not IN either of the devices). People have pointed out that the risk is so small, and so remote, that they're not worried about it and they certainly don't want to make big changes to our game just to remove such a small risk. Especially when we all take much bigger risks with nearly every step of the way getting to such caches (showering, driving, walking in a parking lot, etc).

Link to comment
If you are accessing the maintenance panel of a lamp pole and you are not taking the same precautions that electrical maintenance people do then you are putting yourself at an increased risk of being hurt or even killed.

LPCs aren't hidden inside the access panel with the wiring, they're under the skirts with the bolts.

 

I don't think Sbell, or anyone else, is suggesting that it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage IS. They're saying it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage ISN'T, even though some folks are saying there's a slim chance there could be a short or some other problem that could make touching the pole or skirt cover deadly.

 

As for a fake electrical box teaching someone that it's okay to open real electrical boxes, I call a BS on that too. Folks don't find caches in fake stumps and then go cutting down trees looking inside real stumps (and missing the cache under the pile of sticks by the next tree over). People don't find ammo cans that have been cammo'd with moss glued all over them, and then start pulling up every patch of moss they see at the next cache hunt. I've heard of caches being hidden with a fake snake on it, or near it, so is anyone here worried that this teaches cachers that the next snake they see is fake too and it's okay to just grab it?

 

I think you may have missed the point about the dangers of fake ones causing people to open real ones........The danger isn't that because they opened a fake one, they think its ok to open a real one. The danger is that if fake ones are hidden and the cacher is expecting to need to open somthing that LOOKS like an electrical panel, they could very easily MISTAKENLY open a real one thinking its the fake. The one near me has obviously had the REAL electrical pad box tampered with because they thought it was a fake. The problem is when we create caches that look TOO much like dangerous equipment and those caches need manipulation to gain access too (screw drivers to remove covers, moving of 'fake' wires..etc). If the cacher is then in the wrong spot and THINKS they've found the cache, they very well may be unscrewing and gaining access to a REAL panel and moving REAL wires. By the time the dangerous mistake is realized, it may be too late.

 

Also, something else that I've not seen brought up is that in most places, law enforcement ignores geocaching (unless suspicious activity is reported). There are guidelines on this website about getting permission, places that hides should not be...etc, land managers put out rules (ie, no caches allowed in certain nature preserves, parks etc) but in general there are no municipalities which have laws banning the activity of geocaching directly. If we set the precident of hiding things that look like electrical pad boxes and real ones are mistakenly tampered with, its only a matter of time before they start making laws against geocaching to protect their own expensive equipment.

Link to comment
If you are accessing the maintenance panel of a lamp pole and you are not taking the same precautions that electrical maintenance people do then you are putting yourself at an increased risk of being hurt or even killed.

LPCs aren't hidden inside the access panel with the wiring, they're under the skirts with the bolts.

 

I don't think Sbell, or anyone else, is suggesting that it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage IS. They're saying it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage ISN'T, even though some folks are saying there's a slim chance there could be a short or some other problem that could make touching the pole or skirt cover deadly.

 

As for a fake electrical box teaching someone that it's okay to open real electrical boxes, I call a BS on that too. Folks don't find caches in fake stumps and then go cutting down trees looking inside real stumps (and missing the cache under the pile of sticks by the next tree over). People don't find ammo cans that have been cammo'd with moss glued all over them, and then start pulling up every patch of moss they see at the next cache hunt. I've heard of caches being hidden with a fake snake on it, or near it, so is anyone here worried that this teaches cachers that the next snake they see is fake too and it's okay to just grab it?

 

That's about as weak an argument I've seen yet!

Link to comment
When you consider risk, you have to balance the goal against the risk. What is the actual risk? How likely is it to occur? How bad could it be if it did? And is the goal worth taking the risk? What can you do to minimize the risk?

 

Risk management involves considering all of these things -- just because something is unlikely to happen does not mean that it is safe to disregard it entirely. Especially when the actual severity is high (such as death).

True, but risk assessment is much more that that. You also should look at the risks you normally take without question and see if you're over-reacting. For example, some people have allergies to peanuts that are deadly, and so if you eat a peanut without knowing you have this allergy or not, you're taking some risk right? It's a very small risk, but the actual severity is high (such as death).

 

So let's suppose a cacher drives his motorcycle (some would say this is a high risk, especially compared to driving a car, which itself is a very risky thing to do) to a trail head to go for a cache. He meets a friend and they carry a canoe and some rope through the woods (more risk here when you consider ticks and Lyme disease) to a big lake to row to an island (the chance of them sinking and drowning is unlikely, but again, the severity is high [such as death]). Then they hike up to the top of a large hill (risking a twisted ankle on the rocks, falling down the side, and more Lyme disease carrying ticks) where they use the ropes and harnesses they brought to repel down a cliff to get to a cache (more risk of falling, possibly onto a tree with ticks on it). After they're done, they go through most of these risks again to get home and log their Find on their computer during a thunderstorm (and face a risk of lightening strikes while using the computer).

 

What would you say to this person that went to dinner that night, but refused to try a dish, simply because it was prepared with peanut oil, when they have no reason to believe they're even allergic to peanuts? They're just not willing to take the risk because they could die if it turns out they are.

 

This person is clearly over-reacting in my opinion.

 

It's the same with LPCs or caches hidden on or near transformers (not IN either of the devices). People have pointed out that the risk is so small, and so remote, that they're not worried about it and they certainly don't want to make big changes to our game just to remove such a small risk. Especially when we all take much bigger risks with nearly every step of the way getting to such caches (showering, driving, walking in a parking lot, etc).

 

Wait...this is even weaker! People riding motorcycles are TRAINED to ride safely (they take a test...right??), people using a canoe has little danger of drowning unless they can't swim, don't wear safety equipment etc...and the risk is known to them right off. Opening a real elec box thinking it's a fake isn't an automatically known danger, you'll not likely be wearing safety equipment. And the peanut allergy argument...seriously??

 

Lastly, you can stop showering if you choose, but you'll not be a welcome sight for most, you don't have to drive if you choose, but you'll not get far fast...in other words, these are necessary risks, ones we've trained ourselves to take and be cautious about. Having someone hide a cache which is dangerous and then not let others know of it's dangers is something that can be avoided...the risk is unnecessary, especially for kids and those not wise enough to know better!

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment
If you are accessing the maintenance panel of a lamp pole and you are not taking the same precautions that electrical maintenance people do then you are putting yourself at an increased risk of being hurt or even killed.

LPCs aren't hidden inside the access panel with the wiring, they're under the skirts with the bolts.

 

I don't think Sbell, or anyone else, is suggesting that it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage IS. They're saying it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage ISN'T, even though some folks are saying there's a slim chance there could be a short or some other problem that could make touching the pole or skirt cover deadly.

 

As for a fake electrical box teaching someone that it's okay to open real electrical boxes, I call a BS on that too. Folks don't find caches in fake stumps and then go cutting down trees looking inside real stumps (and missing the cache under the pile of sticks by the next tree over). People don't find ammo cans that have been cammo'd with moss glued all over them, and then start pulling up every patch of moss they see at the next cache hunt. I've heard of caches being hidden with a fake snake on it, or near it, so is anyone here worried that this teaches cachers that the next snake they see is fake too and it's okay to just grab it?

 

That's about as weak an argument I've seen yet!

Weak?

 

You mean like when one person tells another person his reasoning is "wrong" without bothering to explain why he thinks it’s wrong?

Link to comment

As long as "effortless smilies" can be found underneath lamppost covers, no amount of reasoning will work for the defenders of this type of hide. If lamppost caches were done away with, the sun would no longer rise, the earth's axis would change, and "power cachers" would protest worldwide :D

 

The only driving factor for this type of hide is convenience, not common sense, or aesthetics.

Link to comment
If you are accessing the maintenance panel of a lamp pole and you are not taking the same precautions that electrical maintenance people do then you are putting yourself at an increased risk of being hurt or even killed.

LPCs aren't hidden inside the access panel with the wiring, they're under the skirts with the bolts.

 

I don't think Sbell, or anyone else, is suggesting that it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage IS. They're saying it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage ISN'T, even though some folks are saying there's a slim chance there could be a short or some other problem that could make touching the pole or skirt cover deadly.

 

As for a fake electrical box teaching someone that it's okay to open real electrical boxes, I call a BS on that too. Folks don't find caches in fake stumps and then go cutting down trees looking inside real stumps (and missing the cache under the pile of sticks by the next tree over). People don't find ammo cans that have been cammo'd with moss glued all over them, and then start pulling up every patch of moss they see at the next cache hunt. I've heard of caches being hidden with a fake snake on it, or near it, so is anyone here worried that this teaches cachers that the next snake they see is fake too and it's okay to just grab it?

 

That's about as weak an argument I've seen yet!

Weak?

 

You mean like when one person tells another person his reasoning is "wrong" without bothering to explain why he thinks it’s wrong?

 

KBI...do you seriously need to be told why this argument is weak?? People will realize a cacher didn't cut a tree down to place a cache and then MAGICALLY make the tree whole again...right?? Fake snakes are good for a laugh, but I think you can tell the difference between them and the real (moving, living breathing) ones...right? And the moss...well, that's just funny! I've actually seen where people have ripped up large areas of growth (be it moss or whatever) when searching for a cache!

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment

As long as "effortless smilies" can be found underneath lamppost covers, no amount of reasoning will work for the defenders of this type of hide. If lamppost caches were done away with, the sun would no longer rise, the earth's axis would change, and "power cachers" would protest worldwide :D

 

The only driving factor for this type of hide is convenience, not common sense, or aesthetics.

 

Yep...and just because someone hasn't been hurt finding one of these yet (or have they...), doesn't lessen the chances, does it?

Link to comment
Having someone hide a cache which is dangerous and then not let others know of it's dangers is something that can be avoided...the risk is unnecessary, especially for kids and those not wise enough to know better!

These hiders to whom you refer – are you implying that they are creating an intentional hazard? As in a booby trap? If so, then you are arguing against something that is not being promoted in this thread.

 

If, on the other hand, you are concerned that a cache hunt might present unintended or incidental hazards – then you might want to review the standard disclaimer that appears at the top of every Groundspeak cache page listing – the one that begins with the words "Cache seekers assume all risks involved in seeking a cache."

 

Electrical boxes present an extremely deadly, yet extremely unlikely, hazard. So do trees, bushes, rocks, creeks, ponds, mountains, hillsides, wildlife, bad weather, good weather, sunlight ...

 

It would make no sense to ban one improbable/incidental hazard without banning all of them. Are you also against, for example, the hiding of cache containers amongst trees? Trees are heavy and can fall on you, you know. They also sometimes contain ticks, snakes and/or hornets – and trees ALWAYS block out the sunlight, which your body needs to produce vitamin D.

 

Come to think of it, you’re right ... and I completely agree. ALL caching is bad. You said it best: "Its dangers is something that can be avoided...the risk is unnecessary, especially for kids and those not wise enough to know better!"

Link to comment

I'm thinking that if these items were as dangerous to be around as some in this thread would have us believe that they would not place them immediately adjacent to sidewalks and on playgrounds. In stead, they would be surrounded by fences topped with razor wire to keep the public safe from their danger.

 

They actually place them where they need to be, there are a lot of locations that need electricity.

It isn't possible to protect distribution infrastructure, there are thousands of of locations even in a small community. The grid is designed to be safe as it can be and additional safeguards are often added. Almost all ground pad transformers exposed to traffic are protected by bollards because in the event of a vehicle impact the very small chance of the case becoming energized grows much larger.

When there is a failure that energizes a transformer case you are right in noting that it can happen anywhere. In the OP's first post the linked article pointed out that ConEd tested their system and...

 

The utility found 7,117 electrified objects on city streets between Jan. 1 and Oct. 31. That's 468 more than in all of last year, says the Jodie S. Lane Safety Foundation, named for a woman electrocuted in 2004 by faulty wiring in a Con Ed street box.

 

I am not sure if that is the source of your inference that transformers are placed near streets but I would be willing to bet they found "electrified objects" near playgrounds, near parks, near daycares and even near schools. If they found 7,117 electrified objects how many do you think they tested? Note that the previous year they found and fixed 6,449 electrified objects (that can also be inferred from the article) unless you want to suppose they didn't fix the ones they found last year but just retested to confirm they were indeed electrified again this year.

 

Most people do not, in their normal course of affairs, come into contact with poles, transformers, guys, masts or any other part of the infrastructure. Workers who work on or near utility infrastructure are trained. Special tools are needed to assess the possible hazard in any job and you know what - I am going to keep using them whenever there is a chance that I might be killed by "touching" an energized object.

Link to comment
Having someone hide a cache which is dangerous and then not let others know of it's dangers is something that can be avoided...the risk is unnecessary, especially for kids and those not wise enough to know better!

These hiders to whom you refer – are you implying that they are creating an intentional hazard? As in a booby trap? If so, then you are arguing against something that is not being promoted in this thread.

 

If, on the other hand, you are concerned that a cache hunt might present unintended or incidental hazards – then you might want to review the standard disclaimer that appears at the top of every Groundspeak cache page listing – the one that begins with the words "Cache seekers assume all risks involved in seeking a cache."

 

Electrical boxes present an extremely deadly, yet extremely unlikely, hazard. So do trees, bushes, rocks, creeks, ponds, mountains, hillsides, wildlife, bad weather, good weather, sunlight ...

 

It would make no sense to ban one improbable/incidental hazard without banning all of them. Are you also against, for example, the hiding of cache containers amongst trees? Trees are heavy and can fall on you, you know. They also sometimes contain ticks, snakes and/or hornets – and trees ALWAYS block out the sunlight, which your body needs to produce vitamin D.

 

Come to think of it, you’re right ... and I completely agree. ALL caching is bad. You said it best: "Its dangers is something that can be avoided...the risk is unnecessary, especially for kids and those not wise enough to know better!"

 

KBI...I expect better arguments from you, my friend! Yes, GS shields themselves from responsibility, but (as has been proven wth the bomb scare thread) CACHERS can be held responsible! Placing a cache in a dangerous piece of electric equipment, whether intentionally upping the dangers or not, is irresponsible at best...and could be viewed as criminal in the event of injury or death!

 

The rest of your argument is comical, THANKS for the laugh!

 

And please, if you're going to quote me, try not to take my quote out of context???

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment
If you are accessing the maintenance panel of a lamp pole and you are not taking the same precautions that electrical maintenance people do then you are putting yourself at an increased risk of being hurt or even killed.
LPCs aren't hidden inside the access panel with the wiring, they're under the skirts with the bolts.

 

I don't think Sbell, or anyone else, is suggesting that it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage IS. They're saying it's okay to hide a cache where the high voltage ISN'T, even though some folks are saying there's a slim chance there could be a short or some other problem that could make touching the pole or skirt cover deadly.

 

As for a fake electrical box teaching someone that it's okay to open real electrical boxes, I call a BS on that too. Folks don't find caches in fake stumps and then go cutting down trees looking inside real stumps (and missing the cache under the pile of sticks by the next tree over). People don't find ammo cans that have been cammo'd with moss glued all over them, and then start pulling up every patch of moss they see at the next cache hunt. I've heard of caches being hidden with a fake snake on it, or near it, so is anyone here worried that this teaches cachers that the next snake they see is fake too and it's okay to just grab it?

That's about as weak an argument I've seen yet!

I really didn't think I'd need to explain this one, but I guess I was wrong.

 

Basically what I'm trying to say is, you can't teach stupid. If someone is stupid enough to force their way into a live electrical box this is something they'd do regardless of what other cache they've found. Non-stupid cachers when looking for a cache near electrical equipment for the first time will be cautious and look at other places first. After not finding the cache they will inspect the electrical devices more closely and will see something that will clue them in, such as a box being held onto the side of another box with magnets, or a box connected to a wooden pole with no conduits connected, etc. The only thing these hides will teach a non-stupid cacher is to maybe start looking at electrical equipment sooner next time, and teach him things to look for to confirm it's a cache. He's not going to change his IQ suddenly and next cache hunt assume that all electrical boxes are safe.

 

A stupid cacher will get to the location, not find the cache, and then take a screw driver or other tool and start opening the metal boxes. He would do this even if he's never found a fake electrical box. These are the same people that open access covers on lamp posts before raising the skirt to check under it. The fake box that he may have found previously didn't teach him to do this, he was already that stupid.

 

You can't teach stupid.

Link to comment

One must ask themselves...would someone simply stop what they're doing (possibly going for a walk) and decide to look inside an elec box out of the blue? No...there's a motivation behind it. The motivation being someone ignorantly placed a cache in or near a cache.

 

Stupidity can be taught...o in this case, it can be promoted!

Link to comment
Wait...this is even weaker! People riding motorcycles are TRAINED to ride safely (they take a test...right??), people using a canoe has little danger of drowning unless they can't swim, don't wear safety equipment etc...and the risk is known to them right off. Opening a real elec box thinking it's a fake isn't an automatically known danger, you'll not likely be wearing safety equipment. And the peanut allergy argument...seriously??

 

Lastly, you can stop showering if you choose, but you'll not be a welcome sight for most, you don't have to drive if you choose, but you'll not get far fast...in other words, these are necessary risks, ones we've trained ourselves to take and be cautious about. Having someone hide a cache which is dangerous and then not let others know of it's dangers is something that can be avoided...the risk is unnecessary, especially for kids and those not wise enough to know better!

People riding motorcycles die every day due to changes in road conditions, other drivers making bad decisions, the motorcycle having a problem that the rider isn't aware of, etc. Being trained doesn't move the risk to zero, it just reduces it some.

 

People using a canoe are less safe if the canoe has a problem that they're not aware of. Same thing with swimming. People drown that have been swimming for years.

 

People die in cars every day because of the dangers they're not aware of (engine trouble, tire trouble, road hazards, etc.).

 

My post wasn't to debate that it's okay to open a live electrical box because it's a known high hazard. That would be stupid. My point was that it's okay to lift a lamp post skirt, or look for a magnetic hide a key on the side of a transformer, because the known hazard is extremely small, especially when you compare it to the other known hazards we willingly take every day.

 

You also obviously completely missed the point of the peanut allergy. I wish you'd read it again but I know you won't. I wasn't suggesting that a peanut allergy is a danger, I was using it as a very small risk in the story. Seriously.

Link to comment
One must ask themselves...would someone simply stop what they're doing (possibly going for a walk) and decide to look inside an elec box out of the blue? No...there's a motivation behind it.
Correct, but off topic. We're talking about people looking for caches near electrical equipment, and whether they're going to open a live electrical box because last week they found a fake one. I'm saying that if they do, they would have done it even without having found the fake one. They weren't taught to be that stupid.

 

The motivation being someone ignorantly placed a cache in or near a cache.
I've found caches inside other caches before. I think they're called parasite caches, and were a fun surprise. What's dangerous about parasite caches? They're not real parasites you know.

 

Stupidity can be taught...o in this case, it can be promoted!
I'll let you promote whatever you want. I'm off to run a few errands.
Link to comment
Wait...this is even weaker! People riding motorcycles are TRAINED to ride safely (they take a test...right??), people using a canoe has little danger of drowning unless they can't swim, don't wear safety equipment etc...and the risk is known to them right off. Opening a real elec box thinking it's a fake isn't an automatically known danger, you'll not likely be wearing safety equipment. And the peanut allergy argument...seriously??

 

Lastly, you can stop showering if you choose, but you'll not be a welcome sight for most, you don't have to drive if you choose, but you'll not get far fast...in other words, these are necessary risks, ones we've trained ourselves to take and be cautious about. Having someone hide a cache which is dangerous and then not let others know of it's dangers is something that can be avoided...the risk is unnecessary, especially for kids and those not wise enough to know better!

People riding motorcycles die every day due to changes in road conditions, other drivers making bad decisions, the motorcycle having a problem that the rider isn't aware of, etc. Being trained doesn't move the risk to zero, it just reduces it some.

 

People using a canoe are less safe if the canoe has a problem that they're not aware of. Same thing with swimming. People drown that have been swimming for years.

 

People die in cars every day because of the dangers they're not aware of (engine trouble, tire trouble, road hazards, etc.).

 

My post wasn't to debate that it's okay to open a live electrical box because it's a known high hazard. That would be stupid. My point was that it's okay to lift a lamp post skirt, or look for a magnetic hide a key on the side of a transformer, because the known hazard is extremely small, especially when you compare it to the other known hazards we willingly take every day.

 

You also obviously completely missed the point of the peanut allergy. I wish you'd read it again but I know you won't. I wasn't suggesting that a peanut allergy is a danger, I was using it as a very small risk in the story. Seriously.

 

I'm sure you understood what I said and are just going in circles for your enjoyment, so please carry on and have fun!

Link to comment
Wait...this is even weaker! People riding motorcycles are TRAINED to ride safely (they take a test...right??), people using a canoe has little danger of drowning unless they can't swim, don't wear safety equipment etc...and the risk is known to them right off. Opening a real elec box thinking it's a fake isn't an automatically known danger, you'll not likely be wearing safety equipment. And the peanut allergy argument...seriously??

 

Lastly, you can stop showering if you choose, but you'll not be a welcome sight for most, you don't have to drive if you choose, but you'll not get far fast...in other words, these are necessary risks, ones we've trained ourselves to take and be cautious about. Having someone hide a cache which is dangerous and then not let others know of it's dangers is something that can be avoided...the risk is unnecessary, especially for kids and those not wise enough to know better!

People riding motorcycles die every day due to changes in road conditions, other drivers making bad decisions, the motorcycle having a problem that the rider isn't aware of, etc. Being trained doesn't move the risk to zero, it just reduces it some.

 

People using a canoe are less safe if the canoe has a problem that they're not aware of. Same thing with swimming. People drown that have been swimming for years.

 

People die in cars every day because of the dangers they're not aware of (engine trouble, tire trouble, road hazards, etc.).

 

My post wasn't to debate that it's okay to open a live electrical box because it's a known high hazard. That would be stupid. My point was that it's okay to lift a lamp post skirt, or look for a magnetic hide a key on the side of a transformer, because the known hazard is extremely small, especially when you compare it to the other known hazards we willingly take every day.

 

You also obviously completely missed the point of the peanut allergy. I wish you'd read it again but I know you won't. I wasn't suggesting that a peanut allergy is a danger, I was using it as a very small risk in the story. Seriously.

 

I'm sure you understood what I said and are just going in circles for your enjoyment, so please carry on and have fun!

Link to comment

Electrical boxes present an extremely deadly, yet extremely unlikely, hazard. So do trees, bushes, rocks, creeks, ponds, mountains, hillsides, wildlife, bad weather, good weather, sunlight ...

 

This analogy doesn't work because the danger presented by energized utility infrastructure is undetecable without specilaized equipment. Hazards can be identified, every other hazard you mentioned is a potential hazard and every one of them can be seen, the first hazard you mentioned is invisible.

 

Try this, use a voltage tester to determine that a transformer case is energized. Once you have determined that it is indeed energized place the tip of your finger, any finger, on the case. (not really please, we don't want to lose you or your brother) Once you become part of the circuit you will continue to be part of the circuit until you fall over and hopefully break contact.

 

"Let go" voltages are extremely low, you could encounter let go voltage limits in household wiring and when you touch a energized transformer you are way way over the let go voltage, the tingle will be fatal.

 

Here are the accepted let go voltage amounts -

1 mA Threshold of feeling, tingling sensation.

10-20 mA "Can't let go!" current - onset of sustained muscular contraction.

100-300 mA Ventricular fibrillation, fatal if continued.

 

These are milliamps, these are exrtremely low levels. You cannot determine if utliity infrastructure is energized without specialized tools. Every geocache secured to a utility pole, every magnetic decal stuck to a transformer and every cache hidden on distribution infrastructure creates the potential of a fatal stray voltage incident.

 

You don't have to believe me but I sincerely hope that new cachers are aware of these dangers. Threads like this one are a great way to let people know that these placements are at best very poor caches, thanks to those who pointed that out, and at worst they are very dangerous to everyone who searches for them.

Edited by wavector
Link to comment
Electrical boxes present an extremely deadly, yet extremely unlikely, hazard. So do trees, bushes, rocks, creeks, ponds, mountains, hillsides, wildlife, bad weather, good weather, sunlight ...

This analogy doesn't work because the danger presented by energized utility infrastructure is undetecable without specilaized equipment. Hazards can be identified, every other hazard you mentioned is a potential hazard and every one of them can be seen, the first hazard you mentioned is invisible.

Electrical hazards are the only hazards that are invisible?

 

So the next big rock I reach under during a cache search – you’re promising me there will be NO black widow or brown recluse underneath it?

 

And the next large dead tree I walk past in the woods – you can guarantee me that it will NOT choose that precise moment to fall over and crush me dead?

 

And the next frozen pond I walk across on my way to a cache – you can assure me 100% that the ice will be thick enough to support me, and to protect me from a horrible death due to hypothermia?

 

And the unseen camouflaged hunter who hears me coming and thinks maybe I’m a deer – you’re saying there is NO WAY a hunter would ever fire without positive target ID, or hunt out of season when caching should have been safe?

 

That’s good to know. Thanks. I’m glad to learn that electrical boxes are the only things that ever present unseen hazards to ignorant or unlucky cachers like me.

Edited by KBI
Link to comment
Having someone hide a cache which is dangerous and then not let others know of it's dangers is something that can be avoided...the risk is unnecessary, especially for kids and those not wise enough to know better!

These hiders to whom you refer – are you implying that they are creating an intentional hazard? As in a booby trap? If so, then you are arguing against something that is not being promoted in this thread.

 

If, on the other hand, you are concerned that a cache hunt might present unintended or incidental hazards – then you might want to review the standard disclaimer that appears at the top of every Groundspeak cache page listing – the one that begins with the words "Cache seekers assume all risks involved in seeking a cache."

 

Electrical boxes present an extremely deadly, yet extremely unlikely, hazard. So do trees, bushes, rocks, creeks, ponds, mountains, hillsides, wildlife, bad weather, good weather, sunlight ...

 

It would make no sense to ban one improbable/incidental hazard without banning all of them. Are you also against, for example, the hiding of cache containers amongst trees? Trees are heavy and can fall on you, you know. They also sometimes contain ticks, snakes and/or hornets – and trees ALWAYS block out the sunlight, which your body needs to produce vitamin D.

 

Come to think of it, you’re right ... and I completely agree. ALL caching is bad. You said it best: "Its dangers is something that can be avoided...the risk is unnecessary, especially for kids and those not wise enough to know better!"

KBI...I expect better arguments from you, my friend! Yes, GS shields themselves from responsibility, but (as has been proven wth the bomb scare thread) CACHERS can be held responsible! Placing a cache in a dangerous piece of electric equipment, whether intentionally upping the dangers or not, is irresponsible at best...and could be viewed as criminal in the event of injury or death!

How do you feel about a cache container placed halfway up a 300 foot vertical rock face?

 

Or a few feet from a busy highway?

 

Or within view of a residential area where the inhabitants might very well be jumpy -- and armed?

 

Or inside a hollow stump where there might be a venomous spider?

 

Or in a forest known to contain bears?

 

Or in a desert area known to contain venomous snakes?

 

Or in a parking garage that might collapse during an earthquake?

 

Or at ANY spot on the planet where an expired Russian satellite might come crashing down from orbit, without warning, and create an impact crater?

 

Are you against any of these types of hides as well? All those hides pose very real hazards, all of which could leave a person injured or seriously killed, and all of which are presumably known to the cache owner.

 

What should we do about all those irresponsible cache owners, Roddy?

Link to comment
Electrical boxes present an extremely deadly, yet extremely unlikely, hazard. So do trees, bushes, rocks, creeks, ponds, mountains, hillsides, wildlife, bad weather, good weather, sunlight ...

This analogy doesn't work because the danger presented by energized utility infrastructure is undetecable without specilaized equipment. Hazards can be identified, every other hazard you mentioned is a potential hazard and every one of them can be seen, the first hazard you mentioned is invisible.

Electrical hazards are the only hazards that are invisible?

 

So the next big rock I reach under during a cache search – you’re promising me there will be NO black widow or brown recluse underneath it?

 

And the next large dead tree I walk past in the woods – you can guarantee me that it will NOT choose that precise moment to fall over and crush me dead?

 

And the next frozen pond I walk across onto on my way to a cache – you can assure me 100% that the ice will be thick enough to support me, and to protect me from a horrible death due to hypothermia?

 

And the unseen camouflaged hunter who hears me coming and thinks maybe I’m a deer – you’re saying there is NO WAY a hunter would ever fire without positive target ID, or hunt out of season when caching should have been safe?

 

That’s good to know. Thanks. I’m glad to learn that electrical boxes are the only things that ever present unseen hazards to ignorant or unlucky cachers like me.

 

You can see electric currents?? No wonder this isn't a problem for you, you have powers most of us are lacking! :D

 

For crying out loud, stop going in circles with your argument. Hunting season is announced, people (ok, MOST) know the dangers of hunters during hunting season, walking on ponds is known to be a danger and we tend to not do this without taking precautions, people living where poisonous critters dwell know of this danger and aren't going in blindly (or I'd sure hope not)...but electric hazards ARE invisible, tempting someone to go into a real or perceived real box is bad for caching IMHO...you who want to continue with your argument in favor of these hides might want to think up something better for your side of the argument!

 

When that comes, I might come back, but seeings this has likely accomplished what it was intended to accomplish (from my point at least...which is to inform that these hides are dangerous and bad). Have fun playing your games! I didn't realize championing a bad idea solely to argue was fun, but you seem to enjoy it! Analogy after analogy, all missing the mark and all being made solely to continue an argument...sheesh!

Link to comment

Electrical hazards are the only hazards that are invisible?

 

I must have missed that comment. :D

 

Electrical hazards are not detectable without specialized equipment. If you find an electrical hazard it won't be because you weren't paying attention.

I see you are willing to admit that there are hazards and they can and do occur unexpectedly, that is a refreshing viewpoint because people are constantly trying to minimize real dangers.

In the case of the dangers presented by the utlity distribution grid you cannot avert the danger by paying attention.

Many of the dangers you presented could be averted by someone paying attention though I admit that every year a tree could fall in the forest directly on top of an unsuspecting geocacher.

I live in an area that has both black widow spiders and prairie rattlesnakes. Neither the snakes nor the spiders have been responsible for the death of anyone of which I am aware.

Last year an electrician was killed when his apprentice failed to turn off the breaker to a 347 volt lightning arrest system, that is low voltage.

 

you’re saying there is NO WAY a hunter would ever fire without positive target ID

 

Are you sure you saw that comment in this thread? I must have missed it when I made that that remark. I do remember another thread about disabling caches in the hunting season, is that the thread you are talking about?

Link to comment
Electrical boxes present an extremely deadly, yet extremely unlikely, hazard. So do trees, bushes, rocks, creeks, ponds, mountains, hillsides, wildlife, bad weather, good weather, sunlight ...

This analogy doesn't work because the danger presented by energized utility infrastructure is undetecable without specilaized equipment. Hazards can be identified, every other hazard you mentioned is a potential hazard and every one of them can be seen, the first hazard you mentioned is invisible.

Electrical hazards are the only hazards that are invisible?

 

So the next big rock I reach under during a cache search – you’re promising me there will be NO black widow or brown recluse underneath it?

 

And the next large dead tree I walk past in the woods – you can guarantee me that it will NOT choose that precise moment to fall over and crush me dead?

 

And the next frozen pond I walk across onto on my way to a cache – you can assure me 100% that the ice will be thick enough to support me, and to protect me from a horrible death due to hypothermia?

 

And the unseen camouflaged hunter who hears me coming and thinks maybe I’m a deer – you’re saying there is NO WAY a hunter would ever fire without positive target ID, or hunt out of season when caching should have been safe?

 

That’s good to know. Thanks. I’m glad to learn that electrical boxes are the only things that ever present unseen hazards to ignorant or unlucky cachers like me.

You can see electric currents?? No wonder this isn't a problem for you, you have powers most of us are lacking! :D

 

For crying out loud, stop going in circles with your argument. Hunting season is announced, people (ok, MOST) know the dangers of hunters during hunting season ...

I wasn’t only talking about caching during hunting season. I also mentioned the very real hazard caused by hunters who hunt out of season. A skilled hunter is even more invisible than an electrical current.

 

walking on ponds is known to be a danger and we tend to not do this without taking precautions ...

... and after taking the precautions, there might still be unseen thin spots in the ice. A thin spot can be even more invisible than an electrical current.

 

... people living where poisonous critters dwell know of this danger and aren't going in blindly (or I'd sure hope not) ...

Venomous critters dwell everywhere. Some cache containers can only be retrieved by reaching one’s hand into a place one cannot see. If you can't see the spider OR the cache container, then they are no more visible than an electrical current.

 

... but electric hazards ARE invisible, tempting someone to go into a real or perceived real box is bad for caching IMHO...

... and whether to succumb to that temptation is the choice of the seeker, NOT the hider. That’s not "IMHO." That’s just the way it is.

 

... you who want to continue with your argument in favor of these hides might want to think up something better for your side of the argument!

My only argument is this:

 

EVERY cache experience presents hazards. Injury and death are ALWAYS possible with EVERY cache.

 

If the hazard is
intentional,
then the
hider
has by definition placed a booby trap, and is very likely in violation of the Terms of Service ... and the law.

 

If the hazard is
unintentional
– in other words, if it is incidental, and exists solely as a known, reasonably unanticipated yet possible risk (as in the case of a big honkin’ green electrical box), then it is the responsibility of the cache
seeker
to decide how (or whether) to proceed.

 

Seems pretty intuitive to me.

That is my only argument. You obviously disagree. If you want me to abandon my point of view in favor of yours, then you’ll need to convince me with some sort of persuasive reasoning.

 

If you don’t care what I think that’s fine too.

 

I didn't realize championing a bad idea solely to argue was fun, but you seem to enjoy it! Analogy after analogy, all missing the mark and all being made solely to continue an argument...sheesh!

So now you think I’m a troll. Fine.

 

I’ve stated my viewpoint. You are free to state yours. I never once questioned your underlying integrity, however – but go ahead and feel free to replace your own opinions with insults. Getting yourself booted from this thread by posting personal attacks isn’t likely to convince anyone of anything – but who knows, maybe I’m wrong about that.

 

You are also free to ignore me if you truly think I'm merely trolling. Isn't that the recommended anti-troll advice? Whether a person is a troll or not, what does it say about you that you’re allowing yourself to get so worked up?

 

I invite you to either: (1) ignore me, (2) join me in polite and civilized debate over our differences regarding this topic, or (3) continue with the personal insults while taking your chances with the Mods.

 

Good luck with whichever you choose.

Link to comment
Electrical hazards are the only hazards that are invisible?

 

I can do that, you can't. nyah, nyah nyah :D

 

If you are a new reader you can see that I have bracketed KBI's words with quotes that clearly show KBI said what KBI said, not me. Now we can all wait for the proper return volley which is KBI quoting me saying what he actually said.

 

I bet he can't do it.

Link to comment
Electrical boxes present an extremely deadly, yet extremely unlikely, hazard. So do trees, bushes, rocks, creeks, ponds, mountains, hillsides, wildlife, bad weather, good weather, sunlight ...

This analogy doesn't work because the danger presented by energized utility infrastructure is undetecable without specilaized equipment. Hazards can be identified, every other hazard you mentioned is a potential hazard and every one of them can be seen, the first hazard you mentioned is invisible.

Electrical hazards are the only hazards that are invisible?

 

So the next big rock I reach under during a cache search – you’re promising me there will be NO black widow or brown recluse underneath it?

 

And the next large dead tree I walk past in the woods – you can guarantee me that it will NOT choose that precise moment to fall over and crush me dead?

 

And the next frozen pond I walk across onto on my way to a cache – you can assure me 100% that the ice will be thick enough to support me, and to protect me from a horrible death due to hypothermia?

 

And the unseen camouflaged hunter who hears me coming and thinks maybe I’m a deer – you’re saying there is NO WAY a hunter would ever fire without positive target ID, or hunt out of season when caching should have been safe?

 

That’s good to know. Thanks. I’m glad to learn that electrical boxes are the only things that ever present unseen hazards to ignorant or unlucky cachers like me.

You can see electric currents?? No wonder this isn't a problem for you, you have powers most of us are lacking! :D

 

For crying out loud, stop going in circles with your argument. Hunting season is announced, people (ok, MOST) know the dangers of hunters during hunting season ...

I wasn’t only talking about caching during hunting season. I also mentioned the very real hazard caused by hunters who hunt out of season. A skilled hunter is even more invisible than an electrical current.

 

walking on ponds is known to be a danger and we tend to not do this without taking precautions ...

... and after taking the precautions, there might still be unseen thin spots in the ice. A thin spot can be even more invisible than an electrical current.

 

... people living where poisonous critters dwell know of this danger and aren't going in blindly (or I'd sure hope not) ...

Venomous critters dwell everywhere. Some cache containers can only be retrieved by reaching one’s hand into a place one cannot see. If you can't see the spider OR the cache container, then they are no more visible than an electrical current.

 

... but electric hazards ARE invisible, tempting someone to go into a real or perceived real box is bad for caching IMHO...

... and whether to succumb to that temptation is the choice of the seeker, NOT the hider. That’s not "IMHO." That’s just the way it is.

 

... you who want to continue with your argument in favor of these hides might want to think up something better for your side of the argument!

My only argument is this:

 

EVERY cache experience presents hazards. Injury and death are ALWAYS possible with EVERY cache.

 

If the hazard is
intentional,
then the
hider
has by definition placed a booby trap, and is very likely in violation of the Terms of Service ... and the law.

 

If the hazard is
unintentional
– in other words, if it is incidental, and exists solely as a known, reasonably unanticipated yet possible risk (as in the case of a big honkin’ green electrical box), then it is the responsibility of the cache
seeker
to decide how (or whether) to proceed.

 

Seems pretty intuitive to me.

That is my only argument. You obviously disagree. If you want me to abandon my point of view in favor of yours, then you’ll need to convince me with some sort of persuasive reasoning.

 

If you don’t care what I think that’s fine too.

 

I didn't realize championing a bad idea solely to argue was fun, but you seem to enjoy it! Analogy after analogy, all missing the mark and all being made solely to continue an argument...sheesh!

So now you think I’m a troll. Fine.

 

I’ve stated my viewpoint. You are free to state yours. I never once questioned your underlying integrity, however – but go ahead and feel free to replace your own opinions with insults. Getting yourself booted from this thread by posting personal attacks isn’t likely to convince anyone of anything – but who knows, maybe I’m wrong about that.

 

You are also free to ignore me if you truly think I'm merely trolling. Isn't that the recommended anti-troll advice? Whether a person is a troll or not, what does it say about you that you’re allowing yourself to get so worked up?

 

I invite you to either: (1) ignore me, (2) join me in polite and civilized debate over our differences regarding this topic, or (3) continue with the personal insults while taking your chances with the Mods.

 

Good luck with whichever you choose.

 

I'm not worked up and I didn't insult a single soul here, so thanks for your concern! MY point is, this has been discussed endlessly and all you can come back time after time after time (which, IMHO is the same as arguing for the sake of hearing yourself speak...or type as it would be in this case) with is other dangers which we would accept every single day were we caching or not. Seeking to open a potentially live elec box is not likely something we'd do unless motivated by a cache...or werre trained to...or just ignorant!

 

When you can come back with a danger caused due to the motivation of a cache, let me kknow and I'll be more than happy to debate that, but I am tired of this round-a-round which you continue even now!

 

And if you MUST label an ignorant hide as a booby-trap, well those are your words, not mine!

 

Oh, and I never suspected you of trolling, merely someone who can't stop arguing and still hasn't come up with anything near a good argument...the troll part were...again....your words, not mine! But if you feel I've wronged you, please, by all means, report button is at the bottom!

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment
Electrical hazards are the only hazards that are invisible?

 

I can do that, you can't. nyah, nyah nyah :D

 

If you are a new reader you can see that I have bracketed KBI's words with quotes that clearly show KBI said what KBI said, not me. Now we can all wait for the proper return volley which is KBI quoting me saying what he actually said.

 

I bet he can't do it.

 

:laughing::santa:

 

Darned electricians and their magic equipment!

Link to comment
Electrical hazards are the only hazards that are invisible?

I can do that, you can't. nyah, nyah nyah :lol:

 

If you are a new reader you can see that I have bracketed KBI's words with quotes that clearly show KBI said what KBI said, not me. Now we can all wait for the proper return volley which is KBI quoting me saying what he actually said.

 

I bet he can't do it.

Hmmm ...

 

Electrical boxes present an extremely deadly, yet extremely unlikely, hazard. So do trees, bushes, rocks, creeks, ponds, mountains, hillsides, wildlife, bad weather, good weather, sunlight ...

This analogy doesn't work because the danger presented by energized utility infrastructure is undetecable without specilaized equipment. Hazards can be identified, every other hazard you mentioned is a potential hazard and every one of them can be seen, the first hazard you mentioned is invisible.

Sounded pretty clear to me, but if that's not what you meant, then please clarify.

 

That was why I phrased my post as a question: "Electrical hazards are the only hazards that are invisible?" I was asking if you really meant your claim to sound the way it sounded.

 

 

(Why does this thread suddenly remind be of third grade?)

Link to comment
I'm not worked up and I didn't insult a single soul here, so thanks for your concern! MY point is, this has been discussed endlessly and all you can come back time after time after time (which, IMHO is the same as arguing for the sake of hearing yourself speak...or type as it would be in this case) ...

Here you claim once again that I am posting only for the sake of hearing myself argue, which implies that my statements are not sincere representations of my viewpoint; that I am lying to you about my opinion, and only trying to stir the pot.

 

What is the difference between saying that and calling me a 'troll?' None.

 

I’d like to respond to the rest of your post, but until you drop the insults I will not respond to you any further.

 

"Don’t feed the trolls" is excellent advice. I prefer to take that advice one step further: I ignore those who choose to insult me personally instead of debating the merits of my viewpoints.

Link to comment
I'm not worked up and I didn't insult a single soul here, so thanks for your concern! MY point is, this has been discussed endlessly and all you can come back time after time after time (which, IMHO is the same as arguing for the sake of hearing yourself speak...or type as it would be in this case) ...

Here you claim once again that I am posting only for the sake of hearing myself argue, which implies that my statements are not sincere representations of my viewpoint; that I am lying to you about my opinion, and only trying to stir the pot.

 

What is the difference between saying that and calling me a 'troll?' None.

 

I’d like to respond to the rest of your post, but until you drop the insults I will not respond to you any further.

 

"Don’t feed the trolls" is excellent advice. I prefer to take that advice one step further: I ignore those who choose to insult me personally instead of debating the merits of my viewpoints.

Oh please, you know full well what I'm saying. I'm sorry if my saying that all you're doing is going in circles is somehow inerpretted by you as me calling you a troll...WOW! Is this your new ploy since you haven't a good argument? Going round in cicles is getting too old?

 

And as I said, the report button is at the bottom if you truly feel I'm calling you a troll!

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 3
×
×
  • Create New...