Placement issues and alerting "owners".

[+scorpio_dark]

So I went to a cache with a cool name and an interesting placement on a recent trip to Albuquerque. The placement is in a City Open Space designated so by postings all around. I drove all the way around the perimeter and saw two entry points that were padlocked and a fence around the entire thing.

 

Usually fences are meant to keep people out as far as I know. . . . . so there were alot of questions and other cachers have avoided this one for 2 months. I posted a needs maintenance because it seemed that an aspect of the cache DID need maintenance.

 

From other cachers and cache owners I want to know if they's like to learn about issues through their cache by maintenance postings or if it hurts their feelings (honestly). Also, was the tresspassing issue unclear in my post? I would hate to have a LEO on my butt in that situation . . .

 

Mines of Moria - GC1GKWF (Please don't bother the cache owner. I'm not posting this to flame them.)

[+WRASTRO]

It appears to me from the cache page and from the picture you posted with your log that the area is freely available to enjoy. I can't comment on the locked gates as they are not shown in your photo.

 

Personally, if I had concerns such as yours with a cache that had been active for nearly a year I would have contacted the owner via email rather than posting a needs maintenance log on the cache. You *think* there may be an issue but you really do not know since you seem to have conflicting information. Public access signs and locked gates do seem to be conflicting. Yet you chose to hunt the cache and post your "found it" log. I don't understand why you would choose to enter an area that you felt was off limits to get your smilie and then felt compelled to post a "needs maintenance" log.

 

No online logs for two months do not seem to have any bearing. Perhaps no one searched for it?

[+scorpio_dark]

It appears to me from the cache page and from the picture you posted with your log that the area is freely available to enjoy. I can't comment on the locked gates as they are not shown in your photo.

 

Personally, if I had concerns such as yours with a cache that had been active for nearly a year I would have contacted the owner via email rather than posting a needs maintenance log on the cache. You *think* there may be an issue but you really do not know since you seem to have conflicting information. Public access signs and locked gates do seem to be conflicting. Yet you chose to hunt the cache and post your "found it" log. I don't understand why you would choose to enter an area that you felt was off limits to get your smilie and then felt compelled to post a "needs maintenance" log.

 

No online logs for two months do not seem to have any bearing. Perhaps no one searched for it?

 

Thanks for the feedback! I'm won't argue each detail involved with a choice to say something about it. You have some valid points, But the conflicting information is the exact reason for the maintenance request . . . or e-mail as you suggest. Thanks again!

Edited August 14, 2009 by scorpio_dark

[GOF and Bacall]

With the situation you describe I'd not be offended by a NM log. An email would have worked also. As I see it the NM log type is there to alert the owner to any possible problems be they with the cache itself or the area the cache is in. Posting the log has the added benefit of also letting anyone who reads the logs know.

[+Buddies-Buddies]

We did a multi-cache in Spain at a public garden. The garden was locked up tight when we arrived, and we were out of breath for trying to rush to get there during operating hours. Of course we don't like to give up too easily so Mrs. Buddies-Buddies was looking through the binoculars at a plaque that we could see through the gate which we needed to gather information from in order to locate the next waypoint. After running the calculations we realized that the next waypoint was also within the garden... We thought the hunt was done at that point but then lo and behold - the gate started to open!

 

It seems that the hours of operation posted on the site were for the winter hours of operation and they had just started operating their summer hours schedule that week - so we got to go in and finish the multi-cache.

 

Perhaps the locked gates that you came across are only locked during certain hours... I dunno just a thought... As for the NEEDS MAINTENANCE post, as a cache owner I appreciate the notification that there is an issue - notes posted on the cache page do not generate an email for me.

[Dj Storm]

When I'm in a situation like the one described by the OP, I re-read the cache page (usually at home, as I carry only a summary with me), and the logs. If there's a mention of operating hours, or something else obstructing the search, than my bad for not reading carefully. If there's nothing, then I post a NM log. I won't be offended if anyone does the same for my caches in similar situations - I appreciate such a notification.

 

The "needs maintenance" log means exactly that, the cache needs maintenance. The (responsible) cacher will (probably) do preventive maintenance about once every year. If something happens with the cache or the location, a NM log will (hopefully) trigger an unscheduled visit for maintenance of the container or the cache page.

[+ecanderson]

While I can't tell much from a sat map of the area, understand that it is entirely possible that "Open Space" is NOT intended to be accessed by the public. Sadly, that describes about 90% of the open space that Boulder County purchases around here. They gate and chain off an awful lot of territory here.

 

Anyway, just because an area is designated "open space", that doesn't mean that the city/county wants people to access it. It's often used to protect a specific patch of land for whatever local wildlife exists, especially near urban areas.

 

So the OP may well be right in their concern, and the CO confused about public access to "open space", or the gates may exist just to keep out the bicycles so paths don't start to be made.

 

Someone needs to establish which case is true by contacting local (Albuquerque?) government to get a clear reading of the status of that piece of ground.

Edited August 14, 2009 by ecanderson

[+Castle Mischief]

I'm confused. You talk about locked gates but you hunted the cache. How did you get on the other side of said locked gates?

 

If the answer is "I walked thirty over to the gate that was open" then I wouldn't worry about it.

 

If entered by climbing the fence, crawling under/through the fence then I agree with your NM log but in your own words...

 

Usually fences are meant to keep people out as far as I know. . .

[+scorpio_dark]

Thanks to all the responders so far. Learning a couple of things. For instance, I didn't know that notes don't leave e-mail alerts. (I'd prefer an e-mail alert too.)

 

I'm confused. You talk about locked gates but you hunted the cache. How did you get on the other side of said locked gates?

 

If the answer is "I walked thirty over to the gate that was open" then I wouldn't worry about it.

 

If entered by climbing the fence, crawling under/through the fence then I agree with your NM log but in your own words...

 

Usually fences are meant to keep people out as far as I know. . .

 

You're the second to point that out. You are both, of course, absolutely right. I went ahead and crawled under the fence basing the action on blind trust of the CO and reference to the previous logs where people had crawled. But it still itched at me. To me the needs maintenance wasn't a suggestion to the CO of "Oh you're wrong!!!!' as much as it was a request of, "Please clarify the circumstances, because I feel bad having possibly gone into a preserve of sorts or otherwise trespassed." Probably a bit self-serving as I did indeed post it after having hunted, myself. But I also wanted to help out other cachers.

[+StarBrand]

I would have left a note on the cache page or emailed the owner asking for some clarification before attempting such a cache. No need to create an LEO encounter.

[+J-Way]

Thanks to all the responders so far. Learning a couple of things. For instance, I didn't know that notes don't leave e-mail alerts. (I'd prefer an e-mail alert too.)

Notes do send email alerts to the cache owner and to anyone watching the cache. But some owners have their email software auto-sort email alerts and maybe won't notice a "Note" quite as quickly as a "Needs Maintenance".

 

I didn't see a fence in your picture. Is it a low fence that you can step over, but would work to keep vehicles out?

 

Also, lots of public areas have short sections of fence with gates at roads to keep unauthorized vehicles out, but pedestrians can just walk around.

 

As for the "Stay on Trails", that looks like a standard sign. So the guy probably just grabbed a few off the top of the stack in the maintenance shed and put them up without checking to see if there were any actual trails on the property.

[+scorpio_dark]

I didn't see a fence in your picture. Is it a low fence that you can step over, but would work to keep vehicles out?

 

Couple of people have said that. The picture is just of the sign and captioned (EDIT:titled) that way. . . It's not meant to depict the whole situation -sorry to confuse. The fence is 5' high all the way around. The cachers apparently must make access by crawling under.

 

Also, lots of public areas have short sections of fence with gates at roads to keep unauthorized vehicles out, but pedestrians can just walk around.

 

Um, yeah. I'd be kinda dumb to not just walk 5' feet to the left or whatever. -Or to lift my leg up and over a foot or so

 

As for the "Stay on Trails", that looks like a standard sign. So the guy probably just grabbed a few off the top of the stack in the maintenance shed and put them up without checking to see if there were any actual trails on the property.

I absolutely agree, but then the CO could have researched the situation and said as much, right?

Edited August 14, 2009 by scorpio_dark

[+Castle Mischief]

 

As for the "Stay on Trails", that looks like a standard sign. So the guy probably just grabbed a few off the top of the stack in the maintenance shed and put them up without checking to see if there were any actual trails on the property.

I absolutely agree, but then the CO could have researched the situation and said as much, right?

 

Could be the signs appeared after all the cachers started going off the trail and scooting under the fence...?

[+Renegade Knight]

...I want to know if they's like to learn about issues through their cache by maintenance postings or if it hurts their feelings (honestly). ...

 

I find NM Logs annoying in that I have to read two logs where one will do when they actually manage to use the NM log correctly. I also find them annoying in that the majoriy of NM logs that I do get are bogus speculation that proves to be a wast of my time to follow up on because the finder was unable to find the cache and got in a tizzy that it "may" be missing. Your normal note or did not find log where you talk about the open space being gated (rather ironic to have a gate on open space), would alert me to any issue with the cache.

 

The NM log really only alerts other cachers who may want to avoid a cache with any kind of NM issue.