legal issues & guardrails

[AZcachemeister]

I thought we were discussing the legal ramifications, not the lazy, lame, cheap ramifications?

[+t4e]

 

(Disclaimer: To forgo any possible concerns from any rasta-hat wearing pooches regarding bigger is better, allow me to point out that this is not the direction I was going. For those who want to hide micros on guard rails, have at it! Just don't insult our intelligence by claiming you chose that size because "there's no way of having anything bigger". We've found bigger, much bigger, in fairly active spots, so we know better. If you choose a micro because you are a cheapskate, I'm OK with that. If you choose a micro because you are too mentally lazy to apply a hint of creativity to your hides, I'm OK with that. If you choose a micro because you like micros, I'm OK with that too. As long as you are upfront about your reasons when the subject comes up.)

 

your insulted intelligence should know that it can be true, but by all means please visit the location before you point any fingers

you didn't demonstrate anything, yes you can put an ammo can on the guardrail that will go missing every other day...what's the point of that?

 

and yes, i don't think size matters, i like micros in the woods because they cause the least "disturbance" to the surroundings, a micro will give me a lot more chances of having a placement approved by places where i need permission ...after you signed the log, what exactly is your joy from finding a big container?

Edited September 15, 2011 by t4e

[knowschad]

if you read my comment above there is no way of having anything bigger, and that's because a lot of people stop there to take in the view, so a micro is less likely to be spotted

Of course there is a way to have something bigger. I've already demonstrated that. Your argument is a copout to creativity.

 

(Disclaimer: To forgo any possible concerns from any rasta-hat wearing pooches regarding bigger is better, allow me to point out that this is not the direction I was going. For those who want to hide micros on guard rails, have at it! Just don't insult our intelligence by claiming you chose that size because "there's no way of having anything bigger". We've found bigger, much bigger, in fairly active spots, so we know better. If you choose a micro because you are a cheapskate, I'm OK with that. If you choose a micro because you are too mentally lazy to apply a hint of creativity to your hides, I'm OK with that. If you choose a micro because you like micros, I'm OK with that too. As long as you are upfront about your reasons when the subject comes up.)

 

Don't worry, be happy.

 

 

 

I will say, however, that you sound like Emperor Joseph II in the movie, Amadeus:

 

Emperor Joseph II: My dear young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect.

Mozart: Which few did you have in mind, Majesty?

[Clan Riffster]

And why insult us by saying you are ok with laziness and cheapness?

(You're not really ok with laziness and cheapness are you?)

I'm not sure I'm reading this the way you meant it. To clarify;

I am OK with people hiding whatever they want, where ever they want, so long as they adhere to the guidelines.

If you, (the collective you) want to make lazy and cheap hides, then by all means, of course I'm OK with that.

That doesn't mean I like them, nor does it mean I will hunt them. It just means I have no issue with you hiding them.

Don't get me wrong. I'm no saint. I used to rail against such hides. These forums taught me otherwise.

Now I hide what I like to find, find what I like to hide, and mostly ignore the rest.

Life is so much simpler that way.

 

Given my position on this issue, why would you be insulted?

 

you didn't demonstrate anything,

Actually, I did. You must have missed it in your zeal to defend mediocrity.

I demonstrated that a regular cache can survive at a location like that one, (actually in the guardrail), for at least 4.5 years/270 finds without a single muggling. All it takes is a bit of creativity. The proof is in the regular cache I mentioned.

 

yes you can put an ammo can on the guardrail that will go missing every other day

Why would you want to do that? Unless you are independently wealthy, and infinitely patient, you would likely grow weary of supplying the free world with ammo cans full of swag. Perhaps a bit of creativity might result in a regular that is not an ammo can? One that looks like it belongs? At least to your average muggle? I can say as a certainty that it has been done at least once. Seems it might be possible to do it at least one more time. Maybe?

 

and yes, i don't think size matters

We agree. For me, size really isn't a deciding factor for judging a cache. Though, for my personal bias, if all other things are equal, I would prefer a regular over a micro, as I actually enjoy sitting down and reading logbooks, pawing through swag, (though I almost never trade), moving travel bugs, etc. But that's just my bias. Someone else might prefer caches on the smaller end of the spectrum for any number of reasons. Their reasons, and their preferences, are every bit as valid as mine.

 

i like micros in the woods because they cause the least "disturbance" to the surroundings

That hasn't been my experience. Possibly because a natural woodland environment offers so many more possible hide locations than, say, a guardrail along a stretch of highway, at least at a local level, hiding a micro in the woods is often going to result, in the long term, in quite a bit of habitat destruction. I arrived at a site where a Mr Magneto was hidden in the woods for a couple weeks, and it looked like the cartoon character Tasmanian Devil had thrown a fit at ground zero. Leaves were ripped off, branches were snapped, ground cover was rooted up, bark was pulled off. A very sad sight indeed. (Yes, I let the owner know) About 2/10 of a mile away rested an ammo can hidden the same day, by the same hider. I could kinda, sorta, make out a bit of a social trail, possibly because a lot of seekers had been there looking for the fairly new hide. The trace disturbance seemed to indicate that folks approached the area, looked in the most likely spot, found the ammo can, and returned it, mostly without bothering anything else at ground zero.

 

a micro will give me a lot more chances of having a placement approved by places where i need permission

Interesting. Of the four areas I (mostly) hide caches, two of them have enacted an "Ammo Cans Only" policy.

I imagine I'd have quite a hard time convincing those two land managers to let me spit out film cans.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Clan Riffster

[+EdrickV]

I know of some places where ammo cans would not be allowed as cache containers, and the policy there is to use clear containers. (So in that case it isn't the size that's the issue as much as being able to see what is inside it.) Standards will vary from place to place. (Those particular places also require having a permit and relocating/removing a cache after a year to minimize environmental impact.)

[+Prescott Patrol]

Back to the OP (I think). 1. Federal law is not going to dictate whether a geocache can be placed on a state roadway. 2. I am not disagreeing various state laws could prohibit, and probably do, caches on guardrails. But, I have yet to see a legal citation.

[7rxc]

There is a new Ministry of Transportation directive for BC - have a look...

http://wizardofooze....ation-directive

 

eh - the correct section after all..... t4e see - haha

To be fair, I believe that directive came about as a result of a US cacher who was visiting Canada (BC) who fell to his death while seeking a cache at a scenic pullout. He crossed the guardrail when it was not necessary to do so. My reading, was that the Ministry wanted to examine the risks, not of the caches but of the locations they might be placed in.

Death of a Geocacher

 

This also happened, I believe, when the ET trail caches were pulled and then re-invented then reactivated again in safer locations, however that was as a result of complaints and behaviour, if I read it right.

 

As for the meaning of 'highway'. In t4e's Ontario, it was always just about any surface that was normally used by the public for driving upon... including lanes, trails etc. I'd have to look it up both for accuracy and currency though. We looked at and used it when we were active in the Bicycle Commitee in Metro Toronto. It is quite broad. Most Provinces have similar wording.

And there are regs about what you can and cannot do / place etc. as well.

 

edit: These are up to date of what a "highway" is at the provincial level. Municipalities generally use the same as their province.

 

Ontario HTA

“highway” includes a common and public highway, street, avenue, parkway, driveway, square, place, bridge, viaduct or trestle, any part of which is intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles and includes the area between the lateral property lines thereof;

 

BC Transportation Act

"highway" means a public street, road, trail, lane, bridge, trestle, tunnel, ferry landing, ferry approach, any other public way or any other land or improvement that becomes or has become a highway by any of the following:

[ 7 items removed by me, not important in this case]

 

Doug 7rxc

Edited September 19, 2011 by 7rxc

[+5g]

We got stopped by the Sheriff's Dep. on this one! found this log.