ABSOLUTLY NO ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT IT!

2k · January 2, 2012

I'm an electrician that works for a major power company. Over the years (before I became active in the game), I've found probably half a dozen caches around electrical equipment I was working on. I normally just threw them away as trash. Geocaches have no business around electrical equipment, especially any that would be disguised as equipment themselves. If you want to set one up on your own property and willing to accept the liability (especially since your insurance probably won't cover it), then go for it, but keep it off privately owned equipment without permission.

Now that I'm in the game, if I find them around the equipment, I will remove them, and either turn it over to Lost Property or the Business Owner and email the cache owner where to pick it up. This would also go for any lamp post caches I find that are hidden inside the equipment.

Nice to find a hidden gem among all the sneering and insults. Thanks for posting this.

"all the sneering and insults"? I think I might have seen a couple of posts that could be described that way, but the vast majority are quite thoughtful and respectful. I'm not sure I would say the same about yours.

From the standpoint of innocent newbies visiting the primary geocaching forum, I must admit that I'm not proud of the general forum attitude that played out here. Are you?

9.3k · January 2, 2012

I'm not proud of the general forum attitude that played out here.

Never encourage a seagull...

January 2, 2012

Call me crazy but whatever happened to personal responsibility? Be responsible for your kids if they're out caching with you. Be responsible when poking around geocaches. Yes, electrical equipment is incredibly dangerous and deadly. However, so is poking around/under rocks, tree trunks, fallen trees... Anybody ever heard of Jake??? One bite from the wrong Jake where you're too far out in the booneis to get to emergency medical care quickly will kill you just as dead. So are we going to ban caches out in the woods??? You might get snake bit & die. You might get stung by bees/wasps & go into anaphlactic shock and die. As the show says, there 1000 ways to die. Just use common sense people. If you aren't getting a warm fuzzy, then don't grab the smilie. If you aren't comfortable placing these kinds of caches, don't. As for me, I haven't placed my first cache yet and I don't know if I'd place one or not. As far as hunting caches, if I don't feel comfortable poking around somewhere, I don't - be it a rock, stump or light pole.

I'm sorry, but I'm sick of having common sense & personal responsibility regulated. It's my life. If I choose to be a bonehead & wind up getting hurt, it's my own dumb fault for doing something I shouldn't have been doing or not doing something safely enough to avoid getting hurt in the first place.

Just my 2 cents.

January 2, 2012

Call me crazy but whatever happened to personal responsibility? Be responsible for your kids if they're out caching with you. Be responsible when poking around geocaches. Yes, electrical equipment is incredibly dangerous and deadly. However, so is poking around/under rocks, tree trunks, fallen trees... Anybody ever heard of Jake??? One bite from the wrong Jake where you're too far out in the booneis to get to emergency medical care quickly will kill you just as dead. So are we going to ban caches out in the woods??? You might get snake bit & die. You might get stung by bees/wasps & go into anaphlactic shock and die. As the show says, there 1000 ways to die. Just use common sense people. If you aren't getting a warm fuzzy, then don't grab the smilie. If you aren't comfortable placing these kinds of caches, don't. As for me, I haven't placed my first cache yet and I don't know if I'd place one or not. As far as hunting caches, if I don't feel comfortable poking around somewhere, I don't - be it a rock, stump or light pole.

I'm sorry, but I'm sick of having common sense & personal responsibility regulated. It's my life. If I choose to be a bonehead & wind up getting hurt, it's my own dumb fault for doing something I shouldn't have been doing or not doing something safely enough to avoid getting hurt in the first place.

Just my 2 cents.

I'm a big believer in personal responsibility, unfortunately, that is not how our society works. I've had to give dispositions numerous times in cases when individuals were injured (or killed in one case) because they were messing with company electrical equipment. Instead of taking personal responsibility for their actions, they try to blame others (hoping for monetary compensation). This is why you will not get permission to place Geocaches in or around our equipment. We are specifically instructed to remove all debris in or around the equipment when we service it. If we are servicing equipment on private/business owned property, it is removed at the discretion of the property owner (and noted in our reports).

Sorry if people are offended, but yes, I will remove Geocaches I find. Those I recognize as geocaches will be turned into the company and/or property owner. As a courtesy, I'll notify the CO and ask them to archive the listing and let them know where they can pick up the cache. So far, since I started playing this game, I have not had to do it. But since I have found them in the past, I'm sure it is only a matter of time.

Edited January 2, 2012 by Encino

2.6k · January 3, 2012

There is a cache in Arizona that looks something like this:

Yes, it's on the CO's private property (his gas station).

Let's try a different image.

Yuma?

January 3, 2012

I'm an electrician that works for a major power company. Over the years (before I became active in the game), I've found probably half a dozen caches around electrical equipment I was working on. I normally just threw them away as trash. Geocaches have no business around electrical equipment, especially any that would be disguised as equipment themselves. If you want to set one up on your own property and willing to accept the liability (especially since your insurance probably won't cover it), then go for it, but keep it off privately owned equipment without permission.

Now that I'm in the game, if I find them around the equipment, I will remove them, and either turn it over to Lost Property or the Business Owner and email the cache owner where to pick it up. This would also go for any lamp post caches I find that are hidden inside the equipment.

Hey Encino,

Thank you for your insight. I agree that caches on electrical equipment are a bad idea but I personally wouldn't remove one or avoid finding one. I am curious. If you found a cache around electrical equipment OTHER than your companies or while you were not on the job, just caching, would you still remove the cache? While you are working it is you obligation to remove the caches but what if they aren't on company equipment or were found on personal time?

January 3, 2012

I would have to agree. The most awkward moment in my geocaching career was when I had found GC176MC. It was magnetically attached to the side of an electrical box outside a bank. I didn't realize I was suspicious until after I signed the log and had to re-hide. To make matters worse it is near the drive thru part of the bank so it makes it extra sketchy. No one on the cache page seems to be complaining but I would not hunt something like that again.

3.1k · January 3, 2012

I would have to agree. The most awkward moment in my geocaching career was when I had found GC176MC. It was magnetically attached to the side of an electrical box outside a bank. I didn't realize I was suspicious until after I signed the log and had to re-hide. To make matters worse it is near the drive thru part of the bank so it makes it extra sketchy. No one on the cache page seems to be complaining but I would not hunt something like that again.

Right. You don't have to hunt any cache you don't want to. If it looks like something you're uncomfortable with for any reason, don't go for it. But, there shouldn't be cache "vigilantes" going around trying to push their opinion on other's caches. (Especially if they meet the guidelines...) <_<

10.2k · January 3, 2012

I would have to agree. The most awkward moment in my geocaching career was when I had found GC176MC. It was magnetically attached to the side of an electrical box outside a bank. I didn't realize I was suspicious until after I signed the log and had to re-hide. To make matters worse it is near the drive thru part of the bank so it makes it extra sketchy. No one on the cache page seems to be complaining but I would not hunt something like that again.

Right. You don't have to hunt any cache you don't want to. If it looks like something you're uncomfortable with for any reason, don't go for it. But, there shouldn't be cache "vigilantes" going around trying to push their opinion on other's caches. (Especially if they meet the guidelines...)

Well, meets the guidelines is debatable. From the cache description:

Be careful not to be spotted! During business hours the customers are sitting in their cars awaiting their turn to be helped.

Per another thread, that's code for "I absolutely, positively do not have permission for this cache".

To each their own, I guess. The chances of me ever finding such a cache are non-existant, whether it's on a transformer or not. Oh, and I'd never agree with cache vigilantes removing caches from electrical boxes, don't go there please.

EDIT: Man, I see a ton of familar names in the logs for that cache, forum regulars, my Terracaching.com Sponsor, and even a Groundspeak Lackey (who didn't work for Groundspeak at the time). I really am an extremist anti-parking lot cache radical, aren't I?

Edited January 3, 2012 by Mr.Yuck

2.8k · January 3, 2012

But, there shouldn't be cache "vigilantes" going around trying to push their opinion on other's caches. (Especially if they meet the guidelines...)

Right...coz I'm sure the CO had permission to place a cache at the bank.

4.4k · January 3, 2012

From "the safety guy":

Johnnygeo's Geocaching Electrical Safety Blog

Sorry I'm late; I didn't realize it was time for this subject to come up ...again.

19k · January 3, 2012

Nice to find a hidden gem among all the sneering and insults. Thanks for posting this.

"all the sneering and insults"? I think I might have seen a couple of posts that could be described that way, but the vast majority are quite thoughtful and respectful. I'm not sure I would say the same about yours.

From the standpoint of innocent newbies visiting the primary geocaching forum, I must admit that I'm not proud of the general forum attitude that played out here. Are you?

I really don't think that most of it has been anything other than opinions. There have been a few posts with attitudes that I'd rather see rephrased. But I agree with you that thinking of how something sounds to newcomers to the forums is very important , and a good way of judging what we say.

19k · January 3, 2012

I would have to agree. The most awkward moment in my geocaching career was when I had found GC176MC. It was magnetically attached to the side of an electrical box outside a bank. I didn't realize I was suspicious until after I signed the log and had to re-hide. To make matters worse it is near the drive thru part of the bank so it makes it extra sketchy. No one on the cache page seems to be complaining but I would not hunt something like that again.

Pssst... look at the cache owner's profile and see what his occupation is. Pair that bit of intel up with this line from the cache page, "I spend LOTS of time in the building next to this cache. " and I think you will understand.

19k · January 3, 2012

Be careful not to be spotted! During business hours the customers are sitting in their cars awaiting their turn to be helped.

Per another thread, that's code for "I absolutely, positively do not have permission for this cache".

To each their own, I guess. The chances of me ever finding such a cache are non-existant, whether it's on a transformer or not. Oh, and I'd never agree with cache vigilantes removing caches from electrical boxes, don't go there please.

EDIT: Man, I see a ton of familar names in the logs for that cache, forum regulars, my Terracaching.com Sponsor, and even a Groundspeak Lackey (who didn't work for Groundspeak at the time). I really am an extremist anti-parking lot cache radical, aren't I?

See my previous post. I strongly suspect it was hidden with permission.

10.2k · January 3, 2012

Be careful not to be spotted! During business hours the customers are sitting in their cars awaiting their turn to be helped.

Per another thread, that's code for "I absolutely, positively do not have permission for this cache".

To each their own, I guess. The chances of me ever finding such a cache are non-existant, whether it's on a transformer or not. Oh, and I'd never agree with cache vigilantes removing caches from electrical boxes, don't go there please.

EDIT: Man, I see a ton of familar names in the logs for that cache, forum regulars, my Terracaching.com Sponsor, and even a Groundspeak Lackey (who didn't work for Groundspeak at the time). I really am an extremist anti-parking lot cache radical, aren't I?

See my previous post. I strongly suspect it was hidden with permission.

Might not be at all! I could see someone deciding to hide a cache at their work, and not tell anyone, including their boss.

I'll see your checking the cache owner's profile for occupation, and take it one step further. I looked at her Gallery, and determined it's a her. :lol: I'll tell you what, if she's still a teller at that bank, I nominate her for worst cache owner ever. This nearly 10 month old needs maintenance log indicates the log is full, and the top of the container is missing. And recent logs indicate that is still the case.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Mr.Yuck

8k · January 3, 2012

Be careful not to be spotted! During business hours the customers are sitting in their cars awaiting their turn to be helped.

Per another thread, that's code for "I absolutely, positively do not have permission for this cache".

To each their own, I guess. The chances of me ever finding such a cache are non-existant, whether it's on a transformer or not. Oh, and I'd never agree with cache vigilantes removing caches from electrical boxes, don't go there please.

EDIT: Man, I see a ton of familar names in the logs for that cache, forum regulars, my Terracaching.com Sponsor, and even a Groundspeak Lackey (who didn't work for Groundspeak at the time). I really am an extremist anti-parking lot cache radical, aren't I?

See my previous post. I strongly suspect it was hidden with permission.

Even without your post I found the comment that asking people to use stealth means that there was no permission pretty silly.

On the other hand, it could still be an indication that the cache does not meat current guidelines.

Select an appropriate location and container. Think about how your container and the actions of geocachers seeking it will be perceived by the public. Although your geocache will be hidden with landowner permission, concerned passersby who are unaware of geocaching may view people searching the property as suspicious. For example, a geocacher will likely be wrongly suspected of being malicious if a cache is hidden in full view of an office or apartment windows.

Edited January 3, 2012 by tozainamboku

January 3, 2012

But, there shouldn't be cache "vigilantes" going around trying to push their opinion on other's caches. (Especially if they meet the guidelines...)

Right...coz I'm sure the CO had permission to place a cache at the bank.

Doesn't matter if it has permission or not, it's not another cacher's job to remove caches he or she suspects does not have permission.

2.8k · January 3, 2012

But, there shouldn't be cache "vigilantes" going around trying to push their opinion on other's caches. (Especially if they meet the guidelines...)

Right...coz I'm sure the CO had permission to place a cache at the bank.

Doesn't matter if it has permission or not, it's not another cacher's job to remove caches he or she suspects does not have permission.

I never said it was. That's what Needs Archive logs and emails to the local reviewer are for. When I see an issue (cache under a highway bridge, near main line train tracks, behind "No Trespassing" signs) I shoot the reviewer an email, with the details and maybe even a pic or two. They deal with it.

2.8k · January 3, 2012

I would have to agree. The most awkward moment in my geocaching career was when I had found GC176MC. It was magnetically attached to the side of an electrical box outside a bank. I didn't realize I was suspicious until after I signed the log and had to re-hide. To make matters worse it is near the drive thru part of the bank so it makes it extra sketchy. No one on the cache page seems to be complaining but I would not hunt something like that again.

Pssst... look at the cache owner's profile and see what his occupation is. Pair that bit of intel up with this line from the cache page, "I spend LOTS of time in the building next to this cache. " and I think you will understand.

If that is the case, a "Cache placed with management permission" could be placed on the listing.

3.1k · January 3, 2012

Oopsy

Edited January 3, 2012 by NeverSummer

3.1k · January 3, 2012

I would have to agree. The most awkward moment in my geocaching career was when I had found GC176MC. It was magnetically attached to the side of an electrical box outside a bank. I didn't realize I was suspicious until after I signed the log and had to re-hide. To make matters worse it is near the drive thru part of the bank so it makes it extra sketchy. No one on the cache page seems to be complaining but I would not hunt something like that again.

Pssst... look at the cache owner's profile and see what his occupation is. Pair that bit of intel up with this line from the cache page, "I spend LOTS of time in the building next to this cache. " and I think you will understand.

If that is the case, a "Cache placed with management permission" could be placed on the listing.

Could be, but certainly doesn't have to be. That's what the check boxes at the bottom of a new listing are for.

9.3k · January 3, 2012

I found the comment that asking people to use stealth means that there was no permission pretty silly.

I found that statement to be dead on. Something I really enjoy doing is talking to cachers about their hides. At any event I attend, you will most likely find me schmoozing with old friends and new ones, discussing various caches they own. One particular topic that comes up a lot is the notion of assumed permission as opposed to explicit permission, with regards to caches on private property, such as a Wally World lamp post, Burger King hedge, Target dumpster, etc.

At a local level, I can state with certainty that a cache with "Use Stealth", or words to that effect, most likely does not have explicit permission. I haven't been to Kalifornia since I took up this hobby, so I will grant that things may be completely different in your neck of the woods. But it is telling that, in every single instance, (not even one exception to date), when I've asked a cache owner about how they obtained permission for their cache on private property, there was not a single one who obtained explicit permission. Every single one operated under the banner of assumed permission.

As I interpret the guidelines, they require explicit permission for hides on private property. I suspect that this is the most commonly violated guideline.

1.1. Fundamental Placement Guidelines

Obtain the landowner's and/or land manager's permission before you hide any geocache, whether placed on private or public property. If you are given permission to place a cache on private property, indicate this on the cache page for the benefit of the reviewer and those seeking the cache.

Doesn't matter if it has permission or not, it's not another cacher's job to remove caches he or she suspects does not have permission.

What if a person knows, (not suspects), a cache on private property does not have permission, as required by the guidelines? Should we ( a ) be good stewards, correcting those wrongs we see, in the hope that doing so might bring favor upon the game, by either removing the offending cache or be notifying a reviewer about the violation, or should we ( b ) bury our collective heads in the sand, pretending it is OK?. If we decide as a group that ( a ) is the correct course of action, we get branded as "cache cops". If we pick ( b ) we enable those who systematically ignore the guidelines. Neither one looks very appealing.

But let's kick it up a notch. What about a land manager, property owner, or their representative. If they discover a cache on their property, and they know it has not been given permission, should there be any backlash of public opinion if they remove it? I don't think so. I feel that one falls smack on the shoulders of the mook who hid it without permission. A utility worker would most certainly be a representative of the power company. I would have no problem with a utility worker removing a cache from a ground level transformer, since, as an employee, they know it was not given permission.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Clan Riffster

9.3k · January 3, 2012

Could be, but certainly doesn't have to be.

According to the guidelines, we are supposed to include wording to the effect of, "This cache placed with permission", for any hide placed on private property. The older version of the guidelines used to include putting the contact information of whoever gave such permission, (I think?), but I see that's been changed.

3.1k · January 3, 2012

I would have to agree. The most awkward moment in my geocaching career was when I had found GC176MC. It was magnetically attached to the side of an electrical box outside a bank. I didn't realize I was suspicious until after I signed the log and had to re-hide. To make matters worse it is near the drive thru part of the bank so it makes it extra sketchy. No one on the cache page seems to be complaining but I would not hunt something like that again.

Right. You don't have to hunt any cache you don't want to. If it looks like something you're uncomfortable with for any reason, don't go for it. But, there shouldn't be cache "vigilantes" going around trying to push their opinion on other's caches. (Especially if they meet the guidelines...)

Well, meets the guidelines is debatable. From the cache description:

Be careful not to be spotted! During business hours the customers are sitting in their cars awaiting their turn to be helped.

Per another thread, that's code for "I absolutely, positively do not have permission for this cache".

To each their own, I guess. The chances of me ever finding such a cache are non-existant, whether it's on a transformer or not. Oh, and I'd never agree with cache vigilantes removing caches from electrical boxes, don't go there please.

EDIT: Man, I see a ton of familar names in the logs for that cache, forum regulars, my Terracaching.com Sponsor, and even a Groundspeak Lackey (who didn't work for Groundspeak at the time). I really am an extremist anti-parking lot cache radical, aren't I?

My reply was a general response to the thread on the whole. The idea that a cacher admits here that they will remove a cache without knowing whether or not a cache owner has permission is just plain not cool. Also, from a "high traffic" or "muggle heavy" (or whatever we want to call it) standpoint, nobody has to go after a hide they are uncomfortable with, and it certainly doesn't warrant an all-out ban on caches where you might be seen by said people.

If they did have permission (I like to believe in the goodness of people's hearts: when they check the box at the bottom of the new cache form that they do have permission), you can still be spotted by muggles, other employees who might not know what you're up to, or adjacent managers, etc. If they don't have proper permissions, you usually find out...like when an employee or manager approaches you. You then get to feel awkward explaining geocaching, and get to post a NM/NA log. Individual cache owners are responsible for their caches once Reviewed and published--not Groundspeak. The onus comes right back to the owners, and if they don't have permissions, it is their fault. Groundspeak doesn't need to get involved in banning certain cache containers or locations where caches can be legally placed.

The bottom line it sounds like, is that people should, as described in the guidelines, have permission for their hides to be in their location. We all should know that, and it's a dead horse we should all be fine with beating again from time to time. From there, calling for a torch and pitchfork attack on a certain kind of hide is crazy.

3.1k · January 3, 2012

Could be, but certainly doesn't have to be.

According to the guidelines, we are supposed to include wording to the effect of, "This cache placed with permission", for any hide placed on private property. The older version of the guidelines used to include putting the contact information of whoever gave such permission, (I think?), but I see that's been changed.

Nice catch. I'll be updating my cache descriptions for any on private property.

3.1k · January 3, 2012

As I interpret the guidelines, they require explicit permission for hides on private property. I suspect that this is the most commonly violated guideline.

1.1. Fundamental Placement Guidelines

Obtain the landowner's and/or land manager's permission before you hide any geocache, whether placed on private or public property. If you are given permission to place a cache on private property, indicate this on the cache page for the benefit of the reviewer and those seeking the cache.

That indication, as I've become familiar with, is something posed in a Reviewer note. Often, those become deleted by the Reviewer and are not visible to the normal viewer.

Of the 4-6 Reviewers I've dealt with in 4 states, I've never had to post "placed with permission" in the cache description. Instead, the early caches I placed had the Reviewer asking me, via Reviewer log, what permissions I had. After the first time, I include it in a Reviewer log each time I publish a cache. So far, for me, that has sufficed.

Is this a unique situation that I'm unaware of?

January 3, 2012

It seems some people are worried about getting shocked or someone in their family getting shocked. I too am worried. There is a problem though. First I loved the electrical box caches but I am now afraid to touch them. I started thinking about it. So I came up with a solution. What does the world have way to much of? Answer "KITTENS". People don't get their cats neutered or spayed and we end up with way to many kittens. So kittens are naturally curious and since they are numerous also quite disposable. So Caged Kittens work 9 out of 10 times. All you need is go collect some kittens. I suggest the crazy woman in town who has over 100 or go to the rednecks who don't have the money for neutering but have enough money for food for that many cats.

What to do.

1st Take out some catnip or cat treat throw them on the boxes.

2nd Take kitten out of crate and throw over near the electrical stuff

3rd wait 3 minutes minimum to see what happens

4th nothing happens put kitten back in box and find cache

Here is a pic of my crate I carry with me.

9.3k · January 3, 2012

I include it (permission note) in a Reviewer log each time I publish a cache. So far, for me, that has sufficed.

Is this a unique situation that I'm unaware of?

I have to preface my response with an explanation:

I don't own any active caches on private property. In the past, I've owned two, one being in a grocery store parking lot with explicit permission from a manager, the other in a big box store parking lot with explicit permission from a manager.

I don't recall being questioned about permission on either of those, though that was quite some time back. I know I did not include the requisite phrase on either cache page. The remaining 60 or so (active) hides are all on public land. Locally, there are some land managers who have expressed a desire for explicit permission, such as a geocache permit. Each of my hides on such properties has one. Other land managers feel their liability is reduced if they follow the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" format, giving blanket permission for any benign activity, to include geocaching. For those hides, I simply do my best to ensure compliance with the remaining guidelines.

My reviewers keep me straight regarding which properties need explicit permission and which properties do not. On some of my earlier hides, for areas requiring explicit permission, I would post a notice stating who gave me permission, but I don't think I've done that in a while. Hence, my comment regarding the "most violated guideline". I am one of the offenders.

9.3k · January 3, 2012

What does the world have way to much of? Answer "KITTENS".

You could save money in the long run if you built a mini trebuchet, instead of buying catnip. Plus, a launch mechanism would be safer than trusting an herb. Catnip tends to go stale over time, releasing its enticing compounds, till it reaches a point where it loses its ability to attract kittens. You could sprinkle it to your heart's content, and get no more reaction from your kitten than a "Meh".

But with a trebuchet, you could stand back a few hundred yards, dropping those kittens right on top of the dreaded device. Naturally, you'd need to practice, so your aim would not be affected by cross winds or inconsistent kitten weights, but like you said, the world is full of kittens.

If one lands on the top and nothing happens, go find the cache.

If it turns into a charred hairball, post a NM.

January 3, 2012

I found the comment that asking people to use stealth means that there was no permission pretty silly.

I found that statement to be dead on. Something I really enjoy doing is talking to cachers about their hides. At any event I attend, you will most likely find me schmoozing with old friends and new ones, discussing various caches they own. One particular topic that comes up a lot is the notion of assumed permission as opposed to explicit permission, with regards to caches on private property, such as a Wally World lamp post, Burger King hedge, Target dumpster, etc.

At a local level, I can state with certainty that a cache with "Use Stealth", or words to that effect, most likely does not have explicit permission. I haven't been to Kalifornia since I took up this hobby, so I will grant that things may be completely different in your neck of the woods. But it is telling that, in every single instance, (not even one exception to date), when I've asked a cache owner about how they obtained permission for their cache on private property, there was not a single one who obtained explicit permission. Every single one operated under the banner of assumed permission.

As I interpret the guidelines, they require explicit permission for hides on private property. I suspect that this is the most commonly violated guideline.

1.1. Fundamental Placement Guidelines

Obtain the landowner's and/or land manager's permission before you hide any geocache, whether placed on private or public property. If you are given permission to place a cache on private property, indicate this on the cache page for the benefit of the reviewer and those seeking the cache.

Doesn't matter if it has permission or not, it's not another cacher's job to remove caches he or she suspects does not have permission.

What if a person knows, (not suspects), a cache on private property does not have permission, as required by the guidelines? Should we ( a ) be good stewards, correcting those wrongs we see, in the hope that doing so might bring favor upon the game, by either removing the offending cache or be notifying a reviewer about the violation, or should we ( b ) bury our collective heads in the sand, pretending it is OK?. If we decide as a group that ( a ) is the correct course of action, we get branded as "cache cops". If we pick ( b ) we enable those who systematically ignore the guidelines. Neither one looks very appealing.

But let's kick it up a notch. What about a land manager, property owner, or their representative. If they discover a cache on their property, and they know it has not been given permission, should there be any backlash of public opinion if they remove it? I don't think so. I feel that one falls smack on the shoulders of the mook who hid it without permission. A utility worker would most certainly be a representative of the power company. I would have no problem with a utility worker removing a cache from a ground level transformer, since, as an employee, they know it was not given permission.

I am not advocating choice ( B ). In fact, I was just part of a situation in Central Ohio that unfortunately ended up in the archiving of a cache by someone I respect quite a bit. However, your (a) choice conflates two issues into one choice. There are two options there: tell the reviewer or take the cache. Those options are not the same thing. Not even close. My comment was in regard to those who seem to advocate taking the cache and asking questions later. That action is highly inappropriate. Not only is it not my property, but I also have imperfect information about the cache placement. I may assume, even correctly, that permission has not been granted. But just because nothing is on the cache page and 99.9% of hides in places exactly like one I encounter might never gain permission does not mean it is up to me to remove the cache container.

Further, just because someone who works in the electricity business states that no company would approve a cache on some sort of equipment does NOT mean there could not be a scenario where a company actually would allow it. I'm sure our imaginations can all come up with a situation where a hide could gain permission.

Boiled down, if you think it's in a spot that would not give permission/is illegal/etc., the proper action to take is to contact the reviewer and allow the reviewer and the cache owner to work out the situation. It is not up to us to be "cache cops" of the taken-container variety.

Edited January 3, 2012 by blandestk

19k · January 3, 2012

I would have to agree. The most awkward moment in my geocaching career was when I had found GC176MC. It was magnetically attached to the side of an electrical box outside a bank. I didn't realize I was suspicious until after I signed the log and had to re-hide. To make matters worse it is near the drive thru part of the bank so it makes it extra sketchy. No one on the cache page seems to be complaining but I would not hunt something like that again.

Pssst... look at the cache owner's profile and see what his occupation is. Pair that bit of intel up with this line from the cache page, "I spend LOTS of time in the building next to this cache. " and I think you will understand.

If that is the case, a "Cache placed with management permission" could be placed on the listing.

That is an option that the cache owner could avail herself of, yes. It would seem to be the right thing to do, I will agree wholeheartedly, but it is her prerogative.

January 3, 2012

I'm an electrician that works for a major power company. Over the years (before I became active in the game), I've found probably half a dozen caches around electrical equipment I was working on. I normally just threw them away as trash. Geocaches have no business around electrical equipment, especially any that would be disguised as equipment themselves. If you want to set one up on your own property and willing to accept the liability (especially since your insurance probably won't cover it), then go for it, but keep it off privately owned equipment without permission.

Now that I'm in the game, if I find them around the equipment, I will remove them, and either turn it over to Lost Property or the Business Owner and email the cache owner where to pick it up. This would also go for any lamp post caches I find that are hidden inside the equipment.

Hey Encino,

Thank you for your insight. I agree that caches on electrical equipment are a bad idea but I personally wouldn't remove one or avoid finding one. I am curious. If you found a cache around electrical equipment OTHER than your companies or while you were not on the job, just caching, would you still remove the cache? While you are working it is you obligation to remove the caches but what if they aren't on company equipment or were found on personal time?

I would confer with the property owner and remove the cache if he/she/they did not give or does not wish to continue to give permission for the cache to be hidden among electrical equipment. So the answer would almost always be yes. And yes, I would check if permission was given.

Edited January 3, 2012 by Encino

2.8k · January 3, 2012

I would have to agree. The most awkward moment in my geocaching career was when I had found GC176MC. It was magnetically attached to the side of an electrical box outside a bank. I didn't realize I was suspicious until after I signed the log and had to re-hide. To make matters worse it is near the drive thru part of the bank so it makes it extra sketchy. No one on the cache page seems to be complaining but I would not hunt something like that again.

Pssst... look at the cache owner's profile and see what his occupation is. Pair that bit of intel up with this line from the cache page, "I spend LOTS of time in the building next to this cache. " and I think you will understand.

If that is the case, a "Cache placed with management permission" could be placed on the listing.

Could be, but certainly doesn't have to be. That's what the check boxes at the bottom of a new listing are for.

And if you believe everyone who checks that box truly has "adequate" permission (especially on property that is obviously private, such as a shopping center), I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

9.3k · January 3, 2012

However, your (a) choice conflates two issues into one choice.

Yeah, it was poorly worded. The message I was trying to convey was "Do something or do nothing". For the "Do something" choice I selected two acts on opposite ends of the acceptance spectrum, that could have a drastic impact on the continued life of the cache. I probably should have stuck with "Contact the reviewer" as my ( a ) choice, or listed all three as separate options.

My comment was in regard to those who seem to advocate taking the cache and asking questions later.
That action is highly inappropriate.

I agree completely. I have seen a rare few incidents where I felt that the seeker taking the cache with them was the right choice, but these mostly revolved around a scenario where a senior land manager, private property owner or law enforcement officer discovered a cacher at ground zero and directed that they remove the cache. The seeker is kind of between a rock and a hard place at that point. But for the other 99.999% of the time, taking the cache would be a bad thing.

Further, just because someone who works in the electricity business states that no company would approve a cache on some sort of equipment does NOT mean there could not be a scenario where a company actually would allow it.

Maybe. But in this particular case we're talking about a utilities company employee, for a specific company, (not generalized), whose job directly relates to the objects which are having caches placed on them, and is able to cite the relevant statutes/company policies that prohibit caches being placed on them. This is a lot more than just "someone who works in the electricity business". My power company is FP&L. If an FP&L janitor came on these forums and said no company would approve caches on articles of company property, I might take such a statement with a grain of salt. But when words to that effect comes from someone in a position to know, I'll listen.

Boiled down, if you think it's in a spot that would not give permission/is illegal/etc., the proper action to take is to contact the reviewer and allow the reviewer and the cache owner to work out the situation. It is not up to us to be "cache cops" of the taken-container variety.

On that we agree wholeheartedly. If you think a cache is illegal, let the owner and the reviewer hash it out.

If you know for a fact a cache is illegal, maybe opt for a more direct course of action. Maybe...

2.6k · January 3, 2012

EVERTIME I SEE THIS THREAD SUBJECT I THINK OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT CASHES. I NEVER EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT THEM BEFORE THIS THREAD. PLEASE MAKE IT STOP!

4.2k · January 4, 2012

EVERTIME I SEE THIS THREAD SUBJECT I THINK OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT CASHES. I NEVER EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT THEM BEFORE THIS THREAD. PLEASE MAKE IT STOP!

please stop yelling

January 4, 2012

What does the world have way to much of? Answer "KITTENS".

You could save money in the long run if you built a mini trebuchet, instead of buying catnip. Plus, a launch mechanism would be safer than trusting an herb. Catnip tends to go stale over time, releasing its enticing compounds, till it reaches a point where it loses its ability to attract kittens. You could sprinkle it to your heart's content, and get no more reaction from your kitten than a "Meh".

But with a trebuchet, you could stand back a few hundred yards, dropping those kittens right on top of the dreaded device. Naturally, you'd need to practice, so your aim would not be affected by cross winds or inconsistent kitten weights, but like you said, the world is full of kittens.

If one lands on the top and nothing happens, go find the cache.

If it turns into a charred hairball, post a NM.

If you want kittens because they are plentiful, then you will need the trebuchet. Kitties may not react to catnip until after 6 months of age, and some kitties will never respond to catnip as it is a genetic thing (like litmus paper or being able to roll your tongue).

Trebuchets FTW!

2.6k · January 4, 2012

please stop yelling

How about toning down the subject topic then? Sheesh :rolleyes:

ABSOLUTLY NO ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT IT!

3.1k · January 4, 2012

I would have to agree. The most awkward moment in my geocaching career was when I had found GC176MC. It was magnetically attached to the side of an electrical box outside a bank. I didn't realize I was suspicious until after I signed the log and had to re-hide. To make matters worse it is near the drive thru part of the bank so it makes it extra sketchy. No one on the cache page seems to be complaining but I would not hunt something like that again.

Pssst... look at the cache owner's profile and see what his occupation is. Pair that bit of intel up with this line from the cache page, "I spend LOTS of time in the building next to this cache. " and I think you will understand.

If that is the case, a "Cache placed with management permission" could be placed on the listing.

Could be, but certainly doesn't have to be. That's what the check boxes at the bottom of a new listing are for.

And if you believe everyone who checks that box truly has "adequate" permission (especially on property that is obviously private, such as a shopping center), I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

Funny...it's not up to me to check that they do have the required (or implied) permissions to hide a cache where they do, that's up to the cache owner to get and the Reviewer to check. From there, I'm not going to question it unless I get approached by someone of authority.

And you're right. There's nothing that stops people from checking a box and not having proper permission. All the box does is make sure that Groundspeak is not liable for a cache's physical placement--that's the owner's liability. So, if a cache placer wants to risk it, they can...and will face any consequences. We, as seekers, don't have to seek a cache that we don't like. But it certainly isn't up to us to say who does or doesn't have permission just because we are playing the odds here. I like to be a little less pessimistic and give cache owners and their respective Reviewers credit that they are doing what they should. There's no such thing as cache police...just the real police.

6.1k · January 4, 2012

I would have to agree. The most awkward moment in my geocaching career was when I had found GC176MC. It was magnetically attached to the side of an electrical box outside a bank. I didn't realize I was suspicious until after I signed the log and had to re-hide. To make matters worse it is near the drive thru part of the bank so it makes it extra sketchy. No one on the cache page seems to be complaining but I would not hunt something like that again.

Pssst... look at the cache owner's profile and see what his occupation is. Pair that bit of intel up with this line from the cache page, "I spend LOTS of time in the building next to this cache. " and I think you will understand.

If that is the case, a "Cache placed with management permission" could be placed on the listing.

Could be, but certainly doesn't have to be. That's what the check boxes at the bottom of a new listing are for.

And if you believe everyone who checks that box truly has "adequate" permission (especially on property that is obviously private, such as a shopping center), I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

Funny...it's not up to me to check that they do have the required (or implied) permissions to hide a cache where they do, that's up to the cache owner to get and the Reviewer to check. From there, I'm not going to question it unless I get approached by someone of authority.

And you're right. There's nothing that stops people from checking a box and not having proper permission. All the box does is make sure that Groundspeak is not liable for a cache's physical placement--that's the owner's liability. So, if a cache placer wants to risk it, they can...and will face any consequences. We, as seekers, don't have to seek a cache that we don't like. But it certainly isn't up to us to say who does or doesn't have permission just because we are playing the odds here. I like to be a little less pessimistic and give cache owners and their respective Reviewers credit that they are doing what they should. There's no such thing as cache police...just the real police.

Skiing on a slippery slope.

"Permission" is deemed adequate if the general public is allowed in the area.

So technically there is no permission.

Then "adequate permission" is twisted to mean that any activity is allowed - such as hiding a keyholder in places where the electric company would not like.

Permission then becomes a guideline that is openly ignored.

Next, all guidelines slowly become ignored. Creative caches that violate the guidelines are awarded a large amount of favorite points for being unique. The majority of geocachers do nothing to stop guideline violations. Reporting them becomes frowned upon.

Geoanarchy ensues. The negative aspects of the hobby come to light and the activity is banned. Good caches that cause no problems get affected.

Go ahead keep it up.

3.2k · January 4, 2012

With all the passion expressed here you'd think these Electrical Box hides are the best things since sliced bread. Look what they really are.. lame geotrash that will eventually get someone in trouble. Ban them all and go hide something worthwhile.

3.8k · January 4, 2012

From "the safety guy":

Johnnygeo's Geocaching Electrical Safety Blog

Sorry I'm late; I didn't realize it was time for this subject to come up ...again.

Yep, seems we've been talking about continuously for over five years. Kinda makes you want to commit geo-forums-cide, at least in the Geocaching Topics.

1.6k · January 4, 2012

The National Electric Code has requirements for ensuring that electrical components are installed in a safe manner. That means a properly installed [light pole, breaker panel, etc] will not deliver a shock to anone passing by that happens to touch it. I would not take a screwdriver to any electrical equipment. Even if inhstalled on a tree in the middle of nowhere. The electrical hides I have found were logable without using tools. I searched for one cache that I'm pretty certain was inside the uncovered center cavity of a light pole. A brief inspection revealed numerous wires. Perhaps one of the wires was the cache? I passed. My safety is more important than a smiley.

19k · January 4, 2012

EVERTIME I SEE THIS THREAD SUBJECT I THINK OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT CASHES. I NEVER EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT THEM BEFORE THIS THREAD. PLEASE MAKE IT STOP!

please stop yelling

I'm sorry... didn't hear you. Would you please speak up?

January 4, 2012

From "the safety guy":

Johnnygeo's Geocaching Electrical Safety Blog

Sorry I'm late; I didn't realize it was time for this subject to come up ...again.

Thanks for the link, I hadn't seen this before, but he makes some very good arguments:

1. Even if something is totally safe the day you place it, stuff breaks, and if something electrical breaks by your cache, it has the potential to be a horrible accident. This simply can't be forseen by the hider.

2. I hadn't thought about inadvertantly teaching children that it was "OK" to poke around in electrical equipment. That is a horrible idea. (Saying "just supervise your dadgum kids!" is fine, but if they see you poke around a fake electrical box, they may learn that it's OK to mess with electrical equipment, despite what you tell them. My experience is that what kids see you actually do carries a lot more weight than what you say - at least it was that way with my kids.)

3. People should have a healthy respect for this equipment, and incorporating it into a game could reduce this respect, even with grownups. This is a bad idea.

Before reading Johnnygeo's blog, I disagreed with the OP and didn't really see this as being a big issue - other than avoiding placement near high voltage equipment. But he has a point - do we really need to take these risks?

Interesting read, anyway.

2k · January 4, 2012

I would not take a screwdriver to any electrical equipment. Even if inhstalled on a tree in the middle of nowhere. The electrical hides I have found were logable without using tools.

+100

You can be reasonably assured that a live box will require tools to access the dangerous parts. Not 100%, but reasonable enough that if you make it a general rule never to open up electrical boxes with tools you will likely be safe.

Yes, I know there are exceptions to every rule and some extremists will point out that it only takes that one improperly maintained panel to kill someone, but this rule works relatively fine for me an mine.

4.2k · January 4, 2012

From "the safety guy":

Johnnygeo's Geocaching Electrical Safety Blog

Sorry I'm late; I didn't realize it was time for this subject to come up ...again.

Yep, seems we've been talking about continuously for over five years. Kinda makes you want to commit geo-forums-cide, at least in the Geocaching Topics.

This is one of those times that you and I agree again.

1.9k · January 6, 2012

Hey! its not tuesday!!

January 6, 2012

Well I found a cache in an electrical enclosure type box yesterday. There were obviously no cables, and it was the type that would house low voltage gear. The risk seemed very low, so I apparently I don't think that type of hide is a big deal.

January 6, 2012

These containers are among the easier ones to spot. It is pretty easy to tell that a plain utility box designed for indoor use when stuck onto the side of a lamp pole with a "Caution, high voltage" sign is a phony. Certainly hides should not be placed inside of live electrical equipment, but when you see a suspect utility box, switch cover etc. ask yourself whether or not this is placed in accordance to code, whether or not it serves any function etc. If you do not want to deal with this kind of hide, upon finding one, walk away.

ABSOLUTLY NO ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT IT!

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment