Jump to content

Railroad tracks


Followers 2

Recommended Posts

It would be frowned upon then to say one would need a canoe or tube to reach the cache and leave the tracks up to them, I assume?

 

I guess Im gonna scratch that idea then. Thats too bad, its such a neat spot

 

Is RR track the only way to access it? If it is far enough away from the tracks and there are alternate approaches, even if a long hike, then you'd be good to go.

It's illegal to walk along the RR tracks in Virginia.

http://www.ehow.com/about_5564906_railroad-trespassing-laws.html

Link to comment

A while back I found a magnetic key holder that was actually on a live track. However, it was right at the end of a dead end spur but there were cars parked only about a hundred yards away or so. The spur terminated about 50 feet from crossing a road. There were no barriers or stops on the spur, either. Still an active cache, I don't know how this one got published. I didn't think it was unsafe, though.

 

GC199QG, "Whistle Stop"

.http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4903679b-fa18-489a-adef-cfdc2dd6c5ea

 

I must disagree with Chief301's assessment of WHISTLE STOP. The cache is not at all on a live track. It's on discarded track no longer part of a railroad system, and in the woods off the highway. I recently took over this cache from the original owner.

 

Read from the cache description written by Mudbug00:

 

"Today, the South bound spur that was built in 1872 is gone. The tracks end just a few hundred yards from the original Schriever Junction Station, at Hwy 20, near Hwy 24. If you look, you can still find parts of rail discarded in the overgrowth near this cache. The elevated railroad bed is still very evident for the entire route into Houma. A hiker can even find an occasional road bed remnant, such as a RR spike, or a RR tie anchor. Even pieces of the old cross ties at times."

 

Hemlock feels this cache should be archived. If that be the case I don't mind archiving this cache. However let not an inaccuracy remain in the public record here. This isn't live track.

Link to comment

A while back I found a magnetic key holder that was actually on a live track. However, it was right at the end of a dead end spur but there were cars parked only about a hundred yards away or so. The spur terminated about 50 feet from crossing a road. There were no barriers or stops on the spur, either. Still an active cache, I don't know how this one got published. I didn't think it was unsafe, though.

 

GC199QG, "Whistle Stop"

.http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4903679b-fa18-489a-adef-cfdc2dd6c5ea

 

Once again... safety has nothing at all to do with it. The guideline is all about illegal trespass.

Link to comment

A while back I found a magnetic key holder that was actually on a live track. However, it was right at the end of a dead end spur but there were cars parked only about a hundred yards away or so. The spur terminated about 50 feet from crossing a road. There were no barriers or stops on the spur, either. Still an active cache, I don't know how this one got published. I didn't think it was unsafe, though.

 

GC199QG, "Whistle Stop"

.http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4903679b-fa18-489a-adef-cfdc2dd6c5ea

 

Once again... safety has nothing at all to do with it. The guideline is all about illegal trespass.

 

Agreed. And I admit I didn't know it was "all about illegal tresspass" myself for a few years, and read it here in the forums. Chalk that up for yet another thing the masses don't know, and it's known only to the small number who read the forums, or have had the information handed down to them from those that do. :P

 

Man, how'd they ever get away with the cache Chief describes? I know people who have been questioned for proximity to tracks that have even been completely removed, but still show up on some maps. And I'm not talking about *ON* the old rail line either, just nearby.

Link to comment

A while back I found a magnetic key holder that was actually on a live track. However, it was right at the end of a dead end spur but there were cars parked only about a hundred yards away or so. The spur terminated about 50 feet from crossing a road. There were no barriers or stops on the spur, either. Still an active cache, I don't know how this one got published. I didn't think it was unsafe, though.

 

GC199QG, "Whistle Stop"

.http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4903679b-fa18-489a-adef-cfdc2dd6c5ea

 

I must disagree with Chief301's assessment of WHISTLE STOP. The cache is not at all on a live track. It's on discarded track no longer part of a railroad system, and in the woods off the highway. I recently took over this cache from the original owner.

 

Read from the cache description written by Mudbug00:

 

"Today, the South bound spur that was built in 1872 is gone. The tracks end just a few hundred yards from the original Schriever Junction Station, at Hwy 20, near Hwy 24. If you look, you can still find parts of rail discarded in the overgrowth near this cache. The elevated railroad bed is still very evident for the entire route into Houma. A hiker can even find an occasional road bed remnant, such as a RR spike, or a RR tie anchor. Even pieces of the old cross ties at times."

 

Hemlock feels this cache should be archived. If that be the case I don't mind archiving this cache. However let not an inaccuracy remain in the public record here. This isn't live track.

 

You say that it isn't a "live track". That is not relevant. What is important is, who owns it? If it is still owned by the railroad, then the trespassing laws are still in effect and it doesn't matter one bit if a train hasn't rolled those rails in 100 years.

Link to comment

A while back I found a magnetic key holder that was actually on a live track. However, it was right at the end of a dead end spur but there were cars parked only about a hundred yards away or so. The spur terminated about 50 feet from crossing a road. There were no barriers or stops on the spur, either. Still an active cache, I don't know how this one got published. I didn't think it was unsafe, though.

 

GC199QG, "Whistle Stop"

.http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4903679b-fa18-489a-adef-cfdc2dd6c5ea

 

I must disagree with Chief301's assessment of WHISTLE STOP. The cache is not at all on a live track. It's on discarded track no longer part of a railroad system, and in the woods off the highway. I recently took over this cache from the original owner.

 

Read from the cache description written by Mudbug00:

 

"Today, the South bound spur that was built in 1872 is gone. The tracks end just a few hundred yards from the original Schriever Junction Station, at Hwy 20, near Hwy 24. If you look, you can still find parts of rail discarded in the overgrowth near this cache. The elevated railroad bed is still very evident for the entire route into Houma. A hiker can even find an occasional road bed remnant, such as a RR spike, or a RR tie anchor. Even pieces of the old cross ties at times."

 

Hemlock feels this cache should be archived. If that be the case I don't mind archiving this cache. However let not an inaccuracy remain in the public record here. This isn't live track.

 

You say that it isn't a "live track". That is not relevant. What is important is, who owns it? If it is still owned by the railroad, then the trespassing laws are still in effect and it doesn't matter one bit if a train hasn't rolled those rails in 100 years.

 

Agreed. The railroad, if still in business, and not gone bankrupt, probably still owns it. Most Counties in America probably have a GIS up and running now, you can check this stuff out yourself, you know.

 

Part of The Lehigh Valley Railroad runs probably 3/8 of a mile from my house. Long, long gone, not used since the mid 70's, and tracks removed by probably the mid 80's. In that section near my house, I have looked, and it now belongs to the local Power Company. I haven't looked at other sections further from my house that are not an "official" rails to trails, but I'm sure they now have private owners too. There are many sections of this railroad through NY and Pa. that are official rails to trails, but not within 10 miles of my house! And yes, there are a few (not many) caches along it.

Link to comment

I'm having a problem getting several cache sites approved due to their proximity to the BNSF railroad tracks. The cache sites are all on city property and I have permission from the city to place them. The scenario is this Historic Route 66 runs through our town, the city obtained right of way for a bike pedestrian path along the route. The railroad as in many towns parallels the road 100 to 300 feet from the roadway and path. Here is what the reviewer has to say "...may be owned by the city but that's not the issue here. The issue is distance. Your cache is well in the prohibited zone of 150 ft of active tracks".

 

I can not find this 150 foot restriction anywhere and wonder why if it's a bike pedestrian path there is an issue.

 

What should I do?

Link to comment

I can not find this 150 foot restriction anywhere and wonder why if it's a bike pedestrian path there is an issue.

1.3. Inappropriate or Non-publishable Placements

A cache may be disabled or archived if one or more of the following is true

...

The cache is on property belonging to a railroad. In the United States we generally require a distance of 150 ft (46 m) from active tracks. Local laws may vary.

Link to comment
I'm having a problem getting several cache sites approved...

 

What should I do?

Funny. I only see one cache of yours with this issue :rolleyes:

 

What you should do is communicate with your reviewer. Unfortunately that note you posted last week will not be seen by your reviewer until you enable the listing. Please read the 2nd paragraph of the note he posted to you.

Link to comment

A while back I found a magnetic key holder that was actually on a live track. However, it was right at the end of a dead end spur but there were cars parked only about a hundred yards away or so. The spur terminated about 50 feet from crossing a road. There were no barriers or stops on the spur, either. Still an active cache, I don't know how this one got published. I didn't think it was unsafe, though.

 

GC199QG, "Whistle Stop"

.http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4903679b-fa18-489a-adef-cfdc2dd6c5ea

 

Once again... safety has nothing at all to do with it. The guideline is all about illegal trespass.

 

Ahhh interesting. So in my local area there is a public park that is butted right up against a RR track that is barely used. There is a rail fence between the RR and the park. No part of the park is over 150ft from the RR tracks. So I am wondering would it pass review to place a cache in the park. Why I ask is I have been talking to the mayor of our town about Geocaching and she suggested a cache in this park. I had told her it wasn't allowed because of the 150ft rule because I thought it due to safety.

Link to comment

A while back I found a magnetic key holder that was actually on a live track. However, it was right at the end of a dead end spur but there were cars parked only about a hundred yards away or so. The spur terminated about 50 feet from crossing a road. There were no barriers or stops on the spur, either. Still an active cache, I don't know how this one got published. I didn't think it was unsafe, though.

 

GC199QG, "Whistle Stop"

.http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4903679b-fa18-489a-adef-cfdc2dd6c5ea

 

Once again... safety has nothing at all to do with it. The guideline is all about illegal trespass.

 

Ahhh interesting. So in my local area there is a public park that is butted right up against a RR track that is barely used. There is a rail fence between the RR and the park. No part of the park is over 150ft from the RR tracks. So I am wondering would it pass review to place a cache in the park. Why I ask is I have been talking to the mayor of our town about Geocaching and she suggested a cache in this park. I had told her it wasn't allowed because of the 150ft rule because I thought it due to safety.

 

Most likely it would be approved, but be prepared to provide your reviewer with answers & possibly documentation. Photos may prove to be very helpful, especially in regards to the fence. A strong note on your cache page that "the cache is not on railroad property, do not cross the fence" might be wise, as well.

Link to comment

A while back I found a magnetic key holder that was actually on a live track. However, it was right at the end of a dead end spur but there were cars parked only about a hundred yards away or so. The spur terminated about 50 feet from crossing a road. There were no barriers or stops on the spur, either. Still an active cache, I don't know how this one got published. I didn't think it was unsafe, though.

 

GC199QG, "Whistle Stop"

.http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4903679b-fa18-489a-adef-cfdc2dd6c5ea

 

Once again... safety has nothing at all to do with it. The guideline is all about illegal trespass.

 

Ahhh interesting. So in my local area there is a public park that is butted right up against a RR track that is barely used. There is a rail fence between the RR and the park. No part of the park is over 150ft from the RR tracks. So I am wondering would it pass review to place a cache in the park. Why I ask is I have been talking to the mayor of our town about Geocaching and she suggested a cache in this park. I had told her it wasn't allowed because of the 150ft rule because I thought it due to safety.

 

Most likely it would be approved, but be prepared to provide your reviewer with answers & possibly documentation. Photos may prove to be very helpful, especially in regards to the fence. A strong note on your cache page that "the cache is not on railroad property, do not cross the fence" might be wise, as well.

 

Agreed. When there is a public park adjacent to an active RR track, getting explicit permission to place the cache in the park is likely to be required by the reviewer. This is an opportunity for Mad Dawgg not only to establish a good relationship with the leading town official and the game of geocaching but also to establish a working relationship with the local reviewer.

Link to comment
I'm having a problem getting several cache sites approved...

 

What should I do?

Funny. I only see one cache of yours with this issue :rolleyes:

 

What you should do is communicate with your reviewer. Unfortunately that note you posted last week will not be seen by your reviewer until you enable the listing. Please read the 2nd paragraph of the note he posted to you.

 

Thank You I have enabled the cache with some additional notes in hopes it can be approved.

 

The other cache with the same problem I adopted last night.

Link to comment

It would be frowned upon then to say one would need a canoe or tube to reach the cache and leave the tracks up to them, I assume?

 

I guess Im gonna scratch that idea then. Thats too bad, its such a neat spot

 

Considering that two of the caches in Forest Park (St. Louis) are on islands and the only way to get to either is with the use of a boat (by which there is no way to get a boat there, save to drive up to the pond and put it in - ie., no leading tributary) or to strip down and walk through the water (somewhat frowned upon), I think you might go ahead with the attempt at publication. These two got published, and they have had people visit them (by my reading of the log entries). You might put a caviat in your cache notes that while there is a railroad nearby that would make the cache accessible by foot, that it's recommended you enjoy the creek and tube, canoe or swim down to the cache area. That being said, are you sure that the creek area ISN'T owned by the railroad? I noticed in the link provided by another respondent said that property "owned by the railroad" is off limits. As long as there's a legitimate, legal way to get to the cache without trespassing, it might pass the publishers' inspection, IMHO. The worst they can say is "no".

Link to comment

A while back I found a magnetic key holder that was actually on a live track. However, it was right at the end of a dead end spur but there were cars parked only about a hundred yards away or so. The spur terminated about 50 feet from crossing a road. There were no barriers or stops on the spur, either. Still an active cache, I don't know how this one got published. I didn't think it was unsafe, though.

 

GC199QG, "Whistle Stop"

.http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=4903679b-fa18-489a-adef-cfdc2dd6c5ea

 

Once again... safety has nothing at all to do with it. The guideline is all about illegal trespass.

 

Ahhh interesting. So in my local area there is a public park that is butted right up against a RR track that is barely used. There is a rail fence between the RR and the park. No part of the park is over 150ft from the RR tracks. So I am wondering would it pass review to place a cache in the park. Why I ask is I have been talking to the mayor of our town about Geocaching and she suggested a cache in this park. I had told her it wasn't allowed because of the 150ft rule because I thought it due to safety.

 

Most likely it would be approved, but be prepared to provide your reviewer with answers & possibly documentation. Photos may prove to be very helpful, especially in regards to the fence. A strong note on your cache page that "the cache is not on railroad property, do not cross the fence" might be wise, as well.

 

Agreed. When there is a public park adjacent to an active RR track, getting explicit permission to place the cache in the park is likely to be required by the reviewer. This is an opportunity for Mad Dawgg not only to establish a good relationship with the leading town official and the game of geocaching but also to establish a working relationship with the local reviewer.

 

Thank you for your replies and I will see about getting maybe a letter to forward to the reviewer. Maybe first I will contact our local reviewer to see if it is possible. Don't really want to waste the Mayor's time if the reviewer and/or Groundspeak is adamant about the 150 ft. rule. The nice thing is the park would be perfect and we could even tie in an event (like a special cache) for the week our town has a Street Festival. And on that note is it poassible to get one of those Souvenirs setup for caching say in the town proper during the festival? and if so who would I contact to see about it? Thanks all and thanks for this thread it may have given me the info needed to get some nice caches placed in our great little town. Lots of geocachers frequent areas close to us. I would love to get some good Caches here to make stopping in our town worthwhile for people who live outside our area.

 

Thanks again

 

Mad Dawgg B)

Link to comment

The 150 foot "rule" should be a guideline. If the cache is not on railroad property it should not mater how close to the tracks the cache is IF the CO can demonstrate that they are not "leading" other cachers onto RR property or are putting anyone in a dangerous situation.

 

The guidelines say:

The cache is on property belonging to a railroad. In the United States we generally require a distance of 150 ft (46 m) from active tracks. Local laws may vary.

 

A cache like cosninocanines and one described by Mad Dawgg on city property, with approval by the city, should be acceptable even if it is within the 150 feet.

 

Again these are guidelines. I do not like it when a reviewer treats the guidelines as hard and fast rules.

Link to comment

Many of the railroads have recently been running enforcement details and citing people for trespassing. Their insurance companies have been really pushing for more enforcement due to injuries and deaths on RR properties.

Remember, trespassing cites are not a simple parking or traffic tickets. Trespassing is a criminal arrest meaning you'll have a criminal record following you the rest of your life. Criminal arrests you just don't mail in your fine and it's forgotten about. Criminal arrests mean taking time off to go to court, many times multiple times until your case is heard. The fine may be the least expensive part of the ordeal. If you decide to get an attorney don't expect that to be cheap either. Win, lose, or draw you'll still have to pay the attorney. Expect that bill to be in the neighborhood of $1000 and go up from there. A criminal arrest may impact things like future employment, some govt benefits, it may prevent you from entering foreign countries on vacation and travel. People do not realize the full impact it could have on their lives until it's too late.

 

http://www.sj-r.com/top-stories/x455124311/Rail-trespassers-ticketed-in-enforcement-education-campaign

Police issued seven tickets for trespassing on railroad property Thursday as part of a two-day education and enforcement campaign.

Ten officers from the Norfolk Southern railroad police and the Springfield Police Department patrolled five miles of rail line between North Grand Avenue and Springfield’s far south side to call attention to the dangers of trespassing on railroad property, Norfolk Southern spokesman Robin Chapman said.

“It’s something that we do six times a year throughout our system,” Chapman said.

The railway chooses locations where trespassing has been a problem and resulted in injuries or deaths, he said.

There were 79 trespassing incidents reported in Springfield last year, resulting in one injury and one death, according to the railway. There already have been three deaths this year, Chapman said.

Trespassing on railroad property is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of $150 to $500.

Among those ticketed for trespassing was one person who had an outstanding warrant for escaping from jail, Chapman said.

Another was arrested for possession of marijuana, and a third was served an order of protection, he said.

Officers visited 600 homes and businesses along the railroad Wednesday to spread the word about the campaign.

In addition to the citations, officers gave five warnings Wednesday and two on Thursday.

“Hopefully, more people will be aware of what trespassing on railroad property is,” Chapman said.

Pedestrians should not walk on or alongside railroad tracks and should cross only at designated locations, he said.

Springfield Deputy Police Chief Cliff Buscher said the department “absolutely” would like to work with the railroad police on a future enforcement event.

The department contributed two officers to the patrol, Buscher said.

The Illinois Department of Transportation has recommended consolidating freight- and passenger-train traffic along the corridor that was patrolled Thursday as part of a long-term plan for a high-speed passenger line from Chicago to St. Louis.

Link to comment

The 150 foot rule must be more of a guideline in my area. see: GCQPA9 It is within 50 feet of tracks, on the public side of the railroad's people-proof fence.

It is a guideline. If you can prove that a location isn't on railroad property and that there's a sufficient barrier to prevent people from straying onto railroad property (like said people-proof fence), a reviewer may* publish it.

 

*I say "may" because some reviewers are more strict than others. They're all supposed to be equal, but they are human, after all.

Link to comment
I'm having a problem getting several cache sites approved...

 

What should I do?

Funny. I only see one cache of yours with this issue :rolleyes:

 

What you should do is communicate with your reviewer. Unfortunately that note you posted last week will not be seen by your reviewer until you enable the listing. Please read the 2nd paragraph of the note he posted to you.

 

Thank You I have enabled the cache with some additional notes in hopes it can be approved.

 

The other cache with the same problem I adopted last night.

 

With the help of my reviewer and permission from the city to place the cache on their property I was able to successfully place the cache. GC3R2B7 HistoricAZ66:Flagstaff El Pueblo Motor Court

 

The reviewer listened to all my points and gave me the guidance to complete the task.

Link to comment

Mushroom420,

You don't need to give up on you cache placement. It can be accessed by boat only on the river. There are lots of caches that are landlocked which can only be legally accessed by boat. Keep in mind that it would be likely to have less visitors due to the restraints of access.

 

One thing that you definitely need to consider is if the location away from the tracks is actually on public property. If it is landlocked as you mention, most surrounding property is likely to be private.

If it's still within 150 it's still trespassing.

 

I have a question about this 150 feet thing. I live in a trailer park and my trailer is 20 feet from the tracks (they parrell my bedroom window) as are allot of the other trailers if you need to be 150 feet from the tracks then how did this trailer park get built.

Edited by Lexmarks567
Link to comment

when I first time came to Florida for geocaching,

I found alot of caches hidden near, behind or compleetly inside an area marked with

no tresspassing signs.

I know all caches are pr definition placed with special permission,

so offcourse this no tresspassing dont apply to a geocache seeker,

who per this definition also got special permission to go there and find the cache.

Link to comment

With the help of my reviewer and permission from the city to place the cache on their property I was able to successfully place the cache. GC3R2B7 HistoricAZ66:Flagstaff El Pueblo Motor Court

 

The reviewer listened to all my points and gave me the guidance to complete the task.

Congratulations on getting your cache published. It appears to have been well received.

 

I've dealt with four different Volunteer Reviewers. Despite the grief I'm sure they must receive from unhappy geocachers, I found all of them to be quite friendly and helpful. Kudos, again, to them.

Edited by CanadianRockies
Link to comment

If it's still within 150 it's still trespassing.

That's true only as a general rule. Allow me to BLOW YOUR MIND. Click on the link below and then zoom in. Tell me what you see.

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=34.614328,-86.979991&num=1&t=h&z=20

Looks like an abandoned railroad spur. And it looks more like an easement on the playground's property rather than the playground infinging on railroad property. Interesting counter example. I assume reviewers would need to look this case differently than any rote 150' rule.

Link to comment

Mushroom420,

You don't need to give up on you cache placement. It can be accessed by boat only on the river. There are lots of caches that are landlocked which can only be legally accessed by boat. Keep in mind that it would be likely to have less visitors due to the restraints of access.

 

One thing that you definitely need to consider is if the location away from the tracks is actually on public property. If it is landlocked as you mention, most surrounding property is likely to be private.

If it's still within 150 it's still trespassing.

 

I have a question about this 150 feet thing. I live in a trailer park and my trailer is 20 feet from the tracks (they parrell my bedroom window) as are allot of the other trailers if you need to be 150 feet from the tracks then how did this trailer park get built.

 

Because the 150 ft guideline is based on the usual railroad right of way. It can vary. There are tracks running through a nearby town right between buildings. Obviously the ROW is significantly less than 150 feet there. Maybe 5 feet. Similar thing in your case.

Link to comment

I have a question about this 150 feet thing. I live in a trailer park and my trailer is 20 feet from the tracks (they parrell my bedroom window) as are allot of the other trailers if you need to be 150 feet from the tracks then how did this trailer park get built.

 

Because the 150 ft guideline is based on the usual railroad right of way. It can vary. There are tracks running through a nearby town right between buildings. Obviously the ROW is significantly less than 150 feet there. Maybe 5 feet. Similar thing in your case.

 

Exactly.

The railroad ROW may be significantly less than 150 feet in some locations.

I suppose there may be locations where the ROW is even more than 150 feet.

 

If you want to be certain that you are not within their ROW, place the cache 150 feet (or more) from the tracks.

Link to comment

I have a question about this 150 feet thing. I live in a trailer park and my trailer is 20 feet from the tracks (they parrell my bedroom window) as are allot of the other trailers if you need to be 150 feet from the tracks then how did this trailer park get built.

 

Because the 150 ft guideline is based on the usual railroad right of way. It can vary. There are tracks running through a nearby town right between buildings. Obviously the ROW is significantly less than 150 feet there. Maybe 5 feet. Similar thing in your case.

 

Exactly.

The railroad ROW may be significantly less than 150 feet in some locations.

I suppose there may be locations where the ROW is even more than 150 feet.

 

If you want to be certain that you are not within their ROW, place the cache 150 feet (or more) from the tracks.

 

As I see it, the 150' guideline is just that, a guideline. If you attempt to place a cache within 150' of a set of RR tracks, you can expect that the reviewer will ask for more information which the reviewer *may* use to make an exception. In some cases, what may appear to be an active RR on a map that the reviewer is looking at may actually be an rail-to-trail. If the tracks are indeed active, it might require explicit permission from the RR company and the adjacent property manager (aka a town park) before the reviewer would publish the cache....and as every cacher owner and potential cache owner should know, there is no precedent when it comes to publishing a geocache. The fact that there may be a published cache 10 feet from a set of RR tracks is irrelevant, as would be the denial of a cache that is 200 feet from an active railroad.

Link to comment

I have a question about this 150 feet thing. I live in a trailer park and my trailer is 20 feet from the tracks (they parrell my bedroom window) as are allot of the other trailers if you need to be 150 feet from the tracks then how did this trailer park get built.

 

Because the 150 ft guideline is based on the usual railroad right of way. It can vary. There are tracks running through a nearby town right between buildings. Obviously the ROW is significantly less than 150 feet there. Maybe 5 feet. Similar thing in your case.

 

Exactly.

The railroad ROW may be significantly less than 150 feet in some locations.

I suppose there may be locations where the ROW is even more than 150 feet.

 

If you want to be certain that you are not within their ROW, place the cache 150 feet (or more) from the tracks.

 

As I see it, the 150' guideline is just that, a guideline. If you attempt to place a cache within 150' of a set of RR tracks, you can expect that the reviewer will ask for more information which the reviewer *may* use to make an exception. In some cases, what may appear to be an active RR on a map that the reviewer is looking at may actually be an rail-to-trail. If the tracks are indeed active, it might require explicit permission from the RR company and the adjacent property manager (aka a town park) before the reviewer would publish the cache....and as every cacher owner and potential cache owner should know, there is no precedent when it comes to publishing a geocache. The fact that there may be a published cache 10 feet from a set of RR tracks is irrelevant, as would be the denial of a cache that is 200 feet from an active railroad.

 

Because of the differences in the size of the right of way I think it good for the reviewer to question the cache placement, BUT if the cache owner can show that the cache is not hidden in the right of way or on RR controlled property AND that it is not required to (illegally) cross the tracks to access the cache then no reviewer should reject a cache just because it is within 150'. Question the placement, YES. Deny and not publish it, NO.

I know this is important for safety, but living in an area with a lot of RR tracks I would not want to see any caches legally placed to be rejected.

 

I think the reviewers need to remember they are called guidelines and not rules. That being said I have had good communications with our reviewer regarding this issue. One of my caches is in a former historic railyards (no longer owned by the RR) and if you were just looking at the map it would appear to be unsafe and to close to the tracks but in fact it is over 260' from the active lines. After explaining this to the reviewer I had no problems with its placement.

Link to comment

If it's still within 150 it's still trespassing.

That's true only as a general rule. Allow me to BLOW YOUR MIND. Click on the link below and then zoom in. Tell me what you see.

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=34.614328,-86.979991&num=1&t=h&z=20

Looks like an abandoned railroad spur. And it looks more like an easement on the playground's property rather than the playground infinging on railroad property. Interesting counter example. I assume reviewers would need to look this case differently than any rote 150' rule.

 

Nope, that's an active line. Connects to the RR bridge that runs across the river.

Link to comment

The area looks great, but still.

 

At a recent truck show, I talked with the folks from Operation Lifesaver, Texas Chapter. Was shocked when told that there are now as many killed by trains while trespassing (walking the tracks) as were at grade crossings.

Did they say anything about how many of those had alcohol involved? I'm guessing quite a few, if not most. (OK... that was a rhetorical, mostly off-topic question)

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...