Jump to content

Dangerous and illegal caches


4wheelin_fool
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

This is a new thread to discuss the topic of caches which are BOTH dangerous and illegal. In this topic, (bumped because of a recent NA) is a cache hidden in a shopping mall and has presumably been disabled 9 months for permission. Personally, I really enjoy dangerous caches, but illegal ones not so much. This cache is hidden very high inside of signage of the parking lot of a mall and also which appears to have commercial language in its description. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC1VZ85

 

d771d0e4-e982-41ae-a53a-b28318f17d52.jpg

 

63a6c8f2-04a7-466a-a783-5646054f2c60.jpg

 

It has had at least 4 NAs posted in which 2 have been deleted. In light of a German cacher dying last December at a cache which was in an illegal area, do you think there has been any changes in Groundspeak policies of listing illegally placed and dangerous caches?

 

Dangeous, as I see as fine. However, when it's illegal it tends to make the finder act more nervous and may contribute to the danger. Nobody is going to want to wear safety harnesses, and most will go at night when it is dark as not to be seen.

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment
do you think there has been any changes in Groundspeak policies of listing illegally placed and dangerous caches?

 

Their policy has always been not to list illegal caches, and they let the cache seeker determine danger for them selves.

 

mm, I see sbell111 beat me to it.

 

The cache mentioned has had several NAs posted and does appear to be illegal and listed for awhile. The written policy appears to not be enforced, moreso in other countries.

Link to comment
do you think there has been any changes in Groundspeak policies of listing illegally placed and dangerous caches?

 

Their policy has always been not to list illegal caches, and they let the cache seeker determine danger for them selves.

 

mm, I see sbell111 beat me to it.

 

The cache mentioned has had several NAs posted and does appear to be illegal and listed for awhile. The written policy appears to not be enforced, moreso in other countries.

 

That's topic of this thread?

Link to comment
do you think there has been any changes in Groundspeak policies of listing illegally placed and dangerous caches?

 

Their policy has always been not to list illegal caches, and they let the cache seeker determine danger for them selves.

 

mm, I see sbell111 beat me to it.

 

The cache mentioned has had several NAs posted and does appear to be illegal and listed for awhile. The written policy appears to not be enforced, moreso in other countries.

You stated that that cache is disabled so issues can be worked through.

 

Of course, you didn't ask whether there should be any changes to policy. Your question was whether there have been any changes to policy. There does not appear to have been any changes to policy. Likely this is because the current policies are sufficient.

 

Whether policies are consistently enforced worldwide seems like an entirely different issue than whether policies exist or, more specifically, whether policies have been changed.

 

mm, I see SwineFlew beat me to it. :laughing:

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
do you think there has been any changes in Groundspeak policies of listing illegally placed and dangerous caches?

 

Their policy has always been not to list illegal caches, and they let the cache seeker determine danger for them selves.

 

mm, I see sbell111 beat me to it.

 

The cache mentioned has had several NAs posted and does appear to be illegal and listed for awhile. The written policy appears to not be enforced, moreso in other countries.

 

You didn't mention if any of the NAs that were posted specifically mentioned if the cache is illegal. If the reviewer was never aware that it was illegal. Policies can only be enforced if the enforcer is aware that a policy has been violated.

 

As someone pointed out recently in order to have a cache published it must comply with the "Geocache Listing Requirements / Guidelines". It's understandable that Guidelines might be inconsistently enforced in different countries, or even regionally. The requirements/guidelines page indicates that "all local laws and documented land management policies apply. This refers to both the placement of the geocache and the journey required to reach it. Geocachers must not be required to cross any land with "No Trespassing" signs, or locally-defined markers that prohibit access." That sounds like a requirement, and not a guideline open to interpretation.

Link to comment

I don't know how they are illegal-I just skimmed the first and can't read the second cache, so I may have missed something, but far as I can tell the only illegal thing might be trespassing. While here in Canada and the US that first one may be trespassing it may not be in other countries, where, for example signs must be posted or there should be an attempt to prevent people from accessing an area such as a fence in or someone going in those areas may not be trespassing in the eyes of the law. I do not know, just saying what I think may be happening.

Link to comment

Don't know how they could possibly get permission for that?

Yeah, I think permission is the issue, not legality. I don't think we need to worry about this cache being legal since there's no way the owner would give permission to put a cache there, legal or not. Or to look at it in a positive way: if the owner gave permission, wouldn't that make it legal?

Link to comment

I don't know how they are illegal-I just skimmed the first and can't read the second cache, so I may have missed something, but far as I can tell the only illegal thing might be trespassing. While here in Canada and the US that first one may be trespassing it may not be in other countries, where, for example signs must be posted or there should be an attempt to prevent people from accessing an area such as a fence in or someone going in those areas may not be trespassing in the eyes of the law. I do not know, just saying what I think may be happening.

 

These both came up in light of the discussion where a Geocacher tragically lost their life at a cache in Germany, and some lets say "international differences" in extreme caches were pointed out. The cache in Germany was not "extreme" by the way, the cacher fell through a missing grate on a catwalk over a creek or small river in the dark. However, this catwalk was along a utility pipeline bridge crossing this creek/river, and was not open to the public by any stretch of the imagination.

 

Anywho, the 2nd one, as linked to by Swineflew, is what we would call a standard observation tower here in North America, which has stairs to the top. However, cachers are required to leave the stairway, and suspend themselves on a rope to find the cache. I hardly think that one would fly in a microsecond on this side of the pond.

 

I cannot argue with your basic premise. The Mall sign is in Austria, and the Observation Tower in Germany. It could very well be more socially acceptable to climb/rappel off these things over there, and you're not going to spend a night in jail after 20 Police cars show up. I would like to know if anyone has ever thought of, and did these things at either of these locations exclusive of Geocaching though. :)

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

 

appear to be illegal

I wonder why just because something is dangerous one can be so sure that there was no permission to place a cache?

 

Perhaps you can say that permission is unlikely. You may even be able to say that anyone who gave permission would be foolish and that they might find it harder to defend themselves if someone were injured and sue the property owner.

 

The fact remains that the property owner may think that something is perfectly safe to climb on and figure that anyone who did get hurt geocaching would understand that "Cache seekers assume all risks involved in seeking a cache". They may feel that by giving a general OK to hide the cache rather than explicitly approving the specific hiding location they can argue that is the cache hider who picked a dangerous location and they can't be responsible for that.

 

It may be reasonable for reviewers to look at a situation and decide that a reasonable person would not have given permission. But I'm not sure that reviewers can tell which caches are like this from the descriptions or the terrain rating. The NA log brings this the the attention of the reviewer to make a call. The response should be to disable the cache to allow the owner to prove that they have permission and to archive the cache when the cache owner does not provide the proof in a reasonable time.

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

This is a new thread to discuss the topic of caches which are BOTH dangerous and illegal. In this topic, (bumped because of a recent NA) is a cache hidden in a shopping mall and has presumably been disabled 9 months for permission. Personally, I really enjoy dangerous caches, but illegal ones not so much. This cache is hidden very high inside of signage of the parking lot of a mall and also which appears to have commercial language in its description. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC1VZ85

 

It has had at least 4 NAs posted in which 2 have been deleted. In light of a German cacher dying last December at a cache which was in an illegal area, do you think there has been any changes in Groundspeak policies of listing illegally placed and dangerous caches?

 

Dangeous, as I see as fine. However, when it's illegal it tends to make the finder act more nervous and may contribute to the danger. Nobody is going to want to wear safety harnesses, and most will go at night when it is dark as not to be seen.

 

word-sell-woman-raising-hand.jpg

 

I'm going to want to wear the harness.

 

Did you HAVE to post the picture of looking down???

Link to comment

I wouldn't count legality in other countries because their laws would be different. But here I am sure permission would play into it and I doubt they would give it because of liablity. The owner of the sign my say yes, but if someone were to die or get injured, you would see those cachers pointing back at the owners of the sign because they gave permission and assumed responsiblity. Don't think the sign owners are going to go out and hand out waivers.

Link to comment

Caches like this are a disaster waiting to happen. I don't think it's as bad as that other one where the cacher died, because at least with this cache, the danger is obvious.

 

A translation of the reviewer note from January:

 

Dear owner! In a few weeks ago I already turned to you and do not get a response to date, unfortunately, the situation does not improve your cache since then, more the opposite. Groundspeak itself now has concerns about the legality your caches (....owner) has reported, for this reason, it is now time the listing you disabled and a period of 14 days scheduled for, in order to clarify the issue
Edited by The_Incredibles_
Link to comment

I wouldn't count legality in other countries because their laws would be different.

 

Huh? Legal is legal. What is legal or illegal in one country isn't a a precedent for what is legal or illegal in another, but all caches must comply with *local* laws.

I meant to say I wouldn't account for other countries laws as I don't know theirs.

Link to comment

I wouldn't count legality in other countries because their laws would be different.

 

Huh? Legal is legal. What is legal or illegal in one country isn't a a precedent for what is legal or illegal in another, but all caches must comply with *local* laws.

I think what was meant was that we-or Groundspeak-cannot say something is illegal based on our laws, when the cache is is another part of the world that may have different laws, or at least different interpretations of those same laws for example, trespassing in my previous post.

Link to comment

I think if the cache in question were on a sign in a shopping mall here, permission would NOT have been given. The owners would be too concerned about lawsuits against them in case of a fall, and accidental damage to the structure.

Would I do that cache? No. No head for heights, and my legs aren't long enough, either!

Link to comment

Guess it would be nice if someone who lives in Germany would say something.

 

So, here I go!

 

I´ve come across some illegal caches, and I do report them. The rules and laws are, more or less, as is rule enforcement. Keep that in mind.

 

One of the cache owner trends for the rule-bending/breaking is to list it with "Steath Required" or the funnier naming it a "Night cache". "Is permission obtained?, implied?, or was there no way they would get it?" are the questions not really asked, until someone complains.

 

The problem here also falls on to the cachers themselves. Some, if not most, tend to log and forget, and go under the theory "I didn´t get caught/hurt, not my problem anymore."

 

I went to one, listed as a "night cache". Before we drove off to it, I said to my wife that the cache sits in the sewer tunnel covered with "No tresspassing", and took the camera with me. Sure enough, there were the no tresspassing signs(the entire length of the "stream", at every possible crossing, so no "I didn´t see it!"s). I get home, my wife logs, and I say to add a needs archive. She answered "not my problem, not doing it". An email later, the cache was gone.

 

Let´s step away from the cache theme a second, and go further. My monst... err mother-in-law had a problem. There were kids* partying in the woods near her house, and going loud late into the night in one of the pavillons. Next day, she whined around about it, and I asked her why she didn´t call the police. Answers: "Then the kids will come raise hell at my house cause I called!" then later "Other people live nearer to the woods, it´s their problem to handle, not mine". Great logic, I know. "It bothers me, but not my problem" is a common thing here.

 

Meh, starting to ramble on too much.

 

Short version: Cacher/CO apathy creates the situation. Some get the smiley, but eventually someone pays a big price for it. Why? "I found it, and don´t care anymore!" or "Someone else can deal with it"

 

*Law note: Beer drinking age is somewhat lower here than in the US. (16)

Edited by schattentanz
Link to comment

wow one more good reason to visit Germany again, looks like alot og cool caches there..

I do any of them you mention..

but I use my safety equipment OFFCOURSE !!!

 

it is like, any cache is potential dangerous if you do wrong,

close your eyes and ears, and run over a road !!!

same as if you try to do a high tower cache with no safety harness..

Link to comment

Guess it would be nice if someone who lives in Germany would say something.

 

So, here I go!

 

I´ve come across some illegal caches, and I do report them. The rules and laws are, more or less, as is rule enforcement. Keep that in mind.

 

One of the cache owner trends for the rule-bending/breaking is to list it with "Steath Required" or the funnier naming it a "Night cache". "Is permission obtained?, implied?, or was there no way they would get it?" are the questions not really asked, until someone complains.

 

The problem here also falls on to the cachers themselves. Some, if not most, tend to log and forget, and go under the theory "I didn´t get caught/hurt, not my problem anymore."

 

I went to one, listed as a "night cache". Before we drove off to it, I said to my wife that the cache sits in the sewer tunnel covered with "No tresspassing", and took the camera with me. Sure enough, there were the no tresspassing signs(the entire length of the "stream", at every possible crossing, so no "I didn´t see it!"s). I get home, my wife logs, and I say to add a needs archive. She answered "not my problem, not doing it". An email later, the cache was gone.

 

Let´s step away from the cache theme a second, and go further. My monst... err mother-in-law had a problem. There were kids* partying in the woods near her house, and going loud late into the night in one of the pavillons. Next day, she whined around about it, and I asked her why she didn´t call the police. Answers: "Then the kids will come raise hell at my house cause I called!" then later "Other people live nearer to the woods, it´s their problem to handle, not mine". Great logic, I know. "It bothers me, but not my problem" is a common thing here.

 

Meh, starting to ramble on too much.

 

Short version: Cacher/CO apathy creates the situation. Some get the smiley, but eventually someone pays a big price for it. Why? "I found it, and don´t care anymore!" or "Someone else can deal with it"

 

*Law note: Beer drinking age is somewhat lower here than in the US. (16)

 

Very nice post, thank you! I'm surprised there isn't more interest in this topic. I think a lot of what you say, especially in the "short version" at the bottom, is true everywhere. For example, I did not report the only buried cache I remember finding. Nor did I report a local who for a leg of a multi drilled a hole for a film canister in a live tree. I did tell him he's not supposed to do that at the next event. :)

 

The thread that is referenced in 4Wheelin' Fools OP contains an excellent post on the cultural differences, and how Geocaching developed in Germany and Austria versus how it did in the U.S. her post She is from Austria, and is very fluent in English. As are you. :D

 

The cache where you rappel off of an observation tower? I don't know what else to say, but we just don't do something like that in North America in the name of Geocaching. And, if I can speak for all of North America :P I don't believe we ever would have done something like that, or else it would have shown up in 2001 or 2002 before Geocaching started to get regulated over here.

Link to comment

 

The cache where you rappel off of an observation tower? I don't know what else to say, but we just don't do something like that in North America in the name of Geocaching. And, if I can speak for all of North America :P I don't believe we ever would have done something like that, or else it would have shown up in 2001 or 2002 before Geocaching started to get regulated over here.

People take what they can get. There´s not always that nice mountain or cliff to climb around on. People just put things on them. One cache owner here did similar with a smaller observation tower, in a protected nature area. The cache was stolen, including the brackets he screwed onto the tower for it. Next day after someone said it was gone, he put it out again. A few days later, the town contacted him, and said they don´t want it there at all. The cache was then archived.

 

When someone sees such things, and does say something, the caches do go away. Be it a fellow cacher, some random person, or town worker. Someone says something to Groundspeak, it´s gone. Someone says something to the property owner, it takes a while longer, but then it´s gone.

 

She is from Austria, and is very fluent in English. As are you.

 

Sadly, my German sucks. I´ve only been living here for 5 years. I moved here from RI, but consider the entire New England region as "home" instead.

Link to comment

lets imagine this :

 

a similar big tover like seen on the top picture.

lats say the cache IS alowed by the tower owner and land owner,

and lats say the cache page is correctly made with D/T ratings

and attributes and warnings and suggestions to use correct safety equipment.

imagine the cache is on the very top, and to sign its log, you need to climb outside at the top.

 

how do you feel then ??

 

1 : it must not be approved, all caches must be safe to do for all, even kids.

2 : I dont care, I just dont do it if it looks unsafe for me.

3 : cool let the ones who like it, do it.

4 : I do it with correct equipment, else not.

5 : I do it with no equipment just for the thrill.

6 : I be the one who judge if what ever I do is safe or not.

7 : it is the CO fault if anything goes wrong.

8 : it is only my own fault if anything goes wrong.

9 : I expect Groundspeak to be responsible for the safety of all listed caches.

10 : Groundspeak is not responsible for any legal or safety maters of any caches or their areas.

 

what do you vote for ? as many numbers as you feel apply to your feelings..

Link to comment

lets imagine this :

 

a similar big tover like seen on the top picture.

lats say the cache IS alowed by the tower owner and land owner,

and lats say the cache page is correctly made with D/T ratings

and attributes and warnings and suggestions to use correct safety equipment.

imagine the cache is on the very top, and to sign its log, you need to climb outside at the top.

 

how do you feel then ??

 

1 : it must not be approved, all caches must be safe to do for all, even kids.

2 : I dont care, I just dont do it if it looks unsafe for me.

3 : cool let the ones who like it, do it.

4 : I do it with correct equipment, else not.

5 : I do it with no equipment just for the thrill.

6 : I be the one who judge if what ever I do is safe or not.

7 : it is the CO fault if anything goes wrong.

8 : it is only my own fault if anything goes wrong.

9 : I expect Groundspeak to be responsible for the safety of all listed caches.

10 : Groundspeak is not responsible for any legal or safety maters of any caches or their areas.

 

what do you vote for ? as many numbers as you feel apply to your feelings..

 

I was going from the idea that the D/T was correct, and someone did say "Bring climbing equipment with you".

 

But, when you want a number, fine. I make my own, as an "other" option is missing.

 

11: Ask myself if the cache owner actually said it was a climbing cache that he was placing, when he asked for permission. Then ask myself "Was that thing really built to be climbed on in such a manner."

 

And perhaps when I decide that 11 comes up as "no":

12: Contact the property owner and see if the permissions are really for what the person hid there.

 

I have no problem with people having fun, and doing things properly. I do have one with letting someone walk to their death.

 

(Walk is meant as figurative in this post)

Link to comment

I went to one, listed as a "night cache". Before we drove off to it, I said to my wife that the cache sits in the sewer tunnel covered with "No tresspassing", and took the camera with me. Sure enough, there were the no tresspassing signs(the entire length of the "stream", at every possible crossing, so no "I didn´t see it!"s). I get home, my wife logs, and I say to add a needs archive. She answered "not my problem, not doing it". An email later, the cache was gone.

 

It sounds as if depspite the No Trespassing signs, you and your wife still looked for, and found, the cache. Or am I reading things wrong.

 

If you did look for it, that's part of the problem as well. If I get to a cache in a situation such as you indicate, I walk away from it, and drop the local reviewer a note, with pictures if I have them. This way teh reviewer deals with the situation in the proper manner.

 

(And greetings from RI)

Link to comment

It sounds as if depspite the No Trespassing signs, you and your wife still looked for, and found, the cache. Or am I reading things wrong.

 

 

(And greetings from RI)

 

Yes and no.

 

My wife drove there, and said "I´m not going in there! There´s snails/slugs/spiders/other random disgusting insects/animals! You go get it!"

 

I answered "I´d rather just take a picture and go"

 

and she said "I didn´t drive here for nothing. Go get it or we don´t go."

 

We were a long way from home, and the walk home would have been through a pair less-than-friendly neighborhoods. Yes, I had to go get it, still took the pictures, and No, my wife didn´t go get it.

Edited by schattentanz
Link to comment

Here is another one that I wonder about permission. And yep, its Germany as well.

 

If they allow the public to climb on it, I guess that's ok. The problem is this, we normally dont see this type of climbing on things here in America.

For the record:

Names removed.

 

Sehr geehrter Herr (schattentanz),

 

danke für Ihre Mitteilung. Der Besitzer des Caches hat vom RVR – Eigentümer des Tetraeders – keine Genehmigung erhalten, dort ein Cache anzubringen. Auch ist es verboten außerhalb der öffentlichen Treppen auf dem Tetraeder herumzuklettern. Auch hier werden wir für diese Tätigkeit keine Erlaubnis erteilen.

 

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

 

Im Auftrag

 

******

 

Parkleiter

 

---------translated-----------

Dear Mr. Schattentanz

Thank you for sharing this information. The cache owner has no permission from RVR- Owner of the Tetraeders- to mount a cache there. It is also forbidden to climb outside of the public stairs on the Tetraeder. We would not give permission for this activity.

 

With friendly greetings

(im auftrag translates odd. left out)

 

*****************

Park supervisor.

 

See? It´s easy to ask questions, and doesn´t hurt or cost money. Now if people would only do it beforehand...

Link to comment

lets imagine this :

 

a similar big tover like seen on the top picture.

lats say the cache IS alowed by the tower owner and land owner,

and lats say the cache page is correctly made with D/T ratings

and attributes and warnings and suggestions to use correct safety equipment.

imagine the cache is on the very top, and to sign its log, you need to climb outside at the top.

 

how do you feel then ??

 

1 : it must not be approved, all caches must be safe to do for all, even kids.

2 : I dont care, I just dont do it if it looks unsafe for me.

3 : cool let the ones who like it, do it.

4 : I do it with correct equipment, else not.

5 : I do it with no equipment just for the thrill.

6 : I be the one who judge if what ever I do is safe or not.

7 : it is the CO fault if anything goes wrong.

8 : it is only my own fault if anything goes wrong.

9 : I expect Groundspeak to be responsible for the safety of all listed caches.

10 : Groundspeak is not responsible for any legal or safety maters of any caches or their areas.

 

what do you vote for ? as many numbers as you feel apply to your feelings..

4 or 5, I would have to size it up on location to know forsure.

and

8

Link to comment

Here is another one that I wonder about permission. And yep, its Germany as well.

 

If they allow the public to climb on it, I guess that's ok. The problem is this, we normally dont see this type of climbing on things here in America.

For the record:

Names removed.

 

Sehr geehrter Herr (schattentanz),

 

danke für Ihre Mitteilung. Der Besitzer des Caches hat vom RVR – Eigentümer des Tetraeders – keine Genehmigung erhalten, dort ein Cache anzubringen. Auch ist es verboten außerhalb der öffentlichen Treppen auf dem Tetraeder herumzuklettern. Auch hier werden wir für diese Tätigkeit keine Erlaubnis erteilen.

 

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

 

Im Auftrag

 

******

 

Parkleiter

 

---------translated-----------

Dear Mr. Schattentanz

Thank you for sharing this information. The cache owner has no permission from RVR- Owner of the Tetraeders- to mount a cache there. It is also forbidden to climb outside of the public stairs on the Tetraeder. We would not give permission for this activity.

 

With friendly greetings

(im auftrag translates odd. left out)

 

*****************

Park supervisor.

 

See? It´s easy to ask questions, and doesn´t hurt or cost money. Now if people would only do it beforehand...

 

Well, I thought I was talking to a Native German. But hey, your German skills can't be that bad if you got a response.

 

Let the record show I only discussed The Tetraeder Bottrop. :P

 

EDIT: Holy Cow! Over 350 favorite points. I hope nuttin' happens here, if you know what I mean. :huh:

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

 

Well, I thought I was talking to a Native German. But hey, your German skills can't be that bad if you got a response.

 

Let the record show I only discussed The Tetraeder Bottrop.

EDIT: Holy Cow! Over 350 favorite points. I hope nuttin' happens here, if you know what I mean.

 

Good enough to get through the everyday, but sometimes it requires a few attempts. The grammer is a real pain.

 

Yep, you discussed. Wondered about something, and somebody found the answer. Could very well be that something happens. It´s something for the owner to work out, or was something that he/she should have been handled long before now. We just have to wait and see.

Link to comment

lets imagine this :

 

a similar big tover like seen on the top picture.

lats say the cache IS alowed by the tower owner and land owner,

and lats say the cache page is correctly made with D/T ratings

and attributes and warnings and suggestions to use correct safety equipment.

imagine the cache is on the very top, and to sign its log, you need to climb outside at the top.

 

how do you feel then ??

 

1 : it must not be approved, all caches must be safe to do for all, even kids.

2 : I dont care, I just dont do it if it looks unsafe for me.

3 : cool let the ones who like it, do it.

4 : I do it with correct equipment, else not.

5 : I do it with no equipment just for the thrill.

6 : I be the one who judge if what ever I do is safe or not.

7 : it is the CO fault if anything goes wrong.

8 : it is only my own fault if anything goes wrong.

9 : I expect Groundspeak to be responsible for the safety of all listed caches.

10 : Groundspeak is not responsible for any legal or safety maters of any caches or their areas.

 

what do you vote for ? as many numbers as you feel apply to your feelings..

2, 3, 4, possibly 5 based on on-site review (the 'correct' equipment could be no equipment), 6, and 8

 

Ten is written in terms that are too absolute to pass muster.

Link to comment

lets imagine this :

 

a similar big tover like seen on the top picture.

lats say the cache IS alowed by the tower owner and land owner,

and lats say the cache page is correctly made with D/T ratings

and attributes and warnings and suggestions to use correct safety equipment.

imagine the cache is on the very top, and to sign its log, you need to climb outside at the top.

 

how do you feel then ??

 

1 : it must not be approved, all caches must be safe to do for all, even kids.

2 : I dont care, I just dont do it if it looks unsafe for me.

3 : cool let the ones who like it, do it.

4 : I do it with correct equipment, else not.

5 : I do it with no equipment just for the thrill.

6 : I be the one who judge if what ever I do is safe or not.

7 : it is the CO fault if anything goes wrong.

8 : it is only my own fault if anything goes wrong.

9 : I expect Groundspeak to be responsible for the safety of all listed caches.

10 : Groundspeak is not responsible for any legal or safety maters of any caches or their areas.

 

what do you vote for ? as many numbers as you feel apply to your feelings..

All but 1, 7, and 8. I believe It is MY choice-and therefore responsibility-to go or not. Just because the CO and the finders were there before me, or just because the CO/Groundspeak provided me with the info on the location doesn't mean I have to go there.

 

I get there I would attempt to free climb if there are plenty of hand-holds and it's not more then 25feet or so. Any higher or if I could fall due to rain or the hand-holds are too few, or too far apart for my experience I would use proper equipment. Personally I would love a (legally placed) cache like this around here.

Link to comment

 

Well, I thought I was talking to a Native German. But hey, your German skills can't be that bad if you got a response.

 

Let the record show I only discussed The Tetraeder Bottrop.

EDIT: Holy Cow! Over 350 favorite points. I hope nuttin' happens here, if you know what I mean.

 

Good enough to get through the everyday, but sometimes it requires a few attempts. The grammer is a real pain.

 

Yep, you discussed. Wondered about something, and somebody found the answer. Could very well be that something happens. It´s something for the owner to work out, or was something that he/she should have been handled long before now. We just have to wait and see.

 

Well now you've done it, schattentanz. I hope your passport is still good, and you can return to the USA. Because there are going to be some seriously ticked off German cachers. :ph34r:

 

Dieser Cache wird bereits im internationalen Forum diskutiert. Einem Posting nach liegt für den Cache keine Erlaubnis vom Ruhrverband vor: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=303434&view=findpost&p=5145197

 

Ich kann nicht prüfen, ob die Aussage im Forum echt ist. Bitte lege mir daher kurz per Mail die Erlaubnis für diesen Cache vor. Falls diese mündlich erfolgt ist, würde ich mich über Name und Kontaktmöglichkeit des Ansprechpartners freuen.

 

Falls du keine Erlaubnis hast bzw. keine einholen möchtest, archiviere bitte selber das Listing. Siehe dazu auch die Guidelines: http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#permission

 

Ich schaue hier in 14 Tagen wieder vorbei.

Link to comment

 

Well now you've done it, schattentanz. I hope your passport is still good, and you can return to the USA. Because there are going to be some seriously ticked off German cachers.

 

 

What´s a few more special friends on the list?

 

The owner was given the option to get permission for his cache, he chose not to try.

 

It would have been nice if eigengott had spoken with me before reacting. I would have given him a copy of the emails.

Link to comment

 

Well, I thought I was talking to a Native German. But hey, your German skills can't be that bad if you got a response.

 

Let the record show I only discussed The Tetraeder Bottrop.

EDIT: Holy Cow! Over 350 favorite points. I hope nuttin' happens here, if you know what I mean.

 

Good enough to get through the everyday, but sometimes it requires a few attempts. The grammer is a real pain.

 

Yep, you discussed. Wondered about something, and somebody found the answer. Could very well be that something happens. It´s something for the owner to work out, or was something that he/she should have been handled long before now. We just have to wait and see.

 

Well now you've done it, schattentanz. I hope your passport is still good, and you can return to the USA. Because there are going to be some seriously ticked off German cachers. :ph34r:

 

Dieser Cache wird bereits im internationalen Forum diskutiert. Einem Posting nach liegt für den Cache keine Erlaubnis vom Ruhrverband vor: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=303434&view=findpost&p=5145197

 

Ich kann nicht prüfen, ob die Aussage im Forum echt ist. Bitte lege mir daher kurz per Mail die Erlaubnis für diesen Cache vor. Falls diese mündlich erfolgt ist, würde ich mich über Name und Kontaktmöglichkeit des Ansprechpartners freuen.

 

Falls du keine Erlaubnis hast bzw. keine einholen möchtest, archiviere bitte selber das Listing. Siehe dazu auch die Guidelines: http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx#permission

 

Ich schaue hier in 14 Tagen wieder vorbei.

I am on the hitlist as well. :ph34r: Thank you for posting my post on that cache page. :ph34r: :ph34r: :ph34r:

Link to comment

 

Well now you've done it, schattentanz. I hope your passport is still good, and you can return to the USA. Because there are going to be some seriously ticked off German cachers.

 

 

What´s a few more special friends on the list?

 

The owner was given the option to get permission for his cache, he chose not to try.

 

It would have been nice if eigengott had spoken with me before reacting. I would have given him a copy of the emails.

 

First of all, I find Bing Translator to be the best for German to English, as opposed to Google Translator or Babelfish (Yahoo, but originally invented by Altavista).

 

I was just kidding around, but at this point, I don't expect any torch and pitchfork angry reaction. The owners archive note, and a note posted by a previous finder, seem to be accepting the fact that there was no chance in heck there could be permission for rappeling off of an active, open to the public observation tower, and the Geocaching community "got away with it" for a couple years. It's on my watchlist, I'll be getting (and translating with Bing) any further logs that come in. But as I said, it's been over 24 hours, and it seems pretty calm.

 

I havent followed the forums in over a year, work changed that. No time at home. But the topics are the same. lol this same topic was going on last time I was here, and I wonder if people are still talking about alien heads in the nevada desert? lol

 

I know you didn't mean it that way, but I wouldn't be lol'ing anything. :) Both these specific caches were discussed about a year ago (actually, I think it was about a week before Christmas) as a direct result of the death of German cacher Willimax, on a utility bridge over a creek that was not open to the public for any reason.

Link to comment

It's calm because the listing has been locked. If that gives any indication to you...

 

Geocaching has become mainstream. I am sure this one will be replaced by a Leitplanken-Tradi! Great work!

 

See, that Bing translator works. Leitplanken = Guardrail. :P

 

The listing was not locked when I looked a day or two after the archival. If you consider this Geocaching going mainstream, then it's always been mainstream. I can't stress enough, we just would NEVER rappell of an observation tower in North America in the name of Geocaching. You know what that is? It's illegal stunting. It's like going over Niagara Falls (which I happen to live 10 miles from) in a barrell. If you survive, you're going to be arrested at the bottom, spend time in jail, and receive a hefty fine. Geocaching should not be associated with "illegal stunting". :)

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

It's calm because the listing has been locked. If that gives any indication to you...

 

Geocaching has become mainstream. I am sure this one will be replaced by a Leitplanken-Tradi! Great work!

 

See, that Bing translator works. Leitplanken = Guardrail. :P

 

The listing was not locked when I looked a day or two after the archival. I can't stress enough, we just would NEVER rappell of an observation tower in North America in the name of Geocaching. You know what that is? It's illegal stunting. It's like going over Niagara Falls (which I happen to live 10 miles from) in a barrell. If you survive, you're going to be arrested at the bottom, spend time in jail, and receive a hefty fine. Geocaching should not be associated with "illegal stunting". :)

 

We logged a magnetic key holder guardrail hide yesterday near a historic site. It was no big deal, except they have been banned by VDOT, and therefore an illegal geocache placement. :laughing: It was not dangerous. :P

Link to comment

 

See, that Bing translator works. Leitplanken = Guardrail. :P

 

The listing was not locked when I looked a day or two after the archival. If you consider this Geocaching going mainstream, then it's always been mainstream. I can't stress enough, we just would NEVER rappell of an observation tower in North America in the name of Geocaching. You know what that is? It's illegal stunting. It's like going over Niagara Falls (which I happen to live 10 miles from) in a barrell. If you survive, you're going to be arrested at the bottom, spend time in jail, and receive a hefty fine. Geocaching should not be associated with "illegal stunting". :)

 

It´s because people wasted the money on the climbing set, so they could get those few tree climbing caches, and then had no use for it. Now they want to mainstream climbing caches, regardless of if one should be there or not.

Link to comment

A thought on illegal caches:

 

There is one I'm very embarrassed about.

I was trying for FTF, but missed, you've got to be REALLY quick around here. I ran into a fairly new cacher right after I put it back. We chatted as he found it. He mentioned that its partially buried. I said I wasn't going to report it. Now I deeply regret this for three reasons. 1. The new cacher got the wrong message. It should have been reported. 2. Other new cachers could have seen it after me and decided it was okay to do. 3. I realized that the reviewer probably looked down the list of finders and saw who did not report it. That really embarrasses me. I want a good local reputation. That's not the way to get it.

 

I will report it next time.

Link to comment

A thought on illegal caches:

 

There is one I'm very embarrassed about.

I was trying for FTF, but missed, you've got to be REALLY quick around here. I ran into a fairly new cacher right after I put it back. We chatted as he found it. He mentioned that its partially buried. I said I wasn't going to report it. Now I deeply regret this for three reasons. 1. The new cacher got the wrong message. It should have been reported. 2. Other new cachers could have seen it after me and decided it was okay to do. 3. I realized that the reviewer probably looked down the list of finders and saw who did not report it. That really embarrasses me. I want a good local reputation. That's not the way to get it.

 

I will report it next time.

I am fast to report something that way over the gray line. Anything in the gray line, I let it go.

Link to comment

It's calm because the listing has been locked. If that gives any indication to you...

 

Geocaching has become mainstream. I am sure this one will be replaced by a Leitplanken-Tradi! Great work!

 

See, that Bing translator works. Leitplanken = Guardrail. :P

 

The listing was not locked when I looked a day or two after the archival. I can't stress enough, we just would NEVER rappell of an observation tower in North America in the name of Geocaching. You know what that is? It's illegal stunting. It's like going over Niagara Falls (which I happen to live 10 miles from) in a barrell. If you survive, you're going to be arrested at the bottom, spend time in jail, and receive a hefty fine. Geocaching should not be associated with "illegal stunting". :)

 

We logged a magnetic key holder guardrail hide yesterday near a historic site. It was no big deal, except they have been banned by VDOT, and therefore an illegal geocache placement. :laughing: It was not dangerous. :P

 

This thread is intended to be about caches which have illegal access in the eyes of the law, not ones considered illegal placement by the Virginia DOT, or illegal to Groundspeak by being buried.

 

However, the guardrail micro is not allowed by VDOT because they do consider it dangerous, although it's probably legal to be there if everyone parked in a safe place and walked to it.

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment

It's calm because the listing has been locked. If that gives any indication to you...

 

Geocaching has become mainstream. I am sure this one will be replaced by a Leitplanken-Tradi! Great work!

 

See, that Bing translator works. Leitplanken = Guardrail. :P

 

The listing was not locked when I looked a day or two after the archival. I can't stress enough, we just would NEVER rappell of an observation tower in North America in the name of Geocaching. You know what that is? It's illegal stunting. It's like going over Niagara Falls (which I happen to live 10 miles from) in a barrell. If you survive, you're going to be arrested at the bottom, spend time in jail, and receive a hefty fine. Geocaching should not be associated with "illegal stunting". :)

 

We logged a magnetic key holder guardrail hide yesterday near a historic site. It was no big deal, except they have been banned by VDOT, and therefore an illegal geocache placement. :laughing: It was not dangerous. :P

 

This thread is intended to be about caches which have illegal access in the eyes of the law, not ones considered illegal placement by the Virginia DOT, or illegal to Groundspeak by being buried.

 

However, the guardrail micro is not allowed by VDOT because they do consider it dangerous, although it's probably legal to be there if everyone parked in a safe place and walked to it.

Sorry, I don't phrase myself correctly sometimes. Geocaches on VDOT maintained property are not legal by Law in Virginia. Guardrails, signs, area offices, rest areas, are some of the places that I have seen geocaches archived by Groundspeak. It all started out (according to what I read in the forums here) some where in Northern Virginia between two geocachers that did not get along and one had to have his way, and that one had friends high up on the Totom Pole and got things messed up for all of us here in the Commonwealth. I am one of the geocachers that complyed with Groundspeak and relocated some of my listings.

I think there may be more info on my local reviewers page, I'll post you a link. But yes, I understood that this thread is intended to be about caches which are illegal in the eyes of the Law. B)

 

http://www.geocaching.com/profile/?guid=1729c5b1-071b-4282-a165-51bc1d681a6b

Edited by Manville Possum Hunters
Link to comment
It all started out (according to what I read in the forums here) some where in Northern Virginia between two geocachers that did not get along and one had to have his way, and that one had friends high up on the Totom Pole and got things messed up for all of us here in the Commonwealth.

Let us all give thanx that this spat occurred, and pray that it expands to the rest of the country. B)

Link to comment
It all started out (according to what I read in the forums here) some where in Northern Virginia between two geocachers that did not get along and one had to have his way, and that one had friends high up on the Totom Pole and got things messed up for all of us here in the Commonwealth.

Let us all give thanx that this spat occurred, and pray that it expands to the rest of the country. B)

 

HEY! I just hid the best guardrail cache EVER. :anibad:

Edited by Snoogans
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...