Jump to content

Cache NOT on school grounds


jfpinell
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

My "50% need not apply" is not, nor has it ever been on any school grounds as someone has stated. 2 parts are in a public park owned by the Village of Sherwood. (Everything from the Fire Station #1 to the edge of the farm field about 100 yards+ back and in the other direction, the farm field and the school tennis/basketball court is public park. The other is on Sherwood's maintenance garage land.) The school is next to it, but where these are and have been is Village park. I've talked to our Administrator several times about its placement and he doesn't care at all. Who does one bring this to the attention to?

Edited by jfpinell
Link to comment

Related Link:

 

Working with the Reviewer

 

I'm assuming you are resubmitting your Archived Traditional cache as a Multi cache. Looking at the maps does not support what you say. I'm assuming that you'll need to provide additional information to support your assertions. Stating that you have permission from the school administrator can't hurt either, but schools are such a sensitive issue, it might not help either.

Link to comment

Related Link:

 

Working with the Reviewer

 

I'm assuming you are resubmitting your Archived Traditional cache as a Multi cache. Looking at the maps does not support what you say. I'm assuming that you'll need to provide additional information to support your assertions. Stating that you have permission from the school administrator can't hurt either, but schools are such a sensitive issue, it might not help either.

But it was OK the first time for months no one said anything and a handful found it. I just added 2 more. To be on school grounds it'id have to be about 40 or 50 yards east of where they are. Is this one of those "opinion" things depending on who reads it?

Link to comment

I've talked to our Administrator several times about its placement and he doesn't care at all. Who does one bring this to the attention to?

1. The reviewer's note on your unpublished cache submission is dated yesterday. I'm not sure how that translates to talking to "our Administrator" several times and that the "Administrator" doesn't care at all. Reviewers are not on duty 24/7; we are volunteers. Are you perhaps speaking of the school Administrator for Sacred Heart School?

 

2. I would have left a similar reviewer note on your page; if the cache elements are not "on" school property, they are "near" it and clearly visible from the school grounds.

Link to comment

jfpinelli, no offense, but I suggest that maybe you should find some caches first before trying to place your next one. Placing a cache that's within the guidelines sometimes comes with experience and seeing examples that others have set first to see what/where is acceptable in your area for a cache placement may help you in the future.

The "number found" thing really got nothing to do with this post. The point is it's no where near school grounds to begin with. Finding 1 or 1000 before putting any out is NOT going to change the fact that this isn't located there -unless the school buys more public park land, which isn't likely.

Edited by jfpinell
Link to comment

I've talked to our Administrator several times about its placement and he doesn't care at all. Who does one bring this to the attention to?

1. The reviewer's note on your unpublished cache submission is dated yesterday. I'm not sure how that translates to talking to "our Administrator" several times and that the "Administrator" doesn't care at all. Reviewers are not on duty 24/7; we are volunteers. Are you perhaps speaking of the school Administrator for Sacred Heart School?

 

2. I would have left a similar reviewer note on your page; if the cache elements are not "on" school property, they are "near" it and clearly visible from the school grounds.

I was referring to the part of it that is located on the village garage area. He said he didn't care, and that covers that possible problem.

I guess I don't get why no one complained or said no before. (In fact, if my memory is correct "Bec" is the one who was listed as O.K.-ing (is that a word?) my first 2. The first part was not changed. The 2nd is towards the garage and the 3rd is in an area that was abandoned by its original owner and apparently no one cared about it being put there originally either.

Link to comment

jfpinelli, no offense, but I suggest that maybe you should find some caches first before trying to place your next one. Placing a cache that's within the guidelines sometimes comes with experience and seeing examples that others have set first to see what/where is acceptable in your area for a cache placement may help you in the future.

That's really got nothing to do with this post. The point is it's no where near school grounds to begin with. Finding 1 or 1000 before putting any out is NOT going to change the fact that this isn't located there -unless the school buys more public park land, which isn't likely.

 

The lack of any recorded finds on your account is relevant to your post as it gives those who might respond to your post a little background information on your levels of experience to date when considering their responses. To date, if you account statistics are to be believed, your geocaching find experience is zero.

 

The reviewer who posted previously had the view that elements of the cache in question are sufficiently close to school grounds to cause concern.

Link to comment

jfpinelli, no offense, but I suggest that maybe you should find some caches first before trying to place your next one. Placing a cache that's within the guidelines sometimes comes with experience and seeing examples that others have set first to see what/where is acceptable in your area for a cache placement may help you in the future.

That's really got nothing to do with this post. The point is it's no where near school grounds to begin with. Finding 1 or 1000 before putting any out is NOT going to change the fact that this isn't located there -unless the school buys more public park land, which isn't likely.

 

The lack of any recorded finds on your account is relevant to your post as it gives those who might respond to your post a little background information on your levels of experience to date when considering their responses. To date, if you account statistics are to be believed, your geocaching find experience is zero.

 

The reviewer who posted previously had the view that elements of the cache in question are sufficiently close to school grounds to cause concern.

OK I'll give you that as far as the first part. :) But again, it was never questioned before. That's why I asked if this could be a "opinion based on who reviews it" kind of thing. If I knew if anyone was close to me I'd love to take them out & show them exactly where it is. :)

Edited by jfpinell
Link to comment

jfpinelli, no offense, but I suggest that maybe you should find some caches first before trying to place your next one. Placing a cache that's within the guidelines sometimes comes with experience and seeing examples that others have set first to see what/where is acceptable in your area for a cache placement may help you in the future.

That's really got nothing to do with this post. The point is it's no where near school grounds to begin with. Finding 1 or 1000 before putting any out is NOT going to change the fact that this isn't located there -unless the school buys more public park land, which isn't likely.

 

The lack of any recorded finds on your account is relevant to your post as it gives those who might respond to your post a little background information on your levels of experience to date when considering their responses. To date, if you account statistics are to be believed, your geocaching find experience is zero.

 

The reviewer who posted previously had the view that elements of the cache in question are sufficiently close to school grounds to cause concern.

OK I'll give you that as far as the first part. :) But again, it was never questioned before. That's why I asked if this could be a "opinion based on who reviews it" kind of thing. If I knew if anyone was close to me I'd love to take them out & show them exactly where it is. :)

 

Well, reviewers are human and they do have opinions and so far it appears that at least two of them share a concensus of opinion which seems to differ from your own.

Link to comment

But again, it was never questioned before. That's why I asked if this could be a "opinion based on who reviews it" kind of thing. If I knew if anyone was close to me I'd love to take them out & show them exactly where it is. :)

There's never been a three-part multicache including all three of your locations. The location near the maintenance garage is the most problematic.

 

Reviewer can tell this without visiting the cache location. The Google aerial photos are clear enough that I can see school children playing on the school playground. They show up as little "dots." The nearest tot dot is 300 feet from one of your cache waypoints, across an open, flat playground/field.

Link to comment

But again, it was never questioned before. That's why I asked if this could be a "opinion based on who reviews it" kind of thing. If I knew if anyone was close to me I'd love to take them out & show them exactly where it is. :)

There's never been a three-part multicache including all three of your locations. The location near the maintenance garage is the most problematic.

 

Reviewer can tell this without visiting the cache location. The Google aerial photos are clear enough that I can see school children playing on the school playground. They show up as little "dots." The nearest tot dot is 300 feet from one of your cache waypoints, across an open, flat playground/field.

Exactly. and that "open flat area" is public park. How close are these allowed to be to a school or church? 200 Ft.? 300? This is the first time anyone's mentioned the garage as the point that's the most problem. I'm not sure how to say this without giving away its location but that piece that's "by" the garage is actually, again, on park area not far from the slide and swings, etc. But the garage & parking lot -which is actually mostly used for citizen's vehicles that are at the park(I've seen others placed almost next to playground stuff so I hope that's not the issue.) The farthest one back (the final) is where the original was that was abandoned even further behind the pavilion area. I'm not sure how accurate on-line maps are, but can they show exact property lines or is there margin of error there?

Link to comment

jfpinelli, no offense, but I suggest that maybe you should find some caches first before trying to place your next one. Placing a cache that's within the guidelines sometimes comes with experience and seeing examples that others have set first to see what/where is acceptable in your area for a cache placement may help you in the future.

That's really got nothing to do with this post. The point is it's no where near school grounds to begin with. Finding 1 or 1000 before putting any out is NOT going to change the fact that this isn't located there -unless the school buys more public park land, which isn't likely.

 

The lack of any recorded finds on your account is relevant to your post as it gives those who might respond to your post a little background information on your levels of experience to date when considering their responses. To date, if you account statistics are to be believed, your geocaching find experience is zero.

 

The reviewer who posted previously had the view that elements of the cache in question are sufficiently close to school grounds to cause concern.

OK I'll give you that as far as the first part. :) But again, it was never questioned before. That's why I asked if this could be a "opinion based on who reviews it" kind of thing. If I knew if anyone was close to me I'd love to take them out & show them exactly where it is. :)

 

No need. Keystone already saw the satellite image. By the way, you say it's nowhere near the school but also say:

 

 

To be on school grounds it'id have to be about 40 or 50 yards east of where they are. 

 

That's too close in the opinion of some, regardless of whether the former cache slipped by.

 

How close? That's an objective measurement.

 

How close is too close? A subjective judgment call.

 

Even if the school admin is fine with it, people worry about the safety of schools ( & bridges, military bases, etc.). Some muggle will see a cacher acting strangely and call the police.

 

We haven't heard from you in many weeks. Hope the gpsr issue got worked out.

Link to comment

jfpinelli, no offense, but I suggest that maybe you should find some caches first before trying to place your next one. Placing a cache that's within the guidelines sometimes comes with experience and seeing examples that others have set first to see what/where is acceptable in your area for a cache placement may help you in the future.

That's really got nothing to do with this post. The point is it's no where near school grounds to begin with. Finding 1 or 1000 before putting any out is NOT going to change the fact that this isn't located there -unless the school buys more public park land, which isn't likely.

 

The lack of any recorded finds on your account is relevant to your post as it gives those who might respond to your post a little background information on your levels of experience to date when considering their responses. To date, if you account statistics are to be believed, your geocaching find experience is zero.

 

The reviewer who posted previously had the view that elements of the cache in question are sufficiently close to school grounds to cause concern.

OK I'll give you that as far as the first part. :) But again, it was never questioned before. That's why I asked if this could be a "opinion based on who reviews it" kind of thing. If I knew if anyone was close to me I'd love to take them out & show them exactly where it is. :)

 

No need. Keystone already saw the satellite image. By the way, you say it's nowhere near the school but also say:

 

 

To be on school grounds it'id have to be about 40 or 50 yards east of where they are. 

 

That's too close in the opinion of some, regardless of whether the former cache slipped by.

 

How close? That's an objective measurement.

 

How close is too close? A subjective judgment call.

 

Even if the school admin is fine with it, people worry about the safety of schools ( & bridges, military bases, etc.). Some muggle will see a cacher acting strangely and call the police.

 

We haven't heard from you in many weeks. Hope the gpsr issue got worked out.

You ain't heard from me in weeks because, to put it bluntly, a few people's attitude about me and the way I write.

If there was no problem with this the first time, nothing has changed, so nothing should be any less allowable.

I'm just going to get rid of these.

Link to comment

You say that one stage is even near some slides and playground equipment. I spoke about your experience in an earlier post and this is where it comes into play.

 

Imagine you are a mother (or father, respectively) with a small child playing on that equipment. How comfortable would you feel if some lone male walked up and was searching for something nearby? You need to consider these things when placing a cache.

Link to comment

I've talked to our Administrator several times about its placement and he doesn't care at all. Who does one bring this to the attention to?

1. The reviewer's note on your unpublished cache submission is dated yesterday. I'm not sure how that translates to talking to "our Administrator" several times and that the "Administrator" doesn't care at all. Reviewers are not on duty 24/7; we are volunteers. Are you perhaps speaking of the school Administrator for Sacred Heart School?

 

2. I would have left a similar reviewer note on your page; if the cache elements are not "on" school property, they are "near" it and clearly visible from the school grounds.

 

Keystone,

 

Per your #1, He refers to his (what we call a Mayor) as the Town Administrator or "our Administrator".

Link to comment

From the Guidelines:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx

 

At times a geocache may meet the requirements for publication on the site but the reviewers, as experienced geocachers, may see additional concerns not listed in these guidelines that you as a geocache placer may not have noticed. The reviewer may bring these additional concerns to your attention and offer suggestions so that the geocache can be published.

 

6. Geocaches are not placed in restricted, prohibited or otherwise inappropriate locations.

 

4. The cache is problematic due to its proximity to a public structure, including and not limited to, highway bridges, major roadways, dams, government buildings, schools, military installations, hospitals, airports and other such locations.

 

Communicate with your reviewer.

 

If you believe that special circumstances may affect whether or not your cache listing is published, post a Reviewer Note on the cache listing. This note will auto-delete on publication.

 

 

B.

Link to comment

I tried to place a cache on parkland near a high school. The cache was to highlight an Eagle Scout service project that was done on school property. I went back and forth with my reviewer over this. I was told that around schools, the MINIMUM approved district is a quarter mile, preferably a half mile. I couldn't win that one and gave up.

Link to comment

Our reviewer has rejected at least 1 cache that was across from a school. No, it was not on school property. The point is, you don't want concerned parents calling the police because pedophiles are poking around in the bushes across from a school.

 

Wouldn't the same concerns be raised by parents at playgrounds in public parks, miles from schools? Yet those caches still seem to be listed.

Link to comment

Our reviewer has rejected at least 1 cache that was across from a school. No, it was not on school property. The point is, you don't want concerned parents calling the police because pedophiles are poking around in the bushes across from a school.

 

Wouldn't the same concerns be raised by parents at playgrounds in public parks, miles from schools? Yet those caches still seem to be listed.

 

Whenever we see that a cache is located in a park with playground equipment, with live tot dots running around, we just keep driving. We especially ignore any in those subdivision "parkettes".

 

 

B.

Link to comment

Our reviewer has rejected at least 1 cache that was across from a school. No, it was not on school property. The point is, you don't want concerned parents calling the police because pedophiles are poking around in the bushes across from a school.

 

Wouldn't the same concerns be raised by parents at playgrounds in public parks, miles from schools? Yet those caches still seem to be listed.

 

It is the same concern....the one time I cached in a playground without my wife I was approached by a parent....its the time we live in.

Still, its part of the little public land out there available for cache placements.

Link to comment

Our reviewer has rejected at least 1 cache that was across from a school. No, it was not on school property. The point is, you don't want concerned parents calling the police because pedophiles are poking around in the bushes across from a school.

 

Wouldn't the same concerns be raised by parents at playgrounds in public parks, miles from schools? Yet those caches still seem to be listed.

 

Perhaps. But those locations are not mentioned specifically in the guidelines. The reviewers make decisions based on the guidelines. If you think those areas should be added to the guidelines you should start a new thread about that concern, or email geocachingHQ asking for this change.

Link to comment

Our reviewer has rejected at least 1 cache that was across from a school. No, it was not on school property. The point is, you don't want concerned parents calling the police because pedophiles are poking around in the bushes across from a school.

 

Wouldn't the same concerns be raised by parents at playgrounds in public parks, miles from schools? Yet those caches still seem to be listed.

 

Whenever we see that a cache is located in a park with playground equipment, with live tot dots running around, we just keep driving. We especially ignore any in those subdivision "parkettes".

 

 

B.

Pro Tip: Bring the kids or grandkids, nieces or nephews, even family friend’s kids. Bring some kids. They work great as "urban camo". If that fails, visit in the rain. No kids or parents around then.

Link to comment

I'm not sure how accurate on-line maps are, but can they show exact property lines or is there margin of error there?

In many areas, Google Maps does show property parcel boundaries. The more urban the area, the more likely it is that boundary lines will show in the map view. I find this helpful when reviewing issues under guidelines that are dependent on property ownership, like the railroad guideline. It's irrelevant, of course, to the school guideline, since a "suspicious-looking middle aged bald guy walking around strangely" looks just as suspicious to Patty PTA regardless of which side of a property line he is pacing around on.

 

If there was no problem with this the first time, nothing has changed, so nothing should be any less allowable.

I'm just going to get rid of these.

But that's factually inaccurate. Your reviewer previously reviewed and published a single-stage cache. Your new submission is a three-stage multicache, materially increasing the chances that "suspicious behavior" might be observed and reported from across the playground at the school.

 

Rather than "get rid" of the cache, you might prevail upon your reviewer to unarchive the traditional cache originally published, minus the attempted conversion to a multicache. If I received such a request, I'd say "yes" to an innocent, cooperative cache owner and "no" to a cache owner who did not follow the process and who started lots of forum threads about me.

He refers to his (what we call a Mayor) as the Town Administrator or "our Administrator".

Thank you, mrreet, for enlightening me. Unless the "Town Administrator" is also in charge of Sacred Heart School, the infobit about the Town Administrator "not caring" is irrelevant. jfpinell's Reviewer has already offered to reconsider the multicache submission if there is proof of approval from the appropriate school official.

Edited by Keystone
Link to comment

Our reviewer has rejected at least 1 cache that was across from a school. No, it was not on school property. The point is, you don't want concerned parents calling the police because pedophiles are poking around in the bushes across from a school.

 

Wouldn't the same concerns be raised by parents at playgrounds in public parks, miles from schools? Yet those caches still seem to be listed.

Not exactly. Security concerns are infinitely higher around schools these days than around park playgrounds. Just pick up a newspaper on any random day.

 

--Larry

Link to comment

Our reviewer has rejected at least 1 cache that was across from a school. No, it was not on school property. The point is, you don't want concerned parents calling the police because pedophiles are poking around in the bushes across from a school.

 

Wouldn't the same concerns be raised by parents at playgrounds in public parks, miles from schools? Yet those caches still seem to be listed.

Not exactly. Security concerns are infinitely higher around schools these days than around park playgrounds. Just pick up a newspaper on any random day.

 

--Larry

 

But a parent sitting on a bench while little Suzy or Jimmy plays on the swing set will be equally worried seing a grown man poking around the bushes whether it is at a school or a playground.

 

If GS is concerned about a cacher poking around a school, why are they not concered about a cacher poking around the playground?

Link to comment

With regards to schools, I think it is not about exact property lines, but about perception and visibility. If tots or their guardians can see cachers lurking and searching near the playing area, suspicions will be raised, and that is a bad thing for geocachers, and geocaching in general.

 

I feel the same way, and I thank the reviewer for not publishing a geocache that is likely to raise concerns. :anibad:

Link to comment

How close are these allowed to be to a school or church? 200 Ft.? 300?

 

This is a good question that I'd like to see clearly answered :)

You are unlikely to receive any answer clearer than "it depends" when it comes to schools or other off-limits areas. (Churches are not on the list of off-limits areas.)

 

Assume two caches are placed, each exactly 200 feet from the border of the school property. Cache #1 is across an open, flat field (playground, soccer field) so that someone searching for Cache #1 is easily seen from people standing on the school property. Cache #2 is at the top of a steep hill, and behind a retaining wall built by the shopping center next door. The retaining wall extends eight feet above the parking lot where the cache is hidden in a guardrail.

 

I would ask the cache owner for permission details and school awareness regarding Cache #1. I would publish Cache #2 without incident.

Edited by Keystone
Link to comment

How close are these allowed to be to a school or church? 200 Ft.? 300?

 

This is a good question that I'd like to see clearly answered :)

You are unlikely to receive any answer clearer than "it depends" when it comes to schools or other off-limits areas. (Churches are not on the list of off-limits areas.)

 

Assume two caches are placed, each exactly 200 feet from the border of the school property. Cache #1 is across an open, flat field (playground, soccer field) so that someone searching for Cache #1 is easily seen from people standing on the school property. Cache #2 is at the top of a steep hill, and behind a retaining wall built by the shopping center next door. The retaining wall extends eight feet above the parking lot where the cache is hidden in a guardrail.

 

I would ask the cache owner for permission details and school awareness regarding Cache #1. I would publish Cache #2 without incident.

 

Thanks Keystone, that's what I figured - common sense prevails :)

 

So if I placed a cache within 60 feet of a school playground, with flat ground between them and no obstacles to the line of sight - how would you feel about that one? For the avoidance of doubt, this imaginary cache is outside the boundary of the school property.

Link to comment

Related Link:

 

Working with the Reviewer

 

I'm assuming you are resubmitting your Archived Traditional cache as a Multi cache. Looking at the maps does not support what you say. I'm assuming that you'll need to provide additional information to support your assertions. Stating that you have permission from the school administrator can't hurt either, but schools are such a sensitive issue, it might not help either.

But it was OK the first time for months no one said anything and a handful found it. I just added 2 more. To be on school grounds it'id have to be about 40 or 50 yards east of where they are. Is this one of those "opinion" things depending on who reads it?

It looks as if you archived your traditional cache and resubmitted it as a three stage multi cache. I would have to know more about where the other two stages are, but I feel that your reviewer made the correct decision. I don't think you will get the answer you want by posting here in the forum, it sounds like your cache is too close to school property and may attract attention of the school's security.

Link to comment

I've talked to our Administrator several times about its placement and he doesn't care at all. Who does one bring this to the attention to?

1. The reviewer's note on your unpublished cache submission is dated yesterday. I'm not sure how that translates to talking to "our Administrator" several times and that the "Administrator" doesn't care at all. Reviewers are not on duty 24/7; we are volunteers. Are you perhaps speaking of the school Administrator for Sacred Heart School?

 

2. I would have left a similar reviewer note on your page; if the cache elements are not "on" school property, they are "near" it and clearly visible from the school grounds.

 

Keystone,

 

Per your #1, He refers to his (what we call a Mayor) as the Town Administrator or "our Administrator".

Right, and/or it could be the school administrator. Either way, GS has a separate concern about whether a search at GZ could "spook" some parents.

Link to comment

Related Link:

 

Working with the Reviewer

 

I'm assuming you are resubmitting your Archived Traditional cache as a Multi cache. Looking at the maps does not support what you say. I'm assuming that you'll need to provide additional information to support your assertions. Stating that you have permission from the school administrator can't hurt either, but schools are such a sensitive issue, it might not help either.

But it was OK the first time for months no one said anything and a handful found it. I just added 2 more. To be on school grounds it'id have to be about 40 or 50 yards east of where they are. Is this one of those "opinion" things depending on who reads it?

It looks as if you archived your traditional cache and resubmitted it as a three stage multi cache. I would have to know more about where the other two stages are, but I feel that your reviewer made the correct decision. I don't think you will get the answer you want by posting here in the forum, it sounds like your cache is too close to school property and may attract attention of the school's security.

 

It's a shame you archived the original. It had 2 favs in the short time it's been around.

Link to comment

Our reviewer has rejected at least 1 cache that was across from a school. No, it was not on school property. The point is, you don't want concerned parents calling the police because pedophiles are poking around in the bushes across from a school.

 

Wouldn't the same concerns be raised by parents at playgrounds in public parks, miles from schools? Yet those caches still seem to be listed.

Not exactly. Security concerns are infinitely higher around schools these days than around park playgrounds. Just pick up a newspaper on any random day.

 

--Larry

 

But a parent sitting on a bench while little Suzy or Jimmy plays on the swing set will be equally worried seing a grown man poking around the bushes whether it is at a school or a playground.

 

If GS is concerned about a cacher poking around a school, why are they not concered about a cacher poking around the playground?

 

I saw a nice small park recently. A playground takes up most of the space. Nice park, but I wouldn't put a cache there even if GS okayed it. Why? Cachers would have incidents with parents, and the cache would be muggled by inquisitive parents and/or children. There's always another place.

Link to comment

How close are these allowed to be to a school or church? 200 Ft.? 300?

 

This is a good question that I'd like to see clearly answered :)

 

I don't think there can be a clear answer as there are other variables besides distance.

 

I have a cache that is relatively close to a school to took a few rounds of back and forth between my reviewer before it was published. In this case, there is a "park" that appears to be an extension of the playground behind but the maps that the reviewer had available didn't show the property boundary, and just looking at satellite views it would appear that the cache was much closer to the school boundaries than it actually was. The cache was on the far side of the park from the school in a heavily wooded area. Much of that area was used as a disc golf course. Someone could search for the cache for hours and nobody at the school or a parent dropping or picking up their child from school would ever know it. Theoretically, someone going to find the cache with no common sense whatsoever, could walk through the school grounds to get to GZ so I also added suggested parking coordinates which was close to trail head which allow someone to enter the woods beyond the view of the school as well. It's the same general areas where people that use the disc golf course use.

The OP has mentioned that "it was never questioned before". There's a few problems with that.

 

First, as was the case for the cache I hid, it *was* questioned by the reviewer and only after working with the reviewer and explaining how the property boundaries were set, and the physical (visible) barrier that existed, was the cache published. When looking at a previously existing cache you're not going to see the discussion an CO might have had with the reviewer prior to publication.

 

Secondly, there is the no precedence guideline:

 

"Please be advised that there is no precedent for placing geocaches. This means that the past publication of a similar geocache in and of itself is not a valid justification for the publication of a new geocache."

 

It doesn't matter if there was a cache published which appears to be identical in almost every way. That's not going to get your cache published.

 

Finally, sometimes a cache will get published which has guideline violations simply because it slipped by the reviewer. Once a cache is published, it could be active for years without any complaints. People don't want to be labeled a "cache cop" and many don't care if a cache violates guidelines once they've found it.

Link to comment

I have a cache that is relatively close to a school to took a few rounds of back and forth between my reviewer before it was published. In this case, there is a "park" that appears to be an extension of the playground behind but the maps that the reviewer had available didn't show the property boundary, and just looking at satellite views it would appear that the cache was much closer to the school boundaries than it actually was. The cache was on the far side of the park from the school in a heavily wooded area. Much of that area was used as a disc golf course. Someone could search for the cache for hours and nobody at the school or a parent dropping or picking up their child from school would ever know it. Theoretically, someone going to find the cache with no common sense whatsoever, could walk through the school grounds to get to GZ so I also added suggested parking coordinates which was close to trail head which allow someone to enter the woods beyond the view of the school as well. It's the same general areas where people that use the disc golf course use.

Here is a great example of how to work cooperatively with your reviewer. Sounds like the right answer was reached.

Link to comment

Doesn't help the image of men much that so many of the responses include reference to "some male walking around", "mom & tots bothered by some guy acting...." and such. FEMALES commit crimes -even like these- too!

I can say that where these are/were, they are not in any vicinity that would scare mommy & little jenny. What lacks today (speaking as society in general goes) is something that used to be called good judgment & common sense. While you don't go putting one right in someone's front yard or just outside the security fence at Area 51 in Nevada :) using common sense while searching needs to be done too. I've read other posts about "we decided to wait until all the kids & parents were gone....". Well....?? Ahh, if someone is THAT overly proactive then they'd just come back at night after school hours, early in the morning or better on weekends. I read about 1 on here in the last couple days to the extent of "....there were security around because of a local event. Can we still look for it?" (or something to that extent). 1 of the responses was, to put it short, wait & come back afterwards. Simple enough, ain't it? The original is/was the closest to the area of issue -and that was found by a handful of people since early Aug.- which is/was next to a pavilion. So what if someone was sitting at that public park? The newly added 2 about 200+ feet roughly, in front of it, and about 75 or 100 ft. behind the original. None of which locations are going to attract attention -unless people are paranoid about citizens being in a public park. In fact, there is a driveway split in 2....1 going right to the picnic/pavilion area, the other going behind it in the vicinity of #3.

Not that it would help anyway, but this is a community where, in the last 40+ years I could count the # of things worse than a speeding ticket on less than 2 hands. An area where everyone knows, or at least recognizes- everyone. In fact, people take short cuts across that playground to the park -even during recess- and if anyone DOES do anything, they wave to you. A bit different than putting one in the middle of the city in a similar set up.

What about "nano regular"? That one is/was in a park that is CRAWLING with kids all the time because of the newly added water park (or whatever it's called). No one denied that & no one ever came up to me while I was checking it (every couple days) telling me I was scaring anyone, nor have any police ever been there because of people looking around.

There apparently is a newer one further back from mine in that same park which, I believe there was a note saying something like; "don't go at night. People tend to get nervous about flashlights in the area". Well, then duh, don't look for that one at night. (Not to mention there is another kiddie area back that far.)

To me, and from other posts I've read here, this one is being taken out of context with its location. No one's ever complained about anyone stalking anyone in this park.

Talking about parks, the swings & slide & such I refer to before near #2 is WAY towards the front of the park being questioned. The pavilion & washrooms & horse arena & announcer's stand sit WAY behind it.

So where praytell do I get in touch with the guy that reviewed this? If I go and pace this out to get a decent measurement would THAT help if they get put back?

Edited by jfpinell
Link to comment

So where praytell do I get in touch with the guy that reviewed this? If I go and pace this out to get a decent measurement would THAT help if they get put back?

 

The appropriate place to discuss this is in reviewer notes on the cache page.

 

Yelling about it in the forum is not going to get you anywhere.

 

Have you read the cache placement guidelines? That would help too.

Link to comment

OP I think you may misunderstand the purpose some of the guidelines, they deal with managing the perception of geocachers and geocaches to land managers and the general public. It is important for the longevity of geocaching as a whole to consider the perceptions of the general public.

You may want to see if your local government has a web version of the county clerks office, that way you can get real data on who owns or manages a specific plot of land.

Link to comment

So where praytell do I get in touch with the guy that reviewed this? If I go and pace this out to get a decent measurement would THAT help if they get put back?

Your reviewer provided her direct email address in the log she left on your cache page. You could email her at that address, or you could post a log on your cache page. Because your listing is currently disabled, you will need to enable the page again to be sure that your reviewer sees your log. She does not have your page on her watchlist.

 

To help you out and save you from retyping everything, I've given your reviewer a link to this forum thread.

 

Google Maps have a map scale at the bottom, so going back and pacing the distances out isn't necessary. I wanted to save you the trouble.

 

You can also exercise your appeal rights if you are unhappy with your reviewer's answer. Information about Appeals can be found here.

Link to comment

You may want to see if your local government has a web version of the county clerks office, that way you can get real data on who owns or manages a specific plot of land.

Trust me.....I know that area like the back of my hand after being here 40+ years. :)

But with that official information you can make sure that you and your reveiwer are in the same page.

Link to comment

So where praytell do I get in touch with the guy that reviewed this? If I go and pace this out to get a decent measurement would THAT help if they get put back?

Your reviewer provided her direct email address in the log she left on your cache page. You could email her at that address, or you could post a log on your cache page. Because your listing is currently disabled, you will need to enable the page again to be sure that your reviewer sees your log. She does not have your page on her watchlist.

 

To help you out and save you from retyping everything, I've given your reviewer a link to this forum thread.

 

Google Maps have a map scale at the bottom, so going back and pacing the distances out isn't necessary. I wanted to save you the trouble.

 

You can also exercise your appeal rights if you are unhappy with your reviewer's answer. Information about Appeals can be found here.

I'm not sure if that's what I just did but I finally found that "send us an e-mail" area.

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...