Jump to content

Caches Inside Airports


Followers 0

Recommended Posts

I recently placed a cache inside a major public airport, and am appealing to have it approved (it was turned down by the approver). It's an offset magnetic-keyholder type of cache, with the coords zeroing out at the airport entrance. Clues in the name and description are used to figure out just exactly where the cache is located inside the airport. Some kind of "terrorist threat" rule is being used to deny this cache. I would like your opinions on placing micros INSIDE airports. Good idea or not? :P:P Would you hunt for one if you were flying into an airport that had a micro in it? Why or why not? :P Do you think this whole "war on terrorism" has gone too far, now affecting geocaching? :P Should these types of caches be looked at individually, instead of allowing a blanket policy to deny its placement?

 

Some of my thoughts on this subject:

1. Cachers looking for these would HAVE TO BE ticketed passengers, and pass through security, so they are obviously not any kind of threat to the airport. The micro cache had to pass through security as well (prior to being placed) and so it was not perceived as a threat either. What safer place could you ask for to place a cache in? Contents are only a logsheet, no contraband (obviously).

2. Looking for a micro INSIDE the airport with alot of people around is a whole lot less suspicious than wandering back and forth by yourself along the outside perimeter of the runway fenceline.

 

Your opinions, please, whether they be "for" or "against" this type of micro, I would like to hear all arguments.

Thank you.

Link to comment

I think in todays climate the concept is not a wise one. Trying to explain what you are doing to an overzealous security guard or a nervous, nearby passenger would be too much.

 

And in order to get access the way you describe, youwould have to pay for a ticket, so it's kinda commercial, though I understand your intent isn't so.

Edited by New England n00b
Link to comment

Yes: They should be looked at individually; as you pointed out, everyone goes through security, so denying it on security grounds is unfounded.

 

No: Personally, I don't like the idea of caching inside buildings. That sounds like a different type of game/sport altogether. Outside, it would be called orienteering; inside, I have no clue, but buildings which cut off GPS signals just don't appeal to me when geocaching. I like this game/sport because it takes me outside and gets me out from the indoors.

 

If you are intent on your cache, I wonder if you can incorporate it into a multi or puzzle.

Link to comment
Do you think this whole "war on terrorism" has gone too far, now affecting geocaching? :P

Um, please tell me you were kidding with that line.

 

As to airports, consider that there was an item in the news today about prosecutors pushing for jail time for some guy just because he left a bag (with harmless stuff in it) unattended while he went for a smoke. They argue that he should have known that this item left there would cause a major disruption and evacuation of the airport, including all of the associated costs. Given that, I think it's too great of a risk for something as trivial as adding another micro to the rolls.

 

If I were the approver, I would ask for a copy of your written permission from the managing agency of the property, per the cache placement guidelines. Would that be the end of it?

Link to comment

I like the idea. Given how much time one has to wait for a flight these days it would be great to have something to do besides eat, spend money on tacky trinkets or read for so long that the snoring and drooling starts. :P

 

HOWEVER--I think the risk of a cache being misunderstood/-interpreted is huge, and why risk that much stress to anyone? I think the best idea is a virtual or a multistage virtual. That way we can cache, the muggles can rest easy and none of us have to wipe the drool from our shoulders. :P

 

Maybe a new version of a cache could be developed?

Link to comment

Official rule that tells me this may be disapproved:

Cachers looking for these would HAVE TO BE ticketed passengers.

Caches that Solicit aren't allowed. Examples include for-profit locations that require an entrance fee.

 

Unofficial rule that tells me you need permission from the land manager:

An airport fails the frisbee rule. I wouldn't and have never seen someone playing frisbee in an airport. I'm sure someone somewhere has, but it isn't normal. I would expect someone official to come by and tell people to stop it. But it might be a fun experiment to find out...

Edited by bons
Link to comment

Lets see....

Team 360 thinks the no caches in security areas doesn't apply to him.

Team 360 thinks the no caches that solicit without permission from gc.com doesn't apply to him.

 

What about the rules about maintaining your caches? do you work there? Are you going to buy a airline ticket to check it every time there is a DNF?

 

What about the rules about vacation caches? What airport is this? Is it local to you, or just someplace you were passing thru?

 

Despite some bonehead moves in the past, you seem like a smart enough guy... did you REALLY think this is a good idea, or just a way to rile things up?

Part of me doubts you even placed the cache, just submitted the idea as a cache knowing you would be turned down, so you could have something to whine about.

Link to comment

I think it's a poor choice for a cache. As someone that used to do a heavy amount of air travel, the last thing I'd want to see today is someone fumbling around a telephone (or other object) searching for some magnetic key holder.

 

I think a less security sensitive area would be more appropriate for that type of cache or as someone else posted, some relevant and meaningful virtual. As for having to go through security, I think that the cache should be located in the general area that anyone could access without a ticket. You could even make it a multi-stop virtual. Hopefully the cacher doesn't have a bunch of kids and luggage to drag around with him/her.

Link to comment
Lets see....

Team 360 thinks the no caches in security areas doesn't apply to him.

Team 360 thinks the no caches that solicit without permission from gc.com doesn't apply to him.

 

Wrong and wrong again, Mopar, as usual...I simply asked what everyone thought about the idea, I did not say I was above the rules.

Don't you have anything to contribute here?

Link to comment
Lets see....

Team 360 thinks the no caches in security areas doesn't apply to him.

Team 360 thinks the no caches that solicit without permission from gc.com doesn't apply to him.

 

Wrong and wrong again, Mopar, as usual...I simply asked what everyone thought about the idea, I did not say I was above the rules.

Don't you have anything to contribute here?

As usual, you already forgot what you said at the start of this thread:

I recently placed a cache inside a major public airport, and am appealing to have it approved (it was turned down by the approver).

You stated you are appealing to have it approved, even though it violates 2, maybe more, of the guidelines the rest of us have to follow when hiding our caches.

 

You still didn't answer how you would be able to maintain such a cache if it WAS approved, or where it is located.

Link to comment

Don't you have anything to contribute here?

Don't you? You consider your cache idea a contribution?

 

My contribution to this thread:

I've dealt with airport security twice in the last week. Both times me and members of my party were singled out for added security checks. I have to assume it was the GPS and geocaching related stuff. One person had a rock on the return trip, and was told THAT was a security risk (you could use it to bash someone over the head).

In a location where the mere fact of forgetting your bag, or uttering the wrong word (bomb) can send you to jail, searching for a cache is the ultimate bad idea. Unless of course you got permission to hide a cache there (HA, I crack myself up!).

Besides, if it's inside, and you don't need a GPS to find it, it's a letterbox, not a geocache. Go list it on the letterboxing site.

Link to comment
You still didn't answer how you would be able to maintain such a cache if it WAS approved, or where it is located.

Okay, that's the easy part. It's in the Portland airport, and since I have to fly up there at LEAST once a year (I have been through there twice since September already, taking care of the Plaque) it's no sweat for me to maintain. The logbook has enough room for 190 finders, more than enough room to carry it between visits.

Hey, no biggie if it's not approved after all. I just asked for your opinion on this type of cache, not what you thought about me. Everyone in here knows you will jump on every opportunity to take a shot at me, no matter what I post.

The cache approver has indicated to me that they want to retrieve the cache and get it out of there. Now to me, that's going too far, since I WILL probably list it on an alternative site.

Edited by TEAM 360
Link to comment

Well, there are plenty of caches located near airports. My inspiration for an airport cache:

 

PDX Airport Travel Bug Lounge

by Sparrowhawk

 

N 45° 34.240 W 122° 33.617 (WGS84)

 

In Oregon, United States [view map]

Hidden: 7/27/2003

Use waypoint: GCGHK6 (what's this?)

Make this page print-friendly (no logs)

 

This cache is inspired by the LAX travel bug airport cache known as Grand Central Station. This new cache features easy access for travelers, both bug and human, who are passing through Oregon's Portland Airport.

 

I've made this a relatively easy find close to PDX so that cachers who are traveling can stop by and pick up a Travel Bug and take it with them to a far off location.

 

If you are spending an hour or more waiting to change planes at the airport, you can get to this cache via MAX train for $1.25 and a bit of a walk.

 

Enjoy the planes that fly directly over your head, especially in the evenings. Walk back to active train station and head back to airport. Catch next plane. Relatively convenient for ya. :P

 

If you have more time than that while waiting for your plane, check out my PDX Airport T.B. Lounge Supplementary Page for other things to do and places to go instead of getting bored and stir-crazy inside an airport waiting room.

 

Don't seek this cache in the dead of night. You might freak out the cops.

Link to comment
You still didn't answer how you would be able to maintain such a cache if it WAS approved, or where it is located.

Okay, that's the easy part. It's in the Portland airport, and since I have to fly up there at LEAST once a year (I have been through there twice since September already, taking care of the Plaque) it's no sweat for me to maintain. The logbook has enough room for 190 finders, more than enough room to carry it between visits.

Hey, no biggie if it's not approved after all. I just asked for your opinion on this type of cache, not what you thought about me. Everyone in here knows you will jump on every opportunity to take a shot at me, no matter what I post.

The cache approver has indicated to me that they want to retrieve the cache and get it out of there. Now to me, that's going too far, since I WILL probably list it on an alternative site.

You fly there at least once a year.

The logbook has room for 190 names.

 

What you are overlooking is that this cache could easily go missing. Maintenance is not merely replacing the logbook, but also checking up on your cache if it appears to be missing.

 

I think it's a bad idea to place a cache in a high-security area. That goes for military bases also, as you must have to proper credentials to gain access.

Link to comment

I agree that a micro in the airport itself is going to be better than a box outside of the runway area which most likely would be approved. It's just todays geopolitical climate and we aren't ever going to get an airport cache approved.

 

Funny how after you talk about your plans for placing such a cache you get jumped for the difficulity in maintaining it. That looked more like a personal attack to me instead of one that dealt with the issue at hand.

 

But I'll bet ya a penny that there is currently a micro in the airport waiting to be picked up during your next visit isn't there? :P

Link to comment
Funny how after you talk about your plans for placing such a cache you get jumped for the difficulity in maintaining it.  That looked more like  a personal attack to me instead of one that dealt with the issue at hand.

If you were referring to my reply, no it was not a personal attack. I know 360 and think he has some great hides. He also has caches spread over a large area that he is able to maintain. (Arizona, Nevada, and Michigan come to mind)

 

However, none of those require anyone to purchase a plane ticket just to visit or maintain the cache. That is just one of the many obstacles preventing this cache from being approved. Others had already mentioned different reasons, I didn't want to just repeat what they were saying.

Edited by Team GPSaxophone
Link to comment
Well, there are plenty of caches located near airports. My inspiration for an airport cache:

 

PDX Airport Travel Bug Lounge

by Sparrowhawk

 

N 45° 34.240 W 122° 33.617 (WGS84)

 

Not really a good example. That cache is over a mile from the terminal, so it really is not close to the airport. It was originally located about 30 feet from the light rail line, but the police forced the owner to move it.

 

I can't believe someone could think it was Ok to put a cache of any type in an airport. Didn't the bomb squad get called to a cache in Disneyland that looked like a cell phone?

 

Please use some common sense.

Link to comment

I am already imagining someone coming across the cache and wondering what it is. In the alternative other people in the airport notice a peson retrieving the cache and think it seems suspicious. They call security. Security freaks and the airport is evacuated. Hundreds of people are angry and caching looks bad in the media. Plus you perhaps are arrested.

 

It just isn't a good idea, and I don't think it is a good idea to leave it there and list it on another site. Why risk damaging the sport as a whole? Not to mention risk getting in trouble yourself!

 

Also, there are the issues that it does not have airport permission, is commercial, and can't easily be maintained.

Link to comment

I actually thought this was a joke at first glance. I don't think this is a good idea in any way. There is a laundry list of reasons that this cache doesn't meet the guidelines for approval. I think most have been covered here, so I won't be redundant. While I like the idea of having something to do while waiting for a connecting flight, this cache will probably cause more problems than it is worth.

Link to comment

Just like adding a cache near a military facility, an airport would tend to cause alarm and suspicion if someone is acting "odd" and looking like they're hiding something...

 

AND airports tend to have every nook and cranny searched and/or cleaned, so it would probably be found and removed anyway.

Edited by SnowLeopard
Link to comment
AND airports tend to have every nook and cranny searched and/or cleaned, so it would probably be found and removed anyway.

Good point.

 

Or, the airport security can use it as a training exercise. "Okay, we've got a cach... er bomb hidden somewhere on a concourse. You've got 20 minutes to find it. GO!"

Link to comment

If this cache was denied because of the fact that it was located in an airport and that it has the potential to be considered a security risk, then it should clearly state that in the guidelines of gc.com...maybe it does already, but it needs to be clear and not vague. And if such caches do pose any sort of security risk or unneeded terrorism paranoia, then the grandfather rule should not apply either to such caches in these locations and they should be pulled. As many have said, why tarnish our beloved sport.

Link to comment

I fail to see what is unclear about the current written guidelines, which specifically mention airports. More people need to read them! Here is the relevant text from the Geocache Listing Requirements/Guidelines (with emphasis added):

 

Caches will be quickly archived if we see the following (which is not inclusive):

 

Caches on land maintained by the U.S. National Park Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges)

Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate.

Caches placed on archaeological or historical sites. In most cases these areas are highly sensitive to the extra traffic that would be caused by vehicles and humans.

Caches hidden in close proximity to active railroad tracks. In general we use a distance of 150 ft but your local area’s trespassing laws may be different. All local laws apply.

Caches near or on military installations.

Caches near or under public structures deemed potential or possible targets for terrorist attacks. These include but are not limited to highway bridges, dams, government buildings and airports.

 

There may be some exceptions. If your cache fits within one of the above areas, please explain in notes to the reviewer section of the cache page. For example, if you are given permission to place a cache on private property, indicate it in the notes for the benefit of both the approver and people seeking out the cache.

Edited by The Leprechauns
Link to comment

I think that it is not a good idea to hide a cache in an airport. We have seen recently with the Disney evacuation that small caches could be mistaken as something harmful. I'd imagine in an airport this effect could be magnified many times over. I think it'd be cool to seek caches in an airport, because God knows I spend enough time just sitting around in them, but the security concerns outweigh this, IMO.

 

--RuffRidr

Link to comment

Dang I can't believe you are still arguing this should be approved. Unless you're just doing it to intertain yourself.

 

#1 You have to pay for a ticket to find it.

 

#2 It's a inappropriate place for people to be looking for something hidden.

 

#3 Only visiting a cache once a year isn't very good care for it.

 

#4 NO VACATION CACHES

 

#5 Do you have permission?

 

#6 NO VACATION CACHES

 

#7 It SHOULD be common sense that an airport after Sept 11th isn't the place to be paying around.

 

Plus I would say that an airport isn't a virt. What is unusual and book worthy of an airport? I agree it would be cool to have caches in them to pass time while you're there, but I wouldn't think they are worthy of a virt or appropriate for a regular cache. Plus it should be in an area where anyone can get it. Not just someone pay $$$$ for a ticket.

Link to comment

Oh and this was placed, without approval and you can't just go back and retrieve it. Nicely done.

 

It's junk like this that will cause more restrictive rules by agencies if they hear about it. While some groups are working hard to get geocaching accepted, this is not something that needs to be taking place!

Link to comment

BAD IDEA! BAD BAD BAD.. NO, I'm not going to looking for it and get arrested for suspicious behaviour in an airport, just for a magnetic micro, no thanks, no way, no how. Go remove it, bad idea, what were you thinking!?!?!?! Besides who wants to hunt stuff inside?

 

:D:P:P:P:P:P

 

This is one of the most unbelievable questions yet.

Link to comment

Thoughts.

 

1) With permisison there is no issue.

2) Airports have displays, some of wich are worthy of a museum. Virtuals are approriate or they would not invite people to look at stuff.

3) The Frisbee rule is really only for the adequate permission test for a traditional cache. Virtuals, Webcams don't need it and permission makes it a moot point.

4) If it is a traditional then the frisbee rule kicks in and I suspect you go back to number 1.

Link to comment
Thoughts.

 

1) With permisison there is no issue.

2) Airports have displays, some of wich are worthy of a museum. Virtuals are approriate or they would not invite people to look at stuff.

3) The Frisbee rule is really only for the adequate permission test for a traditional cache. Virtuals, Webcams don't need it and permission makes it a moot point.

4) If it is a traditional then the frisbee rule kicks in and I suspect you go back to number 1.

and I really don't thing there is an airport manager in existence who will say yes to this.....

 

If he does, I won't be using that airport!!!!!

Link to comment
If it does get approved, make sure it doesn't look like a teddy bear! :P

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../06/ixhome.html

A plumber who left an unattended bag containing a teddy bear, some fruit and clothes in an airport lounge was jailed yesterday for causing a full-scale security alert."

 

"Magistrates sentenced Jose da Silva, 25, to 10 days under public nuisance laws."

 

"The airport was closed for three hours and 1,000 passengers and staff had to leave as an Army bomb disposal team investigated. Three incoming flights were diverted and 15 planes grounded."

 

"Howard Turner, the chairman of the bench, said while da Silva had not intended to cause the alert the offence was serious enough to warrant a prison sentence."

Link to comment
Thoughts.

 

1) With permisison there is no issue.

2) Airports have displays, some of wich are worthy of a museum.  Virtuals are approriate or they would not invite people to look at stuff.

3) The Frisbee rule is really only for the adequate permission test for a traditional cache.  Virtuals, Webcams don't need it and permission makes it a moot point.

4) If it is a traditional then the frisbee rule kicks in and I suspect you go back to number 1.

Since it is a physical cache, we are back to number 1, huh?

 

Even if it's never approved here, I would doubt even another (responsible) site would list it either. If it is marked "geocache" I suspect Jeremy will be the one getting a phone call asking for Team 360's contact info.

Like someone said, these areas get cleaned/checked VERY well, I suspect it will be found by security soon enough. Probably sooner then the hider can get back and remove it.

Edited by Mopar
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...