Bridges, "Rock and Roll" (GC19FHX), "Handy Relief" (GC19NF1)

[addisonbr]

[Tatanka49]

I'm glad you made this posting. I was hoing to do it just now, but see you did it first.

The strange thing about this cache is that there is lots of controversy about it, but there are only two DNF's .. one of them being my own. I walked that bridge for 20 minutes. I went back later and tried again. There is only pne place where I think it may be, and if it is, it's not a 2/1 as he has posted. I think the 'Rock" may mean the pebbles UNDER the bridge and the 'Roll' may be the mechanism that pulls this bridge into the open position. This is all about 5 feet under the roadway. I looked for the 'ladder' but if it's there, it's in a place where I wouldn't want to be. I am sure it is very illegal to be down under the bridge. The areas around the bridge are fenced off. Fences mean...Stay out!. This is supposed to be a family sport and no one is supposed to get hurt or arrested finding a cache.

Location on this bridge (about 100 feet long) I could almost see, but I could not see putting it on say the QueensBorough Bridge. There is Stage 1 of a multi on the Brooklyn Bridge, but you just have to copy down info from a sign. I think that is a good alternative to actual bridge placements. Lets face it, to do geocaching, you do look 'suspicious' especially in city settings. I got a request to move a cache near the Arthur Ashe stadium in Queens because although it was on the outside of an ivy covered fence, I was still too close for comfort for the terrorist wary police. This is one reason I do not support GC.com's ban on Virtuals. You lose some very interesting sites, without compromising security.

Yes, magnetics on phone booths or on the backs of Coke machines are on the 'edge' of legality...but they are within public reach. If a cache is hidden BELOW a bridge in the mechanism's of that bridge, it's a different story. If you follow the "But it's ina telephone booth" argument, why not place it inside the telephone exchange building and sneak in the back door?

I've reported 2 caches so far as being in problem locations. I was 'upheld' on one (a cacher who is no longer active had one placed in Manhattan where the only access was up a rickity staircase 4 blocks away, behind a fence that said "No Tresspassing". The other was a lamp hide in a parking lot in Michigan where it said "Parking for Ford Employee's only" on the grounds of their assembly plant. That one it said, is generally kn own to be an 'open' lot and 'everyone' knew that you could drikve in their even if you were not a Ford employee. But I don't live in Michigan and I didn't know that. I still think the decisoon was wrong, but hey, I don't write the rules.

Admins keep their identity secret. I suppose with good reason. I've been told I know NY Admin...but I have no idea who it is. I also know OReviewer--as many of you do. (look at the name and you'll know right away) Ben makes no secret of the fact that he is a reviewer and openly discusses rules and problems with people. I think the transparency is good.

I've had my say. Now let's go out and have SOMEBODY find that Rock and Roll and Union Street bridge caches. And let's find out if it is in a legal or illegal spot.

[halijusapa]

They may be "illegal", but I have heard of plenty of other cache listings in other parts of the country on bridges and it seems as long as there's ample warnings (i.e. no kids, dangerous) and nobody is suing over it, it's kind of a "don't ask, don't tell" thing.

I hope it doesn't turn fats277 away from the game. He (she?) seems to be trying to add hides in Brooklyn, where there aren't too many and his profile is interesting in that he seems to have a SEVEN year hiatus from caching and suddenly come back......

[Tatanka49]

I was there again today. If it's ON the bridge or surrounding area, I see no problem. But if it's UNDER the bridge, then I do have a problem. The ladders are old and shaky and you have to be pretty agile to even get at them. I also DNF'd on Union Street. I didn't have a GPS with me (well I did, but no coords in it) but tried to find it based on the hint alone. Right after I finished and was driving away, a bridge keeper came out and looked where he saw me and finding nothing unusual, went back inside.

[peeves79]

Its funny I am trying to access the cache pages for both of them to get more info on the matter but can't get to it. Not even an old archived page should have coords and old logs but nada.

[peeves79]

Should we, Metro NY geocaching society, contact NYC DOT to ask them what their take is on geocaching. I just did a general search on the NYC DOT website and got no hits. Just an idea

[Tatanka49]

The 'Rock and Roll' and the 'Handy Relief' caches have been "retracted" -- Read the posting from NY Admin below. I was able to get this because I had them on my watchlist.

I am glad that Fats277 is trying to add caches, but I am also unhappy that he is going against the rules. I checked the 'guidelines' page of GC.com and it clearly states that there are no 'precedences'. Some caches that were placed wrongly have been grandfathered. Don't assume that they would be approved again.

I do not want to deal with DOT either officially or unofficially. The rules say to stay off bridges and I concur. We don't need an agency looking over our shoulder each time we set a new cache. There are plenty of places to put new caches...especially micros. On both of those bridges, I found at least a half dozen spots that are not on (or under) those bridges that would be acceptable locations. IF those caches were under the bridges, the rating of 2 stars definitely don't apply. This is the type of activity--perceived or not--that gives GC a bad name in some circles. We have to reinforce the positive, family attributes rather than supporting those with slightly illegal tendencies. If Fats gets back to NY Admin with the permissions granted, and they feel that the location is safe, then all the power to him. Until then, I have to support NY Adm.


Log Date: 3/2/2008
Listing Retracted

Rock and Roll by fats277 (GC19FHX)
Handy Relief by fats277 (GC19NF1)


By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location. If and when a situation arises suggesting the cache may have been placed without permission we will then pursue the permission issue.

I am retracting both above caches until the cache owner can confirm he has permission to place each cache in its respective location. A note should be added to each cache page indicating it was placed with permission and include the title of the person granting permission. Retracting the listing will also prevent its continued use as a messaging system. If you wish to discuss these caches please feel free to utilize the Groundspeak, LIGO or other forums.

Once permission has been obtained and the cache pages edited as indicated above please email me at newyorkadmin@gmail.com with the Name, title and contact information of the person granting permission. Upon receipt I'll be happy to review and republish your caches providing they meet the current guidelines.

[halijusapa]

I was just noting that the admins seem to often let these go, otherwise I actually fully agree with you (Tatanka) and NYAdmin. I for one certainly would never hunt for a cache "under a bridge" or similarly unsafe spot, but then again I probably wouldn't go for one on the side of a cliff but I think that if someone wants one there for people who enjoy/are skilled at rockclimbing, etc. then so be it.

But of course, we don't need a "black eye" with the NYC DOT, police, etc. and in the case of something like under a bridge where it could become a liability/public safety issue it makes sense that one shouldn't have a cache there. Just want to clarify and all.......

I wonder if fats277 had these issues back in 2001, his/her 2 hides from then are long archived....

[addisonbr]

One reason the local reviewer system works well for geocaching is that different regions of the country have different concerns.

If New York authorities are skittish about geocaches on bridges, even relatively minor bridges, I think we and the New York Admin have a lot to gain by respecting that. I would much rather play nice with New York authorities over things they really care about (caches on bridges, caches on federal mailboxes, etc.) so that they'll continue to play nice with us over things that they don't (caches in city parks, magnetic caches attached to minor municipal property, etc.).

To that end, I hope for my own sake and my own ability to play this game that other cachers will respect the city's guidelines and New York Admin's efforts to represent them.

[Bonick0]

I agree with NYAdmin on this. No need to start suspicious activity that might lead to the shut down of the whole game. Although it might be helpful to find out what the city rules are about cache hiding. I know NY State parks require permission, what about the NYC Parks Department or the DOT?

[Tatanka49]

I started to approach the subject withe the Queens Park Commissioner when she visited my school last year. I didn't come out and ask but I did mention to her that I was a geocacher and she said said something like "Find any good ones lately" So she knows but didn't say anything like -- "Oh those damn caches" I ran into a Parks employee when caching in Staten Island last month and told him what I was doing. He said "no problem" nad even told me about a nearby cache that he tried to rescue when the owner abandoned it.

I do have a friend who is an adminsitrator with NYS DEC and she is adiment against caches and removed them when they were on 'her' parklands. I think she has warmed up a bit since you can get a permit.

[addisonbr]

Central Park is geocache friendly. The Director of Operations in March 2005 asked that no listings be allowed in Strawberry Fields because that area is particularly sensitive, but was supportive of responsibly maintained caches in other areas of the park. (I got this information from New York Admin a few weeks ago, (s)he has been helpful regarding an ambitious Central Park multi I am planning.)

Positive relationships like these are part of why I place a high value on staying on the good side of the authorities.

[fats277]

[C-Ville Elite]

Well said, Fats. I had a miserable time getting my Summer on the Hudson cache posted, and I've had several other unique cache ideas shut down since then. It seems that as geocaching becomes more popular, it also becomes more standardized, rule-driven, and tastes more and more like low-fat, plain yogurt. I'm not complaining about the current caches in NYC- I love 'em. But I think we should be able to push the envelope a bit more. If you can get something really unique and challenging past the NY Admin, I commend you. So let's break out the scuba gear and tetanus boosters!

[Merge!]