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

[addisonbr]

Summer on the Hudson is one of my favorite area caches, bummer that it was a challenge to get listed.

I think sometimes there is a disconnect between a challenging cache and a problem cache. It is a drag when the admins assume at first that a challenging cache is a problem. But it's also fair to keep in mind that the admins have their own "admins" that they have to deal with, the kind that carry guns. And I think that as a caching community, as interesting and unthreatening and cache-worthy as we find bridges, we really have no true conception of how sensitive "admins with guns" treat even the most minor bridges. It's not even remotely similar to a cache placed on private property, or a park worker getting upset about permits, or a cache that requires somewhat dangerous rock climbing or a rappel line that many of us would be unqualified to hunt for. The worst that can happen authority-wise to an individual in any of those situations is, basically, nothing.

Contrast this with what happened on the Rainbow Bridge a couple of years ago. Most definitely not a major bridge, not a terrorism target, etc. etc. etc. It's just an insignificant little span in Nowhere, Idaho that nobody cares about.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/boise/emmett/el ... bridge.jpg

Long story short, when the authorities became aware of the cache, they completely freaked. They shut about 15 miles of the highway down for a few hours until they ultimately got everything sorted out, and wound up arresting the guy who placed it there for violating a bunch of laws that they claimed applied (he did avoid jail time in the end though). It's not geocaching-related, but the guys who placed the Cartoon Network advertising signs under Boston bridges were arrested afterwards as well, although I believe they also avoided jail.

The point isn't that these are sensible responses, or that the story are true parallel with anything that has happened in NYC geocaching. I am in complete agreement that these are totally ridiculous responses. The point is that admins have figured out that people not connected with the game who carry guns seem to care about bridges A LOT and that these folks are perfectly willing (eager?) to respond disproportionately - even for really stupid bridges that we all know nobody, but nobody, cares about. They treat these situations as humorlessly as they would someone waving a plastic gun near the presidential motorcade - which is to say with maximum response and zero risk. And so regardless of how challenging (or easy) a cache is, the admins want to steer clear of those problems. I can respect where they're coming from on that. I think this is why the caches in the subject line were retracted rather than archived - I've never seen another retraction before or since. Every other cache I've seen that later turned out to be in violation of guidelines has simply been archived, but in this case I think GC.com wants there to be as little evidence as possible that these were ever here. It's not that the admins think that caches on bridges are too dangerous. It simply shows how seriously they take the "admins with guns" opinion on the matter.

I also want challenging caches, and don't care a bit if there are listed caches I think are too dangerous for me to try. Frankly, if there aren't caches too hard for me, the scale is probably not calibrated correctly. My main concern is working to make sure that the admins don't treat every challenging or difficult cache like a problem cache (which can be a frustrating process), and to help other cachers understand the difference as well, to avoid all of the frustration and anger.

There are alternatives to the increasingly mainstream GC.com listing site as well. I don't think that caches that are considered big problems by the "admins with guns" are likely to be approved even by these alternatives, but I would venture to guess that caches that don't get approved by GC.com because they are too challenging would have a much easier time getting approved by these "old school" throwback sites. People should check out terracaching.com and navicache.com and see if there's something there that they like.

C-Ville, I'm intrigued by your cache ideas that have been shot down, I'm shooting you a private message now.

[fats277]

I get the bridge thing, and I get the whole mainstream deal - what I don't get is that if this "game" has grown into a "community" how come the alerter didn't contact me personally first, before going to the Admin.

I def. give respect the Admin, moreso if they actually live in the city, but this never had to be an issue.

If I was properly educated as to bridge concerns by my fellow cacher, I would have removed them and replaced them down the road. Instead it became a major dustup and pain in the butt. I mean, the reason I stopped caching was b/c of 9/11. I didn't want to be placing plastic boxes in the city at that point. So, I get the fundementals, I just didn't know little bridges fell under these laws.

Any ideas?

[majormajor42]

Thank you Fats277 for your recent downtown additions. I was one for four but the one I found was near City Hall and with plenty of LEOs in the distance. Kinda made it one of the cooler micros that I have done, even though it is really innocent as far as this topic goes. This is "Hats Off". somebody please go for it, I've been the LTF since I FTF'd it two weeks ago. hope it is still there. (Hey, look at that! Ellapops JUST found it!)

[addisonbr]

[fats277]

Actually the caches went missing this past week, and I was asking, as basically a new cacher again, what the new policies and theories are with this type of thing.

[Tatanka49]

Hey guys...this is really great.

Frankly, I was concerned about the dynamic daring doo of Fats coming into the community. I had been in touch with him once or twice by private e-mail, and I found him quite personable (sorry Fats, but it's true). Fats was there at the start. I tried a few of his Prospect Park caches that were since archived and are now back...to be tried again. Fats, were you a charter member? I am somewhat in awe of that group.

I think this forum was good for the community as well. I tried those bridge caches and did post DNF's with my opinions. Perhaps a higher difficulty rating and I would not have searched for them. I have found 2 others of his and I liked them both.

Urban caching is a whole different story than back woods caching. I have two families and a couple of other church members waiting to do some urban caching with me for an auction that they won last year. I can easily stroll 6 adults and 5 kids through Central Park. I can't do that on the Lower East Side where EVF and some others have some great caches. I found them first (although that Rosado one is still giving me troubles) and I am very glad that I won't be taking big groups, with kids to find them. Too many cars, sleazy people, litter, broken glass, etc.

All I ask Fats, is that when you do put out those 'terracaching-type' caches, is that the difficulty and terrain stars really match the levels. I know my limits and I hope others do as well.

We also heard from many lurkers on this topic. How about everyone chiming in more often?

And lets all be careful about what we say about each other...we are friends and colleagues. Let''s not ruin this community before it starts.

Hope to see you all at CITO, Staten Island, WWFM and Montauk.

John
(Facilitator)

[fats277]

I'll do a better job rating and attributing my caches.

Thanks for the patience.

Fats277

[lekogm]

when it comes to rating caches, as with anything caching related, it's a two way street. i've placed caches which i thought were only one star caches and i got told that a one star cache was supposed to be handicap accessible. so with that said, i had to reevaluate my caches and bump the ones not ADA compliant up to a star and a half or something. i've also posted notes on caches and sent emails to cache owners saying that their cache is in violation of what i understand the rules of geocaching.com to be and that the cache owner should look at their cache hide. mainly i do this on caches that have trails that are dangerous like where you can fall and hit your head on some rocks and land in a river or they outright say, "No Tresspassing," or something like, "Area Closed to Public - Dangerous Trails." of course i could be completely wrong about these caches but, when i went looking for them it brought me into areas that clearly are not safe or are off limits to the public.

also there is no such thing as back woods caching in nyc. i've introduced my friends to geocaching and have used caches in central park to do it as i felt that they would be less likely to have people wandering around as it's the biggest park on the island, but sadly i was wrong and we had to wait for like 20 minutes to go to where the ubercache is placed, which is in "the woods," just because of the human factor. i've gone caching where i grew up and i've spent hours hiking trails and the only people i've run into are fellow cachers searching the same thing as me. just remember, in new york, you're never alone.

[fats277]

Perhaps the establishment of an ad hoc additional Urban Cache rating system could be useful. It could describe anything like the difficulty of the urban placement (3/5 for a nano made out of a rusty drainpipe) , or the surroundings (5/5 for a bad neighborhood), plus maybe a back-to-nature rating (5/5 for Central Park, 3/5 for Tompkins Square Park and street caches 1/5).

From now on, I'm going to add a urban cache rating or at least write if I think it's suitable for new cachers, young cachers, timid cachers, etc.

I am still working on a plan to hide a 5 gallon spackle bucket in Manhattan. I want to get it sponsored by Kid Robot and have it filled with those cool japanese style toys. That one will be good for kids, and adults too, if I can figure it out.

[buttaskotch]

[fats277]

Well, commercialized only for them - anyone remember the Planet of the Apes thing?

What I meant was - see if I could get some cool stuff from them to put in there - I don't mean that it would be like a promotion or something....

I don't imagine I'd even put the name of the company on the cache...just the goodies inside.

[Bonick0]

I think Urban Caching rating is a great idea. I'm personally terrible at it - no stealth skills at all. Unless it's an obvious magnetic micro, or I'm out at 4am, I will probably not even try searching in fear of ruining the cache or getting caught. Give me a hiking trail and a cleverly hidden match holder handing in a tree, and I'll be completely happy.