Gaming the system

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:27 am

Yeah, especially when someone created a pdf version that is a fillable form so I can copy and paste the more common fields.

I have heard of DNR forms not being submitted to parks and know this directly as they asked me when I was there handing mine in if I knew this person. I gave them the person's number and told them to contact the reviewer directly to get them removed. So far they have yet to do anything.

I think people don't report them bad caches because they don't want to look like troublemakers or end up somehow in a fight with the hider even though if they go to the reviewer directly no info should be given out. What steps are taken when someone submits a bad cache? Is there a process the reviewers make people prove that they aren't faking the report just to mess with someone?

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:17 am

kc9gbo wrote:

I think people don't report them bad caches because they don't want to look like troublemakers or end up somehow in a fight with the hider even though if they go to the reviewer directly no info should be given out. What steps are taken when someone submits a bad cache? Is there a process the reviewers make people prove that they aren't faking the report just to mess with someone?

My normal process is to disable the listing and give the CO a chance to correct the situation.

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:24 am

please remember that, for the most part, the DNR does not maintain Parks, that would be the Park and Rec Depts and they may have different reporting requirements and perhaps fees involved with placements (or they may not allow placements at all).

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:47 pm

State parks?

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:49 pm

Labrat in my post I meant DNR regulated lands, i.e state parks and forests.

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:10 pm

Ah, yeah, I guess the State Parks are DNR lands.
Brain not functioning on all cylinders...

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:32 am

Ha! That's what I was going to put as I posted in the morning before I had my caffeine.

Staying on topic, I think it is in the games best interest of course to report issues like those spelled out in the original post. But, sadly I think alot of us don't due to not wanting to cause trouble.

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:03 pm

If I see something amiss, I will say it, but I really haven't seen many in my 2000+ finds...

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:25 pm

Seriously? I have seen lots of caches on or under bridges. If I were to report them all I would be the most hated cacher in central WI

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:54 pm

Oh, I have a problem. Under a bridge, depending upon the terrain, not so much. I have a favorite that is in the storm drain under a median. In an urban setting, this is the best!!!
The Psycho Urban Caches are the most incredible and I have yet to any of do them, I say, if it is in a public right of way, let the cacher beware!

See this one...http://coord.info/GCQ8YA

Joined: 2009-06-05 Posts: 2123 Location: Menominee, MI

Take a look at the Psycho Urban Cache series in the Baltimore area as well. Insane!

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 9:44 pm

BigJim60 wrote:

Seriously? I have seen lots of caches on or under bridges. If I were to report them all I would be the most hated cacher in central WI

Where did bridges come from? I thought I missed something, but went back to page 1 and can't find anything. Did I miss something in this thread?

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 11:39 pm

CodeJunkie wrote:

BigJim60 wrote:

Seriously? I have seen lots of caches on or under bridges. If I were to report them all I would be the most hated cacher in central WI

Where did bridges come from? I thought I missed something, but went back to page 1 and can't find anything. Did I miss something in this thread?

Caches are not to be allowed under bridges per GC.com regulations. I think it's somewhere in between the high lines and rail road tracks section.

There was a cache just west of here that was under some big rocks of a bridge that crossed the Togatic River. It literally was a bridge to nowhere. It was a town road that turned into a 4wheeler trail. There were a couple of cabins down the road. Somehow the WI DOT found out about it and contacted a reviewer to have it archived. And again. it wasn't under the bridge, it was next to the bridge abutment 30 feet from the actual bridge under some rip rap rock.

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:49 am

Looking at the bridge section of GC's guidelines it read:

Cache is problematic due to its proximity to a public structure including and not limited to highway bridges, dams, government buildings, military bases, schools, hospitals, airports and other such locations.

Does problematic also include the overload of guardrail and signpost caches (parking at or near a highway/road and/or next to one searching)? And I also see some confusion in that it specifies "highway" bridge. Does this make rural road, snowmobile, etc. O.K.

A lot can be read in to this rule. I'm going to go back and scour the rules more but I would like some opinions.

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 12:37 pm

The way I read that language is it might not be published if there's a problem with the location, not a flat out ban.