Gaming the system

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:38 pm

beezers958 wrote:

The way I read that language is it might not be published if there's a problem with the location, not a flat out ban.

As far as bridge go, the intent is not to get Homeland Security all riled up. So putting a cache on an interstate bridge would be kind of dumb, and could result in the bomb squad getting called out and probably would not get approved in the first place.

A bridge on an old single lane road out in the country is much less likely to be a terrorist target. Just use a little common sense, and think about what it will look like when people start crawling on the bridge looking for the cache. If it is an urban freeway bridge, probably not a good idea all around. Country road with no traffic, what would be the risk of it causing problems? If nil, then it might be a tad more reasonable.

z

Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:48 pm

The DOT prohibits caches on or under vehicular bridges. Basically they prohibit ANYTHING from being attached or placed under the bridges that they inspect.

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:00 am

I'm 99% my cache isn't an issue, given GC specifies highway bridges and the bridge in question isn't a DOT monitored one, but in an attempt to be in compliance, should I pull mine from a covered bridge on a hiking trail?

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 3:08 pm

I am no long time veteran of this sport but I look at it in a worst case scenario. Someone sees a non stealthy cacher messing around under a bridge, looking for a cache. They see them placing a container up under a support. The onlooker knows nothing about the activity and calls the police and reports the suspicious activity. The police check it out and find a container. Do they call the bomb squad?

Why let it get to this point. Can't the cache be placed elsewhere? It may be legal to place it in many cases, but so often we don't look at the what if. Debate all you want, but I don't want to lose my ammo can. Geocache logo on the outside "might" help.

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:21 pm

Ashen15 wrote:

I'm 99% my cache isn't an issue, given GC specifies highway bridges and the bridge in question isn't a DOT monitored one, but in an attempt to be in compliance, should I pull mine from a covered bridge on a hiking trail?

By vehicular, they mean an Automobile bridge. Hiking trails, bike trails, snowmobile bridges, pedestrian walkways, etc, do not fall under this DOT issue. Note that they claim they inspect all vehicular bridges in the state.

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:28 pm

Team Deejay wrote:

By vehicular, they mean an Automobile bridge. Hiking trails, bike trails, snowmobile bridges, pedestrian walkways, etc, do not fall under this DOT issue. Note that they claim they inspect all vehicular bridges in the state.

And they do, last month at our town board meeting, we recieved a letter from the DOT with maintaince issues that needed to be done on our bridges and (Glorified Culverts that are rather large and could be considered bridges) so they do inspect all bridges even in BFE

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:29 pm

BFE? Bright Future Everytown? wink

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:33 pm

BFE ( Middle of Nowhere) not really kid friendly

but if you want you can check out this link

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=BFE

Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:36 pm

Oh, no! I got it. That's why I winked. Should I have wink, wink, nudge, nudge, you know what I mean, you know what I mean 'ed? (Monty Python reference...) Very Happy