Yes, it is getting harder and harder for the reviewers to keep track of all the “rules” now. I also had to archive a newly placed cache, a micro, that was under a bridge. In the long run it is going to be better for our sport.

With regard to virtual stages at “terrorist targets”, the idea is to consider how people hunting geocaches would be perceived by neighbors and other observers.

If you are taking info off a historical marker near a dam, nobody is going to be suspicious about that. If you require that someone slide down the dam and swim underwater to read a number below the surface, well, that might draw some unwanted attention.

If you have someone drive through an airport to record the speed limit, that might be ok. If you have someone crawl into the baggage claim area to see how many turns are on the conveyors, well, I’m not bailing you out of jail. Its basically common sense.

Note that bridges are a special case, as not only are they considered a terrorist target, but we have also been asked by the DOT to not place anything on bridges due to inspection requirements. Plus, there have already been a handful of incidents where people were detained while hunting caches hidden on bridge structures, when they were suspected to be planting a bomb. An easily accessible plaque on a bridge would be ok as a virtual stage, however, if it was located in an area frequented by pedestrian traffic. Just consider how your finders will be perceived when retrieving the information.

@PCFrog wrote:

It is threads like this that reinforce the fact that some people don’t like to hear. 9/11 impact was greater than just two buildings it has cost this nation millions and has put our society on paranoid status. It is well know you CAN NOT protect everything and not everything is a target. Being in the military I made quite a few friends over seas and when I moved to Wisconsin they had no clue where Wisconsin was. I know this has been mentioned 1001 times in other places, but it still amazes me that in rural towns like Tomah or Portage they believe that they are a target. Heck I live in this state and I don’t even know where Portage is.

Bravo! Standing ovation and all that. I agree 100%, however, I also agree that because of the perceptions (imperceptions), I think it’s a great idea to stick with these guidelines until (if ever) the paranoia fades.

I had a new NEMESIS cache all set to go last fall. It was a small flat and flexible kitchen magnet that I had color-matched the paint from a local water tower. The magnet was maybe 1 1/2 square and would have been tough to find on that water tower to say the least. When I went back to place the cache, I noticed the tower now had a camera pointed at in from its power station (?), and decided it was a bad idea to place it.

Sux, because it would have been a great cache! 😀 8)

@Averith wrote:

What about small pedestrian bridges? Are these now considered off limits as well? I have 2 caches involving pedestrian bridges should I be archiving these as well?? Any opinions??

Great question! I hope that this is not the case though. There is an entire series in this are that is a whole lot of fun, that would also need to be archived.

Is there a grandfather clause on any of these guidelines???

And then there are always exceptions or special cases, like the culvert at the Neenah Slough on the south side of Neenah. That is apparently a bridge per the D.O.T. (per reviewers), though it has a guard rail on both sides on posts embedded in terra firma that is mowed on one side and hosts shrubs the entire length on the other side. That one still has me puzzled, but the ruling was a bridge in that case so the nano had to go elsewhere.

@marc_54140 wrote:

Even if some of us do not know where Portage is, it does not get eliminated as a target.

HEY!!! I know where Portage is….

@marc_54140 wrote:

A big explosion is a small town will generate just as much publicity as another Trade Towers event.

We live in a sick world!

Are you sure about that?

IMHO: If a terrorist blew up a water tower in Portage, it would definitely make CNN. If it flooded the whole town, and a hundred people drowned, it would most likely make small headlines around the world. But most of the world would surely have forgotten it a month later. They most definitely would not change their travel plans. World markets would not crash. And they surely would have that tower rebuilt in less than 7 years.

Now what would happen if a terrorist took out the Sears tower. A bit more memorable eh?

I’m not saying small attacks can’t or won’t happen, but I’m not going to lose any sleep over the possibility, because that’s just what the terrorists (and many members of our own government) want us all to do. Live in fear I mean.

And yes, we do live in a sick world.