This topic contains 5 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by 
Bennycams 7 years, 3 months ago.
-
Posts
-
In my quest to finally have my first hide, I ran into a road block with permission for the location.
The location was an area I didn’t think at the time needed permission. I submitted, and was told it was owned by County Parks, so I went through the process of getting the permit. They told me it was now owned by someone else, so I went about trying to find out who I needed to speak to, even recruiting someone on the inside who, as it turns out, used to geocache with his son.
The answer came back as a “no” due to safety & security concerns. The safety part I think I might be able to appeal by giving a more precise explanation of the location – a 1.5 T, BTW – but I’m not sure if I can get them to bend on the security. The location is far away from the main part of the property they own – that’s why it surprised me a little to learn they owned it – and really, if there is a way to do harm from the location, there doesn’t need to be a geocache there for someone to do it.
So, I’m asking the veteran hiders – would you try to appeal? Or is this a case of, there’s very little chance they’ll budge, so I’m better off focusing on one of my other ideas?
I spent 30 minutes at a local store trying to find someone that would allow me to place a LPC. “The guy” finally came back and said that it was my lucky day because they would say yes, but normally would not allow due to concerns over liability.
Not sure if things have changed out in Oregon since I left, but it really is the wild west out there wrt placing caches. One of the reviewers is quite a stickler about certain things, but once you tell him “it’s a pill bottle under a rock” – he’s happy. There are a wide variety of “pill bottles under a rock” out there because hiders simply don’t want to answer all his unnecessarily picky questions about placement and containers that are legal, but know that he’s fine with “pill bottle under a rock”.
He also would hate our LCG because he routinely archives caches that haven’t been found for some time, even if they haven’t had DNF’s posted. Contrarily, caches can rack up multiple DNFs in a row, have no active CO and remain in play. Argh.
To go back to what your question was – if the cache was built specifically for that location, or has a puzzle based around the location, maybe. I have a puzzle designed and in place but haven’t been able to contact the person I now know I need to contact in order to activate the cache.
The best sig is no sig.
To go back to what your question was – if the cache was built specifically for that location, or has a puzzle based around the location, maybe. I have a puzzle designed and in place but haven’t been able to contact the person I now know I need to contact in order to activate the cache.
The cache itself is a bison tube, so something I can easily use in another location. I wanted the cache to draw people to that location, because I like the view from it. The view is actually a little better a few yards away, but doesn’t really work for a hide.
I would think “safety and security” are probably unsurpassable.
The views expressed here are that of myself only and do not necessarily represent that of the WGA board.
Cami, I’ve been in that situation or something similar to it more than once.
If you just go back to the property owner without any new information, I’d say it is unlikely that the owner would change their mind, and may even become annoyed at your second request. My “second request” approach was/is as follows:
I take pictures of the location, taking into consideration the ideal lighting, angle, and focal point, to best show how approachable and safe the cache location would be. Doing that I’ve been able to get a “yes” when the initial response was “no.” And (hopefully) it wasn’t annoying to the land owner, because my second request was (hopefully) viewed as a clarifying correspondence, since now I was providing additional information to affirm that the location was safe, rather than just repeating myself. All of this is assuming, of course, that the location is indeed safe with minimal impact to the area.
Okay, I was being purposely vague in case I did get this published, so as not to give inside information for an FTF, but here goes –
The property in question is owned by the Brewers organization. It is a walking path that on one end leads to/from the Molitor lot, and can be accessed by the nearby neighborhood on the other. After getting nowhere trying to talk to someone on the phone, and no response from an email inquiry on the website, I enlisted the help of my Season Seat Holder ticket rep. He spoke with people in Security, Miller Park Operations, and Guest Relations, and CCed the Director of Security in his response, which included the my emails about the general location being on the other side of the freeway from the ballpark itself. Looking at the credentials of the Director Of Security – over 26 years as a police officer, has been teaching defense, arrest, and tactical response for almost 2 decades – I’m guessing they definitely won’t budge on the security issue.
So, I guess it’s back to the drawing board. Again.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.