MnGCA Home MnGCA
Minnesota Geocaching Association
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   User listUser list   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Green and Gold Bucket with Stars
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    MnGCA Forum Index -> General
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
EagleXplore
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Jan 2005

Posts: 29

PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 11:06 am    Post subject: Green and Gold Bucket with Stars Reply with quote

"Barn Bluff is off limits until further notice." Red Wing Republican Eagle ~ Friday, January 14th.

On Jan 4th Dennis Blattner, 21 slipped on the icy north trail about 5:30pm Monday evening. A passerby on the RR tracks heard his call for help late Tuesday afternoon. The Red Wing fire department rescued him about 7:30pm (26 hours later) using rope rescue equipment. The Pierce County Sheriffs Department brought thermal imaging equipment to help locate the Red Wing man who fell half way down the steep north bluff side braced against a small tree. The north side trail is treacherous enough in the summer and lately it has been eXtremely icy with freezing and thawing. The North Trail is/was not really an approved trail.

On January 8th Andrew Rustad 42, and Terri Tomber 44 from Anoka also became stranded on the treacherous North Trail. Fortunately they had a cell phone to call for help.

There are 3 closings posted at entry points on the east side; one posted closing sign along Hwy 61; "police line" yellow ribbon across the top of the steps; and yellow "police line" ribbon at the west head of the entrance/exit of the North Trail which is chained Off Limits.

The Barn Byewater geocache is located near the head of the North Trail. I'm proposing that the existing geocache be located between the Prairie Trail and the main branch trails that lead to each end of the bluff. This geocache location would be user friendly and yet somewhat hidden from main trail passerbys. There are some safer and eXcellent hiding possibilities in this wooded area with a level lay between the Prairie Trail and the main West Bluff trail.

Would the owners of 'Barn Byewater be interested in working with me to move their geocache and retltle it "Vision Quest" with an eastern Dakotah theme? Please email me.

To get the latest information on hiking conditions and possible opening of the main trails contact, Lenny Strusz, Deputy Director-Public Works. Phone (651) 385-3674 or Lenny.Strusz@ci.red-wing.mn.us
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 11:11 am    Post subject: Re: Green and Gold Bucket with Stars Reply with quote

EagleXplore wrote:
Would the owners of 'Barn Byewater be interested in working with me to move their geocache and retltle it "Vision Quest" with an eastern Dakotah theme? Please email me.

They placed the geocache and disappeared from "active" status sometime soon after that (several days later) thus they will likely not respond to your post here.

You could try to email them through the site and see if they will respond to that.

The best course of action would be to place your own cache on Barn Bluff when the trails open if you really feel that the Bluff needs another. Just make sure you follow the guidelines that geocaching.com has put in place.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
EagleXplore
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Jan 2005

Posts: 29

PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I tend to agree that one good geocache (?multi-stage?) on the Barn is sufficient, but even if I restrain myself isn't it just a matter of time before someone else places another cache and then another ... .?

What do you think about a combined multi-stage geocache from different members? Does MnGCA have enough control so as to combine current and future Barn Bluff geocaches under one title and limit it to a certain number (3-6) of hiding places. What is the possibility of having such a grouping of future Barn Bluff geocaches all under one title such as "Vision Quest" in which 3-6 caches are placed by 3-6 MnGCA members?

Is it OK if I still go ahead and place "Vision Quest" in a centrally located leveler area between the Prairie Trail and the West Branch Trail ~ in hopes that someday the 3-6 caches on the Barn are all listed under one common title (e.g. Vision Quest)?

Because Barn Bluff is such a Minnesota Treasure it only seems right that someone from MnGCA should personally approve each hiding place and set a limit and then enough is enough unless someone wants to remove their cache making room for another cache placement.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Moe the Sleaze
Geocacher


Joined: 10 Jan 2003

Posts: 1146

PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 8:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MnGCA has absolutely no control over where people place caches, nor does geocaching.com for that matter. However gc.com does have rules and guidelines controlling caches that they will list on there website. The most basic rule is that no cache can be hidden within 0.1 miles of another (with some rare exceptions, ie. there is a significant body of water between them). You are free to hide another cache near Barn Bluff if you want and have it listed on gc.com as long as it meets their requirements.
_________________
"Hi, I'm Moe, or as the women know me - Hey! You in the bushes."
-Moe, The Simpsons
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
EagleXplore
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Jan 2005

Posts: 29

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I received an email reply from Kim, the geocacher that placed "Barn Byewater."
She indicates that she has "lost interest" and has "sold the gps to another friend." She wants to know if I can take over her cache as she doesn't know about putting caches on hold, or winterizing them or the like. She goes on to say, "Feel free to do what needs to be done, etc. If there is something I must do because it is my cache I'll do it."
"Please Advise."
I would prefer placing a new cache in a more centrally wooded location when the bluff trails are reopened. I have sent a private email to Silent Bob with Kim's email address.

On a 1786 map by Jean Baptiste Perrault he shows 2 granges at the head of Lake Pepin. I will be climbing a nice bluff tomorrow that overlooks the Wacouta Bay & Beach area. I was thinking about placing my geocache here and calling it "Vision Quest Bluff" as this bluff doesn't have a name shown on the USGS map. If I do place a geocache on "Vision Quest Bluff" it will only be active during the winter equinox(?12/22-3/22?).
Please Advise. Thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 7:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

EagleXplore wrote:
If I do place a geocache on "Vision Quest Bluff" it will only be active during the winter equinox(?12/22-3/22?).
Please Advise. Thanks

No temporary caches are permitted by geocaching.com. Caches that are only available for less than 1/4 of the year shouldn't even be considered. Obviously caches that are not winter accessable are for safety only not by design.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
EagleXplore
Geocacher


Joined: 13 Jan 2005

Posts: 29

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Would appreciate some feedback on the following as I'm finally coming around to Silent Bob's perspective ~ one cache on Barn Bluff is possibly sufficient, two is the max, and three would be a crowd ~ so-to-speak.

I've been looking at the rules for Hennepin County Parks, Ramsey County Parks, and Carver County Parks. It's likely that the Red Wing Parks & Recreation could adopt a similar policy and for good reason. This could mean that no more than 1-2 geocaches (frown on multi-caches) would be allowed on a smaller special site like Barn Bluff (geocaches no closer than 1/2 mile ~ Ramsey Parks and no more than one geocache per person). It wouldn't do me any good to adopt Kim's "Barn Byewater" if only one geocache were to be allowed by any one geocache member as I still couldn't place another 'Vision Quest' geocache.

All three Park systems have a rule that geocaches be removed after one year (give others a chance). Kim's geocache was placed in March of 2003. Considering that this geocache is located at one of Minnesota's premier historical landmarks (and smaller in size) is it time for Kim to "archive her cache?" I would like to place my 'Vision Quest' geocache on Barn Bluff for a period running at least from April 2005 through April of 2006. If someone else wants to place another geocache in April of 2006 I will archive/remove my 'Vision Quest,' or move it to a new hiding place each year or better yet let other interested members adopt 'Vision Quest' on a yearly basis.

Is it appropriate to post a "Should Be Archived" note at "Barn Byewater" in that Kim has said she has "sold the GPS", "lost interest" in geocaching, and goes on to say, "Feel free to do what needs to be done, etc. If there is something I must do because it is my cache I'll do it. Please advise."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

EagleXplore wrote:
It's likely that the Red Wing Parks & Recreation could adopt a similar policy and for good reason.

I don't believe that they need a policy. Geocaching.com's listing rules are sufficient in most cases.

Quote:
Is it appropriate to post a "Should Be Archived" note at "Barn Byewater" in that Kim has said she has "sold the GPS", "lost interest" in geocaching, and goes on to say, "Feel free to do what needs to be done, etc. If there is something I must do because it is my cache I'll do it. Please advise."

As far as I'm concerned the cache itself is in great shape (as of my visit the Monday after Thanksgiving). Unless the cache has undergone a major downhill slide since then I really see no reason that it should need to be archived.

The owner placed the cache in 2003 and disappeared shortly thereafter. The cache has remained in tact since then. Plenty of caches out there do this and unless they need immediate maintenance I don't see any reason why this one should be removed other than your personal desire to put your own cache there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dances With Beehives
Geocacher


Joined: 12 Sep 2003

Posts: 671

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
As far as I'm concerned the cache itself is in great shape (as of my visit the Monday after Thanksgiving). Unless the cache has undergone a major downhill slide since then I really see no reason that it should need to be archived.

I'm inclined to agree with this. As long as people are finding it on a regular basis....I'd like to be able to make that same find and go through the same experience that my geocaching friends are going through.
_________________
...formerly 'dachebo'.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Pear Head
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 04 Apr 2004

Posts: 5697

PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

EagleXplore wrote:
I've been looking at the rules for Hennepin County Parks, Ramsey County Parks, and Carver County Parks. It's likely that the Red Wing Parks & Recreation could adopt a similar policy and for good reason.


What would be the point though? The GC community has been very much self governing in most cases - getting a parks and rec department involved will only make it harder for us to do anything. I think you will find in most cases that parks and rec departments have policies because THEY wanted them, not because geocachers wanted them. If they feel (on their own) that it's time to implement a policy then I would hope that they involve MNGCA in the process. In the mean time, I don't see why we would want to try and get them to implement something more restrictive.

Also, I think dealings with any parks and rec department in Minnesota should be dealt with through MNGCA - the originization is here to help coordianate these dealings.

EagleXplore wrote:
It wouldn't do me any good to adopt Kim's "Barn Byewater" if only one geocache were to be allowed by any one geocache member as I still couldn't place another 'Vision Quest' geocache.


Sometimes it's not only about what does one person good as much as it's about what does the GC community good. If you're able to adopt it, have taken the time to contact the owner about adopting it, then you may want to seriously consider adopting it, if nothing else just so that the cache has an owner that is active in the sport still.

A cache with no owner tends to eventually go into disrepair and neglect.

EagleXplore wrote:
All three Park systems have a rule that geocaches be removed after one year (give others a chance). Kim's geocache was placed in March of 2003. Considering that this geocache is located at one of Minnesota's premier historical landmarks (and smaller in size) is it time for Kim to "archive her cache?" I would like to place my 'Vision Quest' geocache on Barn Bluff for a period running at least from April 2005 through April of 2006. If someone else wants to place another geocache in April of 2006 I will archive/remove my 'Vision Quest,' or move it to a new hiding place each year or better yet let other interested members adopt 'Vision Quest' on a yearly basis.


Is that the reason that the park systems have the one year rule? I've never read any of the rules for the park systems so I don't really know...

I know the USFS has a one year rule (and I'm sure Eagleyes will correct me if I'm wrong). I believe the rule stems more from damage to the environment then giving others a chance. There are literally billions of hiding places in the state.

EagleXplore wrote:
Is it appropriate to post a "Should Be Archived" note at "Barn Byewater" in that Kim has said she has "sold the GPS", "lost interest" in geocaching, and goes on to say, "Feel free to do what needs to be done, etc.


No, I don't believe that would be appropriate. That post is normally reserved for a cache in disrepair that appears to be neglected by it's owner and the rest of the community, or is in violation of a law somewhere or on private property without permission. From what I've heard, this cache doesn't qualify as any of those.

- Pear Head
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pear Head wrote:
Is that the reason that the park systems have the one year rule? I've never read any of the rules for the park systems so I don't really know...

From what I understand park systems have the one year rule to keep down the amount of traffic to a cache and hope that it will eliminate permanent trails from forming.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lyverbird
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 17 Oct 2003

Posts: 443

PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 9:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok time for my 2 cents here.

I have found the Barn Bywater cache. It is a good cache with a worthy location.

No other is needed on the bluff and I'm sure it wold not be allowed by th .1 mile rule.

The current one does not need arciving. I have confidence that if any harm came to it, a local cacher would take care of it.

It is one of the finer caches in the state. Quit trying to mess with it.

This bluff is only closed untill the path is safe again. Quit worrying.

There are plenty of other nice places in the Red Wing, Lake City, Frontenac area for caches.

Again, just leave this one alone.
_________________
Save the earth.
It's the only planet with chocolate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Moe the Sleaze
Geocacher


Joined: 10 Jan 2003

Posts: 1146

PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:08 am    Post subject: *** WARNING: MINORITY OPINION AHEAD *** Reply with quote

In general, I am not in favor of adopting orphaned caches. I would usually prefer to see them archived, removed and possibly replaced by a nearby hide. I would make an exception for this one however because it is a beauty.

That said, I would like to see someone adopt Barn Bywater since the owner has expressed no interest in maintaining it. If no one steps forward to adopt it (SOMEONE IN THE AREA WHO WILL MAINTAIN IT), I feel it should be archived.
_________________
"Hi, I'm Moe, or as the women know me - Hey! You in the bushes."
-Moe, The Simpsons
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
eagleyes
Geocacher


Joined: 03 Jun 2003

Posts: 743

PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 10:41 am    Post subject: USFS - 1 year rule Reply with quote

Absolutely correct. When we helped to write the USFS GC policy,that rule was placed because of concern for the environment. I check in with my ranger district each spring and ask if I have to move the caches. They know I maintain the caches and I also watch for environmental wear and tear - and move them as I see fit. Also, our district watches GC.com and removes caches listed, but having no permit- and also pulls any regular caches from the BW. My district is pro- gcing and will continue to support the activity as long as a cacher works with them. It fits into the Non-BW land use program. Even though the policy is in effect for the entire USFS- each district can work within the policy as it sees fit. If you intend to place a cache in the USFS- make sure you know what district the cache will be in and apply to the appropriate ranger district. A printout cache application can be found on the USFS website.
_________________
LIFE IS GOOD;CABIN LIFE IS GREAT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marsha and Silent Bob
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 6261

PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 11:54 am    Post subject: Re: *** WARNING: MINORITY OPINION AHEAD *** Reply with quote

Moe the Sleaze wrote:
That said, I would like to see someone adopt Barn Bywater since the owner has expressed no interest in maintaining it. If no one steps forward to adopt it (SOMEONE IN THE AREA WHO WILL MAINTAIN IT), I feel it should be archived.

I believe the adoption process has been started by an individual that's interested in taking over the cache and keeping it in its current state and location.

I would have adopted it myself but I have enough caches and Red Wing is too far out of my radius for me to be comfortable in caring for it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    MnGCA Forum Index -> General All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Geocaching Cache Icons, Copyright 2009, Groundspeak Inc. All rights reserved. Used with Permission.