Jump to content

Bc Parks (version 2)


BC Geocaching Association

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

First off, let me apologize for the length of this post and for not being able to post until today (wanted to make sure that what I've typed conveyed everything that was heard through other ears before posting). On Thurs., Feb 2nd, Brian Bowtinheimer of BC Parks was coming through Chilliwack and a meeting with Chillibusher and I was scheduled to discuss where BC Parks was heading on the development of a geocaching policy and what type of input was required still. Brian brought an “unpolished straw man proposal” to share with us for initial reaction to share with the broader BC caching community. While discussing the ideas put forth, I tried to type up as much of it as possible.

 

What has been put forward so far appears to be encouraging. From all accounts, it appears that great efforts are being made to make this a collaborative process in which geocachers have a chance to contribute. It takes into account current best practice (or general etiquette) that geocachers have deemed to be important, as well as the concerns that many who frequent our Parks for geocaching have highlighted. He mentioned that this is something that is workable and further input and discussion about the “straw man proposal” contents can be discussed, revised, mulled over, and so forth. He wished to thank those who have contributed to the discussions up to this point, whether on the GC.com forums or the forum developed at vigps.com.

 

I asked what we could expect in terms of a timeline for meeting again and what the timelines for input would be before a draft or something on paper would be provided. At this time it would look like some kind of written draft might be put forward sometime in March with a meeting occurring at that time. It was clear that the process of working toward a draft on Park’s end would continue to occur with input and feedback via the GC.com forums and the vigps.com forums forming an important part of this ongoing process. The points and discussions developed through the forum threads continue to be an important vehicle for communication and feedback. Please be assured that those threads are visited and constructive feedback, ideas, and discussion on how we can promote the education of “leave no trace” ethics while geocaching do plenty to promote a policy that promotes geocaching within BC provincial parks.

 

DocMagoo

 

The following is a brief summary of some of the points shared to date:

 

Principles (based on Provision of Activities through BC Park policy)

 

- geocaching is an excellent way to promote parks

- health benefits

- low impact activity

- all ages and abilities can participate

- it is up to geocachers to know about rules of operating in a park

 

Policy (proposed)

  • regarding the activity of geocaching, other existing Parks policies apply (recreational policy that relates to hiking, conservation, vegetation management) since geocaching is an activity that fits within the framework of other activities (90% of geocaching is walking/hiking to the location)
  • permission of the agency is not required
  • placement of caches – do not disturb soils/substrate/rock/vegetation/disturb wildlife. Use common sense and self-police. Try to place in existing “natural” hiding places that present themselves (eg. Movement of rocks vegetation to cache hiding area not permitted, whereas if the feature you are hiding the cache at already has loose bark/debris…this is more acceptable)
  • no permanent caches – when the cache is not being visited anymore and it sits dormant for awhile then it should be removed to allow the area to return to natural vegetative state. (time limit or dormancy … could replace it elsewhere)
    - caches are permanent in nature…in perpetuity….may end up being left indefinitely after a period of time
    - should we as geocachers be allowed to leave something is perpetuity or when do we take responsibility and pull it out?
  • No placement in sensitive sites (needs to be an intuitive thing…no placement on heritage buildings). Sensitive areas will generally be closed off to all uses/users and generally marked as such.)
  • Ecological reserves – cache placements not permitted. These are places set aside for research, recovery of area, study for educational purposes. Nobody can enter an ecological reserve except for the express purpose of the ecological reserve.
  • Rules of hiking apply (trail use vs. non-trail use). If there’s a trail system, then you’re asked to stay on the trail. Regarding how this affects cache placement, geocachers are expected to follow the existing guidelines. Use common sense. If everyone else is expected to stay on trail, geocachers should stay on trail.
  • Caches must have the contact information for the cache hider inside the cache so they can be contacted if need arises.
  • Inappropriate caches: if found by ranger, given 14 days to remove.
  • Clearly mark the container as a “geocache” – no size, shape limitations
  • Geocache should not be placed in an area where it interferes with other activities (ie. Cache hidden under campsite’s picnic table, cache hidden on amphitheatres, etc.)
  • geocaching events - need an organizer and insurance (follow other policies, events commercial in nature need a permit)

Note to moderators: please, could you "sticky" this thread so it doesn't get lost in the shuffle? Thanks!

Link to comment

Sounds like a good potential proposal to me.

 

The only thing that concerns me is the section about "permanent caches" and removal of caches if they are not being visited any longer.

 

I suggest that if BC Parks goes through with that, that the time period of inactivity be 24 months since the last visit. Anything less than a year is not enough time, especially since some caches will sit under snow cover for 6 (sometimes more) months of the year. The "season" on some caches is only 6 (sometimes less) months a year.

Link to comment

Thanks DBC! This is the main topic that needs discussion right now.

 

At what time is a cache not fulfilling it's purpose and therefore removed or relocated?

 

I can see both sides of the coin. We as cachers want a cache to collect history and be there for as long as possible. From the park's perspective, they want to know that this thing isn't going to be there forever. With that being said, there are certain regions of the province that will always have visits (Lowermainland/Island regions) and there are others that will get few visits in Northern regions. Putting a time limit on the cache since the last visit is one way to go. The other thing to remember is that it will be allowed to be moved to a new location within the park if the cacher wishes so. The last point to make is that this will have to be self policed. It will be up to the responsible cache owner to make these decisions.

 

Anyone have any other ideas of setting criteria for life span?

Link to comment

Thanks for the info! I'm also concerned about the "inactive" option. Up here where cachers seem to be rare lately, and there's the whole winter thing, it's often months between finds. I have one cache that has not been found since Sept 11, 2005. Fortunately, it's not in a provincial park.

I do have one in a BC park. It's part of my Pentcachelon series. the cache is inside a hollowed out stump. According to the proposed guidelines, it should be ok. I’m sure I’ll hear from Parks BC is something is inappropriate.

Thanks again for your work on this issue. Hopefully, we’ll be able to meet again and toast Geocaching over some brown pop!

Link to comment
I have one cache that has not been found since Sept 11, 2005. Fortunately, it's not in a provincial park.

I do have one in a BC park.

 

Which is why I'm concerned. I have three provincial park caches that haven't been found since Sept 10 and Sept 11 2005. I don't expect them to be found until at least May 2006 again (maybe later). Which is why I'd want to see either this part of the proposal scrapped, or have it's length fairly long, as in 2 years since a visit before the cache would have to be removed.

 

Besides ... it almost sounds as though the BCGA isn't really putting forth proposals of their own. They're just being a conduit for proposals from BC Parks. I'd like to see the BCGA oppose this section of the BC Parks proposal, rather than simply offer up reasons and understandings on why BC Parks might implement it.

 

One further question ... if I visit my own provincial park caches once per year, would that count towards the visitation status? As long as I'm actively maintaining my own caches, then they really can never be seen as trash, right?

Link to comment

The proposed policy seems like common sense. I am all for it. Infact I think all my caches (even though I don't have a provincial or federal park caches) already follow the guidlines.

 

I was thinking that 1 year would be adequate time for inactivity, even in the snow. But then Chillbusters point about some parks, or areas of parks, being visited less frequently is a valid point to. If this point is going to be self policed then I guess it would be subjective anyways. I see something like the following happening, for self policing. A cacher (or the owner) postes a note that a cache has not been found in some time, then an approprate time line given. This would give anyone watching the cache insentive to go out there. If the time elapses, then the owner or other cacher must go retrive the cache.

 

It also should be kept in mind that a less visited cache will have less enviromental impact. I think the point being that the cache shouldn't be sitting there indefinately, if it not of any use.

 

Circle of Confusion

Link to comment

 

Which is why I'm concerned. I have three provincial park caches that haven't been found since Sept 10 and Sept 11 2005. I don't expect them to be found until at least May 2006 again (maybe later). Which is why I'd want to see either this part of the proposal scrapped, or have it's length fairly long, as in 2 years since a visit before the cache would have to be removed.

Two years is a long time.

 

Besides ... it almost sounds as though the BCGA isn't really putting forth proposals of their own. They're just being a conduit for proposals from BC Parks. I'd like to see the BCGA oppose this section of the BC Parks proposal, rather than simply offer up reasons and understandings on why BC Parks might implement it.

 

That is not how I read the post. Seems like they talked about a lot of the proposed policy.

...Chillibusher and I was scheduled to discuss where BC Parks was heading on the development of a geocaching policy and what type of input was required still... ...While discussing the ideas put forth... ...this is something that is workable and further input and discussion about... ...I asked what we could expect in terms of a timeline for meeting again...

Why go through the proccess of making a new policy when the one that is on the table is a very good starting point. Seems the only thing that is of concern (the timeline for inactive caches) isn't even set yet in the policy that you seem to be rejecting already.

 

One further question ... if I visit my own provincial park caches once per year, would that count towards the visitation status? As long as I'm actively maintaining my own caches, then they really can never be seen as trash, right?

Personally, I don't think so. Only because, one could SAY that they have been out there 'maintaining' there cache, but in reality they haven't...

Link to comment

Informal Poll:

 

How many cachers have an active physical cache that has not been logged in 18+ months? Active as in confirmed present, by either a previous finder or the cache owner.

 

How many cachers have a cache that went over 18 months without a log, but have been logged since? The cache has to have been physically avalible the whole time, no caches that went missing or removed then replaced over the timeline. Feel free to include caches that are disabled for the winter.

Link to comment
Why go through the proccess of making a new policy when the one that is on the table is a very good starting point. Seems the only thing that is of concern (the timeline for inactive caches) isn't even set yet in the policy that you seem to be rejecting already.

I'm not suggesting that the BCGA create a new policy from scratch.

 

As I said before, I think most of the policy as presented by BC Parks is acceptable, even good. I just hope that the BCGA isn't going to just lay down and accept this policy as is, and will work on clarifying, perhaps even working at eliminating, certain elements of the policy.

Link to comment
Informal Poll:

 

How many cachers have an active physical cache that has not been logged in 18+ months? Active as in confirmed present, by either a previous finder or the cache owner.

This poll is bordering on the ridiculous, unless you're looking only for information concerning caches located in provincial parks.

 

Do you have any caches in any provinical parks, CoC? Have you even found any provincial park caches that require 4 to 6 hours of hiking? For someone who only has caches within urban city limits, this poll is going to present skewed results, unless you limit it to only provincial park caches.

 

Anyhow, I know there's a cache in Pinecone-Burke Provincial Park that hasn't been visited in close to two years. The last entry was a DNF. I intend to locate it this summer. I intend to place more provicial park caches this summer, in areas that will see far less geocaching activity than my current park placements. I expect those caches to see 4 to 6 visits in their first year, and then only a couple a year after that, perhaps with year long or more stretches of inactivity.

 

My suggestion of 2 years is simply because it's a nice round number, and always falls in the same season in which the cache was placed. 18 months, as you suggest, makes the cache fall outside the guidelines in an off-season (likely when it can't be retrieved for archival anyhow).

Edited by dogbreathcanada
Link to comment

Looks like a very reasonable policy.

 

With regards to the time limit thing, perhaps a more appropriate guideline than the actual cache visit would be the activity of the owner.

 

It seems to me that the concern is about 'geo-trash' accumulating in the parks. They want some way to assure that these things aren't going to sit around forever and ever with no 'useful' purpose (we aren't intentionally planting things for future archeologists to find).

 

If the owner has been highly active, then there is a good chance they will maintain the cache, and it isn't geotrash. If the owner hasn't been on the site in 6 months, then there is a good chance they won't make the trek out to check on the cache regardless of the time elapsed since placement.

Link to comment

How many cachers have a cache that went over 18 months without a log, but have been logged since? The cache has to have been physically avalible the whole time, no caches that went missing or removed then replaced over the timeline. Feel free to include caches that are disabled for the winter.

 

I have a cache placed in a provincial park, in a 'hard to get to' location that apparently every year or two the bears use the area below the cache as a breeding ground, and the whole area is closed off. It could very easily go for 18 months without a visit (although it hasn't been out for 18 months yet anyways).

Link to comment

Another argument against the 'removal after x months inactivity' is that it has the potential for people to archive caches that are actually still there, just because they can't be bothered to go out and visit them in order to remove them, in essence causing the problem it was designed to solve.

Link to comment

[This poll is bordering on the ridiculous, unless you're looking only for information concerning caches located in provincial parks.

 

...

 

Anyhow, I know there's a cache in Pinecone-Burke Provincial Park that hasn't been visited in close to two years. The last entry was a DNF. I intend to locate it this summer. I intend to place more provicial park caches this summer, in areas that will see far less geocaching activity than my current park placements. I expect those caches to see 4 to 6 visits in their first year, and then only a couple a year after that, perhaps with year long or more stretches of inactivity.

 

My suggestion of 2 years is simply because it's a nice round number, and always falls in the same season in which the cache was placed. 18 months, as you suggest, makes the cache fall outside the guidelines in an off-season (likely when it can't be retrieved for archival anyhow).

 

True that I don't have any BC park Caches, or that I have found any 4+ hour hikes in bc parks. I did try for one cache that had not been found in 18 months, 2 summers (at the time), and it took me over 4 hours round trip. I don't know if it was a BC park. That Cache, it turns out, was missing.

 

The reason I asked for examples of caches with the 18 month timeline is so everyone gets an idea if there are any caches that are not found that long, and what conditions (terrain etc.) that make up such a cache. I choose 18 months to try and distingush caches under 1 summer or over 2 summers. You gave one example, thanks DBC (would you be kind enough add a link to the listing so we are all clear on which one you are talking about?).

 

You say your cache might not be visited for two years. It might be that your cache is visited every 6 months. For people like me who don't do many long treck caches, I just want some examples, so I (and others) can better judge a fair time frame for inactive caches.

 

I doubt that any caches are going to be archived 2 minutes after the expery date, 1 year, 2 years, or what ever it might end up being. This is especially true if we are self policing like the policy says. We are just trying to eliminate "geo-trash" (to quote ibicus), as I said earlier. Not to make the sport unpleasant for the players.

 

Circle of Confusion

Link to comment

To be honest, I think its going to be difficult to judge the utility of a given timeline by looking at older caches.

 

Geocaching has been around for what 5 1/2 years now? 2 years is still a significant chunk of time history wise, in the scheme of things.

 

I know the cache I mentioned has a high potential of not being found for quite a while, but it isn't that old either, so its tough to say. (GCPEYE and GCPEY9)

Link to comment
Why go through the proccess of making a new policy when the one that is on the table is a very good starting point. Seems the only thing that is of concern (the timeline for inactive caches) isn't even set yet in the policy that you seem to be rejecting already.

I'm not suggesting that the BCGA create a new policy from scratch.

 

As I said before, I think most of the policy as presented by BC Parks is acceptable, even good. I just hope that the BCGA isn't going to just lay down and accept this policy as is, and will work on clarifying, perhaps even working at eliminating, certain elements of the policy.

 

LOL! The interesting thing is that we're working toward a policy that will work for the greatest number of cachers. You'll have cachers on either end of the spectrum, from having no policy whatsoever...to having a policy that is over restrictive. Even Chilli and I differ in perspective on the issue of timeline for inactive caches (although we see both sides). Cachers by-and-large place caches to become a part of the culture and history of caching. To me, it would be disappointing to have to archive a cache that was one of the originals around here....yet, given the possibility of having to have a permit system where you had to review (and jump through hoops) a cache prior to placement in BC parks, and then review them annually .... with a possible fee involved, I would sooner take the former approach.

 

CoC's earlier post actually was something I was thinking about and makes sense:

 

I was thinking that 1 year would be adequate time for inactivity, even in the snow. But then Chillbushers point about some parks, or areas of parks, being visited less frequently is a valid point to. If this point is going to be self policed then I guess it would be subjective anyways. I see something like the following happening, for self policing. A cacher (or the owner) postes a note that a cache has not been found in some time, then an approprate time line given. This would give anyone watching the cache insentive to go out there. If the time elapses, then the owner or other cacher must go retrive the cache.

 

So long as a cache is being visited and drawing visitors to it, it could likely continue to exist where placed.

 

Interesting point made about having occasional maintenance visit posts to the cache.....

Link to comment

I think Ibycus hit the nail on the head. It's not whether a cache has been visited or not in a specific period of time, it's whether the cache owner is still active in the hobby.

 

That should be relayed to BC Parks so that adjustments to the policy can be made.

 

If a cache owner goes AWOL, then it should be the communities responsibility to remove that provincial park cache (or have it adopted).

 

I recently adopted a park cache from an owner now living in Thailand. Last summer I helped in the removal of a defunct cache from one of the parks.

 

I withdraw my two year timeline proposal. I was uncomfortable with it anyhow. I was beginning to lean towards what Ibycus wrote above. Glad he did it. I was having problems with expressing the idea properly.

 

Anyhow, the problem is with AWOL cache owners, not the caches themselves, even if they don't see visitation activity for long stretches. The BC Parks proposal SHOULD be updated to reflect this difference between cache owner maintenance and cache visit activity.

Link to comment

Wow, what BC Parks is doing is so much more civilized than what Parks Canada and Ontario did with their interim policies (a.k.a. bans). It gives me hope that the PC and Ontario problems will be resolved in a positive manner.

 

I'm coming west this summer. I hope to visit some of your provincial park caches.

Link to comment

I have a general question about caches in parks, but from a municipal perspective. I work in the communications department for a Lower Mainland (BC) city and have been asked to design new signage (kiosk, trail markers, brochure, etc.) for a large, forested park. As a cacher I know there are caches there, but as a municipal worker I know other staff (incl managers) are probably not terribly aware of caching. Another less remote park in our jurisdiction has probably 20 or more caches...

 

Firstly I would like to educate my fellow employees about caching so they have a positive understanding of it, before a negative issue arises.

 

And secondly, I am considering introducing caching to the kiosk signs -- as part of the rules (dogs, bikes, no fires, etc.). Perhaps something along the lines of welcoming cachers but reminding them of the rules of geocaching (no bushwacking, no burying, no food in caches, etc.).

 

Does anyone have any thoughts on something like this?

Link to comment

bramblerose Posted Jun 26 2006, 10:32 AM

I have a general question about caches in parks, but from a municipal perspective. I work in the communications department for a Lower Mainland (BC) city and have been asked to design new signage (kiosk, trail markers, brochure, etc.) for a large, forested park. As a cacher I know there are caches there, but as a municipal worker I know other staff (incl managers) are probably not terribly aware of caching. Another less remote park in our jurisdiction has probably 20 or more caches...

 

Firstly I would like to educate my fellow employees about caching so they have a positive understanding of it, before a negative issue arises.

 

Being aware of what is occurring can be very useful. I'm saying this as a lead up to part of what you are asking later... review the logs, and if you can revisit sites to get an accurate perspective, it will go a lot further than speculating. This will alow you to provide informed options.

 

Holding an informational seminar for the staff as a presentation will certainly help them feel more aware.

 

And secondly, I am considering introducing caching to the kiosk signs -- as part of the rules (dogs, bikes, no fires, etc.). Perhaps something along the lines of welcoming cachers but reminding them of the rules of geocaching (no bushwacking, no burying, no food in caches, etc.).

 

Does anyone have any thoughts on something like this?

 

Adding a small amount of content about Geocaching is a good idea. It will let Cachers know that the park is aware of the activity and its nuances. It could raise awareness of the activity, but that is really secondary to what you are probably hoping to accomplish. I would assume that not only are you trying to let cachers know that the activity is allowed but also ensuring they do so with respect.

 

The challenge for you is to word it concisely enough to say "Caching is allowed, please respect our park" without saying "Don't do this, don't do that" which might make cachers looks badly to others. Repeating specific rules of Geocaching may cause people to think that we need to be told because we don't follow the rules normally.

 

Finding a way to concisely convey that the Park is allowing Geocaching and that Geocachers must observe the 'code of ethics' could be a great thing for everyone.

 

British Columbia has several passionate Geocaching groups, perhaps they have some insight.

 

Good luck, it is nice to see this position being taken by a member of park staff. Hopefully it is another start of something good.

 

:) The Blue Quasar

 

edit: broke the quote thing, so used italic and bold instead

Edited by The Blue Quasar
Link to comment

Thank you for the comments. I agree about the need to word things in a positive manner -- we try to do that for other park issues such as dogs (of course no one doesn't pick up after their dog! :rolleyes: ) I will track down a local caching group and get some guidance from them.

 

-bramblerose

Link to comment

For those that don't visit the BCGA I thought I'd post this lovely news.

BC Parks is in the final development of policies that will not only allow but encourage geocaching in our provincial parks. Check back here over the next month or so to keep up on the news as the policies are finalized.

 

In summary, geocaching will be seen as being no different than any other recreational sport currently allowed in BC Parks. Thus, geocachers will be expected to follow standard park use guidelines and practice responsible, environmentally sound geocaching. Although BC Parks does not wish to police the sport, park friendly caching will be strongly encouraged. Geocachers will be allowed to place geocaches in provincial parks, but not in designated Ecological Reserves. Any problems will be handled on an individual basis. Additionally, BC Parks is considering geocaching as a promotional tool.

 

The BCGA has forged a positive working relationship with BC Parks and now BC Parks would like our assistance. BC Parks has asked the BCGA to conduct a poll. Shortly, the BCGA will be asking the geocaching community to nominate the best geocaches within the boundaries of British Columbia's provincial parks. The top caches selected will be slated for inclusion on the BC Parks website.

 

Over the next few months, the BCGA will be working closely with BC Parks. A special thank you to the BC Parks executive for listening to our concerns and to Chris (Landsharkz) for his outstanding work on this project. An additional thanks to Ken (Chillibusher) for his efforts in forging the groundwork with BC Parks for these policies.

 

BC Parks Official Website

 

Link to comment

What is the current policy on BC Parks and Geocaches? Does this issue need more work?

BC Parks has no issue with geocaching or geocaches as long as their park use policies are followed. You can read more about it in the 'news' section of the BCGA which mirror's Quigley Jones post above. They do not see a reason to police geocachers as long as we do not create one and they are aware their parks are full of geocaches and feel it is a good way to increase park use by responsible users. They seem to be in no hurry to write a policy for something that doesn't seem to need to be policed, but they do intend to write one so its all spelled out. It's going to be in our favour once it's done. Chris (BCGA Director) is in discussions with BC Parks Management to include geocaching on their website - it would be cool if he could add it to the map based park finder site, but I don't think that they've got the time or money for that!

 

So in a nutshell, we are invited to hide caches that are Park Friendly in BC Parks and hunt them responsibly... don't pick the chocolate lillies, don't squash the moss and clean up after your pooch :anitongue:

Link to comment

...Principles (based on Provision of Activities through BC Park policy)

 

- geocaching is an excellent way to promote parks

- health benefits

- low impact activity

- all ages and abilities can participate

- it is up to geocachers to know about rules of operating in a park...

 

If cachers are to follow existing park rules, then all the rest of the rules are redundant and can be implemented by tweaking that last bit to say.

 

Geocachers will follow park rules.

 

I'd keep the part about contact info in case there is a problem. Of course the park can contact cache owners vias the website, or they can just pull the cache directly then contact the owner.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...