Earthcache Category Too Restrictive

[+RakeInTheCache]

Am I the only one who finds the Earthcache category to be overboard in the number of restrictions placed on it?

 

I'm specifically referring to the requirement to get permission from landowner in the case of public land. (Private land I understand.) This especially applies to sites which are already managed and open to the public, and where there is no restriction for visiting the site. In these cases, is the concern that hoards of waymarkers will descend on the location, overwhelm it's existing facilities for protecting the site, and destroy it's natural beauty?

 

In the case of private land, it should be possible to create a waymark which can be viewed from public land (a roadside for example), and subsequently logged.

 

Sorry, but I think this is too extreme. In cases where the site is already managed for public viewing, there should be no need to gain approval from the land administrator to list it as a waymark.

 

I also find the "educational task" requirement to be too onerous. I'm especially thinking about international waymarks in which language barriers can make this more difficult then intended. This should be a suggestion, not a requirement for waymark creation.

 

Also, the collecting items suggestion could be interpreted to mean collecting rock samples, fossils or plants. This should be discouraged at all cost! "small samples may be collected as part of the cache experience. " No No NO!

 

This is not to say that the whole category is of no value. Far from it, it is a good idea, but with a very disappointing list of restrictions.

 

Therefore, I am thinking of creating an alternate category called Places of Geologic Interest which may be more in tune with the needs of the International Waymarking community.

Edited July 23, 2006 by RakeInTheCache

[+chstress53]

Earthcaches are completely different then any other type of cache or waymark by Definition!!! They also must be approved by another agency: the Geological Society of America; before approval, not Groundspeak, unlike any other type of cache. IT is this agency that has entered into agreements with the heads of these National Parks etc. that approvals from heads of these areas is mandatory!! There definition alone makes that abundantly clear. This link might help you understand an Earthcache better

http://www.earthcache.org/

 

Unlike any other Category Earthcacheing wheather on the ones grandfathered on GC.com or those created here their is an additional incentive from this agency. Please find that on the link titled EARTHCACHE MAsters Program

These pins Bronze, Silver, & Gold, & Platinum pins are a wonderful token of the Geologic knowledge gained by the extra work that you refered to as "educational task." Nothing like this exists for any other type of Category or cache

Edited July 23, 2006 by chstress53

[+BlueDeuce]

So what exactly is the problem, getting permission or being denied?

[+RakeInTheCache]

So what exactly is the problem, getting permission or being denied?

 

Why exactly is there a need to get permission? For exampe, I visited a location publicly managed for visitors to a site in Italy and I would like to place an earthcache there, but I don't speak Italian, and the administrator doesn't speak any of the languages I do. And anyway, the administrator would probably think I was stupid for asking, like asking permission to take a photo of the Dolomites or something.

 

Am I just out of luck in thinking of this site for a waymark?

Edited July 23, 2006 by RakeInTheCache

[+RakeInTheCache]

Earthcaches are completely different then any other type of cache or waymark by Definition!!! They also must be approved by another agency theGeological Socity of America before approval unlike any other type of cache. IT is this agency that has entered into an agreement with the heads of these National Parks etc. There definition alone makes that abundantly clear. This link might help you understand an Earthcache better

http://www.earthcache.org/

 

Unlike any other Category Earthcacheing wheather on the ones grandfathered on GC.com or those created here their is an additional incentive Please find that here. http://www.earthcache.org/

These pins are a wonderful token of the Geologic knowledge gained by the extra work that you refered to as "educational task."

 

Seems to be this is a bit USA centric. Maybe the category should be called "Earthcaches of the USA". BTW, I'm American - and proud of it!

 

O.K. I'll admit that maybe I didn't comletely understand the idea of Earth caches. However, I do see the need for another category that will allow waymarkers to log places of geologic interest without too many restrictions and dependencies on the agency or organization of any single country.

Edited July 23, 2006 by RakeInTheCache

[+chstress53]

IT is most definitely not USA Centric

In fact I have created an Earthcache that is located in Costa Rica ( And yes I had to converse with the head of the National Park In Costa Rica) and there are way too many to count locatd all over the world. Scotland, Spain,Sweden, Australia, Germany, UK,Mexico,British Columbia, &Denmark, just to name a few, all have Earthcaches )The Socity even has a grant program that pays you to stay in a park and create an Earthcache, you do have to become a Society member though to do this and only four of these are given out a year. ANd if I recall one of the approvers for one of my Earthcaches lives in Australia.

 

TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THEIR SITE:

"Why do EarthCaches have this additional approval stage?

Due to the educational nature of EarthCaches, they are checked for their suitability before that are submitted to geocaching.com. The level of the language as well as the educational merit is assessed.

Why is it that Americans are approving caches from other countries?

EarthCaches all have one fundamental goal — to educate the visitor. This is judged by the EarthCache team, which happens to be part of the Geological Society of America. The team is not just US-based. The EarthCache Master lives in Australia, and has a small group of people who discuss the appropriateness of some caches. This group has representatives from the UK, Germany, Canada and the USA. EarthCaches have to meet some solid guidelines. About 60% of submitted EarthCaches are approved in the first round. Many are sent back to the developers for reworking. Some suggestions may be given to how the text needs to be changed to be approved....EarthCaches can be developed on public land only if you have the prior approval of the local land manager...to ensure that sensitive areas are avoided( ANd who would no this better than the land manager)

 

All EarthCaches, once approved by the EarthCache team, go to Geocaching.com for the normal approval process.

Edited July 23, 2006 by chstress53

[+RakeInTheCache]

IT is most definitely not USA Centric

In fact I have created an Earthcache that is located in Costa Rica ( And yes I had to converse with the head of the National Park In Costa Rica) and there are way too many to count locatd all over the world. They even have grant programs that pay you to stay in a park and create an Earthcache, you do have to become a Society member though to do this and only four of these are given out a year. ANd if I recall one of the approvers for one of my Earthcaches lives in Australia.

 

I hear what you say but my point still stands. We need another category for logging geologic locations which is less restrictive.

Edited July 23, 2006 by RakeInTheCache

[+chstress53]

Then I would suggest that you create a group and go through the process and peer review and then it would not be an Earthcache but something entirely different ( Not educational) if approved it could then be cross linked and when Stacking of Locations comes on board visitors could see both waymarks for the same location. As for speaking another language yes that is an additional component but my Land Manager for Costa Rica did not speak English and I speak no Spanish NADA!! But I used babblefish and wrote my letters, when I actually got to visit the site and meet him in person I still spoke no Spanish and he spoke no English but we managed with a store bought translator, I gained so much, not just about the geologic location but about myself and my capabilities. ANd no I was not lucky enough to have had one of those grants but I will continue to apply.

Edited July 23, 2006 by chstress53

[+BruceS]

Am I the only one who finds the Earthcache category to be overboard in the number of restrictions placed on it?

 

I'm specifically referring to the requirement to get permission from landowner in the case of public land. (Private land I understand.) This especially applies to sites which are already managed and open to the public, and where there is no restriction for visiting the site. In these cases, is the concern that hoards of waymarkers will descend on the location, overwhelm it's existing facilities for protecting the site, and destroy it's natural beauty?

 

 

This is exactly why I don't do earthcaches. I have taken pictures and recorded pictures of some great earth cache locations including the landbridge at O'Leno State Park in Florida. The location is on the park's walking trail with their signs. When I visited there was no one available to get permission and seeing I was travelling at the time I won't be going back. If person can visit the site without permssion then why require permission to post the coordinates of the location. There are plenty of other categories so I won't put up with the hassle.

[+chstress53]

BruceS

You could always correspond with the particular Land manager as I said before "EarthCaches can be developed on public land only if you have the prior approval of the local land manager...to ensure that sensitive areas are avoided( And who would know this better than the local land manager) If this seems too restrictive then might I suggest that you hold your photos until someone creates an Earthcache Category and then log a visit.

[+BlueDeuce]

Yep. Personally I haven't gotten into Waymarking, but I don't think anybody really cares that I stopped logging them.

Edited July 23, 2006 by BlueDeuce

[+BruceS]

BruceS

You could always correspond with the particular Land manager as I said before "EarthCaches can be developed on public land only if you have the prior approval of the local land manager...to ensure that sensitive areas are avoided( And who would know this better than the local land manager) If this seems too restrictive then might I suggest that you hold your photos until someone creates an Earthcache Category and then log a visit.

 

And if the waymark coordinates are at the location of the sign explaining the feature, I would assume that permission is granted for me to be there and thus I should be able to post the coordinates without getting explicit permission.

[+chstress53]

That would be correct to log a visit to a waymark but by the rules of the Geologic society and the National Park people and other partners to create a Category it is not acceptable. ( We all know that too assume is not the proper way to procede, violation of a Park requirment is unacceptable even when you assume it does not exist ) And yes, All the National Parks overarching Heads are partners with the Geologic Socitey ( Take note of the National Parks partners on their web Site) and these are their established rules, like it or not. It is just like the various state parks that require permits to place geocaches. They are different organizations, then GC.com and this is there requirment for Earthcaches, not gc.com's.

Edited July 23, 2006 by chstress53

[+BruceS]

That would be correct to log a visit to a waymark but by the rules of the Geologic society and the National Park people and other partners to create a Category it is not acceptable. ( We all know that too assume is not the proper way to procede, violation of a Park requirment is unacceptable even when you assume it does not exist ) And yes, All the National Parks overarching Heads are partners with the Geologic Socitey ( Take note of the National Parks partners on their web Site) and these are their established rules, like it or not. It is just like the various state parks that require permits to place geocaches. They are different organizations, then GC.com and this is there requirment for Earthcaches, not gc.com's.

 

Like I said before... I just ignore the category and not waste my time.

[+chstress53]

Thanks BruceS

 

To clarify I must add that. The agreement/ Partnership is stictly in regard to geologic locations. I am sorry that this was not clear, since the topic of this thread is in regards to Geologic locations that is what I was talking about, but the clarification is necessary.

Edited July 24, 2006 by chstress53

[+TerryDad2]

Disclaimer: I am quite pro Earthcache. I have 57 earthcaches on both gc and wm, with a few still in the approval process. (which may be why the listing is so US centric, I’ve listed about 10% of them)

 

I have had a bit of experience setting up earthcaches and I have found that only on US Federal land (National Parks, Monuments, National Forests, BLM, etc) do you actually need to provide a land manager’s name and phone number. I have done all my approval with land managers (when needed) by e-mail save 1 or 2. Each one of the National Parks has been pleased to help out and happy that I was talking to them first. Twice I found out that the displays I was planning to use were going to be torn down soon. It really is not that hard to talk to someone. Forest Service rangers range from helpful and appreciative to “why are you asking my permission again?”

 

Earthcaches started back on gc and geocaches were outright banned from National Parks and virtuals weren’t being approved. This was another way to get geocachers onto National Parks, and the agreements regarding earthcaches have stuck

 

Since The Park Service is lending their credibility to the program they want to be sure that the information present is accurate. On Earthcache.org the earthcaches on NPS land are given a different symbol showing that they approved it and by association, the content.

 

The earthcaches are also run by a geological organization that is trying to get educational information out to the public. They are trying to make the Earthcache program more than a glorified virtual cache, i.e. show up and take a picture. (Which is complaint in another thread; just can’t please everyone now can you).

 

Besides the educational component can be as simple as some of the logging requirements for virtuals. Read the plaque and pull some information off of it. (yes, I’ve got to update many of my earthcaches to comply with this new rule)

 

As for a new category, I think you’ll find Places of Geological Interest a little broad. There are already Arches, Waterfalls, Active Volcanoes, and Caves. If you want a list of just cool places to go with out learning anything these are great. Earthcaches give you the background. See the waterfall waymark listing http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/details...dd-78ddef6f1e7a vs the same waterfall as an Earthcache http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/details...3b-50258288bb1e. (By the way, a county park, so no approval sought or was requested when I got the Earthcache approved)

 

If you want some help getting approval or developing the oh so onerous educational component, I’d be happy to help.

 

Earthcaching is also being used to try to build the trust with the NPS to bring traditional Geocaching back to the NPs. I am helping develop a puzzle cache at a NP that will be used as a test case for allowing traditional caching in NPs