Federal Lands that require NO permission.

[trackinthebox]

While researching areas to place caches without begging to exercise your right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I happened upon this article:

 

"Tech geeks go treasure-hunting"

 

The excerpt of particular interest is:

 

"The U.S. Forest Service allows geocaching in national parks but does not require permits.

 

"For the most part, they're really responsible folks," Polo said. "They care about the environment and they want to be out in nature. ... These are just the kinds of people we want in our parks."

 

Many geocaching groups organize park cleanup days, known as CITO events, for Cache In Trash Out."

 

Exactly right. With rights come responsibility and as long as we are mindful about the environemnt, we don't need Big Brother babysitting us in the woods.

[+sbell111]

I can remember when I was a noob and I confused national parks with national forests. I got jumped on pretty quickly.

[+unicyclist]

That is a really great article, now on my bookmark list. It explains geocaching better than almost any other article I have read.

 

On thing that is stuck in my mind that I can not think of a correct answer to..... in the article in mentions TB and geocoins as a varation of geocaching. Are they a varation or just an add on?

[+Mr. 0]

 

"The U.S. Forest Service allows geocaching in national parks but does not require permits.

 

Unfortunately that's not true. Geocaches are not allowed in the National Parks.

 

This from the guidelines http://www.geocaching.com/about/hiding.aspx

Will it be on private or public land? - If you place it on private land, please ask permission before putting it there! If you place the cache on public lands you need to contact the managing agency to find out about their rules. You will be in violation of federal regulation by placing a cache in any area administered by the National Park Service (US). The National Park regulations are intended to protect the fragile environment, and historical and cultural areas found in the parks.

 

It sounds like the Delaware State Parks representative quoted in the article was incorrect, or a quote was taken out of context by the paper. The U.S. Forest Service does allow caches, to the best of my knowledge (please correct me if I'm wrong), but they don't actually have anything to do with the National Parks.

 

Edit: Added the last couple of lines for clarification.

Edited October 13, 2006 by Mr. 0

[+sbell111]

 

"The U.S. Forest Service allows geocaching in national parks but does not require permits.

 

Unfortunately that's not true. Geocaches are not allowed in the National Parks.

The US Forest Service could care less whether we have caches in national parks.

[trackinthebox]

They are referring to National Forest parks, not National Park Service parks.

[+Mr. 0]

 

The US Forest Service could care less whether we have caches in national parks.

 

Yeah yeah yeah. I realized that I needed to further clarify what I said, and edited as you were replying. I was hoping to get that edit in there before someone replied and pointed out that I'm an idiot sometimes.

[+sbell111]

They are referring to National Forest parks, not National Park Service parks.

National forest parks, better known as national forests?

[+StarBrand]

excerpt of particular interest is:

 

"The U.S. Forest Service allows geocaching in national parks but does not require permits.

 

Too bad the forest service doesn't administrate National Parks.

[trackinthebox]

excerpt of particular interest is:

 

"The U.S. Forest Service allows geocaching in national parks but does not require permits.

 

Too bad the forest service doesn't administrate National Parks.

 

They are referring to Forest Service or National Forest parks, NOT NPS parks.

 

Forest Service and/or National Forest: http://www.fs.fed.us/

National Park Service: http://www.nps.gov/

Edited October 13, 2006 by trackinthebox

[+sbell111]

excerpt of particular interest is:

 

"The U.S. Forest Service allows geocaching in national parks but does not require permits.

Too bad the forest service doesn't administrate National Parks.

It would be awesome if they did.

 

Unfortunately, this little bit of false information is still on the NPS site:

Geocaching involves burying objects that others search for using Global Position System (GPS) technology

Strangely, so is this:

In fact, GPS units are also used in an adventure game that is played around the world, in more than 200 countries. The game is called “geocaching.” Does anybody know what a “cache” is? A cache (spelled differently than money “cash”!) is a place for hiding, storing, or preserving a treasure or supplies. “Geo” means earth or land. A “geocache”, then, is a hidden treasure that is located somewhere on earth, or land, and is found by using a GPS unit! Are you interested in going geocaching today?

Edited October 13, 2006 by sbell111

[trackinthebox]

A little clarification from the National Forest website in my State:

 

Allegheny National Forest

 

Reasonable guidelines and even more awesome is the fact that we dont have to ask permission for an otherwise harmless activity.

Edited October 13, 2006 by trackinthebox

[+Mr. 0]

A little clarification from the National Forest website in my State:

 

Allegheny National Forest

 

Reasonable guidelines and even more awesome is the fact that we dont have to ask permission for an otherwise harmless activity.

 

It looks like the need for permission varies from location to location. Looking at the Wayne Nat'l Forest here in Ohio, "A special-use authorization for any geo-caching activity is required." Though the page was last updated in May of 2005, so things may have changed and the site just not updated.

 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/wayne/recreation_sites/geocache.html

[Max Cacher]

Please tread softly here, some of the USDA National Forest Service do have written permits and have a geocaching policy on placement, they seem to be a little different state to state.

 

Arkansas, Georgia, and several more have policies , and Tennessee is working on there’s

 

There is “NO” blanket policy for all National Forest

 

Your regular reviewer will be aware of these.

 

Max Cacher

Geocaching.com Volunteer Cache Reviewer // Moderator

[+phask]

A little clarification from the National Forest website in my State:

 

Allegheny National Forest

 

Reasonable guidelines and even more awesome is the fact that we dont have to ask permission for an otherwise harmless activity.

 

It looks like the need for permission varies from location to location. Looking at the Wayne Nat'l Forest here in Ohio, "A special-use authorization for any geo-caching activity is required." Though the page was last updated in May of 2005, so things may have changed and the site just not updated.

 

http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/wayne/recreation_sites/geocache.html

 

And if you take it word for word, you may need a permit to LOOK for a cache.

 

Geo-caching is allowed with the following restrictions:

 

· A special-use authorization for any geo-caching activity is required.

 

Also don't get too much activity or cause a trail to form

[+welch]

They are referring to National Forest parks, not National Park Service parks.

Well why didn't that they say it that way?

If your a noob you may not know the difference.

[+Renegade Knight]

excerpt of particular interest is:

 

"The U.S. Forest Service allows geocaching in national parks but does not require permits.

 

Too bad the forest service doesn't administrate National Parks.

 

Heck I'm all for that.

[dsandbro]

Please tread softly here, some of the USDA National Forest Service do have written permits and have a geocaching policy on placement, they seem to be a little different state to state.

 

Arkansas, Georgia, and several more have policies , and Tennessee is working on there’s

 

There is “NO” blanket policy for all National Forest

 

Max Cacher

Geocaching.com Volunteer Cache Reviewer // Moderator

 

True. The Forest Service has a management philosophy of decentralization as much as possible, with nationwide regulations as rare as possible. The Forest Service has always believed in local managers making local decisions for their local forests, with enacting local regulations only after problems have appeared. Unfortunately, many environmental groups are intent on using the courts to change that. ["No one ever made a good decision from a swivel chair." -- Gen. George Patton.]

 

The downside of this is you can have different geocaching policies on adjacent National Forests. Confusing to the average forest user or cache owner.

 

I am now retired from the FS, but when I worked for them I was the 'geocache monitor' as a collateral duty. I had to personally check out every new geocache placed on National Forest lands, so the taxpayers paid me to go geocaching (it was a tough job, but someone had to do it. ). I only found two that were questionable, one required some personal risk in getting to -- a stream crossing and a rock face scramble, and the other was at a archaeological site. Since there wasn't exactly a throng beating a path to either of the caches (3 logged visits in 2 years) we left them alone.

 

There is no national policy on caches in Wilderness, although some wilderness activists try to claim there is. Local Wilderness managers are free enact their own geocaching policies, and some have banned them from designated Wilderness, others have no restrictions. So check locally.

[+ghost640]

excerpt of particular interest is:

 

"The U.S. Forest Service allows geocaching in national parks but does not require permits.

 

Too bad the forest service doesn't administrate National Parks.

 

Heck I'm all for that.

 

Keep in mind that National Forests are working forests - they are open to harvest, meaning your cache will likely someday end up in a clearcut. It's good to have a few places (Natl' Parks) where the forests are maintained under (relatively) natural conditions.

Edited October 15, 2006 by ghost640

[+Moe the Sleaze]

FYI - SOME National Forests DO require registration. One example is the Superior National Forest in Minnesota.

[trackinthebox]

FYI - SOME National Forests DO require registration. One example is the Superior National Forest in Minnesota.

 

Thats too bad. Glad I dont live in Minnesota.

[AZcachemeister]

Also notable is that (in Arizona at least) National Forest administered Wilderness Areas are OFF LIMITS, while Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Areas are INBOUNDS IF you obtain permission before placing the cache!

[dsandbro]

...Keep in mind that National Forests are working forests - they are open to harvest, meaning your cache will likely someday end up in a clearcut. It's good to have a few places (Natl' Parks) where the forests are maintained under (relatively) natural conditions.

 

On my local NF less than 25% of the total land area has ever had a harvest entry, and less than 1% was a clearcut (too bad, the forest would be healthier with a few more well placed and well designed clearcuts, but politics trumps science). And this forest has historically been one of the largest timber producers.

[+worldtraveler]

Also notable is that (in Arizona at least) National Forest administered Wilderness Areas are OFF LIMITS...

That is understandable. Think of all the NFS employees who would be out of work if that tree in AZ was somehow harmed!

[+ghost640]

...Keep in mind that National Forests are working forests - they are open to harvest, meaning your cache will likely someday end up in a clearcut. It's good to have a few places (Natl' Parks) where the forests are maintained under (relatively) natural conditions.

 

On my local NF less than 25% of the total land area has ever had a harvest entry, and less than 1% was a clearcut (too bad, the forest would be healthier with a few more well placed and well designed clearcuts, but politics trumps science). And this forest has historically been one of the largest timber producers.

 

In the midwest the timber rotation is about 1%/yr, so forests are cut on about a 100 yr cycle -consequently mosts forest are aspen. Most of these (>85%) are still clearcut, although folks are getting smarter about how to design cuts (moving away from 40 ac dispersed squares). This places most forests are kept in a relatively young state (as forests go) - and while caching in clearcuts to 60 yr olds stands is OK (at least they are still forested!), it's pretty neat to get into true old growth hardwoods or pines once in a while - but those things are the exception rather than the rule, and rare in our landscape. Here the science says it's good to have representations of all stages of forest growth and types, but yes, politics does play its heavy hand as well.

[+gcslim]

There is no national policy on caches in Wilderness, although some wilderness activists try to claim there is. Local Wilderness managers are free enact their own geocaching policies, and some have banned them from designated Wilderness, others have no restrictions. So check locally.

 

There may be no policy for caching specifically, but you can get fined for leaving ANY man-made thing behind in a designated wilderness area. That is the point of it in the first place. There were many incidents of this being enforced when I worked for the Salmon-Challis NF, which administered the Frank Church-RONR Wilderness. Wilderness areas are supposed to remain as close to natural as possible. This is also why they have such different wildfire-fighting policies for fires that occur in a wilderness area.

[dsandbro]

There is no national policy on caches in Wilderness, although some wilderness activists try to claim there is. Local Wilderness managers are free enact their own geocaching policies, and some have banned them from designated Wilderness, others have no restrictions. So check locally.

 

There may be no policy for caching specifically, but you can get fined for leaving ANY man-made thing behind in a designated wilderness area. That is the point of it in the first place. There were many incidents of this being enforced when I worked for the Salmon-Challis NF, which administered the Frank Church-RONR Wilderness. Wilderness areas are supposed to remain as close to natural as possible. This is also why they have such different wildfire-fighting policies for fires that occur in a wilderness area.

 

That may be true for the FC-RONR wilderness, it is not true for all. Cachers are advised to check locally and not just assume that because one wilderness bans caches all wilderness ban caches, and conversely, because one allows caches do not assume all allow caches. A cursory check of caches listed on this website reveals that there are many inside designated Wilderness with full knowledge and consent of local Wilderness managers.

[+jackrock]

I've seen some caches listed in National Forest land where controlled burns are done periodically. A managed forest area would have some inherent risks such as this. I'm pretty sure I've seen some caches listed that do fall on National Park Service property which struck me as odd since I understood they are not allowed in National Parks.

[+Mudfrog]

FYI - SOME National Forests DO require registration. One example is the Superior National Forest in Minnesota.

 

Thats too bad. Glad I dont live in Minnesota.

 

What's bad about this? Register, get your permit, whatever,,, then go hide your cache,, sounds pretty easy!

[+SG-MIN]

What is this...

 

A TITB thread that has not been locked yet??

 

Maybe it is here that we will find out how those calls to Walmart go!!

[+WildGooseChase]

IBL!

[trackinthebox]

What is this...

 

A TITB thread that has not been locked yet??

 

Maybe it is here that we will find out how those calls to Walmart go!!

 

You guys solved ALL my ills in one fell swoop and the Moderators sealed it by allowing the horribly libelous comments to proceed.

 

I look forward to being the new owner here.

 

And once I am, YOU'RE ALL FIRED!

Edited October 19, 2006 by trackinthebox

[+SG-MIN]

(Note: I had to use the "fast reply" in order to get this one in before lock down!!)

 

TITB, I cannot see how owning this site would make you happy - apprently you hate geocaching and and geocachers.

 

Please keep us posted on your progress.

[trackinthebox]

apprently you hate geocaching and and geocachers.

 

No, just bias

[+disenchanted]

This appears to fit the classic definition of NPD. I mean signature spot on.

[trackinthebox]

You dont call someone a member of an organization such as was insinuated and expect THAT to be ignored do you?

 

And the Moderators here thought it was FUNNY?

 

No need for me to call Wal*Mart now............

 

The classic straw that broke the camels back (since you were insinuating middle east connections)

Edited October 19, 2006 by trackinthebox

[+Whistlen]

 

You guys solved ALL my ills in one fell swoop and the Moderators sealed it by allowing the horribly libelous comments to proceed.

 

I look forward to being the new owner here.

 

And once I am, YOU'RE ALL FIRED!

 

Just to cut to the chase, if and I say IF you take over, then I quit!

 

Hobbies are fun and you ain't!

[+Airmapper]

DO.NOT.FEED.THE.TROLL

[+WildGooseChase]

You dont call someone a member of an organization such as was insinuated and expect THAT to be ignored do you?

 

And the Moderators here thought it was FUNNY?

 

No need for me to call Wal*Mart now............

 

Oh gee.. And we were all so convinced that you would actually call.

[Keystone]

Closing this one too, as I thought it had dropped off the page.