Cache location requires paid admission - OK?

[+Super Dad]

I'm considering placing a cache in a city park that requires a paid admission (local zoo.) Would this be ok, or would it be considered a "commercial" cache even if run by a not for profit entity?

 

Thanks,

Super Dad

[+Whistlen]

Here in Cleveland, we have a multi cache in the city Zoo...I think it's called Take a Journey Around the World. I'm sure I'll be quickly corrected if I'm wrong so here it goes...

 

As long as it's posted on the cache page that there is an admission, it should be fine.

[+stepshep]

Here in Cleveland, we have a multi cache in the city Zoo...I think it's called Take a Journey Around the World. I'm sure I'll be quickly corrected if I'm wrong so here it goes...

 

As long as it's posted on the cache page that there is an admission, it should be fine.

 

Ditto, I did some looking and there are some zoo and museum caches that admission is required to enter. Just say so on the cache page, and you should be fine.

[Clan Riffster]

When in doubt, ask your local reviewer. I think you'll be fine.

[+bassman69]

The other thing to consider is, will the zoo give permission to place it there. If not you could always do a virtual.

[+Shop99er]

The other thing to consider is, will the zoo give permission to place it there. If not you could always do a virtual.

Not anymore. Virts are no longer being approved.

[+sbell111]

The other thing to consider is, will the zoo give permission to place it there. If not you could always do a virtual.

Not anymore. Virts are no longer being approved.

As Shop99er explained, virts are no longer being approved. You could do a multi that has the final destination outside the zoo.

[+Zilvervloot]

I'm considering placing a cache in a city park that requires a paid admission (local zoo.) Would this be ok, or would it be considered a "commercial" cache even if run by a not for profit entity?

I am against anything that smells like the commercial exploitation of geocaching.

 

I personally would consider it bad taste to place a cache in a zone where you must pay a fee to a commercial organization to find the cache. Examples like these are a cache inside Disney land, at the top of the Eiffel tower, or a cache where you have to pay the cache owner to get the permission to log.

If you allow these caches, you will never know where it will end. Eventually there will be a clever businessman who will place caches in his entertainment park, just to lure more customers.

 

As soon as you must pay to find a cache, I think is wrong. But, a cache is OK when spending money is not mandatory. When the donation of money is optional.

A good example is for instance, a cache near a medieval church where you can support it is maintenance by putting some money in a small box.

Or a cache at a campus for the mentally challenged, where you can support their good work by spending a meal in the restaurant run by the inhabitants.

 

So, answering your question, when the zoo is a commercial zoo, I will never ever go to your cache. I will think of you as a shareholder of this zoo. A zoo that treats of our great free hobby as a source of new income.

However, if your zoo is a non-commercial one, where a small fee is not forced but suggested, I will not even visit your cache, I know I will even donate something.

 

Zilvervloot.

[+sbell111]

I'm considering placing a cache in a city park that requires a paid admission (local zoo.) Would this be ok, or would it be considered a "commercial" cache even if run by a not for profit entity?

I am against anything that smells like the commercial exploitation of geocaching.

 

I personally would consider it bad taste to place a cache in a zone where you must pay a fee to a commercial organization to find the cache. Examples like these are a cache inside Disney land, at the top of the Eiffel tower, or a cache where you have to pay the cache owner to get the permission to log.

If you allow these caches, you will never know where it will end. Eventually there will be a clever businessman who will place caches in his entertainment park, just to lure more customers. ...

You'll want to stay away from this one. Interestingly (or not), I've searched for a cache at the top of the Eiffel Tower. Edited February 21, 2007 by sbell111

[+mtn-man]

Not for profit entity would be OK typically. Many parks charge admission to enter, so not going geocaching just because you might have to pay could limit your caching unnecessarily. sbell111 illustrates this pretty well. I buy a state parks pass each year because our parks allow geocaching, even though we have tight restrictions.

 

Something like Disney would not fly. Its been well debated. A zoo probably would, but your reviewer would know more detail and would be happy to help you. If you are not sure who your reviewer is, write the contact address. They will forward your email to the right person.

[+sbell111]

I made a few inquiries after this post, but nothing ever really came of it.

Future caches will not be approved due to the 'commercial' guideline.

Well... And the fact that disney employees are directed to remove geocaches from the parks most likely means they aren't placed with permission in the first place.

 

if Disney said "Mickey and Eisner would like to place a cache in the park" I'd be happy to include it. I have nothing against Mickey.

[+palser]

There is a cache here at the local zoo which requires an admission fee. The cache owner has permission to place the cache and also requested if you show your GPS at the gate they will let you go in and find the cache with no fee.

 

Which to me is a very good deal all around. But the zoo is so nice it was not hard to bust the guy the fee and spend some time in the zoo after rounding up the cache...nice cache and had a good time, that's what it's all about..

 

Dr. P

[+mikeslomka]

Many local parks near me require an admission fee. For the Metroparks, it is $20 per year, and that covers all the parks. I believe that you can also get yearly passes for other park systems in the area for close to that.

 

I guess it just depends on the location. If the location is a place that I want to go, I'll pay to get in and find caches. If I don't want to go there, then I probably won't pay.

 

I have no problem with commercialism, because I have free will. If I don't want to go somewhere or purchase a product, I don't. There are no amount of caches that would entice me to go somewhere that I don't want to go.

[+Bad_CRC]

I see no problems with it.

 

I actually find it much more disturbing that lawmakers under the current administration are showing less and less interest in funding the parks in the first place.

[+bassman69]

Interesting collection of ideas and ideals. I agree that the commercialism of Geocaching is wrong. Having to pay a cache owner to be able to log?? And what about placing a cache outside your place of business? Could be misconstrued as drawing customers to you. Our first find was like this. I did not feel the owner did this intentionally but others might.

As for placing a cache within a zoo, state park, or regional park where a fee is collected for entrance or parking, I think that is just fine. If some do not want to go after that cache because of it, OK, but others might like to plan a day trip by spending the day in that park and grab a cache or two while there. I know my family would be very excited about going to the zoo and doing some caching.

SuperDad, you still with us???

[+Harry Dolphin]

Oh, I'm sure that it will be acceptable. There are lots of caches like that. And I've got a few in an area that requires a hiking permit.

I've been here before: The Empire Strikes Back, and I'll probably go back again! It's a great place to visit!

On the other hand, I also did one in a botanical garden. Gorge-ous Pretty place, but I hadn't been there before, and probaly would not go back. If I went on a Wedneday or Saturday morning, and took the subway, it would only have cost the two of us $8 (for the subway). Defintely a non-profit area. Some people love it!

Both are acceptable. Guess my question is: Will people enjoy the area, and not mind the admission?

[+Prime Suspect]

Do your research first. Find out exactly who runs the zoo. For example, the Dallas Zoo is run the by Dallas Parks Dept., and caches are okay there (though almost no one goes for them). The Dallas World Aquarium, on the other hand, is a for-profit establishment, and no caches allowed.

[+Fuzzywhip]

There is a BIG difference between charging an entrance fee to enter a park where a cache is located -and- charging a fee to enter just to get to a cache.

 

In the first instance, it would be OK but it MUST be indicated on the cache page that the fee is required.

 

In the second, this is WRONG as it starts a bad precident of commercializing caching.

 

An example is a cache I searched for while on holidays. On the cache page, nothing was mentioned that a parking fee would be charged at a park. So I spent time, gas, and energy to find the location only to be disappointed by a large parking fee for only a few minutes need. A real bummer!

 

On the other hand, I worked a number of caches on Vashon Island, Washington, which required paying a ferry fee to get to the island. As I knew the fee would be charged, I accepted this as the cost of working the collection of caches on the island. Is it commercializing caching? -No- As the ferry would change you a fee regardless of your purpose to traveling to the island.

 

PS: In the summer of 2006, the fee was $18 one-way to the island, and free to get back to the mainland - Found 8 caches and enjoyed exploring the island.

[+Jamisjockey]

Call me an idealistic noob, but I see no problem with a cache being located somewhere that a fee is required for entry, such as a park, amusment park, zoo, etc, as long as the fee is put in the cache description, and the fee is for entry, not for the cache itself. People put caches under dumpsters and lamp post skirts for cryin' out loud....

If everything is upfront about the cache, what's wrong with that?

Edited February 22, 2007 by Jamisjockey

[+sbell111]

There is a BIG difference between charging an entrance fee to enter a park where a cache is located -and- charging a fee to enter just to get to a cache.

 

In the first instance, it would be OK but it MUST be indicated on the cache page that the fee is required.

 

In the second, this is WRONG as it starts a bad precident of commercializing caching.

 

An example is a cache I searched for while on holidays. On the cache page, nothing was mentioned that a parking fee would be charged at a park. So I spent time, gas, and energy to find the location only to be disappointed by a large parking fee for only a few minutes need. A real bummer!

 

On the other hand, I worked a number of caches on Vashon Island, Washington, which required paying a ferry fee to get to the island. As I knew the fee would be charged, I accepted this as the cost of working the collection of caches on the island. Is it commercializing caching? -No- As the ferry would change you a fee regardless of your purpose to traveling to the island.

 

PS: In the summer of 2006, the fee was $18 one-way to the island, and free to get back to the mainland - Found 8 caches and enjoyed exploring the island.

Perhaps I'm thick, but I don't see the difference between the two. The first has a fee to get to where the cache is. The second has a fee to get where the cache is.

[+bassman69]

sbell111, I think the difference is, if the fee is charged to get into the park, regardless of your intent, then that is one circumstance. If someone is charging you to access their acreage simply for the sake of caches, that is another.

All of this brings up another point for me. I am not a premium YET, but until I am, there are a number of caches in my area that are unavailable to me because of this. I do not mind buying the Official products from this site, nor will I mind paying the membership fee this summer as I have planned, but I am much more likely to plan a family day at the zoo, and grab a few caches while there (if available), then spend any more money directly on caching at this time.

All in all, this is a personal preference and really up to the reviewers and those who make the rules for us all to follow. If a vote is taken, I say as long as the property owner/controling entity gives permission, then it should be approved.

[+Jhwk]

sbell111, I think the difference is, if the fee is charged to get into the park, regardless of your intent, then that is one circumstance. If someone is charging you to access their acreage simply for the sake of caches, that is another.

All of this brings up another point for me. I am not a premium YET, but until I am, there are a number of caches in my area that are unavailable to me because of this. I do not mind buying the Official products from this site, nor will I mind paying the membership fee this summer as I have planned, but I am much more likely to plan a family day at the zoo, and grab a few caches while there (if available), then spend any more money directly on caching at this time.

All in all, this is a personal preference and really up to the reviewers and those who make the rules for us all to follow. If a vote is taken, I say as long as the property owner/controling entity gives permission, then it should be approved.

wow, a GPSr and $3 a month subscription. What other 'direct' expenses are there?

 

OK, gas, if you drive.

[+sbell111]

Happy meals do not grow on trees.

[+Renegade Knight]

I've placed a zoo cache and had no problems. The fee does keep most geocachers away. That's their loss. It's a good cache.

[Team Summit]

I am new to the hobby, but I would not start a hunt that seems commercial.

[+Renegade Knight]

I'm considering placing a cache in a city park that requires a paid admission (local zoo.) Would this be ok, or would it be considered a "commercial" cache even if run by a not for profit entity?

 

Thanks,

Super Dad

 

A non profit zoo is not commercial when it comes to caches listed on this site. There is a lot of debate over at what point an entrance fee makes something commercial. that's different from the guidelines that the reviewer will use to approve your cache. Your cache should be fine. It's only issue is that being inside a zoo they may wish to verify that you have permission to place the cache.

[+bassman69]

Jhwk,

OK, OK, you got me there. Thing is, credit cards are a bit tight right now. Putting a recurring charge, annual or monthly is not happening till summer.

My point in that really was, if some caches are unattainable because of a fee, then members only caches fit that description as well. Don't they? I know membership supports the site, and I am all for that but,.....

 

I suppose this is one of those never ending debates. We are all entitled to our beliefs, so I belief I will bow out of this one

[+cdwegner]

How about one inside an ice cream shop?

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...da-d81090df89bd

 

[+Zilvervloot]

There are “new” guidelines (21st Feb '07). It states clear what a commercial cache is.

 

Commercial Caches

Commercial caches attempt to use the Geocaching.com web site cache reporting tool directly or indirectly (intentionally or non-intentionally) to solicit customers through a Geocaching.com listing. These are NOT permitted. Examples include for-profit locations that require an entrance fee, or locations that sell products or services. If the finder is required to go inside the business, interact with employees, and/or purchase a product or service, then the cache is presumed to be commercial

 

These guidelines apply to new caches, the old ones are considered to be “grandfathered” So according to the new guidelines, a new cache in a zoo with an entrance fee is considered commercial.

 

Personally, I am happy with these new guidelines. It will prevent unwanted surprises like this one.

 

Zilvervloot.

[+sbell111]

There are “new” guidelines (21st Feb '07). It states clear what a commercial cache is.

 

Commercial Caches

Commercial caches attempt to use the Geocaching.com web site cache reporting tool directly or indirectly (intentionally or non-intentionally) to solicit customers through a Geocaching.com listing. These are NOT permitted. Examples include for-profit locations that require an entrance fee, or locations that sell products or services. If the finder is required to go inside the business, interact with employees, and/or purchase a product or service, then the cache is presumed to be commercial

 

These guidelines apply to new caches, the old ones are considered to be “grandfathered” So according to the new guidelines, a new cache in a zoo with an entrance fee is considered commercial.

 

Personally, I am happy with these new guidelines. It will prevent unwanted surprises like this one.

 

Zilvervloot.

I believe that a non-profit zoo would not be considered a business and, therefore, would not fall under the 'commercial' guideline. Perhaps TPTB could address this issue.

[+Rockin Roddy]

I have something like 12-15 caches in a local State Park, we're hosting a weekend camp/cache event there this spring! You MUST pay to enter the park, anyone planning to camp MUST pay to stay! Not only has it been OK'd, it's being supported by our local geocaching org!!

 

I also have something like 15 caches in a nearby botanical park...another fee to enter. Although there is a fee to enter, I have heard very little complaint as I did make sure to give people their money's worth (and the park is beautiful year round).

 

If you don't want to pay the small entrance fee to find these examples, your loss...these are GREAT places to visit!!! And I do agree with the one that said that premium membership is much like these examples...you can't get to it unless you pay....not that I'm complaining about the cost of a membership!

 

edit for spelling

Edited February 23, 2007 by Rockin Roddy

[+bassman69]

Happy Anniversary Super Dad!

 

It appears Super Dad has got his answer and has moved on. I am not a moderator but maybe it's time to let this dog lie.

Edited February 23, 2007 by bassman69

[+sbell111]

There are “new” guidelines (21st Feb '07). It states clear what a commercial cache is. ...

 

These guidelines apply to new caches, the old ones are considered to be “grandfathered” So according to the new guidelines, a new cache in a zoo with an entrance fee is considered commercial.

...

I believe that a non-profit zoo would not be considered a business and, therefore, would not fall under the 'commercial' guideline. Perhaps TPTB could address this issue.

Keystone spoke to this issue in the other thread (to the extent that you can 'speak' online):

Keystone-

 

Could you give some clarification as to whether the new 'commercial' guidelines would affect a cache placed in a non-profit zoo?

No, I don't think anything has changed in the Guidelines applicable to that situation. The new language just establishes some rebuttable presumptions about *business* locations.

 

Under my player account, the multicache at the non-profit Cleveland MetroParks Zoo is on my all-time favorites list. Well worth the price of admission.

[Familie Tricaching]

FYI Zilvervloot - the following log lets you know how to get to the AGUNTUM cache without paying an entry fee - so that point is moot.

 

October 17, 2006

Niemand muss Eintritt bezahlen, wenn er nicht will. Der Eingang auf der gegenüberliegenden Straßenseite ist generell KOSTENLOS (aber natürlich ohne Museum).

 

Roughly translated - you do not need to pay an entry fee, if you don't want to. The entrance on the other side of the street is basically FREE (but naturally you don't get access to the museum).

 

If that had been made clear on the cache page itself, the complaint may not have popped up, except perhaps from cachers who rely on coordinates only...

[+Zilvervloot]

I know my English is not that good. Sbell111 makes a remark I do not understand.

I believe that a non-profit zoo would not be considered a business and, therefore, would not fall under the 'commercial' guideline. Perhaps TPTB could address this issue.

Why is a non-commercial organization not a business and why should it not fall under the ‘commercial’ guideline? I think this was the original question asked by Super Dad: “Is a cache on the perimeters of a non-profit entity, where you must pay an entrance fee, a “commercial” cache?

 

I would say the commercial guideline apply also to non-commercial organizations. A non-commercial organization also provides customers a product/service in exchange for money. And when you must purchase their product/service to get to the cache, it should be treated as “commercial”. Any organization is commercial for geocaching if it is not possible to find the cache without buying something.

 

Since the new guidelines states it is not possible anymore to allow commercial caches, to my opinion this implies it is not possible to place any new cache on the perimeters of an organisation where you must pay an entrance fee.

 

But please fee free to place your response if you see it different, or if you agree.

 

@ Familie Tricaching: At the time we were visiting Aguntum in Austria, it was not possible to enter perimeters of the roman village by using the exit on the other side of the road. We tried, but that side was impossible to enter. A guard and (temporarily) fences stopped us and blocked that way.

And yes, I read the remarks other cachers made. I guess the two cachers who visited the roman village after my visit, had the same unpleasant experience and therefore posted also a DNF-log.

 

The reason I placed the link to my log is to illustrate how frustrating it is when you have to pay money, just for looking for a cache.

 

Zilvervloot.

[+sbell111]

I know my English is not that good. Sbell111 makes a remark I do not understand.

I believe that a non-profit zoo would not be considered a business and, therefore, would not fall under the 'commercial' guideline. Perhaps TPTB could address this issue.

Why is a non-commercial organization not a business and why should it not fall under the ‘commercial’ guideline? I think this was the original question asked by Super Dad: “Is a cache on the perimeters of a non-profit entity, where you must pay an entrance fee, a “commercial” cache?

 

I would say the commercial guideline apply also to non-commercial organizations. A non-commercial organization also provides customers a product/service in exchange for money. And when you must purchase their product/service to get to the cache, it should be treated as “commercial”. Any organization is commercial for geocaching if it is not possible to find the cache without buying something. ...

To me it kind of goes back to parks that require an entrance fee. These places are non-profit and we certainly do not want to not be able to place caches there, simply because they charge a fee to help pay the park's expenses.

 

Similarly, a non-profit zoo charges an entrance fee to pay their expenses. If the park is considered non-commercial, so should the zoo.

[Keystone]

Why is a non-commercial organization not a business and why should it not fall under the ‘commercial’ guideline? I think this was the original question asked by Super Dad: “Is a cache on the perimeters of a non-profit entity, where you must pay an entrance fee, a “commercial” cache?

 

I would say the commercial guideline apply also to non-commercial organizations. A non-commercial organization also provides customers a product/service in exchange for money. And when you must purchase their product/service to get to the cache, it should be treated as “commercial”. Any organization is commercial for geocaching if it is not possible to find the cache without buying something.

 

Since the new guidelines states it is not possible anymore to allow commercial caches, to my opinion this implies it is not possible to place any new cache on the perimeters of an organisation where you must pay an entrance fee.

"Commercial" means "a business trying to make a profit." If a park or museum is not a business for profit, then a cache there is not a commercial cache. That is why the listing guidelines distinguish between "for profit" and "non profit" locations that charge an entrance fee.

 

This listing guideline is not new. It is one of the oldest guidelines, having been in place for longer than the four years I've been reviewing caches. All we did in the recent update is add a sentence to it: "If the finder is required to go inside the business, interact with employees, and/or purchase a product or service, then the cache is presumed to be commercial." And we added a statement saying that reviewers will refer caches to Groundspeak if they're perceived to be commercial in nature. The text prior to that has not changed in years.

 

I hope that this explanation is helpful.