Jump to content

AT Caches Archived!


whistler & co.

Recommended Posts

Here's what's been happening today in Pennsylvania. It seems like all the caches on the AT here are being archived. I assume other states will follow?

 

September 17 by Groundspeak (0 found)

Groundspeak has been contacted by the National Park Service and asked to archive this geocache listing, effective immediately.

 

The National Parks Chief Ranger has identified this geocache as one that is currently placed on National Park Service managed Appalachian Trail Corridor lands and/or state lands where the Appalachian Trail passes through. Geocaching is not permitted on these lands. Consequently, Groundspeak is archiving this geocache. Please ensure that the geocache and all contents are removed from its location immediately.

Link to comment

It might be a little hard to 'immediately' hike out to some caches on the AT, LOL.

 

As "Rules and regulations along the A.T. are set and enforced by two major governmental agencies—the National Park Service (NPS) and the USDA Forest Service (USFS)—and state and local agencies as appropriate." I'd wonder at who's saying what, and who to believe since nothing has been published anywhere where it would be official.

Link to comment

It might be a little hard to 'immediately' hike out to some caches on the AT, LOL.

 

As "Rules and regulations along the A.T. are set and enforced by two major governmental agencies—the National Park Service (NPS) and the USDA Forest Service (USFS)—and state and local agencies as appropriate." I'd wonder at who's saying what, and who to believe since nothing has been published anywhere where it would be official.

As typical, when you have dual agencies managing the parks systems, one will issue regulationsi without advising the other. Agency turf wars tug-of-wars are not uncommon.

Link to comment

It might be a little hard to 'immediately' hike out to some caches on the AT, LOL.

 

As "Rules and regulations along the A.T. are set and enforced by two major governmental agencies—the National Park Service (NPS) and the USDA Forest Service (USFS)—and state and local agencies as appropriate." I'd wonder at who's saying what, and who to believe since nothing has been published anywhere where it would be official.

 

Good question.

The various agreements that ties everthing together into the AT would have to be consulted to see who has what authority over what and for what purpose. Something like the AT would involve multiple parties. Not just one agnecy. However since that's nowhere near my area of the country I can't speak to anythnig but generalities.

Link to comment

I wonder what precipated this sudden move? Some of those caches have been around for several years.

 

(Edited for bad spelling.)

I bet I know the exact individual responsible ... she calls herself a "geocacher", but hasn't found anything in years and in reality she uses her ID as a cover for nothing more than lauching a personal and petty vendetta.

Link to comment

:lol::laughing: It seems all the "AT" caches in Ma. were archived today. Many of them didn't seem as

though they were anywhere near the trail. Some were on Ma. Fish and Wild life property that the "trail passed

Through, and had permission to be there. Having seen with my eyes where some of the"AT" survey markers are, a few of the caches that were archived are NOT on NPS land.

Mushroomman1

Link to comment

It would be interesting to know what the final toll is on caches archived today. It must be the biggest single cache "die off" since geocaching started (more than the locationless, maybe?).

I wonder if TPTB did any kind of investigation into the actual placements, or simply followed the directive from the NPS. I know of at least one cache (GC146J4) that is over two miles from the AT on PA State Game Lands. Hopefully, we will get some explanation.

Edited by Klatch
Link to comment

I guess it's a response to side trails. That would explain why some caches that are quite a ways away were axed. If the easiest way to get to a cache on a State Gamelands is by first hiking along the AT then cutting off for the last .15, of course that's how people will go there, and that will create a discernible trail.

 

Here's an interesting report:

AT MEGA Transect

Link to comment

I am glad I checked the forums this evening and saw this post. I have supported (financially) the Appalachian Trail Conference nd am a big proponent of the National Park Service, but on this issue it seems to overstep logic. That is unless they want to piss people off and see less traffic on the AT. I was actually planning on doing a cache along the AT that has been on my TO DO list since it came out. I would have at least like to have had warning that it was coming (maybe there was but I was unaware). I am not normally a person to make a stink, but in this case I think I will be contacting both the ATC and the NPS. Some of the best caches I have ever found are along the AT and I am now thankful that I did a section this summer to grab some of the caches. If we are lucky in PA they will turn around and prohibit caches on state game lands (that was my bit of sarcasm).

 

Edited to add. Hmm, I just checked a stretch along the AT and the archived caches seem hit or miss whether they were archived or not. I wonder if this is still a "work in progress"?

Edited by andGuest
Link to comment

OMG!!! I got my email today for two caches that I have more than 200' off the AT. That was the stipulation I had to follow from the reviewer when I placed them. I live less than 10 miles from the AT near Blue Mtn in PA. I ran a quick list of all the caches I have done on the AT & in my immediate area I counted over 30!!! There are entire sections completely wipped out of caches!!! This is nuts!! :laughing::lol:

Link to comment

I guess it's a response to side trails. That would explain why some caches that are quite a ways away were axed. If the easiest way to get to a cache on a State Gamelands is by first hiking along the AT then cutting off for the last .15, of course that's how people will go there, and that will create a discernible trail.

 

Here's an interesting report:

AT MEGA Transect

 

Even if that is true it shouldn't matter as long as the caches are not actually on land officially deemed to be part of the AT.

Link to comment

I just found an overlay of the AT for GE. I combined it with the GC KML. The cache mentioned above is, like mentioned, 2 cromes from the AT. Additionally, there are caches on or very near the trail still.

 

So, unless this is just the start of a purge, then not all AT caches are going away. The real reason some and not all of these cache are being archived may never get past the Groundspeak offices unless they deem it necessary to tell us.

 

It could be...

The National Parks Chief Ranger has identified this geocache as one that is currently placed on National Park Service managed Appalachian Trail Corridor lands and/or state lands where the Appalachian Trail passes through.
...this part that is key for the above mentioned cache. It's not near the trail, but on state lands that happen to also have the trail go through.

 

It's curious that a NPS ranger is enforcing a state policy when there are caches up and down the trail that aren't being effected.

Link to comment

I am glad I checked the forums this evening and saw this post. I have supported (financially) the Appalachian Trail Conference nd am a big proponent of the National Park Service, but on this issue it seems to overstep logic. That is unless they want to piss people off and see less traffic on the AT.

 

I wonder if it would make any difference if a petition were drawn up which expressed our displeasure as a geocaching community. There are at least a couple of online petition web sites that could be used.

 

I was actually planning on doing a cache along the AT that has been on my TO DO list since it came out. I would have at least like to have had warning that it was coming (maybe there was but I was unaware). I am not normally a person to make a stink, but in this case I think I will be contacting both the ATC and the NPS. Some of the best caches I have ever found are along the AT and I am now thankful that I did a section this summer to grab some of the caches. If we are lucky in PA they will turn around and prohibit caches on state game lands (that was my bit of sarcasm).

 

 

If we are lucky they will turn around and prohibit caches in Walmart parking lots.

Link to comment

Some of you are under the mistaken impression that the NPS/ATC wants to INCREASE the use of the AT. That's quite simply not true. In fact, they're looking to DECREASE its use as they feel parts of it are overused, or overcrowded, and detract from the experience. Here's a quote from their own MEGA-Transect document, page 27:

 

In addition to environmental impacts, an individual’s

experience of the Trail can be compromised by the

sheer number of other visitors, or by others’ actions

and behavior, including crowding, conflict and noise.

A.T. MEGA-Transect partners are considering

adapting the Trail facilities assessment process that

ATC and the Trail clubs are already using to gather

and incorporate information about visitor-created

side trails and campsites.

 

In addition, the USFS Southern Research Station at

the University of Georgia led a visitor count pilot

project in 2007 that was successfully administered

by both staff and volunteers. A.T. MEGA-Transect

partners are exploring avenues to expand this project

to the entire Trail, and incorporate new questions on

quality of experience and crowding.

 

With the results of these studies, managers will

implement new measures that protect the Trail,

its resources, and the associated experience of its

visitors.

 

Knocking off geocaches is one quick, easy way to decrease the impact of visitors. Certainly they could allow caching, but they can also disallow it too, under their "abandoned property" rule. The NPS/ATC doesn't want more people on the trail, they want a pristine environment for a few folks to walk through. Geocachers apparently have no place in their perfect little world. From the looks of the quote above, they're setting up to limit the number of people who can use the trail. The is already done in many of our national parks, where only a handful of people can get permits to hike in the back country that ALL American taxpayers foot the bill for.

 

Geocachers are an easy target, but I have a feeling we won't be the only ones booted off the trail. I hope I'm wrong. Time will tell.

Link to comment

Just checked some of my local (Berks PA) AT finds and at least 5 have been archived through this process. I suspect at least two of them are outside the NPS jurisdiction well within PA state game lands property. I understand why Groundspeak archived them at this time, but hope that if the owners can show the caches are actually outside NPS jurisdiction they can be reinstated. They should not allow the NPS to dictate what goes on outside their boundaries.

Link to comment

TWO of three AT caches of ours were archived by Groundspeak.

BOTH were WELL into State Game Lands #168 and had NOTHING to do with the NPS, other than the views going to them.

 

Still tryiong to figure how Groundspeak would archive them so quickly, WITHOUT proof...

Could have sent an e-mail, asking for proof of location. We had pictures that were sent to our reviewer, as a "just in case you're wondering... " before they were "approved." - yet they were still canned with many others.

 

Can't simply be caches. Something else is afoot.

I can see my next years' membership in ATC going in the circular file.

Link to comment

TWO of three AT caches of ours were archived by Groundspeak.

BOTH were WELL into State Game Lands #168 and had NOTHING to do with the NPS, other than the views going to them.

 

Still tryiong to figure how Groundspeak would archive them so quickly, WITHOUT proof...

Could have sent an e-mail, asking for proof of location. We had pictures that were sent to our reviewer, as a "just in case you're wondering... " before they were "approved." - yet they were still canned with many others.

 

Can't simply be caches. Something else is afoot.

I can see my next years' membership in ATC going in the circular file.

 

I wonder if it wasn't some sort of caches along a route thing that was used for determining which caches got hammered. Have you appealed the archiving? It would be interesting to hear what is said if you appeal with your proof that the cache was NOT on NPS land but on State Game Lands. I certainly would appeal the archive and have something in writing why my cache was archived. After all, if you place another cache on State Game land how do you know the NPS will not complain and get your cache archived again.

 

Jim

Link to comment

Some of you are under the mistaken impression that the NPS/ATC wants to INCREASE the use of the AT. That's quite simply not true. In fact, they're looking to DECREASE its use as they feel parts of it are overused, or overcrowded, and detract from the experience. Here's a quote from their own MEGA-Transect document, page 27:

 

In addition to environmental impacts, an individual’s

experience of the Trail can be compromised by the

sheer number of other visitors, or by others’ actions

and behavior, including crowding, conflict and noise.

A.T. MEGA-Transect partners are considering

adapting the Trail facilities assessment process that

ATC and the Trail clubs are already using to gather

and incorporate information about visitor-created

side trails and campsites.

 

In addition, the USFS Southern Research Station at

the University of Georgia led a visitor count pilot

project in 2007 that was successfully administered

by both staff and volunteers. A.T. MEGA-Transect

partners are exploring avenues to expand this project

to the entire Trail, and incorporate new questions on

quality of experience and crowding.

 

With the results of these studies, managers will

implement new measures that protect the Trail,

its resources, and the associated experience of its

visitors.

 

Knocking off geocaches is one quick, easy way to decrease the impact of visitors. Certainly they could allow caching, but they can also disallow it too, under their "abandoned property" rule. The NPS/ATC doesn't want more people on the trail, they want a pristine environment for a few folks to walk through. Geocachers apparently have no place in their perfect little world. From the looks of the quote above, they're setting up to limit the number of people who can use the trail. The is already done in many of our national parks, where only a handful of people can get permits to hike in the back country that ALL American taxpayers foot the bill for.

 

Geocachers are an easy target, but I have a feeling we won't be the only ones booted off the trail. I hope I'm wrong. Time will tell.

 

That really makes one think. Seems they aren't happy with Trail clubs either as they bring crowds. But aren't these the same crowds that have spent countless hours maintaining that same trail? Limiting access is not something I would support. Who will get to enjoy these beautiful spots if not all Americans"? Lets face it, most of us aren't ever going to hike any but small portions of the AT, but it seems like if you can't commit to doing the whole trail "they" aren't going to let you play at all.

Link to comment

Why are caches not on NPS land, far from the AT, being archived?

 

1) Why is the NPS lying about having authority these caches?

 

2) Why is Groundspeak rolling over and playing dead and not investigating the caches first?

 

The ATC/NPS has authority in the AT corridor, which includes lands not owned by the NPS that the AT runs through. Typically the corridor is 400 feet wide, but that varies depending on the land owner the ATC/NPS has the agreement with.

 

Groundspeak received a request by a federal law enforcement body. While I can't speak for them, I'm guessing its their policy to honor the request and sort out the details later. Technically, anyone who owns a cache in the AT corridor could face fines for abandoning property there. While this may be unlikely, it's possible. Groundspeak is probably trying to protect us from further penalties by cooperating. Not to mention that being uncooperative with a federal agency isn't going to bode well for future relations. I'd like to see a rapid review of these archivals, especially the questionable ones. However, I also believe that cooperating with law enforcement is always a good idea. There will be time for questions later, I hope. Obviously the NPS has overstepped their bounds a bit on some of these caches, I'm hopeful that Groundspeak will call them on it.

Link to comment

As I see it, the problem is that some hardcore backpackers think that geocaching "takes away from their wilderness experience" as expressed in this post at Backpacker.com. There are even those who say that even if they can't see the cache, just knowing it's there detracts from the experience :D:):) Discussed on GC.com in this thread

Edited by clan_Barron
Link to comment

A local cacher/hiker provided this link to a policy discussed/drafted at the May business meeting of the ATC:

 

http://www.appalachiantrail.org/atf/cf/%7B...hing_Policy.pdf

 

I particularly like their use of the terms "weilding" and "armed". Very subtle. Nice effect.

 

Well, it looks like the backpackers and hikers have someone to fight for them. And we have....

 

And I don't like those backpacker's increasing use of compact gas stoves. Sounds dangerous. Can we do anything about it?

Link to comment

Although I'm not happy about the archived caches I'm more interested in the way ahead. Big Green has to look ahead from a strategic viewpoint, after all they are a company that is in business to make money, providing us with a service. As the sport grows exponentially each year, caches and their placement will become a more delicate issue. Big Green probably doesn't want to make waves since they/we don't have as much political/economic leverage.....yet.

 

What I would like from Big green is what the way ahead is? We need to know why the caches were archived and what the "new" guidelines are for placeing caches on/near the AT.

 

-galaP-

Link to comment

Paint's drying on some signs I made up today - they'll be going up all around my property first light tomorrow.

 

ANYONE FROM THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE CAUGHT STEPPING FOOT ON MY LAND WILL BE SHOT ON SIGHT. REPEATEDLY.

 

There. That oughta show 'em.

~*

 

Yep, that'll really show them how we're a peaceful, law-abiding group, really should go a long ways to helping the issue at hand! Really shows just how family-oriented our activity is...as well as WAY over the top for a family-friendly forums IMHO!

 

I'm all for showing my displeasure, I hope people try to use common sense doing this though!!

Link to comment

The restrictions on geocaching on NPS owned land isn’t something new, it has been going on to some degree (or is that minutes?) for at least 2 years. If you check the logs for the archived GCQVVY in PA, you will find this information in the log for June 19, 2006.

” I'm the Boundary Program Mgr. for the Appalachian Trail Conservancy, and I work with the National Park Service and 20 different volunteer trail clubs from VA to ME to help them with monitoring and maintaining the boundaries of the National Park Service lands that have been acquired to protect the Appalachian Trail. Your geocache just off the AT is located on National Park Service property. I'm not sure if you're aware, but geocaching on lands managed by the National Park Service is not permitted. I realize that there are many geocaching sites on trail lands, but they are unauthorized and in violation of park service regulations. Besides being located on property where you do not have permission to place a geocache, it's also in a area filled with poison ivy.

As a former geocacher myself, I know it might seem kind of harsh to not be able to have a cache in the woods next to the AT, but per federal law, all recreation activities in national park areas have to be authorized to prevent unforseen impacts to the natural and cultural resources we protect.

Geocaching is a popular and admirable activity, but the park service just hasn't had the time or the manpower to address concerns with impacts. Without going into all the details, there may be very sensitive plant and animal communities on the corridor lands adjacent to the trail. Therefore, I have to ask you to remove your cache at your earliest convenience and not set up any more caches on Appalachian Trail lands as you would be in violation of federal regulations if you did so….”

While the quote presents some incorrect information about blanket prohibition, it does represent the NPS position. There are over 200 separate jurisdictions for lands that the A.T. crosses and the NPS cannot dictate use or ban activities on many of these. For instance, the A.T. goes right through Damascus, VA, and there are caches within feet of the trail there but they are perfectly legal. In the past I have worked with the Wilderness Supervisor from the Pemi District of the White Mountain National Forest in NH when some caches were being submitted to make sure that the caches were not in areas, like federally designated Wilderness areas, or other sensitive areas. The A.T. goes through the WMNF (which permits geocaching) and GPSFUN, the WMNF, and I had worked together to make sure the caches in the WMNF were placed responsibly.

 

In areas where the NPS actually has authority, the width of the trail corridor would determine whether a cache could be placed or not. There are areas where the corridor is barely wider than the trail itself to other areas where the corridor could be over 1000 feet wide. It also depends on whether lands were directly acquired by the NPS or whether the trail has what an easement across lands owned or managed by one of the many other landowners the trail uses.

 

Recently there has been an effort to remark the boundaries of the trail corridors and volunteers have been checking to see if there have been intrusions onto NPS land. They have found illegal logging, etc., that has occurred mainly because the boundaries haven’t been well marked and some of the landowners abutting the trail didn’t know they were ‘trespassing’ on NPS lands. I'm sure this renewed interest in geocaching is a little related to this recent corridor monitor program. The ATC (Appalachian Trail Conservancy) is the group that the NPS uses to oversee the A.T. and they do their best to carry out the directives from the NPS and they do a good job of trying to make thing go smoothly for everyone who uses these lands.

 

This post has been way too long but I hoped to give some of the background behind this problem. I’m sure there will be no way to reverse any prohibition on lands owned by the NPS but if you can show that a your cache is not within their owned corridor but on State or private land that allows geocaching and they have no say over, then your cache should be allowed. The ATC in Harpers Ferry, WV, or the NPS would have maps showing exactly where their land is so it might take a little investigating on your part to show whether your cache is legal or not. I have hiked the entire trail twice and have been involved with it for years and I know many in the trail community somehow believe that their use of public land is the only legitimate use of these lands and legal hunters, geocachers, etc., are intruders. That the people making the decisions banning geocaching believe that caches can be buried or placed without any approval process is also part of our problem. Trying to work with some of the people involved like I did with the WMNF can help to educate them about responsible geocaching. I don’t see an easy fix here and I’m sure many caches may be lost. I believe the best you can hope for is to check any of your caches that have been archived by this blanket prohibition and if the cache isn’t on land the NPS directly controls, work to get it unarchived.

Edited by rjb43nh
Link to comment
It would be interesting to know what the final toll is on caches archived today. It must be the biggest single cache "die off" since geocaching started (more than the locationless, maybe?).
I wonder if TPTB did any kind of investigation into the actual placements, or simply followed the directive from the NPS. I know of at least one cache (GC146J4) that is over two miles from the AT on PA State Game Lands. Hopefully, we will get some explanation.
When a request like this one comes to TPTB, they immediately archive the referenced caches. Afterwards, the cache owner is welcome to deal with whatever the issue is and try to get the cache unarchived.

 

While this procedure is irritating for owners of caches that should not be affected, it is really the best way for these issues to be handled, in my opinion.

Link to comment

Okay, before things start getting heated, I thought a link to the NPS official rules regarding GPS based Recreational Activities would be good to post.

 

That was obtained from obtained from this thread, which took place here in the forums back in November of 07.

 

This might be the biggest group of caches archived, but it's no the first. A bunch were archived in CT back in mid-June.

Link to comment

Okay, before things start getting heated, I thought a link to the NPS official rules regarding GPS based Recreational Activities would be good to post.

 

That was obtained from obtained from this thread, which took place here in the forums back in November of 07.

 

This might be the biggest group of caches archived, but it's no the first. A bunch were archived in CT back in mid-June.

 

Whoever wrote that obviously didn't do their homework. They're saying no to geocaching because they don't want caches BURIED on NPS land. Standard operating procedure... go in uninformed and make decisions that they don't even have the authority to back up. Groundspeak is a listing site, they don't own our caches, only the listings. Archive them if they will, it doesn't mean they can't (and won't) still be put there. Saying "no caches" is the surest way to make the problem worse, not better. :D

Link to comment

Some of you are under the mistaken impression that the NPS/ATC wants to INCREASE the use of the AT. That's quite simply not true. In fact, they're looking to DECREASE its use as they feel parts of it are overused, or overcrowded, and detract from the experience. Here's a quote from their own MEGA-Transect document, page 27:...Geocachers are an easy target, but I have a feeling we won't be the only ones booted off the trail. I hope I'm wrong. Time will tell.

 

Good point. This is a move predicted by the Tragedy of the Commons. The path forward as population increases is always towards less fredom and more restrictions.

Link to comment

Okay, before things start getting heated, I thought a link to the NPS official rules regarding GPS based Recreational Activities would be good to post.

 

That was obtained from obtained from this thread, which took place here in the forums back in November of 07.

 

This might be the biggest group of caches archived, but it's no the first. A bunch were archived in CT back in mid-June.

 

Whoever wrote that obviously didn't do their homework. They're saying no to geocaching because they don't want caches BURIED on NPS land...

They did an ok job. I read envronmental documents that quite often speculate on negative consequenses. Speculation though is not scientific, it's not policy, and it's not what should be in a document.

 

This needs revised. For one thing the concept of using a GPS is a broad thing. Caching is only one segment. There are also obvious issues of which you pointed out a few.

Link to comment

...This post has been way too long but I hoped to give some of the background behind this problem. I’m sure there will be no way to reverse any prohibition on lands owned by the NPS but if you can show that a your cache is not within their owned corridor but on State or private land that allows geocaching and they have no say over, then your cache should be allowed. ...

 

You do realize this is backwards. The NPS is archiving caches wholesale and leaving it to the owner to show they are good where they are. What the NPS should be doing is doing their homework to archive the caches they have the authority to archive and not the ones they don't. Cache owners in good standing should not have to lift a finger to fix a problem they don't have. The onus is on the NPS, not ownes in good standing.

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...