Is there an environmental difference between a Geocache & a Letterbox?

[Skippermark]

A caching friend asked permission to place a cache in a new trail system in a nearby town. The land manager denied the request saying that "people follow coordinate points and therefore may go off trail, which is prohibited on our properties."

 

They then said that if she is still a recreation permit holder, she could submit a plan to place a letterbox if she wanted, keeping in mind that the letterbox would have to be very close to the actual trail because of their no off-trail rule.

 

A well-placed multi would have the same effect as a letterbox if the stages were laid out so that people had to remain on the trail.

 

This got her wondering why geocaching is sometimes seen in a bad light compared to letterboxing and what can be done to better educate land managers.

 

Is it that people sometimes mention "treasure hunting" when talking about caching, making people think of someone digging a big hole to find the buried treasure, or is it that with a GPS, you tend to wander a bit if the coords aren't super accurate or there's some bounce, whereas a letterbox gives you pretty good clues of where to look?

[Clan Riffster]

It's all about the power of perception. Letterboxers are, historically, no better land stewards than cachers, but so long as the land managers believe otherwise, they'll keep getting the nod, while we get turned away.

[+webscouter.]

Potentially the geocache will have many more visits than the letterbox. Hence a geocache is more likely to have a power trail than a letterbox.

 

This might lead to a perception that the letterbox doesn't cause the damage that a geocache would.

 

Have you approached the land manager with doing a letterbox hybrid type of cache?

[CoyoteRed]

Yes, there is a major difference between letterboxing and geocaching. It's all or most in the endgame. In letterboxing you are pretty walked to the box. This can lead to a more definite social trail. In contrast, in geocaching the arrow leads you an area and you search from there. This can lead to the area being trampled.

 

Of course, these are generalizations, but if you understand how both work then you can see the potential impact of either.

 

I can see the point of a land manager preferring a box over a cache because of the nature of the endgame.

[knowschad]

I'd love to hear what the land manager would say when asked what the perceived difference is.

[+flask]

it may be worth noting that the farther a cache is from the trail, the less likely there is to be a social trail.

 

caches very near (but not on) the trail almost always create distinct social trails.

 

some managers will prefer short social trails to the possiblity of more widesprread trampling.

 

it is often helpful to talk with the land manager about these aspects and sometimes this conversation swings the balance in favor.

 

land managers like to feel like they have some say in it. i don't blame them.

[+Isonzo Karst]

I think the land manager is on to something. Cachers have an arrow to follow, they're liable to leave trail and follow it. Locally, there's a manager who won't allow caches across a loop from each other, knowing that cachers will cut across the loop and make new trail.

 

Also, there are just a boatload more cachers then letterboxers; and finally, there's no such thing as a letterbox micro in the woods (no hint ).

Edited October 1, 2008 by Isonzo Karst

[+Renegade Knight]

It's all about the power of perception....

 

Bingo.

 

To answer the OP's question. "Is there an environmental difference between a Geocache & a Letterbox?"

 

They are the same in that they bring people to a point. They are different in that cachers will follow the GPS and Letterboxers the clues. Both can lead to people following the same path. However the cache is a bit more open in that they are more likely to come from varied directions than following the clues of a letterbox.

 

Perception kicks in with letterboxes being percieved as more discrete and with less thronging masses than caching.

[+flask]

by definition a letterbox is not more discrete.

 

 

if one is approaching the topic of social trails with a land manager, one might suggest the option of making a multi that forces the desired approach.

 

i know some very good caches that are multis exactly for this reason.

[+Firespinner]

I think its because with a geocache, you are given coordinates and what path you take to get to those coordinates could be different depending on where you start, how accurate your GPS is, whether you can read it well or not. Basically you're given an end destination and how you get there is up to you. Even if you start them off on the trail, if they are reading the GPS wrong or it is drifting a lot, if they think its' pointing off the trail, many geocachers would go off trail to find it.

 

With the older game of letterboxing, you are given the instructions on the actual path to take. For example: If you start them off at the beginning of the trail and then you say walk 10 feet forward to the sign post, turn left at the trail intersection and go 50 feet. Cross the creek and continue on the trail for 100 feet until you see the large tree at the fork. Take the right trail fork for 20 more feet and arrive at the letterbox under the bird identification plaque. So they HAVE to stay on your trail to arrive at the letterbox and thus you can make the instructions to follow. With a geocache, if the trail looks like it turns left and the GPS is pointing straight ahead, many cachers would take the 'quick route' and go straight and off trail rather than walking left and seeing if the trail curves back on-track to the cache.

[+briansnat]

I also heard of land managers who preferred virtuals over regular caches. As if the flora cares less if you step on it to look for a virtual vs. a real cache.

 

As far as letterboxing vs. geocaching, a properly worded clue can make sure people stay on the trails, but a properly worded geoccache page or well laid out multi can do the same.

[Luckless]

it may be worth noting that the farther a cache is from the trail, the less likely there is to be a social trail.

 

caches very near (but not on) the trail almost always create distinct social trails.

 

some managers will prefer short social trails to the possiblity of more widesprread trampling.

 

it is often helpful to talk with the land manager about these aspects and sometimes this conversation swings the balance in favor.

 

land managers like to feel like they have some say in it. i don't blame them.

In our state parks I believe you cannot place a cache more than twenty feet from a trail. Makes it harder to hide so it's not noticed. I believe this policy is to keep people from wandering off trail and getting lost.

 

.... a properly worded clue can make sure people stay on the trails, but a properly worded geoccache page or well laid out multi can do the same.

Edited October 2, 2008 by Luckless

[+vw_k]

I've seen mystery caches that have the start co-ordinates in a car park and you then have to follow letterbox style directions to the cache (walk north 200ft, turn right at signpost etc etc)

 

A cache like this would ensure that cachers stick to the paths.

 

Reflector style night caches would ensure the same thing, but the land manager may not approve of the placing of firetacks.

[Dinoprophet]

As far as letterboxing vs. geocaching, a properly worded clue can make sure people stay on the trails, but a properly worded geoccache page or well laid out multi can do the same.

A multi, perhaps. But I've owned and seen pages imploring people to stay on the trail only to get numerous logs saying "Bushwhacked all the way then found the trail." Because letterboxes often require following precise directions, where missing a landmark or not pacing correctly can foil your entire hunt, I think in general letterboxing results in less bushwhacking.

[+CBT69]

I think the land manager is on to something. Cachers have an arrow to follow, they're liable to leave trail and follow it. Locally, there's a manager who won't allow caches across a loop from each other, knowing that cachers will cut across the loop and make new trail.

 

Also, there are just a boatload more cachers then letterboxers; and finally, there's no such thing as a letterbox micro in the woods (no hint ).

 

a friend and I both cache. I tend to follow the trails, knowing they will get me there, eventually, based on who placed the caches, in most cases.

 

He, on the other hand, is Mr STraight Line Guy. Up mountains, across rivers, you name it.. (this has led to some interesting escapades).

 

Now, in _theory_ that should be preventable by putting "STAY ON THE TRAILS!, no need to leave the trail to find the stages" in the listing, but yeah.. some people simply won't pay any attention to that, and "do it their way" anyway.

 

I'm pretty convinced they are the same people who fill caches with mcdonalds wrappers, broken sunglasses, etc, and leave water bottles right at GZ when they are done, too.

[CoyoteRed]

As far as letterboxing vs. geocaching, a properly worded clue can make sure people stay on the trails, but a properly worded geoccache page or well laid out multi can do the same.

An improperly worded letterbox clue could cause bushwhacking, too.

 

One advantage of a letterbox over a geocache is you're guaranteed the seeker will read the description.

 

I've placed or adopted caches that had certain requirements. Making the cache a puzzle or multi with an eye for guiding the seeker helps prevent bushwhacking until you get to ground zero. The nature of the GPS, though, pretty much is a limitation unless you make the hide obvious, provide a spoiler, or give a good hint. In letterboxing, you're almost always given a spoiler or strong hint.

[CoyoteRed]

I'm pretty convinced they are the same people who fill caches with mcdonalds wrappers, broken sunglasses, etc, and leave water bottles right at GZ when they are done, too.

I don't know about leaving junk in the cache, but there are a type of cacher that will completely disregard the wishes of the land owner and do as they please. I've had folks go around a locked fence when the description clearly stated not to and folks go into a park without paying. ...then put in their logs!

[+CBT69]

I'm pretty convinced they are the same people who fill caches with mcdonalds wrappers, broken sunglasses, etc, and leave water bottles right at GZ when they are done, too.

I don't know about leaving junk in the cache, but there are a type of cacher that will completely disregard the wishes of the land owner and do as they please. I've had folks go around a locked fence when the description clearly stated not to and folks go into a park without paying. ...then put in their logs!

 

Is it kosher to put one in a place that requires an entry fee? I thought that fell under the "no business required" type of cache? (I might be wrong, though.)

[+TeamAtlas]

Over on the letterboxing site they are always trashing cachers in the forums for causing harm to the environment, trampling areas, bushwhacking, being too loud, you name it. And yes I have seen areas trampled to death by cachers, so I can agree with them on that point. Geocaches in general are usually hidden much better than letterboxes (at least, the ones we've found have been) so I guess that is why there is a greater chance of causing environmental harm when looking for a well hidden cache. We always try to be careful with the vegetation, etc but I know there are many who don't care, they just want to find the cache.

 

To the OP, if the land manager says letterboxes are ok but caches are not, hide a letterbox hybrid and make everyone happy.

[CoyoteRed]

Is it kosher to put one in a place that requires an entry fee? I thought that fell under the "no business required" type of cache? (I might be wrong, though.)

It depends on the business. If it's owned by a government entity then that it is a business is not an issue. Federal, state, county, and city parks fall under this as does some parks that don't always appear to be such, but sometimes are.

 

There's a fantastic park near us that looks like a private park because it used to be. It's now owned and ran by the county. They never changed the name or anything. The only reason there aren't any caches in there is the entry fee is just too high. We only go on days the entry fee is waived due to some event.

[CoyoteRed]

To the OP, if the land manager says letterboxes are ok but caches are not, hide a letterbox hybrid and make everyone happy.

If I were a land manager and that happened I'll immediately remove it. A hybrid is both a letterbox and a cache. If I don't want caches in my area, then I'd not want a hybrid, either.

 

If the geocache part of the hybrid is made such that problem with the endgame is eliminated then there is no reason to not have a geocache. A hunt with coords to the gate and walk them in with clues should satisfy the owner in regards to the error with GPS use. No need for a hybrid or associated issues.

[Clan Riffster]

caches very near (but not on) the trail almost always create distinct social trails.

I was one of the folks working with Seminole County Natural Lands in creating their current geocaching policy. This was one issue they would not budge on. To get their approval, a cache cannot be more than 6' off an established, marked trail. I suggested that this policy would lead to more social trails, not less, but they were deaf to my arguments. At one point in the process, they mentioned that they first became aware of geocaching by following a social trail to a box in their woods. I asked them how far off the trail it was, and they said "about 6 feet". They didn't see the irony.

[+Renegade Knight]

caches very near (but not on) the trail almost always create distinct social trails.

I was one of the folks working with Seminole County Natural Lands in creating their current geocaching policy. This was one issue they would not budge on. To get their approval, a cache cannot be more than 6' off an established, marked trail. I suggested that this policy would lead to more social trails, not less, but they were deaf to my arguments. At one point in the process, they mentioned that they first became aware of geocaching by following a social trail to a box in their woods. I asked them how far off the trail it was, and they said "about 6 feet". They didn't see the irony.

 

Out of curiosity. What's the trail policy? I've been in parks with a stay on the trail policy for everone and parks that have trails, but there is no policy about staying on them. It's ok to leave the trail.

[+Renegade Knight]

Over on the letterboxing site they are always trashing cachers in the forums...

 

They don't need a reason to trash cachers. Their moral mettle is such that trashing cachers comes easy. It's rather like a fly fisherman being annoyed at a bait fisherman for um...fishing. It's all caching. If it would make them feel better we can change that to "it's all boxing" since they are just a variation on a common theme.

[+Renegade Knight]

As far as letterboxing vs. geocaching, a properly worded clue can make sure people stay on the trails, but a properly worded geoccache page or well laid out multi can do the same.

A multi, perhaps. But I've owned and seen pages imploring people to stay on the trail only to get numerous logs saying "Bushwhacked all the way then found the trail." Because letterboxes often require following precise directions, where missing a landmark or not pacing correctly can foil your entire hunt, I think in general letterboxing results in less bushwhacking.

 

I think you have a point on the bushwacking. Letterboxing would focus finders on a much more defined path resulting in more of a trail with less finders.

[CoyoteRed]

caches very near (but not on) the trail almost always create distinct social trails.

I was one of the folks working with Seminole County Natural Lands in creating their current geocaching policy. This was one issue they would not budge on. To get their approval, a cache cannot be more than 6' off an established, marked trail. I suggested that this policy would lead to more social trails, not less, but they were deaf to my arguments. At one point in the process, they mentioned that they first became aware of geocaching by following a social trail to a box in their woods. I asked them how far off the trail it was, and they said "about 6 feet". They didn't see the irony.

I placed a cache in a park that didn't allow any off trail hiking. The cache--a regular-sized ammo can--didn't require you to venture off the trail at all. It lasted 4 years.

 

Two of the reasons they don't allow off trail hiking is it is a major archeological site and it's infested with water moccasins. Good reasons to stay on the trail!

[Clan Riffster]

Out of curiosity. What's the trail policy?

Oddly enough, there is no policy regarding staying on the trails... unless you're a geocacher

Naturally, they have all the standard "Don't hurt the plants" rules, but other than that, non-geocachers are free to wander at will.

http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/leisure/na.../rulesofuse.asp

[CoyoteRed]

Out of curiosity. What's the trail policy?

Oddly enough, there is no policy regarding staying on the trails... unless you're a geocacher

Naturally, they have all the standard "Don't hurt the plants" rules, but other than that, non-geocachers are free to wander at will.

http://www.seminolecountyfl.gov/leisure/na.../rulesofuse.asp

Yeah, that's weird. One of the first questions I ask land stewards is ask if off-trail hiking is allowed. I've yet to have any major issue with placing a geocache with off-trail hiking is allowed.

[+1NatureMom]

Thx Skippermark I am 'the' said friend

 

Now let's add to the discussion that this landmanagement allows fishing, thus creating those 'social trails', and off trail walking by fisherman. My husband fishes here, and seen the fishing litter, but we wont go into fishermen litter vs caching CITO.

 

You can letterbox

You can fish

You cannot geocache

 

 

Someone in this thread they'd be interested in knowing how the land management defines the difference, as would I, so I emailed them back...........stay tuned.

 

[+1NatureMom]

My email to them today:

 

DPH=department of public health:

 

"Thank you for your reply!

 

As a hiker who's family with small children finds both, I am curious as to what the restrictions are from the DPH on a geocache and not a letterbox ,and how this landmanagement defines the difference between a geocache and a letterbox. "

 

and here is their reply:

 

"You are very welcome! Our permit with the Department of Public Health specifically states that recreational activities are to be conducted on approved trails. Any activity that could possibly lead a user off trail (like geocaching, frisbee golf, orienteering) cannot be allowed. We did institute letterboxing because we felt we could keep people on the trails. While some letterboxes do make use of coordinates, we specifically steered away from that method for the same reason described above" .

 

still dont understand what resttrictions the DPH would have or why, but this is what they say.

[+Renegade Knight]

...

and here is their reply:

 

"You are very welcome! Our permit with the Department of Public Health specifically states that recreational activities are to be conducted on approved trails. Any activity that could possibly lead a user off trail (like geocaching, frisbee golf, orienteering) cannot be allowed. We did institute letterboxing because we felt we could keep people on the trails. While some letterboxes do make use of coordinates, we specifically steered away from that method for the same reason described above" .

 

still dont understand what resttrictions the DPH would have or why, but this is what they say.

They are being helpful, and doing what they can. That's good it shows that a working relatinoship is possible and likely. The next step is to get a copy of that permit. It would appear that the park has an agreement they have to honor and in turn that's creating the stay on the trail designation. Their understanding of the activities is why the difference in approach.

 

An example of why the DPH may be involved. The area is a reclaimed sewage lagoon/hazmat/superfund site and the DPH doesn't mind the open space but is being careful about public interaction off a paved trail. Heck, maybe there is none of that but they water the park with effluence. You have to find the bigger picture to find the specific solution.

Edited October 3, 2008 by Renegade Knight

[+1NatureMom]

ok, so now how do I get copy of that DPH permit? Do I go straight to the DPH, is this public knowledge? or do I continue to email landmanager back and ask them for copy?

 

suggestions?!

[+Renegade Knight]

ok, so now how do I get copy of that DPH permit? Do I go straight to the DPH, is this public knowledge? or do I continue to email landmanager back and ask them for copy?

 

suggestions?!

I'd call the landmanager and ask them. They may be able to make a copy, or point you to the DPH contact who can. As for it being public knowledge, probably not common knowledge but certainly public information.

 

You may have to pony up a small fee for the copy. That depends on the agency and how they handle the expece of making the copies.

 

Once you read the agreement it will probably create more questions.

[+The Herd]

As a land manager that approves state geocaches, I make very little distinction between geocaches and letterboxes. If anything I am more disliking of letterboxes. I find letterboxes get placed more in disregard to our geocaching policy and permit system. Cooperation with the state reviewers ensure better compliance with our policy. Removed or lost letterboxes don't get removed from the web site in a timely manner, especially so since they do not contain online logging, like geocaching.com.

 

Your letterbox issue may be the perception as a boy/girl scout activity, thus eco/family/kid friendly.

 

The points about distance from the trail and social trails are true. Of all our guidelines, I am most liberal about distance from the trail

 

bb

[+Dgwphotos]

 

He, on the other hand, is Mr STraight Line Guy. Up mountains, across rivers, you name it.. (this has led to some interesting escapades).

 

 

 

I had an FTF on one of my caches mention that they brushwacked most of the way there until they hit a trail. It's hidden in a park that was a former coal mining area, with a big problem with sinkholes as a result. There are signs all over the park about staying on trails, and warnings on the park maps (which are free at trailheads) as well. This lead to a note by me reminding people to stay on trail. They later edited their log to remove the part about brushwacking.

[+Too Tall John]

In our state parks I believe you cannot place a cache more than twenty feet from a trail. Makes it harder to hide so it's not noticed. I believe this policy is to keep people from wandering off trail and getting lost.

They are concerned that a cacher is going to get lost if the go more than 20' off the trail? If this their reasoning, someone needs to let them know that 99.9% of the time, a geocacher will have a GPS with them, and are thus less likely to get lost...

 

It is more likely that cachers getting lost isn't the reason behind the rules.