Jump to content

Park contacts and policies


hydnsek

Recommended Posts

Recently someone posted a note on some of my caches and some others in Burien Parks welcoming us.

 

June 12 by BurienParks (0 found)

We hope you all have a great day visiting our parks! Let us know if there's anything we can do to support this fun hobby and great recreational activity in Burien's parks. 206-988-3700 (ask for Steve).

Link to comment

Recently someone posted a note on some of my caches and some others in Burien Parks welcoming us.

 

June 12 by BurienParks (0 found)

We hope you all have a great day visiting our parks! Let us know if there's anything we can do to support this fun hobby and great recreational activity in Burien's parks. 206-988-3700 (ask for Steve).

Wow, that's great! :laughing: Thanks for posting it, Pete!

Link to comment

By now, most folks have heard about the red-flagging of our caches at Mercer Slough (Bellevue City Parks). Read the thread. While the outcome looks promising (short-term pain, long-term gain), it's always a drag when park personnel suddenly blow the whistle on caches that have been out there, causing no fuss, for several years.

 

And kudos to rodgowdy for infiltrating joining the Friends of Discovery Park (Seattle) as part of our effort to sway the hearts and minds of Discovery Park volunteers and staff and eventually get caching restored there. You da man!

 

And now for some really good news:

 

King County Parks has reiterated its support for geocaching, and paid us some compliments, as well! Key update: Geocaching will still be permitted in the 40 parks to be "mothballed" under proposed 2010 budget cuts. Cache owners do not have to remove their containers, and pedestrian entry will be allowed, even if parking gates are locked. This comes directly from KCP director Kevin Brown. :laughing:

 

As you know, KCP has always allowed geocaching in its 180 parks, no permissions or permits required. But I was blown away by the positive vibes for geocaching when I attended KCP's annual volunteer appreciation dinner last week. I also picked up news on the 40 parks to be mothballed. My blog:

 

When I first attended two years ago, most staff and volunteers had never heard of geocaching. I did some explaining, including to the KCP director, who has ultimate say about what goes on in "his" 180 parks. In addition, several geocachers have been volunteering with individual parks and hosting CITOs. Last year, some attendees had a vague idea what geocaching was, and afterward, AndrewRJ and I took an interested volunteer caching in "her" park (Ring Hill Forest). This year, it was amazing. I never brought geocaching up. Instead, volunteers and staff from across KCP kept coming up and saying, "Are you the geocacher volunteer? Tell me more." "We have caches in our park; I found one!" "[soos Creek / Maury Island / Marymoor / etc.] has caches? Neat! Where are they?" "Someone accidentally removed a cache; how can we get it back to the owner so they can replace it?" "Which GPS unit should I buy?" "Can you show me my park's trail system on your GPS?" (Insert demo of Northwest Trails.) "Cool!"

 

During the presentation portion, the Cougar Mountain ranger lauded geocachers as some of their hardest-working volunteers (referencing our CITOs), respectful of park policies, and responsive to issues. Keep in mind, Cougar Mountain is KCP's largest park and one of its flagships, and this was heard by the KCP director and staff/volunteers from parks across the county. (The Cougar Mountain ranger also said they want us back for a third CITO whenever we're ready - removing Scotch broom at AA Peak...yahoo.)

 

Then Kevin Brown, director of KCP, got up to speak. He thanked all the volunteers, mentioning geocachers alongside the native plant, bird, and trail folks. He talked about the budget cuts that may mothball 40 parks. He said "mothballing" is not closed; public entry will still be allowed (on foot, if parking gates are locked). But it does mean KCP won't provide any services - bathrooms locked, gates closed, no trash pickup, no trail maintenance. He noted these parks were in unincorporated areas and were already slated to be transitioned to nearby cities, and he hoped this would speed up the transition process (right, like the cities have budget). He also said he'd been approached by volunteer groups offering to take over basic maintenance in some parks (e.g., brushing out trails and picking up trash), and he welcomed any group that wanted to talk to him about "adopting" a park on the hit list. Hmmmm. And, as noted, when I asked him specifically about geocaching, he said we could continue caching in mothballed parks.

 

I have to say, I left the dinner feeling all warm and tingly. :ph34r:

 

The great relationship we have with KCP is due to all of you who have worked with the various parks, held or attended CITOs, and showed them that we are responsible park users who can help increase support for their parks and showcase their features to visitors. Kudos to you!

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

Renton City Parks apparently has some geocaching guidelines - was anyone aware of this? Tobias and Petronella discovered this when they were talking to the Renton History Museum about one of their cache placements, which needed permission from Renton Parks personnel. (Cache approved; the museum director was excited about it, and T&P did a great job of evangelizing geocaching.)

 

Per the head of the Parks Department, here are the guidelines for the placement of caches on Renton city property and parks. They are pretty basic and are for the safety of geocachers and parks crews (quoting from her email):

  • Caches cannot be placed high in trees (safety).
  • Cachers cannot dig into turf, shrubs, etc. for placement (property destruction).
  • Prefer caches to be placed in more natural areas, not near active public structures (i.e. library, fire station, museum). This is due to staff needing to distinguish whether or not it is garbage, or unwanted items left behind by homeless, etc. in a downtown area.
  • Recommend that the cache container be clearly marked "geocache" on the outside.

Thanks to Tobias and Petronella for initiating contact with Renton Parks and letting us know the scoop.

Link to comment

Renton City Parks apparently has some geocaching guidelines - was anyone aware of this? Tobias and Petronella discovered this when they were talking to the Renton History Museum about one of their cache placements, which needed permission from Renton Parks personnel. (Cache approved; the museum director was excited about it, and T&P did a great job of evangelizing geocaching.)

 

Per the head of the Parks Department, here are the guidelines for the placement of caches on Renton city property and parks. They are pretty basic and are for the safety of geocachers and parks crews (quoting from her email):

  • Caches cannot be placed high in trees (safety).
  • Cachers cannot dig into turf, shrubs, etc. for placement (property destruction).
  • Prefer caches to be placed in more natural areas, not near active public structures (i.e. library, fire station, museum). This is due to staff needing to distinguish whether or not it is garbage, or unwanted items left behind by homeless, etc. in a downtown area.
  • Recommend that the cache container be clearly marked "geocache" on the outside.

Thanks to Tobias and Petronella for initiating contact with Renton Parks and letting us know the scoop.

 

It's kind of interesting that they drafted a policy without informing the Geocaching community.... :(

Link to comment

Renton City Parks apparently has some geocaching guidelines - was anyone aware of this? Tobias and Petronella discovered this when they were talking to the Renton History Museum about one of their cache placements, which needed permission from Renton Parks personnel. (Cache approved; the museum director was excited about it, and T&P did a great job of evangelizing geocaching.)

 

Per the head of the Parks Department, here are the guidelines for the placement of caches on Renton city property and parks. They are pretty basic and are for the safety of geocachers and parks crews (quoting from her email):

  • Caches cannot be placed high in trees (safety).
  • Cachers cannot dig into turf, shrubs, etc. for placement (property destruction).
  • Prefer caches to be placed in more natural areas, not near active public structures (i.e. library, fire station, museum). This is due to staff needing to distinguish whether or not it is garbage, or unwanted items left behind by homeless, etc. in a downtown area.
  • Recommend that the cache container be clearly marked "geocache" on the outside.

Thanks to Tobias and Petronella for initiating contact with Renton Parks and letting us know the scoop.

 

It's kind of interesting that they drafted a policy without informing the Geocaching community.... :(

 

And I can't see anything about the policy to get upset about. Seems pretty open to me.

 

Jim

Link to comment

The National Park Service updated its guidance doc on "GPS-based Recreational Activities (GPSRA)" on Oct. 1, 2009. Download the PDF file. NPS is continuing on its path of embracing GPS-based activities where appropriate; the revisions enhance its support of geocaching and similar activities. Below are my take-aways.

 

Key quotes:

  • "The Service does not have a policy explicitly allowing or prohibiting any of these [GPSRA] activities. Instead, park managers must make determinations on a case-by-case basis..."
  • "GPSRA can be properly managed to offer significant recreational and educational value to visitors, including opportunities for a growing number of families to experience appropriate outdoor adventures in parks."
  • "Some parks, particularly those with a vast expanse of backcountry, will have locations where a letterbox [or geocache!] could be concealed and sought out without causing unacceptable impacts."
  • "Conditions may exist where a properly managed GPS activity would be complementary to the park's educational mission...preferably with the collaboration and assistance of the recreational GPS user community, this activity could be offered by a park to highlight or emphasize particular resources or destinations and thereby enhance the visitor's experience."

Nice additions:

  • CITO is now mentioned as an activity that park managers might want to consider doing with the geocaching community.
  • The notion of buried caches is now mitigated by a statement that this is prohibited by geocaching.com guidelines, and that permissions must be obtained for any placements.

Remaining points of confusion or misunderstanding:

  • Virtual caches. The doc still implies they can be placed as an alternative to physical caches, and that earthcaches are just one flavor.
  • Letterboxing is still represented as being more "environmentally friendly" and less of a "treasure hunt" than geocaching.

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

Renton City Parks apparently has some geocaching guidelines - was anyone aware of this? Tobias and Petronella discovered this when they were talking to the Renton History Museum about one of their cache placements, which needed permission from Renton Parks personnel. (Cache approved; the museum director was excited about it, and T&P did a great job of evangelizing geocaching.)

 

Per the head of the Parks Department, here are the guidelines for the placement of caches on Renton city property and parks. They are pretty basic and are for the safety of geocachers and parks crews (quoting from her email):

  • Caches cannot be placed high in trees (safety).
  • Cachers cannot dig into turf, shrubs, etc. for placement (property destruction).
  • Prefer caches to be placed in more natural areas, not near active public structures (i.e. library, fire station, museum). This is due to staff needing to distinguish whether or not it is garbage, or unwanted items left behind by homeless, etc. in a downtown area.
  • Recommend that the cache container be clearly marked "geocache" on the outside.

Thanks to Tobias and Petronella for initiating contact with Renton Parks and letting us know the scoop.

 

It's kind of interesting that they drafted a policy without informing the Geocaching community.... :(

 

And I can't see anything about the policy to get upset about. Seems pretty open to me.

 

Jim

 

It's not that it's a bad policy or any thing of that sort. It's just that they cannot really expect compliance if no one is aware that there is a policy. :D

Link to comment

It's not that it's a bad policy or any thing of that sort. It's just that they cannot really expect compliance if no one is aware that there is a policy. :(

Unfortunately, one cannot claim ignorance of the guideline.

 

It takes routine review of the municiple guidelines or active participation in policy to keep up with changes.

Link to comment
Letterboxing is still represented as being more "environmentally friendly" and less of a "treasure hunt" than geocaching.
There's no question about the "treasure hunt" aspect. Letterboxes are supposed to contain only the stamping gear, while regular-size caches are supposed to contain cool stuff you'd want to trade for. I know kids for whom the prizes are the whole point of caching.

 

I think they can make the "environmentally friendly" case too based sheerly on numbers. I've never heard of a letterbox site where vegetation was torn up or a rock wall disassembled.

Link to comment
Letterboxing is still represented as being more "environmentally friendly" and less of a "treasure hunt" than geocaching.
There's no question about the "treasure hunt" aspect. Letterboxes are supposed to contain only the stamping gear, while regular-size caches are supposed to contain cool stuff you'd want to trade for. I know kids for whom the prizes are the whole point of caching.

I guess that depends on perspective. I consider the cache to be the "treasure" I'm seeking, not its contents. So, in that respect - seeking a concealed container - the two are quite similar. And it seems like half of caches are micros, which eliminates the trading aspect entirely.

Link to comment

I talked on the phone this afternoon with the Parks Director for the City of Covington, and he was particularly interested in having volunteers and a CITO in Jenkins Creek Park within the next year. I'm planning on attending the parks and rec commission meeting tomorrow to meet with him directly.

Link to comment
Letterboxing is still represented as being more "environmentally friendly" and less of a "treasure hunt" than geocaching.

I think they can make the "environmentally friendly" case too based sheerly on numbers. I've never heard of a letterbox site where vegetation was torn up or a rock wall disassembled.

I've seen a few, but it's rare. As a broad generalization, I see far fewer geotrails and other signs of search-related damage at letterbox sites. Two reasons: First, many if not most letterboxes have explicit clues leading more or less directly to the container with no need for a broad search area. And second, most letterboxes seem to get a lot less visitors.

 

I guess that depends on perspective. I consider the cache to be the "treasure" I'm seeking, not its contents. So, in that respect - seeking a concealed container - the two are quite similar.

I agree - similar enough that in my mind cachers and letterboxers should be on the same page on land use issues.

 

And it seems like half of caches are micros, which eliminates the trading aspect entirely.

But trading is really irrelevant to the damage land managers are concerned about, isn't it? If anything, micros can lead to more damage because the possible hiding places are almost unlimited.

Link to comment

Per GrievousAngel, a member of the WSGA Parks Advocacy Committee who covers the Snohomish area:

 

The locals already know it, I hope, so this is for non-locals and new cachers: Since the end of September, the Lee Memorial/Experimental Forest in Snohomish County (between SE 188th Street and SE 197th Street, between SR 9 and SR 522) has had a no-geocaching policy. All caches in the forest (four or five) were removed then.

Link to comment

The project manager for the Paradise Valley Conservation Area in Woodinville, WA, has asked that no new caches be placed there until further notice, and has notified the reviewers of this request. Hydnsek will be meeting with him soon, so we may have more info then.

In mid-December, I spoke with the Sr Park Planner for Snohomish County Parks (SCP), who said they would be reviewing the Paradise Valley caches after the holidays. Today I heard back from the Park Ranger for that SCP district. They reviewed all the caches and have some concerns, which they will be addressing with the cache owners and us, as part of establishing guidelines for Paradise Valley and other SCP properties. Here is an abridged portion of his response:

Last Thursday, we inspected most of the caches at Paradise Valley. We found very few problems with the caches. However we do have some concerns as listed:

 

1. Saturation of caches. We feel Paradise Valley Park is at full capacity for caches. Maybe if a cache is archived, another one can take its place. For caches located in Sno Co Parks, GC publishers can be extra critical of the number of caches, location, cache descriptions and hints (ie; hint; Only 1 step off trail). We hope to cut down on the geo trails created by certain caches.

 

Also, in the near future we will be inspecting our other parks for caches such as Lord Hill. We will let you know on a park by park basis.

 

2. Issues with particular caches. For example, a cache whose seekers have caused unacceptable environmental damage to the area around it.

 

All and all, we view and welcome caching as a positive recreation opportunity in Sno Co Parks. And we would like to start a good relationship with GC. We do feel though, with the growing popularity of caching in our parks, that these issues need to be addressed. And through open lines of communication between Sno Co Parks and GC, we hope to resolve any issues that come up. We would rather not implement a policy with a permitting process at this time. With the proper guidelines in place and keeping tabs, we hope that will be enough to keep it in check.

Overall, this is great news for geocachers - SCP supports geocaching and doesn't want to implement a permitting process. Yay! However, they do have some concerns we need to address.

 

At this point, we hope to assign a WSGA Parks Advocacy member to work with SCP as their geocaching liaison going forward, to ensure geocaching issues are addressed (e.g, saturation at Paradise Valley) and that we build and maintain a positive relationship with SCP. This would be similar to the liaison arrangement we have with King County Parks.

 

Groundspeak reviewers should also be aware of SCP's request that no new caches be placed at Paradise Valley until/unless existing ones are archived.

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

The WA State Parks Commission has announced that most of Flaming Geyser State Park will be closed to vehicular traffic for the next two years, while the park undergoes significant repairs to its electrical, water, and sewer systems, as well as roads, parking, and buildings. Full story.

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

Anacortes has implemented a new Geocaching Policy and Permit that applies to all city parks and Anacortes Community Forest Lands (ACFL).

 

According to the site: "With the passage of the new Anacortes Community Forest Lands Comprehensive Plan, geocachers are now asked to fill out a permit to cache in the ACFL. The permit and accompanying regulations were modeled after those used in state parks and are meant to encourage geocaching and stewardship of the environment. Two of largest changes are the requirement to use micro caches in the ACFL and the rule that geocachers need to stay on trails."

The Anacortes policy is more restrictive than that of WA State Parks. Cache size is limited to micro and small (max 4''x4''x4"). Caches can't be placed off-trail on ACFL land, and there's no provision for renewing the permit after one year. A map of the affected city parks is located on the last page of the Comprehensive Development plan.

 

Thanks to Jimmerbowl, who has been working with ACFL to reach a solution on geocaching on their lands, and to Rey del Roble, who also has been involved.

Link to comment

Anacortes has implemented a new Geocaching Policy and Permit that applies to all city parks and Anacortes Community Forest Lands (ACFL).

 

According to the site: "With the passage of the new Anacortes Community Forest Lands Comprehensive Plan, geocachers are now asked to fill out a permit to cache in the ACFL. The permit and accompanying regulations were modeled after those used in state parks and are meant to encourage geocaching and stewardship of the environment. Two of largest changes are the requirement to use micro caches in the ACFL and the rule that geocachers need to stay on trails."

The Anacortes policy is more restrictive than that of WA State Parks. Cache size is limited to micro and small (max 4''x4''x4"). Caches can't be placed off-trail on ACFL land, and there's no provision for renewing the permit after one year. A map of the affected city parks is located on the last page of the Comprehensive Development plan.

 

Thanks to Jimmerbowl, who has been working with ACFL to reach a solution on geocaching on their lands, and to Rey del Roble, who also has been involved.

I am going to assume that the quote is a typo and they actually mean that you need a permit to place a cache, not to actually go caching. ;)

 

I also have to laugh that they are completely at cross purposes as they only allow the size types most likely to cause significant environmental degradation by having to examine every tiny place, and in the most visible possible spots by not allowing anything off trail. :) But at least it isn't banned so that is great. ;)

Edited by AndrewRJ
Link to comment

 

I also have to laugh that they are completely at cross purposes as they only allow the size types most likely to cause significant environmental degradation by having to examine every tiny place, and in the most visible possible spots by not allowing anything off trail. :) But at least it isn't banned so that is great. ;)

 

I was thinking the same thing. If that's going to be the only options, I would rather not cache in their park. ;)

Link to comment

I was actually going to post a new thread on the forums when I saw this one.

 

Does anyone know if there are any restrictions on cache placements in Flowing Lake Park in Snohomish County? There are currently no caches placed in that park and I was wondering if it was because of restrictions placed byt ht epark manager or or ranger. Thanks

Link to comment

I was actually going to post a new thread on the forums when I saw this one.

 

Does anyone know if there are any restrictions on cache placements in Flowing Lake Park in Snohomish County? There are currently no caches placed in that park and I was wondering if it was because of restrictions placed byt ht epark manager or or ranger. Thanks

Sorry that nobody's gotten back to you on this. I've asked GrievousAngel to take a look, as she is the WSGA Parks Advocacy Committee member for the Snohomish area.

Link to comment

Yesterday (Feb. 2), I took the Cougar Mountain rangers on a caching walk to sample several of the caches in the park. As y'all know, Cougar and King County Parks are some of our biggest supporters, but they haven't visited most of the caches, other than those they stumble across. I provided them with a marked-up map showing all caches in the park, and they chose a route that visited seven, covering the gamut from micro to ammo can. We even managed not to find one of mine (oops).

 

I'm happy to report that they approved all the placements, with only minor concerns (an erosion trail on one, a hide location a bit too visible on another), and didn't request any changes. They have asked me (their liaison) to take them on a walk every few months to visit a different set of caches around the park.

 

Their primary concern is the number of caches at Cougar Mountain. Even though it's a huge park, the recent spate of new caches, many near the entrances and only 0.1 mi from pre-existing caches, have them concerned about saturation and cachers "just throwing caches in every tree and stump." They are considering requesting a moratorium on new caches - they suggested 50 as a cap, and we are now at 51 within the official park boundaries.

 

I convinced them not to make any decisions immediately, and they remain quite pleased with the way we have self-policed ourselves so far, with respect to trail rules, etc. I'm sure none of us want to see this fantastic park closed to new caches, so I'm asking my fellow Cougar lovers - please dial back your cache placements, and only consider new ones that have real value, in areas without caches nearby. There are still a few backcountry trails that could hold a cache or two, but it's getting tight, at least by the park's preferences. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me directly. Thanks!

 

Oh - and they've requested we host our third annual Cougar CITO, ideally in March, so stay tuned - the more love we show them, the more we'll get in return! :D

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

Hi FM,

I'm not aware of any restrictions, and GeoRoo's Flowing Lake Fish On has been in the park for almost four years.

--GA

 

I was actually going to post a new thread on the forums when I saw this one.

 

Does anyone know if there are any restrictions on cache placements in Flowing Lake Park in Snohomish County? There are currently no caches placed in that park and I was wondering if it was because of restrictions placed byt ht epark manager or or ranger. Thanks

Link to comment

In a previous post, I reported on WSGA's initial contacts with Paradise Valley rangers (Snohomish County Parks), who approached us with some concerns about caches there (off-trail, saturation, damage to surroundings).

 

As of 2/12/10, new cache placements have been banned at Paradise Valley and Lord Hill until further notice, at the request of the rangers.

 

However, the Snohomish rangers are still positive about geocaching, so they would like to work with us. Accordingly, GrievousAngel has become the WSGA Geocaching Liaison working with Snohomish County Parks, addressing concerns within these two parks. Thank you, Kathy! :(

 

------------------

 

Cama Beach State Park (on Camano Island) also has a moratorium on new cache placements until further notice. Rey del Roble is the WSGA Geocaching Liaison working with Cama Beach. Thanks, RdR!

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

As many of you know, Discovery Park, one of Seattle's premier parks, banned geocaching in November 2007, forcing archival of all caches, and we've had no movement since then - until now!

 

Today, Weightman, rodgowdy, and I met with key personnel at Seattle City Parks (SCP) – and geocaching may soon return to Discovery Park on a limited basis! :( Further, SCP confirmed there are no plans to ban caching at Seattle’s other “natural” parks, including Carkeek, Camp Long, Lincoln, and Seward.

 

This is a HUGE win for WSGA on behalf of geocachers. :) It helped that we had demonstrated that we were willing to work with Seattle Parks – through our two Beach Cleanup CITOs at Discovery last year, through our prompt action when Friends of Seward Park contacted us last month for a cache removal, through rodgowdy’s joining Friends of Discovery Park, etc.

 

SCP said they now viewed geocaching as a positive recreational activity and wanted to find the right way to reintroduce it to Discovery Park, with appropriate guidelines to address their concerns (e.g., off-trail activity, sensitive habitat areas, saturation, crowd issues). They liked the sound of WSGA's Park Liaison Program, in which a member of our Parks Advocacy Committee works directly with the designated park(s). This liaison collaborates with the parks to develop appropriate guidelines, monitors cache activity, and enforces both gc.com and park guidelines. (We already have liaison programs in place at some King County and Snohomish County parks.) Rodgowdy is the new WSGA Geocaching Liaison for Discovery Park, working with SCP’s primary contact on reintroducing geocaching to Discovery and addressing any concerns at other parks.

 

Next steps: Rodgowdy and SCP will determine what areas of Discovery are appropriate for caching activity, and what guidelines should be established for placement. Rodgowdy will then propose some initial placements, and we'll see how that goes.

 

Note that the caching ban at Discovery is not being rescinded yet – this is just a positive first step, but the future looks promising! We did not establish a specific timeline, but with luck, perhaps the first new cache will be placed in Discovery Park this spring.

 

WSGA is also going to look into Discovery’s Adopt-an-Area volunteer program, where we might adopt a section of the park for ongoing CITO.

 

A big shout-out to rodgowdy and Weightman for working with me over the past year to get us to this stage. You guys rock!

 

hydnsek

 

WSGA Parks Advocacy Committee Chair

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

I was contacted by someone from the Burien Parks department again.

 

Burien Parks is a fan of geocaching and believe it's a great way to recreate in our parks and a great family activity.

We would like to promote geocaching in our park so have decided to offer several classes on the

subject. Please help us to spread the word about the geocaching classes we are offering.

More information at LINK

 

... thanks!

Edited by FunnyNose
Link to comment

I'm pleased to announce that the first two physical caches were just published in North Cascades National Park Service Complex: Cascade Pass Trailhead (south unit of North Cascades NP) and Gorge Dam Overlook (Ross Lake NRA).

 

As you know, most national parks continue to ban geocaching, but the current NPS geocaching directive leaves it to park superintendents to make the final call. As the WSGA parks liaison, I've been working with North Cascades personnel for two years, educating them on geocaching and getting them started with earthcaches before lobbying for physical placements.

 

North Cascades NP also promoted caching - specifically earthcaches - as a recreational activity in an Aug. 12 press release: Art and Adventure in North Cascades National Park. And they have connected us with the Cascade Loop Scenic Highway group to promote "geocaching tourism."

 

It's great to have such a show of support from this national park - and it may be the first NPS unit in the western U.S. to allow physical caches. A great win for geocachers! :laughing:

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

I'm pleased to announce that the first two physical caches were just published in North Cascades National Park Service Complex: Cascade Pass Trailhead (south unit of North Cascades NP) and Gorge Dam Overlook (Ross Lake NRA).

 

As you know, most national parks continue to ban geocaching, but the current NPS geocaching directive leaves it to park superintendents to make the final call. As the WSGA parks liaison, I've been working with North Cascades personnel for two years, educating them on geocaching and getting them started with earthcaches before lobbying for physical placements.

 

North Cascades NP also promoted caching - specifically earthcaches - as a recreational activity in an Aug. 12 press release: Art and Adventure in North Cascades National Park. And they have connected us with the Cascade Loop Scenic Highway group to promote "geocaching tourism."

 

It's great to have such a show of support from this national park - and it may be the first NPS unit in the western U.S. to allow physical caches. A great win for geocachers! :laughing:

Thanks for all the work you put in on this and other parks around the area.

Link to comment

I'm pleased to announce that the first two physical caches were just published in North Cascades National Park Service Complex: Cascade Pass Trailhead (south unit of North Cascades NP) and Gorge Dam Overlook (Ross Lake NRA).

 

As you know, most national parks continue to ban geocaching, but the current NPS geocaching directive leaves it to park superintendents to make the final call. As the WSGA parks liaison, I've been working with North Cascades personnel for two years, educating them on geocaching and getting them started with earthcaches before lobbying for physical placements.

 

North Cascades NP also promoted caching - specifically earthcaches - as a recreational activity in an Aug. 12 press release: Art and Adventure in North Cascades National Park. And they have connected us with the Cascade Loop Scenic Highway group to promote "geocaching tourism."

 

It's great to have such a show of support from this national park - and it may be the first NPS unit in the western U.S. to allow physical caches. A great win for geocachers! :laughing:

Very cool! Thanks for all you hard work. I guess a road trip is my future...

Link to comment

For Spokane cachers interested in placing caches in Riverside State Park, the person to talk to is Greg King (park ranger).

 

Here is the email I got after I contacted the park service:

 

"Here is the form for you to fill out and send back to the address below. I have attached the geocache WAC relating to this request. Be sure and put your contact info on it in case we have any additional questions. Lori

 

WAC 352-32-237

 

Geocache.

(1) In order to place a cache on state parks' property, an individual or organization must obtain a geocache placement permit from state parks. Any cache located on state parks' property that does not have a permit on file is subject to removal from its location, and after notification of the owner (if known), may be disposed of within ten days.

 

(2) The geocache owner must check the geocache at least every ninety days unless an extension is approved by the park manager not to exceed one hundred eighty days. Proof of the check will be by e-mail, letter, or personal communication by the owner with the park manager or designee, and the owner's entry in the cache log book indicating the date of inspection.

 

(3) The following items shall not be placed in the geocache: Food items; illegal substances; medications; personal hygiene products; pornographic materials; inappropriate, offensive, or hazardous materials or weapons of any type. Log books are required for each cache and are to be provided by the owner of the cache.

 

(4) Any violation of this section is an infraction under chapter 7.84 RCW.

 

Riverside State Park

9711 W Charles Road

Nine Mile Falls, WA 99026

Phone (509) 465-5064

Fax (509) 465-5571"

 

Email address is: Riverside@PARKS.WA.GOV

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...