Jump to content

New park policy


acpdnat
Followers 4

Recommended Posts

Hello,

The Ashland County Park District (Ashland,Ohio) is seeking to establish it's policy for geocaching within the park system. As a new geocacher and park volunteer, I am seeking fellow geocachers input on information to include in this policy. Our main goals are to allow geocaching without prior permission, or permits while protecting the park environment as whole. One Rule that is a must is to keep caches near the trails (no bushwacking) Otherwise I hope to gain your opinion for this policy.

Thanks!

 

Also, we are looking to have a geocaching event to intoduce people to each park. Any Ideas?

Edited by acpdnat
Link to comment
The Ashland County Park District (Ashland,Ohio) is seeking to establish it's policy for geocaching within the park system. As a new geocacher and park volunteer, I am seeking fellow geocachers input on information to include in this policy. Our main goals are to allow geocaching without prior permission, or permits while protecting the park environment as whole. One Rule that is a must is to keep caches near the trails (no bushwacking) Otherwise I hope to gain your opinion for this policy.

You may want to consider having a requirement for container type and labeling on the container, in case it is found by the non geocaching-aware public. Some container types may cause unnecessary panic in the unfortunate climate we live in. I know of at least one instance where a regional park ranger around here asked a geocacher to swap out an ammo can for a transparent plastic container.

 

You can also state that the park district would periodically review caches placed within its boundaries and revoke permission for any geocache found to violate your guidelines.

Link to comment

Hello,

The Ashland County Park District (Ashland,Ohio) is seeking to establish it's policy for geocaching within the park system. As a new geocacher and park volunteer, I am seeking fellow geocachers input on information to include in this policy. Our main goals are to allow geocaching without prior permission, or permits while protecting the park environment as whole. One Rule that is a must is to keep caches near the trails (no bushwacking) Otherwise I hope to gain your opinion for this policy.

Thanks!

 

Also, we are looking to have a geocaching event to intoduce people to each park. Any Ideas?

 

No bushwacking? You're no fun. Just be sure to arrest everyone else that walks off trail. :unsure:

Link to comment

please consider this: a cache close to the trail develops more of a social trail than one farther away.

 

when the cache is significantly off-trail people will make their own paths, but where the cache is close, a herdpath will develop, and quickly.

 

your park system may wish to prohibit caches in specific sensitive areas, but permit caches off-trail in more hardy areas.

Link to comment
No bushwacking? You're no fun. Just be sure to arrest everyone else that walks off trail. :unsure:
Don't troll. Would you rather no geocache within the park?

 

I don't think that was a troll at all.

 

If there are existing rules in place to prevent people from going off trail then those should be enforced for cachers. But, if no such rule currently exists for off-trail use, then different rule sets should not apply just because I put a GPSr in my hand.

Link to comment
Our main goals are to allow geocaching without prior permission, or permits while protecting the park environment as whole. One Rule that is a must is to keep caches near the trails (no bushwacking)

 

How are you going to communicate this policy? And maybe "near trails" should be defined a little better (10 ft, 100 ft?) And that rule should probably be included in the cache descriptions to keep cachers from wandering far off the trail looking for the caches.

 

I drive by Ashland several times a year and look forward to seeing the result of this pro-active policy.

Link to comment
Our main goals are to allow geocaching without prior permission, or permits while protecting the park environment as whole. One Rule that is a must is to keep caches near the trails (no bushwacking)

 

How are you going to communicate this policy? And maybe "near trails" should be defined a little better (10 ft, 100 ft?) And that rule should probably be included in the cache descriptions to keep cachers from wandering far off the trail looking for the caches.

 

I drive by Ashland several times a year and look forward to seeing the result of this pro-active policy.

The policy will be posted online @ ashlandcountyparksdistrict.com as well as each park information board.

Link to comment
No bushwacking? You're no fun. Just be sure to arrest everyone else that walks off trail. :unsure:
Don't troll. Would you rather no geocache within the park?

 

I don't think that was a troll at all.

 

If there are existing rules in place to prevent people from going off trail then those should be enforced for cachers. But, if no such rule currently exists for off-trail use, then different rule sets should not apply just because I put a GPSr in my hand.

 

Yeah, so don't go around making up rules that single out geocachers or others, for 'special' treatment, just because they might happen to have a GPSr device in their hand. :D:D:D

Edited by Team Cotati
Link to comment

 

Yeah, so don't go around making up rules that single out geocachers or others, for 'special' treatment, just because they might happen to have a GPSr device in their hand.

 

I think you can make a distinction between a rule of where caches can be placed and a rule about where people can walk when holding a GPS.

Link to comment
No bushwacking? You're no fun. Just be sure to arrest everyone else that walks off trail. :unsure:
Don't troll. Would you rather no geocache within the park?

 

I don't think that was a troll at all.

 

If there are existing rules in place to prevent people from going off trail then those should be enforced for cachers. But, if no such rule currently exists for off-trail use, then different rule sets should not apply just because I put a GPSr in my hand.

 

I agree, the rules for the trails are in place for the protection of the users as well as for protection of the property. (Think about why the trials were established in the first place.) I think there could be an exception to this rule if prior permission is granted because there are areas that would lend themselves to less restrictive use. But of course this is the point of this post, to insure that geocachers get a say in the parks policy, so I will certianly take this into consideration.

Link to comment

It might be a good idea to contact one of the reviewers who handles this part of the country in order to get some input. They can also steer you to some other OH park policies that might be helpful.

 

And consider my signature line, please. Some of the replies you have received so far may not be all that helpful to your cause.

Link to comment

To start with, be sure the entire board is familiar with Groundspeak's existing rules. Then try your very best to avoid over-regulation. I have a particular distaste, myself, for time limits, which will severely cramp creativity in hides. My 2 cents (but I have a pocket full of change if you want it)

Link to comment

You may want to contact the Missouri Department of Conservation, Dennis Rhoades. When thay were first made aware of GeoCaching they had all of these requirements for permits, etc., but once they found out about the benefits of GeoCahing to bring people to the areas they dropped all the nonsense.

 

One of the things they do in this area is ask that the Finders log were they are from, so the park system can be shown that the Cache's bring in vistors from everywhere.

Edited by BrrrMo
Link to comment

No bushwacking? You're no fun. Just be sure to arrest everyone else that walks off trail. :unsure:

 

There's a distinction between "people who walk off the trail," and "people who place an object at a specific location off the trail and encourage other people to look for it."

 

In the first instance, people wander off the trail for their own reasons, and choose their own places to do so. The impact is scattered over a broad area.

 

In the second instance, people are being guided to a specific off-trail location and the impact will be concentrated over a smaller area.

 

And why do you think they should arrest anyone? This conversation is about guidelines for hiding caches. No one suggested that cachers who wander off the trail would be arrested.

Link to comment

Agreed - don't waste time repeating Geocaching.com guidelines.

 

Keep your policy short and simple to read.

 

Don't include vague phrases like "near the trail" - clearly define what that means and why you want such a rule. Clearly define what areas are off limits or sensitive. Consider allowing "off trail" caches in well defined areas (maybe with a permit).

 

Don't create rules that would not apply to any other visitor.

Link to comment

I don't know how big the park is but you might consider limiting the distance between cache placements.

You could mandate that caches have to be within a certain size range (micros can cause more "trampling" while hunting, for instance).

You could mandate that caches have to have cetain qualities to them, such as transparency or markings.

You could require that all caches submitted have a submission to the park with a photograph of the container and then have a notebook that park caretakers could reference for placement, and container, etc

 

Any "rules" that are established for the placement of caches should be communicated to the reviewer(s) for your area so that they can be sure that each cache they approve complies with your additional guidelines, if you choose to have any.

 

 

Please disregard any snarky attitude in replies you might get. Geocaching encompasses all walks of life and some people just have a different personality that can be abrasive. I'm sure they mean well.

Link to comment

I don't know how big the park is but you might consider limiting the distance between cache placements.

 

Don't the Guidelines already have that one covered?

 

Yes, but in some parks I think they INCREASE the minimum distance. Say.... 1000 feet between caches instead of 528 (or whatever 1/10 of a mile is)

Link to comment

I don't know how big the park is but you might consider limiting the distance between cache placements.

 

Don't the Guidelines already have that one covered?

 

Yes, but in the example the NY parks policy that was posted earlier, they've increased the minimum distance to 1/4 mile. That seems perfectly reasonable considering the environment.

Link to comment

Hello,

The Ashland County Park District (Ashland,Ohio) is seeking to establish it's policy for geocaching within the park system. As a new geocacher and park volunteer, I am seeking fellow geocachers input on information to include in this policy. Our main goals are to allow geocaching without prior permission, or permits while protecting the park environment as whole. One Rule that is a must is to keep caches near the trails (no bushwacking) Otherwise I hope to gain your opinion for this policy.

Thanks!

 

Also, we are looking to have a geocaching event to intoduce people to each park. Any Ideas?

 

First of all, welcome to geocaching and congratulations on your initiative to allow caching in your park system!

 

I have one suggestion I haven't seen elsewhere (and welcome other cachers opinions on this). What if at the first cache event (or the first cache event held in each park, depending upon how large and dispersed your system is), you offered this as a prize - the opportunity to place the first cache within that park?

 

I would think that would be an amazing prize - the opportunity to find the most choice spot for a cache in a "virgin" park. And, because the caching community participating in the event would feel some "buy-in" in the cache placement, perhaps the prize winner would be sure to place a fine cache (read: ammo can).

 

Thoughts?

Link to comment

Well everyone seems to be weighing in on how to regulate, but I haven't found any promotional ideas in the postings. I came across this on GC.com the other day and a new cacher in the area that I am in contact with due to work was very excited. Here's a link to an article regarding the opening of Texas State Parks to geocaching and how they are promoting it. Hope this helps.

Link to comment

I don't know how big the park is but you might consider limiting the distance between cache placements.

Don't the Guidelines already have that one covered?

There is a strong liklihood that any given public park might choose to have rules disrespective of those published at geocaching.com.

Yes, but they generally come up with those rules by themselves. I don't think that we should encourage, or even suggest such a thing.
Link to comment

when i travel, two things bring me to any given town: a good cluster of caches, and strong wifi curbside at the public library.

 

even though the people providing these things rarely see me, i always send a note letting them know that because of the caches and the wifi i have stopped in their town, paid park admissions, and bought groceries, gas, and supplies.

 

sometimes i also attend their churches and do some work for them while i'm there.

 

park systems don't always consider that a good cluster of caches in a nice park will bring people into town from far away, or pull them off of the interstates. properly managed cache-friendly systems benefit the town's economy as a whole.

 

you put a dozen clever caches in a nice park and you have an instant DESTINATION.

Link to comment

when i travel, two things bring me to any given town: a good cluster of caches, and strong wifi curbside at the public library.

 

even though the people providing these things rarely see me, i always send a note letting them know that because of the caches and the wifi i have stopped in their town, paid park admissions, and bought groceries, gas, and supplies.

 

sometimes i also attend their churches and do some work for them while i'm there.

 

park systems don't always consider that a good cluster of caches in a nice park will bring people into town from far away, or pull them off of the interstates. properly managed cache-friendly systems benefit the town's economy as a whole.

 

you put a dozen clever caches in a nice park and you have an instant DESTINATION.

 

I find it interesting that our culture is pretty quick to send in complaints to organizations and businesses, but not compliments. Imagine if everyone sent in thank yous for things like you are describing, then they could truly know how much of an affect things like this can have on a community. But since most of us don't bother to chime in when we're happy with something, they never know.

Edited by Ambrosia
Link to comment
No bushwacking? You're no fun. Just be sure to arrest everyone else that walks off trail. :D

Don't troll. Would you rather no geocache within the park?

Grow up. I raised a valid point.

I apologize for calling you a troll. I do submit, however, that you can rephrase your valid point in a better way.

 

It was fine the way it was.

Link to comment

No bushwacking? You're no fun. Just be sure to arrest everyone else that walks off trail. :D

 

There's a distinction between "people who walk off the trail," and "people who place an object at a specific location off the trail and encourage other people to look for it."

 

In the first instance, people wander off the trail for their own reasons, and choose their own places to do so. The impact is scattered over a broad area.

 

In the second instance, people are being guided to a specific off-trail location and the impact will be concentrated over a smaller area.

 

And why do you think they should arrest anyone? This conversation is about guidelines for hiding caches. No one suggested that cachers who wander off the trail would be arrested.

 

I think you may have missed my point.

Link to comment

please consider this: a cache close to the trail develops more of a social trail than one farther away.

 

when the cache is significantly off-trail people will make their own paths, but where the cache is close, a herdpath will develop, and quickly.

 

your park system may wish to prohibit caches in specific sensitive areas, but permit caches off-trail in more hardy areas.

 

Agree!! There seems to be a common misconception that caches near a trail have a lesser impact on the environment than those that are further away, but the true picture is that everyone goes off trail at the same spot and follows the same route to the cache forming a trail. A cache that is a few hundred meters off the nearest trail will entice searchers to leave the trail at many different points and each tend to take individual routes to the spot lessening the impact. This fact is recognized and has been used for years in designing Orienteering courses.

Link to comment
No bushwacking? You're no fun. Just be sure to arrest everyone else that walks off trail. :D

Don't troll. Would you rather no geocache within the park?

Grow up. I raised a valid point.

I apologize for calling you a troll. I do submit, however, that you can rephrase your valid point in a better way.

It was fine the way it was.
I agree that any rule that prohibits geocachers from going off-trail must also apply to bird-watchers, mushroom hunters, rock hounds, and drunks.
Link to comment
One Rule that is a must is to keep caches near the trails (no bushwacking)

Hi acpdnat, welcome to the forums. Often, this is a great place to obtain information. Sometimes, it's just a place to gather angst. Hopefully, you'll be able to separate the information from the angst. One thing I'd like to touch on, that's been mentioned by a few seasoned cachers already, is the problems inherent in such a policy. I worked with a reviewer and a UCF professor to hammer out a geocaching policy for Seminole County Natural Lands. Your zero tolerance line was the same as their's, quoting a need to protect the natural environment from "bushwhackers". I told them that, based upon my experience, their policy would have the opposite of the intended effect, and I proved my point to them some time later when we went on a cache inspection run. Every single cache that was placed near the trail had a well established social trail leading right to it. I then took them across the street to a state forest, which has a much less restrictive policy. We got to a point on a trail, and I pointed into the shrubbery, telling them there was a cache "about 300' thataway". There was no social trail leading to it. I explained that, cachers who seek caches that are well off the beaten path won't typically follow the same path to get there, so no social trail has a chance to form.

 

Sadly, despite the evidence, the policy is still in place. Some folks are simply unable to let go of their preconceptions.

 

Hopefully, ACPD won't follow suit.

 

One other thing: SCNL does controlled burns on a regular basis. The Natural Lands staff had heard horror stories of fireman stepping onto melted gobs of plastic, (the remnants of a Tupperware cache), and they sought alternatives to prevent this. We suggested an ammo can only policy, which they adopted. If your parks do controlled burns, you may want to consider a similar policy.

 

Something else to consider: The geocaching guidelines are pretty awesome. Many of them were written with park managers in mind. Check them out. If you create your own rules, that are more restrictive than these guidelines, you create a bureaucracy, setting yourself, and the rest of the park staff up for lots of unnecessary work. Let the guidelines work for you, and your job will be a lot easier. What I would suggest is a fairly simple request form, highlighting a few of the more important guidelines, with boxes to fill in. The applicant would enter the cache name, GC number, coords, and their contact information. Once this is submitted, check the coords against a basemap showing known sensitive areas. If it's not in a sensitive area, assign the cache a distinctive number, make a copy of the permit and tell the cacher to put a copy in the cache. For a cache numbering system, maybe an identifier for the park in question, two digits denoting the year, then numbers detailing the chronological order of placement. For example, let's use Black Forks. The first cache permitted this year could bear the identifier of BF-10-001. The second one would be BF-10-002. Etc.

 

Good luck!

 

-Sean

Link to comment
I worked with a reviewer and a UCF professor to hammer out a geocaching policy for Seminole County Natural Lands. Your zero tolerance line was the same as their's, quoting a need to protect the natural environment from "bushwhackers". I told them that, based upon my experience, their policy would have the opposite of the intended effect, and I proved my point to them some time later when we went on a cache inspection run. Every single cache that was placed near the trail had a well established social trail leading right to it. I then took them across the street to a state forest, which has a much less restrictive policy. We got to a point on a trail, and I pointed into the shrubbery, telling them there was a cache "about 300' thataway". There was no social trail leading to it. I explained that, cachers who seek caches that are well off the beaten path won't typically follow the same path to get there, so no social trail has a chance to form.
Another factor is that caches close to the trail will tend to be smaller and better camouflaged than caches further from the trail, because they need to be harder for muggles to find accidentally. The easier a cache is to find, the more quickly geocachers seeking it will be on their way. The harder a cache is to find, the more time geocachers will spend searching for it.
Link to comment
One Rule that is a must is to keep caches near the trails (no bushwacking)

Hi acpdnat, welcome to the forums. Often, this is a great place to obtain information. Sometimes, it's just a place to gather angst. Hopefully, you'll be able to separate the information from the angst. One thing I'd like to touch on, that's been mentioned by a few seasoned cachers already, is the problems inherent in such a policy. I worked with a reviewer and a UCF professor to hammer out a geocaching policy for Seminole County Natural Lands. Your zero tolerance line was the same as their's, quoting a need to protect the natural environment from "bushwhackers". I told them that, based upon my experience, their policy would have the opposite of the intended effect, and I proved my point to them some time later when we went on a cache inspection run. Every single cache that was placed near the trail had a well established social trail leading right to it. I then took them across the street to a state forest, which has a much less restrictive policy. We got to a point on a trail, and I pointed into the shrubbery, telling them there was a cache "about 300' thataway". There was no social trail leading to it. I explained that, cachers who seek caches that are well off the beaten path won't typically follow the same path to get there, so no social trail has a chance to form.

 

Sadly, despite the evidence, the policy is still in place. Some folks are simply unable to let go of their preconceptions.

 

Hopefully, ACPD won't follow suit.

 

One other thing: SCNL does controlled burns on a regular basis. The Natural Lands staff had heard horror stories of fireman stepping onto melted gobs of plastic, (the remnants of a Tupperware cache), and they sought alternatives to prevent this. We suggested an ammo can only policy, which they adopted. If your parks do controlled burns, you may want to consider a similar policy.

 

Something else to consider: The geocaching guidelines are pretty awesome. Many of them were written with park managers in mind. Check them out. If you create your own rules, that are more restrictive than these guidelines, you create a bureaucracy, setting yourself, and the rest of the park staff up for lots of unnecessary work. Let the guidelines work for you, and your job will be a lot easier. What I would suggest is a fairly simple request form, highlighting a few of the more important guidelines, with boxes to fill in. The applicant would enter the cache name, GC number, coords, and their contact information. Once this is submitted, check the coords against a basemap showing known sensitive areas. If it's not in a sensitive area, assign the cache a distinctive number, make a copy of the permit and tell the cacher to put a copy in the cache. For a cache numbering system, maybe an identifier for the park in question, two digits denoting the year, then numbers detailing the chronological order of placement. For example, let's use Black Forks. The first cache permitted this year could bear the identifier of BF-10-001. The second one would be BF-10-002. Etc.

 

Good luck!

 

-Sean

 

I think that every public park that has a rule that prohibits off trail travel by users of the trails ought to apply that rule in a consistent manner and it ought to apply to every human that uses the trails.

 

The parks that I have visited where off trail use is prohibited have made no distinction between trail users. This is a good and righteous thing.

Link to comment

Hello,

The Ashland County Park District (Ashland,Ohio) is seeking to establish it's policy for geocaching within the park system. As a new geocacher and park volunteer, I am seeking fellow geocachers input on information to include in this policy. Our main goals are to allow geocaching without prior permission, or permits while protecting the park environment as whole. One Rule that is a must is to keep caches near the trails (no bushwacking) Otherwise I hope to gain your opinion for this policy.

Thanks!

 

Also, we are looking to have a geocaching event to intoduce people to each park. Any Ideas?

Having only read the question, and not yet all the answers, here are my first couple of thoughts.

 

If the LMs are concerned, then perhaps a Permit system is appropriate(but maybe the permit can be free), or at least allow the LMs to review the Cache before it's submitted.

 

Maybe include people in the decision process that understand geocaching, but do not play, so they can give a more balanced opinion, and not have it look like we are trying to just write a policy that benefits ourselves.

Link to comment

And consider my signature line, please. Some of the replies you have received so far may not be all that helpful to your cause.

 

I totally agree. I would go one step further and encourage the OP to contact some of the local Geocaching Organizations (usually posted in the Regional Forums), for whom these proposed regulations impact the most. It's pretty easy for me to sit out here on the Left Coast and talk about regulating someone else,s backyard.

 

It's hard for me to imagine a more inappropriate manner to propose regulations than to come to a Forum like this for information :D

 

But certainly the Local Reviewer(s) are a good source of information as well, and if you don't know who they are, Groundspeak would be able to put you in touch with them (contact@geocaching.com).

 

I hope everything works out for everyone's benefit.

Link to comment

I don't know how big the park is but you might consider limiting the distance between cache placements.

Don't the Guidelines already have that one covered?

Yes they do, but some park managers have elected to require that Caches be even further apart than GS does. I think it's reasonable.

To repeat myself: then let them suggest it. Do not even think about suggesting something like that, or any other departure from Groundspeak's current guidelines.Don't worry... they will be sure to come up with more restrictive rules without our help.
Link to comment

It always surprises me when some appointed "official" runs around claiming they are going to make rules for everyone else. This is a public park. Do they forget what "public" means? It is the public who should decide any rules for that park, not someone who sits behind a desk all their life dreaming up rules for everyone else. What saddens me is how few people realize that they themselves should be, and are, the rule makers for themselves. I for one refuse to live in a police state. This is America. You spit on the flag every time you let someone make a rule for you, the rule-maker doubly so.

 

"Authority isn't something someone else has. It is something that you have freely, foolishly and irresponsibly given away -- all by your little self."

 

ANYONE who allows or uses the threat of fear to control you is no better than terrorists. People who make policies from fear are the terrorists themselves. They have done exactly what the terrorists wanted them to do.

Edited by Keo1
Link to comment

Hello,

Our main goals are to allow geocaching without prior permission, or permits while protecting the park environment as whole. One Rule that is a must is to keep caches near the trails (no bushwacking) Otherwise I hope to gain your opinion for this policy.

 

Also, we are looking to have a geocaching event to intoduce people to each park. Any Ideas?

I tend to side with the let the people seek further afield crowd... I grew up it Toronto where parks policy was to 'please walk ON the grass' right up to 95 and probably still is that way. Not everywhere of course, some areas were environmentally sensitive and were protected as such. One way you could control sensitive areas while still having caches there that meet your guidelines would be to have the Parks people get 'someone' to place their own caches... seek out other experienced cachers to create them but ownership would be with the Parks department. In non sensitive areas place away. The density guidelines would keep others out in a friendly way... no problem with maintaining either, at least not many.

 

As for cache events to introduce local cachers to the parks and parks staff... can you say CITO... get some volunteer time as well for a good cause. Time to cache as well.

 

Doug

Link to comment

I would like to thank everyone for the great opinions and advice. We will be sure to keep these points in mind and, we will be sure to keep the park rules short and sweet, while keeping the guidelines in mind. I think we may even be able to reconsider the trail rule (at least at one of the parks) However this is a general rule for all the parks, so we will have to consider this carefully. I hope to avoid over regulation here, our goal is to allow geocachers to use the park just as much as everyone else. I wll probly run the rough park policy by our local groups before final approval. Thanks again for all the help and great links!

Link to comment

It always surprises me when some appointed "official" runs around claiming they are going to make rules for everyone else. This is a public park. Do they forget what "public" means? It is the public who should decide any rules for that park, not someone who sits behind a desk all their life dreaming up rules for everyone else. What saddens me is how few people realize that they themselves should be, and are, the rule makers for themselves. I for one refuse to live in a police state. This is America. You spit on the flag every time you let someone make a rule for you, the rule-maker doubly so.

 

"Authority isn't something someone else has. It is something that you have freely, foolishly and irresponsibly given away -- all by your little self."

 

ANYONE who allows or uses the threat of fear to control you is no better than terrorists. People who make policies from fear are the terrorists themselves. They have done exactly what the terrorists wanted them to do.

 

You are absolutly right and if you read my entire post "As a new geocacher and park volunteer, I am seeking fellow geocachers input on information to include in this policy" you would see this is a public forum and as a volunteer for a public run park system I am seeking public opinion.

Link to comment

It always surprises me when some appointed "official" runs around claiming they are going to make rules for everyone else. This is a public park. Do they forget what "public" means? It is the public who should decide any rules for that park, not someone who sits behind a desk all their life dreaming up rules for everyone else. What saddens me is how few people realize that they themselves should be, and are, the rule makers for themselves. I for one refuse to live in a police state. This is America. You spit on the flag every time you let someone make a rule for you, the rule-maker doubly so.

 

"Authority isn't something someone else has. It is something that you have freely, foolishly and irresponsibly given away -- all by your little self."

 

ANYONE who allows or uses the threat of fear to control you is no better than terrorists. People who make policies from fear are the terrorists themselves. They have done exactly what the terrorists wanted them to do.

 

Wow, talk about going wildly off tangent.

 

I put my faith in park directors/departments to keep those public spaces kept up to public use standards. There are reasons for regulations and none of them have anything to do with terrorism or knee-jerk reactions out of fear. Those regulations are meant to preserve these green spaces from abuse. I would hate to see a park that is free from oversight of a public official.

 

While I don't agree with a decision to not allow geocaching in a public park, it isn't the park manager who made that call. It's the people who abused the system...caching after posted hours, littering, trampling through flowerbeds, damaging property...who decided that fate.

Link to comment

when i travel, two things bring me to any given town: a good cluster of caches, and strong wifi curbside at the public library.

 

even though the people providing these things rarely see me, i always send a note letting them know that because of the caches and the wifi i have stopped in their town, paid park admissions, and bought groceries, gas, and supplies.

 

sometimes i also attend their churches and do some work for them while i'm there.

 

park systems don't always consider that a good cluster of caches in a nice park will bring people into town from far away, or pull them off of the interstates. properly managed cache-friendly systems benefit the town's economy as a whole.

 

you put a dozen clever caches in a nice park and you have an instant DESTINATION.

 

I find it interesting that our culture is pretty quick to send in complaints to organizations and businesses, but not compliments. Imagine if everyone sent in thank yous for things like you are describing, then they could truly know how much of an affect things like this can have on a community. But since most of us don't bother to chime in when we're happy with something, they never know.

 

I absolutly agree! What a great attitude to have! Like my Mother always said," If you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all." But perhaps many more of us could say those nice things, they can make such a difference!

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...
Followers 4
×
×
  • Create New...