New! Park Liaison Program

[+hydnsek]

The Washington State Geocaching Association (WSGA) is pleased to announce the Park Liaison Program (PLP), in which a WSGA member is paired with a park system to help them with geocaching issues. As geocaching celebrates its 10th anniversary in 2010, parks recognize that it’s a popular, family-oriented activity, and are looking for ways they can support it with limited staff and resources. The PLP helps parks embrace and manage geocaching without compromising their goals or adding to their overhead.

 

The Park Liaison Program is another way in which WSGA is working with Washington parks at all levels (city, county, state, federal) to create mutually beneficial relationships and ensure continued access for geocachers – part of the club’s founding mission. The Liaison puts a face on geocaching and provides a go-to person for park personnel, and relieves them from having to deal with caching on a regular basis. In turn, WSGA builds trust with the park system by self-policing our activity, ensuring greater support and faster resolution should problems arise.

 

The Park Liaison Program was piloted over the past two years at Cougar Mountain Regional Wildland Park, the flagship of King County Parks. Its success has cemented a positive relationship with KCP, from the director down to individual staff at its 180 parks. Today, other park systems see the mutual benefits of this program and are asking to participate.

 

What does a Park Liaison do? The specifics vary from park to park, but may include:

• Ensuring geocachers adhere to park regulations. If a park says “no off-trail use,” all caches must be by a trail (specific distance will be defined – at Cougar Mountain, it’s 10 feet). “Day use only” – no night caching is permitted. If certain park areas are off-limits due to sensitive habitat or safety issues, no cache placements will be allowed.
  
• Ensuring geocachers adhere to geocaching.com guidelines on placement, especially those under Off-Limit (Physical) Caches. We don’t bury caches, screw things into trees, deface property, contribute to habitat destruction, etc. Mantra: “What would the ranger think?”
  
• Working with park personnel to create and/or implement caching guidelines for their lands. These may be informal, enforced by the Liaison, or written up as a public document. In most cases, cache placements can be overseen by the Liaison without a formal permitting or approval process by the park, as has been demonstrated over the past two years at Cougar Mountain, which has a strict no-off-trail policy (50+ caches along 36 miles of trail).
  
• Physically visiting cache placements to ensure they adhere to guidelines and minimize environmental impact (e.g., social trails, foliage damage).
  
• Monitoring caches and addressing problems if the owner is not responsive, including removing abandoned caches that are archived.
  
• Contacting cache owners and working with them to mitigate any problems that arise.
  
• Keeping park personnel informed about cache placements on their land, and promptly addressing any problems identified by park staff.
  
• Educating park personnel about geocaching and its benefits, such as raising awareness and increasing visitation to their parks.
  
• Taking park personnel geocaching to familiarize them with the activity, show them cache placements in their parks, and get their feedback.
  
• Streamlining the park’s interactions with Groundspeak, as needed, by serving as a conduit to the company and reviewers. This is particularly important if the park needs to clarify its boundaries, request cache removals or moratoriums, or otherwise present an official request.
  
• Hosting CITO (Cache In, Trash Out) volunteer work parties to support the park. At Cougar Mountain, WSGA has annual work parties to remove invasives and replant native flora. At Discovery Park (Seattle), we have done two Beach Cleanups.
  

Below are the park systems currently in the program, with their liaisons and inception dates. In most cases, there are specific parks in the Liaison Program, with the backing of their larger park system and plans to expand the program into other parks.

• Cougar Mountain RWP, King County Parks – hydnsek; pilot, 1/08
  
• North Cascades National Park Service Complex – hydnsek; 10/08
  
• Lord Hill and Paradise Valley, Snohomish County Parks – GrievousAngel; 2/10
  
• Discovery Park, Seattle City Parks – rodgowdy; 3/10
  
• Cama Beach State Park – Rey del Roble; 3/10
  

We are also working with several park systems outside the Park Liaison Program, including those in Bellevue, Renton, Anacortes, and Camano Island; Washington State Parks; and Mount Rainier National Park.

 

Many thanks to the members of WSGA’s Parks Advocacy Committee who have volunteered as Park Liaisons. If you’re interested in participating, or know a park system you think would benefit, please contact me. Most parks currently in the program are in the Puget Sound and 48 North areas, but we would love to see it expanded across the state.

 

We also welcome your feedback - the program is still evolving.

Edited March 5, 2010 by hydnsek

[+WeightMan]

I might mention that this is not something that will be done with every park. Most parks will not be involved with this program since the caches there are not a problem. However, when a park starts getting problems, whether related to the caches or not, but that the park attributes to the caches, then this policy can kick in. This is not the cache police, but a way to work with the parks to keep caches in the parks. Only caches that disregard park guidelines will be dealt with. Those guidelines may be above and beyond the normal guidelines for cache placement.

[+Jomer & Traci]

Is there any need for liaisons in Kitsap?

[+WeightMan]

I should note that this is NOT just for problem parks or caches. Hydnsek started this with Cougar Mtn Park when there was no problem with the park at all.

[+hydnsek]

I might mention that this is not something that will be done with every park. Most parks will not be involved with this program since the caches there are not a problem. However, when a park starts getting problems, whether related to the caches or not, but that the park attributes to the caches, then this policy can kick in. This is not the cache police, but a way to work with the parks to keep caches in the parks. Only caches that disregard park guidelines will be dealt with. Those guidelines may be above and beyond the normal guidelines for cache placement.

Actually, the Liaison Program is not just for parks with caching issues. Just the opposite! It can be better to create a Liaison relationship before problems arise, so that the trust and positive vibes are already there and you don't start out as perceived adversaries - it makes working things out faster and easier.

 

There were no problems with caching at Cougar Mountain when I started the pilot program two years ago. And there still aren't. The goal was to be proactive and build a healthy relationship with the park system, so that if a problem arose, they would already have a positive view of geocaching and work with us without banning caching or enacting onerous guidelines. And while "cache police" has a harsh sound to some folks, the fact is that we do make sure all caches at Cougar Mountain follow the guidelines set by the rangers - this ensures continued support for caching in the park. I think maybe three caches have had to be moved or removed during the past two years due to being too far off-trail; the cache owners were all cooperative. There are 51 caches at Cougar, nearly all placed and maintained without any involvement by the Liaison. This relationship has had several upsides, the most recent being that the rangers were considering a moratorium on new placements (saturation concerns) in February, but decided to let us manage it on our own after conveying their concerns. To me, this is an ideal situation.

 

However, you're correct, the Liaison Program is more likely to come into play when we have problems in a park system, as with Discovery Park and Paradise Valley. But just think - what if we'd had a Liaison at Discovery in 2007, when they had issues with some caches and solved it by banning geocaching altogether? Perhaps a different solution would have been reached that would've enabled caching to continue.

[+brodiebunch]

Discovery Park is listed, will geocaches be allowed there once again?

[+hydnsek]

Is there any need for liaisons in Kitsap?

Great question for the Kitsap cachers! I don't know myself.

[+WeightMan]

Discovery Park is listed, will geocaches be allowed there once again?

We are hopeful. At this point, Discovery Park is still off limits. Rodgowdy will be working with the staff there and will likely place a cache or two later on. After seeing how this works, the park staff may well open up portions of the park to caching. There are area that they are leery of having caches in due to habitat concerns as well as safety concerns. The safety concerns are primarily along the bluff.

[+hydnsek]

Discovery Park is listed, will geocaches be allowed there once again?

In case you missed it in the other thread, here is the report on our March 3 meeting with Discovery personnel. Very promising, as Weightman noted in his reply.

Edited March 6, 2010 by hydnsek

[jholly]

Is there any need for liaisons in Kitsap?

Great question for the Kitsap cachers! I don't know myself.

 

Last time I talked to a person from Kitsap County Parks about two years ago they were very cacher friendly. They seemed very unconcerned. A number of the county parks have a large number of caches in them. I have not heard of any problems.

[+Shop99er]

Is there any need for liaisons in Kitsap?

Great question for the Kitsap cachers! I don't know myself.

 

Last time I talked to a person from Kitsap County Parks about two years ago they were very cacher friendly. They seemed very unconcerned. A number of the county parks have a large number of caches in them. I have not heard of any problems.

 

Since there aren't all that many State Parks over here, it won't be too much of a problem, I don't think.

 

That being said, if Jim can/will do it, and if it's nedded I would recommend him for Illahee State Park in Bremerton.

 

I would be happy to work with Cathy at Manchester State Park. We have known each other for several years, long befor the earlier caches in the park caused so much heartburn.

[jholly]

Is there any need for liaisons in Kitsap?

Great question for the Kitsap cachers! I don't know myself.

 

Last time I talked to a person from Kitsap County Parks about two years ago they were very cacher friendly. They seemed very unconcerned. A number of the county parks have a large number of caches in them. I have not heard of any problems.

 

Since there aren't all that many State Parks over here, it won't be too much of a problem, I don't think.

 

That being said, if Jim can/will do it, and if it's nedded I would recommend him for Illahee State Park in Bremerton.

 

I would be happy to work with Cathy at Manchester State Park. We have known each other for several years, long befor the earlier caches in the park caused so much heartburn.

 

Sure, that should be fairly easy. I don't believe there currently are any in Illahee State Park and my one experience with hiding in a state park is that the management is fairly unresponsive so it probably will stay that way.

[+Shop99er]

Is there any need for liaisons in Kitsap?

Great question for the Kitsap cachers! I don't know myself.

 

Last time I talked to a person from Kitsap County Parks about two years ago they were very cacher friendly. They seemed very unconcerned. A number of the county parks have a large number of caches in them. I have not heard of any problems.

 

Since there aren't all that many State Parks over here, it won't be too much of a problem, I don't think.

 

That being said, if Jim can/will do it, and if it's nedded I would recommend him for Illahee State Park in Bremerton.

 

I would be happy to work with Cathy at Manchester State Park. We have known each other for several years, long befor the earlier caches in the park caused so much heartburn.

 

Sure, that should be fairly easy. I don't believe there currently are any in Illahee State Park and my one experience with hiding in a state park is that the management is fairly unresponsive so it probably will stay that way.

 

I thought Fledermaus had one in that park.

 

When I was putting one there, the Head Ranger could not have been nicer, or easier to deal with. Ditto for Manchester.

[Fledermaus]

Is there any need for liaisons in Kitsap?

Great question for the Kitsap cachers! I don't know myself.

 

Last time I talked to a person from Kitsap County Parks about two years ago they were very cacher friendly. They seemed very unconcerned. A number of the county parks have a large number of caches in them. I have not heard of any problems.

 

Since there aren't all that many State Parks over here, it won't be too much of a problem, I don't think.

 

That being said, if Jim can/will do it, and if it's nedded I would recommend him for Illahee State Park in Bremerton.

 

I would be happy to work with Cathy at Manchester State Park. We have known each other for several years, long befor the earlier caches in the park caused so much heartburn.

 

Sure, that should be fairly easy. I don't believe there currently are any in Illahee State Park and my one experience with hiding in a state park is that the management is fairly unresponsive so it probably will stay that way.

 

I thought Fledermaus had one in that park.

 

When I was putting one there, the Head Ranger could not have been nicer, or easier to deal with. Ditto for Manchester.

 

I am Fledermaus and I have two caches in the Illahee State Park, soon to be three. No more than three caches will be allowed in that park, according to the Ranger. The Park Ranger that I worked with, who is now the Park Manager, and I are on friendly terms with each other. He is fully aware of each cache placement and all of this was done before any of the state park issues existed.

 

/\/(°w°)\/\

[+hydnsek]

Is there any need for liaisons in Kitsap?

Why yes, there is! I received the following email a few days ago, so WSGA needs a Liaison for Kitsap County Parks. This person would need to be a WSGA member (or become one) and willing to be on the Parks Advocacy Committee and fulfill the Liaison role. While many Liaison roles don't require much time or effort, I suspect this one might be different, as they want help in placing the geocaches - so this role is for someone who would enjoy teaching the Kitsap personnel about caching and helping them create their caches.

 

"My name is Lori Raymaker. I am the Park Stewardship Coordinator with Kitsap County Parks. I would love to have a liaison with Geocaching. We just received a grant through Puget Sound Starts Here to create and locate 60 geocache sites within the County. Most will be in the County Parks. We are just starting this program and could benefit from some expert advise from a seasoned geocacher, someone who knows all of the ins and outs and etiquette of geocaching. With a liaison I'm sure we will avoid making a lot of the "first timer" mistakes. Please feel free to contact me via email or phone. I look forward to working with your group."

 

Way cool! This sounds like a wonderful opportunity, and I hope we can help her out. Please email or PM me if you want to discuss taking on this Liaison role.

Edited March 17, 2010 by hydnsek

[+Shop99er]

Is there any need for liaisons in Kitsap?

Why yes, there is! I received the following email a few days ago, so WSGA needs a Liaison for Kitsap County Parks. This person would need to be a WSGA member (or become one) and willing to be on the Parks Advocacy Committee and fulfill the Liaison role. While many Liaison roles don't require much time or effort, I suspect this one might be different, as they want help in placing the geocaches - so this role is for someone who would enjoy teaching the Kitsap personnel about caching and helping them create their caches.

 

"My name is Lori Raymaker. I am the Park Stewardship Coordinator with Kitsap County Parks. I would love to have a liaison with Geocaching. We just received a grant through Puget Sound Starts Here to create and locate 60 geocache sites within the County. Most will be in the County Parks. We are just starting this program and could benefit from some expert advise from a seasoned geocacher, someone who knows all of the ins and outs and etiquette of geocaching. With a liaison I'm sure we will avoid making a lot of the "first timer" mistakes. Please feel free to contact me via email or phone. I look forward to working with your group."

 

Way cool! This sounds like a wonderful opportunity, and I hope we can help her out. Please email or PM me if you want to discuss taking on this Liaison role.

 

And why is it required that the liaison be a member of WSGA? Are non-members somehow not able to do this?

[+hydnsek]

Is there any need for liaisons in Kitsap?

Why yes, there is! I received the following email a few days ago, so WSGA needs a Liaison for Kitsap County Parks. This person would need to be a WSGA member (or become one) and willing to be on the Parks Advocacy Committee and fulfill the Liaison role. While many Liaison roles don't require much time or effort, I suspect this one might be different, as they want help in placing the geocaches - so this role is for someone who would enjoy teaching the Kitsap personnel about caching and helping them create their caches.

 

"My name is Lori Raymaker. I am the Park Stewardship Coordinator with Kitsap County Parks. I would love to have a liaison with Geocaching. We just received a grant through Puget Sound Starts Here to create and locate 60 geocache sites within the County. Most will be in the County Parks. We are just starting this program and could benefit from some expert advise from a seasoned geocacher, someone who knows all of the ins and outs and etiquette of geocaching. With a liaison I'm sure we will avoid making a lot of the "first timer" mistakes. Please feel free to contact me via email or phone. I look forward to working with your group."

 

Way cool! This sounds like a wonderful opportunity, and I hope we can help her out. Please email or PM me if you want to discuss taking on this Liaison role.

 

And why is it required that the liaison be a member of WSGA? Are non-members somehow not able to do this?

Um, because it's the WSGA Park Liaison Program, and because Kitsap County Parks contacted the WSGA President and asked to be part of that program. Working with WA park systems is part of WSGA's core mission (it's the main reason the club was formed), and we created the Liaison Program and manage it. See the OP. Since the Liaisons represent WSGA and are expected to follow the Liaison Program guidelines, they should be members. Responsibility, accountability, all that jazz. (Plus, we have a private WSGA forum for the Liaisons to coordinate and discuss park issues. Sorta like the Groundspeak reviewers.)

 

I think there are several non-members who would make great Liaisons. If they ever choose to become WSGA members, we'd love to have them. And of course, any cacher can work with any park at any time - and there are many great cacher-park relationships outside the WSGA Liaison Program. It's all good.

 

I suppose this is as good a place as any to toot our horn: When Groundspeak saw WSGA's announcement of the PLP, they gave us a big thumbs-up. Bryan said: "What a wonderful program! Congratulations to the WSGA. We will share it with the reviewers and let you know if there are any suggestions. Of course, if there is anything that Groundspeak can do to assist, please don't hesitate to contact us." He also said the work that WSGA and the Maryland club are doing with park systems are the leading examples of how geocaching groups can positively impact parks' attitudes toward geocaching as an acceptable recreational activity.

Edited March 18, 2010 by hydnsek