Residents only restriction

[+LightHouseSeekers]

A nearby park is posted with signs clearly stating the park is only for residents of that community.

Couldn't determine from the guidlines whether a cache would permitted there considering it would

NOT be available to the general (geocaching) public.

[+bittsen]

It's my understanding that one of the fundamental rules is that ALL caches must be available to ALL users (premium membership caches excluded, sort of).

[+StarBrand]

I know a few such caches are allowed when the homeowners (or equivalent) associations gave permission.

 

I have seen the argument that a local resident can place such a cache and extends an inviation to any 'guests' that want to hunt it. (I don't buy this argument).

 

They do exist - but without some form of explicit permission - I don't think they should.

[+Chrysalides]

Check with your reviewer, but in this case I would suspect it will not be approved.

[GermanSailor]

A nearby park is posted with signs clearly stating the park is only for residents of that community.

Couldn't determine from the guidlines whether a cache would permitted there considering it would

NOT be available to the general (geocaching) public.

I don't think such a place is a place for a geocache. There must be a reason why the residents don't want other people there. Why not accept this?

 

GermanSailor

[+ras_oscar]

If an area is residents only there's a reason. We as responsible "guests" need to respect the wishes of the landowners/controllers.

[Mr.Yuck]

A nearby park is posted with signs clearly stating the park is only for residents of that community.

Couldn't determine from the guidlines whether a cache would permitted there considering it would

NOT be available to the general (geocaching) public.

 

Thing is, the reviewer would probably see it's in a park, and have no clue it's a residents only park!

 

What are you talking? A municipality (City, Town, Village etc..) that posts all their parks as residents only? Or you mean like a housing development?

 

There's a township near where I live (Western NY, Suburban Buffalo) that posts all their town parks "residents only". But it gets ignored by everyone. Not just geocache hiders and seekers, but for general park use.

 

If you are talking about a housing development, I'd definitely seek explicit permission. Like in the form of a signed letter on a letterhead.

[+Cardinal Red]

A nearby park is posted with signs clearly stating the park is only for residents of that community.

Couldn't determine from the guidlines whether a cache would permitted there considering it would

NOT be available to the general (geocaching) public.

I have cached in a Park with a sign exactly like that, but it was quite obvious to me that on that day they were making no effort to enforce it. Are the residents enforcing the sign that the OP brought to our attention?

[+briansnat]

Generally speaking if the cache is not available to everyone then it won't be published. There are some rare exceptions but a resident only park wouldn't be one.

 

In NJ many towns had parks with residents only restrictions, but the state supreme court ruled those restrictions to be unconstitutional. Many towns never took down the signs, but they can't enforce their restrictions anymore. But that is NJ. Your state may be different.

Edited April 1, 2010 by briansnat

[+Max and 99]

I avoid caches in neighborhood parks with signs saying "For Residents only".

 

One cacher I know got a letter in the mail from a neighborhood assoc. attorney stating they noted his car tag and told him to not come back!

[+Odie442]

GC1DERR

 

This cache is located in Williamsburg behind Busch Gardens inside a resort with a security checkpoint. Now granted you can get to it via the James River by boat, but other than that you must go through the security checkpoint.

 

Odie

 

I have to admit... it was a blast doing this one too.

[+Borst68]

...There's a township near where I live (Western NY, Suburban Buffalo) that posts all their town parks "residents only". But it gets ignored by everyone. Not just geocache hiders and seekers, but for general park use.

 

I had wondered about that. I am not far from said suburb and wondered about the geocaches there. I have never been to any parks there so I was not aware of the level of enforcement. Thanks.

[hoosier guy]

I am voting no on this one.

[hoosier guy]

I am voting no on this one.

[hoosier guy]

I am voting no on this one.

[hoosier guy]

I am voting no on this one.

[hoosier guy]

I am voting no on this one.

[+Borst68]

I am voting no on this one.

 

Tell us how you really feel !

[+TeamOlson09]

I am voting no on this one.

 

Tell us how you really feel !

What was that!!!!!!!!! ??????????

[+thedeadpirate]

I think hoosier guy should make his position clearer.

 

I would not hide a cache there regardless. If it does get published, there is no way to make the coordinates available only to the residents of the neighborhood. That means that it will attract unwanted attention and will just be trouble.

[+dbrierley]

Here are 2 archived caches that were placed on "Residents Only" land:

 

GCQ845

 

GCMD7C

[Mr.Yuck]

...There's a township near where I live (Western NY, Suburban Buffalo) that posts all their town parks "residents only". But it gets ignored by everyone. Not just geocache hiders and seekers, but for general park use.

 

I had wondered about that. I am not far from said suburb and wondered about the geocaches there. I have never been to any parks there so I was not aware of the level of enforcement. Thanks.

 

I think Hoosier guy has said his piece. I don't remember which way he voted though.

 

Yes, I see you're local to me. Town of Clarence, maybe? Screw that, it's probably unconstitutional like someone else said. Funny how my daughter played about 10-15 Parochial School "away" Soccer games in various parks there a few years ago. Not like they were checking our ID at the Park entrance. Definitely not enforced, go for it.

 

Personally, I'd never hide a cache in those town parks because of those signs, but I've found several of them.

[+Vater_Araignee]

As much as I love violating park curfews (in michigan), if I see a residents only sign, that is an indication that it may receive zero state or federal funding, so I wont enter and If I had one near me I would not place a cache in it.

People are perfectly capable of not seeing a sign, especially with their nose buried in a GPSr.

[7rxc]

I'm left wondering just how many people are resident in those parks, it must be quite a few homeless people to justify having so many parks just for them!

 

Doug

Edited April 1, 2010 by 7rxc

[+LightHouseSeekers]

The cache (not ours) was published a few months ago.

 

Went looking for it recently and found the sign (along with an exiting LEO) upon entering the park. Decided that proceeding could be considered tresspass (though that hasn't stopped other cachers who don't appear to be residents), simply took pictures of the sign and left.

BTW this is the only park of many in that community that is posted in that manner.

 

Been considering an SBA, but wanted to see how others felt about the acceptability of the cache.

[hoosier guy]

Sorry my computer never showed that my reply was finished loading.

[+Team Cotati]

I doubt that the guidelines are capable of covering every possible combination and permutation of conditions that exist in the world.

 

I can't imagine the thought process that would cause someone to think that hiding a geocache in such a location would be a good idea. Why would someone do that?

 

Do not get me wrong. I fully understand that someone would hide a cache there and to be honest I am quite surprised that there is not one or more there already. My question is, why?

[+Borst68]

...There's a township near where I live (Western NY, Suburban Buffalo) that posts all their town parks "residents only". But it gets ignored by everyone. Not just geocache hiders and seekers, but for general park use.

 

I had wondered about that. I am not far from said suburb and wondered about the geocaches there. I have never been to any parks there so I was not aware of the level of enforcement. Thanks.

 

I think Hoosier guy has said his piece. I don't remember which way he voted though.

 

Yes, I see you're local to me. Town of Clarence, maybe? Screw that, it's probably unconstitutional like someone else said. Funny how my daughter played about 10-15 Parochial School "away" Soccer games in various parks there a few years ago. Not like they were checking our ID at the Park entrance. Definitely not enforced, go for it.

 

Personally, I'd never hide a cache in those town parks because of those signs, but I've found several of them.

 

Town of Clarence parks have the residency restrictions. There may be other towns in the area that do that. i could totally see Amherst doing that. I am further to the north in Lockport. I have no interest in placing a cache, especially being a non-resident. Searching for a cache is another issue entirely. If there were other caches in the area that were approved for non-residents, I would try to pick the town park ones while i was there.

[+Castle Mischief]

Even if it wasn't enforcable, even if you could get it published would you want to deal with the drama associated with some local Mrs Kravitz that took the signage to heart and took it upon herself to call the cops/harass cachers/remove the cache/commit unspeakable acts to the cache?

 

Any time I see a sign like that I internally translate it to read "WARNING: RICH, ANCTIOUS FOLK RESIDE WITHIN, SOIL NOT OUR PRECIOUS TURF WITH YOUR FILTH" and turn the other way.

[Mr.Yuck]

...There's a township near where I live (Western NY, Suburban Buffalo) that posts all their town parks "residents only". But it gets ignored by everyone. Not just geocache hiders and seekers, but for general park use.

 

I had wondered about that. I am not far from said suburb and wondered about the geocaches there. I have never been to any parks there so I was not aware of the level of enforcement. Thanks.

 

I think Hoosier guy has said his piece. I don't remember which way he voted though.

 

Yes, I see you're local to me. Town of Clarence, maybe? Screw that, it's probably unconstitutional like someone else said. Funny how my daughter played about 10-15 Parochial School "away" Soccer games in various parks there a few years ago. Not like they were checking our ID at the Park entrance. Definitely not enforced, go for it.

 

Personally, I'd never hide a cache in those town parks because of those signs, but I've found several of them.

 

Town of Clarence parks have the residency restrictions. There may be other towns in the area that do that. i could totally see Amherst doing that. I am further to the north in Lockport. I have no interest in placing a cache, especially being a non-resident. Searching for a cache is another issue entirely. If there were other caches in the area that were approved for non-residents, I would try to pick the town park ones while i was there.

 

Excuse my avatar, and the confusion with another poster. April Fools day, you know?

 

No, there are no other Towns in WNY that have all resident only parks. The only other one I can think of is the Hamburg beach (and not all Hamburg town parks, just that one). And that's it. In 6.5 years of Geocaching and 2,000 finds, that's it. And that includes everywhere I've cached in NY, NJ, PA, Rhode Island, Ohio, WV, Michigan, and Ontario.

 

The last person to place a cache in a Clarence Town Park (a couple of months ago) is not a Town resident. I know this because he has a cache in his yard in Lancaster. Don't worry about it, everyone ignores the signs in Clarence. But there are plenty of other caches there if anyone is really concerned.

[Dinoprophet]

Any time I see a sign like that I internally translate it to read "WARNING: RICH, ANCTIOUS FOLK RESIDE WITHIN, SOIL NOT OUR PRECIOUS TURF WITH YOUR FILTH" and turn the other way.

What about "Private Property No Trespassing"? It's really the same (though maybe with a little air of "Ha ha, you can't come in").

[+Castle Mischief]

Any time I see a sign like that I internally translate it to read "WARNING: RICH, ANCTIOUS FOLK RESIDE WITHIN, SOIL NOT OUR PRECIOUS TURF WITH YOUR FILTH" and turn the other way.

What about "Private Property No Trespassing"? It's really the same (though maybe with a little air of "Ha ha, you can't come in").

 

Yeah, in my head "Residents Only" carries a different meaning than "Private Property" or "Keep Out". Maybe it's because most of the private communities that I've seen put up "Residents Only" were named for geological features/flora and fauna that weren't actually present in the area (Cedar Ridge, Pine View, Maple Meadows, etc).

[+Team Cotati]

Given the financial resources, residents only, armed guard 24x7, security gate, fully fenced with motion detectors would be my personal choice.

 

This thread only further reinforces that desire. Maybe some day, eh?

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Any time I see a sign like that I internally translate it to read "WARNING: RICH, ANCTIOUS FOLK RESIDE WITHIN, SOIL NOT OUR PRECIOUS TURF WITH YOUR FILTH" and turn the other way.

What about "Private Property No Trespassing"? It's really the same (though maybe with a little air of "Ha ha, you can't come in").

 

Yeah, in my head "Residents Only" carries a different meaning than "Private Property" or "Keep Out". Maybe it's because most of the private communities that I've seen put up "Residents Only" were named for geological features/flora and fauna that weren't actually present in the area (Cedar Ridge, Pine View, Maple Meadows, etc).

 

How about "Military Personel Only". I seem to recall a few discussions here about caches located on military bases that were pretty much off limits to civilians. I know a geocacher from North Carolina that was recently in Iraq and had found a cache on a previous visit at a location that required some sort of credentials to be on the property. It appears that there is somewhat of a precedent for exclusive caches.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Given the financial resources, residents only, armed guard 24x7, security gate, fully fenced with motion detectors would be my personal choice.

 

This thread only further reinforces that desire. Maybe some day, eh?

 

For a cache I found last week an armed guard wasn't required but we were strongly urged to hired a guide at the entrance to a game preserve in Tanzania. The cache was just inside the park so it didn't really require the guide, but since I was geocaching in the area, we decided to take in a day safari. The guide didn't do much other then tell (in Swahili) our driver which direction to turn when we came to an intersection of dirt roads. I soon discovered his real job though; squashing the tsetse flies that flew into the vehicle while we were viewing the impala, zebra, wildebeast, giraffe, elephants, etc.

Edited April 1, 2010 by NYPaddleCacher

[+Castle Mischief]

Any time I see a sign like that I internally translate it to read "WARNING: RICH, ANCTIOUS FOLK RESIDE WITHIN, SOIL NOT OUR PRECIOUS TURF WITH YOUR FILTH" and turn the other way.

What about "Private Property No Trespassing"? It's really the same (though maybe with a little air of "Ha ha, you can't come in").

 

Yeah, in my head "Residents Only" carries a different meaning than "Private Property" or "Keep Out". Maybe it's because most of the private communities that I've seen put up "Residents Only" were named for geological features/flora and fauna that weren't actually present in the area (Cedar Ridge, Pine View, Maple Meadows, etc).

 

How about "Military Personel Only". I seem to recall a few discussions here about caches located on military bases that were pretty much off limits to civilians. I know a geocacher from North Carolina that was recently in Iraq and had found a cache on a previous visit at a location that required some sort of credentials to be on the property. It appears that there is somewhat of a precedent for exclusive caches.

 

Precedent? What's that?

 

Yeah, that has a different meaning in my head too than just plain old "Keep Out". That means, "Don't come in here; PS we have tanks and machine guns."

 

(I'm not in the habit of looking for a cache that is behind any of these signs unless there's some contact info on the cache page.)

Edited April 1, 2010 by Castle Mischief

[+DarkZen]

A nearby park is posted with signs clearly stating the park is only for residents of that community.

Couldn't determine from the guidlines whether a cache would permitted there considering it would

NOT be available to the general (geocaching) public.

I own such a cache. I asked for and received written permission from the land owners group. Always ask - the worst that can happen is they will refuse your request.

[+LightHouseSeekers]

A nearby park is posted with signs clearly stating the park is only for residents of that community.

Couldn't determine from the guidlines whether a cache would permitted there considering it would

NOT be available to the general (geocaching) public.

I own such a cache. I asked for and received written permission from the land owners group. Always ask - the worst that can happen is they will refuse your request.

Are your non-resident geocache 'guests' allowed on the property to find your cache?

[+briansnat]

Any time I see a sign like that I internally translate it to read "WARNING: RICH, ANCTIOUS FOLK RESIDE WITHIN, SOIL NOT OUR PRECIOUS TURF WITH YOUR FILTH" and turn the other way.

What about "Private Property No Trespassing"? It's really the same (though maybe with a little air of "Ha ha, you can't come in").

 

Yeah, in my head "Residents Only" carries a different meaning than "Private Property" or "Keep Out". Maybe it's because most of the private communities that I've seen put up "Residents Only" were named for geological features/flora and fauna that weren't actually present in the area (Cedar Ridge, Pine View, Maple Meadows, etc).

 

How about "Military Personel Only". I seem to recall a few discussions here about caches located on military bases that were pretty much off limits to civilians. I know a geocacher from North Carolina that was recently in Iraq and had found a cache on a previous visit at a location that required some sort of credentials to be on the property. It appears that there is somewhat of a precedent for exclusive caches.

 

That was one of the few exceptions. They sometimes allow caches on military bases in war zones placed by those stationed there. It might be the only exception actually