Jump to content

$25 Fee to Place a Geocache on PA State Park Lands


BikeBill

Recommended Posts

AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY.

 

A SIMPLISTIC PLATITUDE WRITTEN IN ALL CAPS IS WORTH MORE THAN A PLATITUDE WRITTEN WITH PROPER PUNCTUATION AND IT ALSO MAKES ME MORE RIGHT THAN YOU.

 

Oh, wait.

Just saying actions speak louder than words....

 

Again - Convince Ontario Parks to let us hide caches in exchange for $25 and we'll be sure to go out and hide a couple.

Link to comment

AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY.

 

A SIMPLISTIC PLATITUDE WRITTEN IN ALL CAPS IS WORTH MORE THAN A PLATITUDE WRITTEN WITH PROPER PUNCTUATION AND IT ALSO MAKES ME MORE RIGHT THAN YOU.

 

Oh, wait.

Just saying actions speak louder than words....

 

Again - Convince Ontario Parks to let us hide caches in exchange for $25 and we'll be sure to go out and hide a couple.

Just send me 25$ and I'll let you hide one!

:unsure:

Link to comment

Unless you look at each cache individually, there is no real way of knowing, since the implementation of the fee was just in June.

 

True enough.

 

Just looking at the PA Dept. of Conservation literature on the subject.

 

"DCNR staff will then conduct a PNDI review (Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Index) to check for threatened or endangered species in the area of the proposed geocache. If there are no known impacts and the cache location is sustainable (can take the traffic without leaving a beaten path), then the cache is likely to be approved."

 

Sounds like the review goes well beyond a cursory glance at a map.

 

It's funny that people keep making angry comments about tax dollars. I'm pretty liberal when it comes to government spending on social programs and facilities, but even I'm not convinced that it should be the taxpayers' responsibility to pay for an environmental study conducted to determine the feasibility of a niche hobby.

Link to comment

Geocachers are just hikers that play a game while hiking. Why should we have to pay extra when others do added things for free. Picnickers play Frisbee. Campers fly kites. They aren't paying extra for their added activities why should you?

 

Campers do pay fees. They rent that spot of ground for the night.

Boaters that leave their boats in the lake all summer pay a fee. For what, to rent a spot of water?

Geocachers will pay a fee for a spot of ground on which they place an ammo can (I am making the assumption that the CO willing to pay the fee will do better than a film can)

Link to comment

 

Just send me 25$ and I'll let you hide one!

:unsure:

 

I think Taoiseach and I could be convinced to help pay for a responsible PA cacher to hide a good quality cache, especially since we plan to visit PA next year for the Mega. I'll have a look at the map and see if I can recruit a PA cache owner to place a cache for us. :D

Link to comment

Right. You can't place a cache there. Therefore its all talk. My point is I would like to see anyone place a few caches under these guidelines. I'm glad you THINK you would do it, but you are knowing unable to. 25$ fee is that same as saying "stop putting geocaches in the park".

 

We would definitely have caches in Provincial Parks if they were allowed. Even if we had to pay a fee. I'm also quite confident that there are many others around here who would happily do the same. Narcissa and I frequently go camping in Provincial Parks, and would love to be able to place caches in our favourite spots!

 

PS I do not have any in PA state parks but could easily (should I care to pay 25$ which I NEVER will).

 

Good for you. Narcissa and I would.

YOU WOULD. But yet you haven't. You are incapable due to distance rules or maintenance issues. Thats like me saying "I would pay 25$ to place caches in Ohio, but can't because I never go there". It's an empty statement, and my opinion wouldn't really hold any value since there's no way to tell if I'm being truthful.

 

AN OUNCE OF ACTION IS WORTH A TON OF THEORY.

 

And your statements are completely theory too as you have already stated that you are also too far from a PA park to make cache placement practical.

I misquoted you. Luke did not say he was too far away, he just would choose not to because of the fee. I'm tired, and my eyes arent focusing well anymore. Still, just an unprovable theoretical statement on his part.

 

This thread is getting ridiculous. Why am I sitting online arguing with people from NJ and NY about a PA state fee that will never effect me anyway? It is just turning into a political commentary, over how governments should run their businesses.

 

I need to get some sleep and go out tomorrow to scope a site along the border of my local National Park. No amount of fees can get me a permit to place it inside that park.

 

Good night.

Link to comment

 

Just send me 25$ and I'll let you hide one!

:unsure:

 

I think Taoiseach and I could be convinced to help pay for a responsible PA cacher to hide a good quality cache, especially since we plan to visit PA next year for the Mega. I'll have a look at the map and see if I can recruit a PA cache owner to place a cache for us. :D

 

Megas actually. Allegany State Park Geobash is right on the NY/PA border, and a great event. I love that Park. Then there is Geo Woodstock which, frankly, if I was a park manager near there I would be right worried about the place after that many people roll down a geotrail...

 

For that earlier Toronto not Ontario thing, one of the more entertaining moments I have had while traveling was when I visited Ontario, California with Ontario plates on my car. One of the locals thought they had issued municipal license plates :(

Link to comment

Geocachers are just hikers that play a game while hiking. Why should we have to pay extra when others do added things for free. Picnickers play Frisbee. Campers fly kites. They aren't paying extra for their added activities why should you?

 

Campers do pay fees. They rent that spot of ground for the night.

Boaters that leave their boats in the lake all summer pay a fee. For what, to rent a spot of water?

Geocachers will pay a fee for a spot of ground on which they place an ammo can (I am making the assumption that the CO willing to pay the fee will do better than a film can)

 

One major difference. If I'm camping, or boating, it's for my personal enjoyment. The park system spent lots of money to provide the infrastructure for me to do so. When I place a cache it's to provide recreational opportunities and enjoyment for others. I spend my time and money to do so in the first place. The park spends nothing and gets to add another recreational opportunity for visitors. On top of that I have to pay a $25 fee? Absurd.

 

They claim it's to pay for conducting a "review". You know what the "review" consists of? They plug the coordinates into a GIS mapping program. Takes as long as it takes someone to key in coordinates and hit submit. 30 seconds if he's a slow typist. Then it's another 30 seconds to check the map, maybe a whole minute if he has to click through a few layers. $25 for maybe a minute or two of work? I'll take that job.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I believe that the problem with this new fee system is that for years it was free.

 

DCNR-run State Parks in PA have a three year time limit on caches within their parks and forests.

Already restrictive and the fact that people actually HAD to get approval, kept caches to State Parks at a minimum anyway.

Now they want to charge $25. for the same .

 

Like others have said, the $25. fee in Parks seems to be just another step in keeping 'em out altogether.

Or, someone within saw a way to add a coupla bucks to a budget-strapped department.

Either way, $25. (each cache) for three years doesn't seem like a good deal to me.

 

There is supposedly a way to "work off" the fee by holding a CITO event or doing trail maintenance, but the rule varies by Park managers. This a huge department in the State. The rules should have been the same everywhere.

We've personally asked two and neither plans to "cut a deal" - yet.

I think they don't even really understand the ruling and right now it's a wait n see thing going on.

 

In my area, the newer caches are being placed by folks who work within the park system (Rangers, maintenance, etc.), not from fee-paying geocachers.

Other caches are "grandfathered in" until their time expires.

Edited by cerberus1
Link to comment

 

Indeed, my record of finding and placing caches certainly bears that out. :unsure:

 

Earlier you claimed it would cost you $4000 to keep your caches in place if you had to pay the fees.

 

You can complain about the numbers, or you can claim some cache quality moral high ground, but you can't do both.

Are you saying that it is not possible for someone to have a high number of quality caches? 'Cause that sure sounds to me like what you're saying!
Link to comment

Geocachers are just hikers that play a game while hiking. Why should we have to pay extra when others do added things for free. Picnickers play Frisbee. Campers fly kites. They aren't paying extra for their added activities why should you?

 

Campers do pay fees. They rent that spot of ground for the night.

Boaters that leave their boats in the lake all summer pay a fee. For what, to rent a spot of water?

Geocachers will pay a fee for a spot of ground on which they place an ammo can (I am making the assumption that the CO willing to pay the fee will do better than a film can)

 

One major difference. If I'm camping, or boating, it's for my personal enjoyment. The park system spent lots of money to provide the infrastructure for me to do so. When I place a cache it's to provide recreational opportunities and enjoyment for others. I spend my time and money to do so in the first place. The park spends nothing and gets to add another recreational opportunity for visitors. On top of that I have to pay a $25 fee? Absurd.

 

They claim it's to pay for conducting a "review". You know what the "review" consists of? They plug the coordinates into a GIS mapping program. Takes as long as it takes someone to key in coordinates and hit submit. 30 seconds if he's a slow typist. Then it's another 30 seconds to check the map, maybe a whole minute if he has to click through a few layers. $25 for maybe a minute or two of work? I'll take that job.

 

With all due respect, I fail to follow your logic here. You camp or boat for your personal enjoyment as well as the enjoyment of those in your party. Why then do you cache? Is it not for your personal enjoyment? Placing a quality cache is hard work (at least my puzzle cache was a lot more work than my guard rail). You've placed a few caches :unsure: , would you agree it is work? And yes, I did it for my personal enjoyment as well as the enjoyment of a few others.

 

As far as the extent of the review, I am not a DCNR employee so I cannot speak from experience. I can only go by the statements from DCNR that I have read. Are you a PA DCNR Ranger? Have you been through the review process since this process was implemented? On what basis do you make the claim?

Link to comment

Geocachers are just hikers that play a game while hiking. Why should we have to pay extra when others do added things for free. Picnickers play Frisbee. Campers fly kites. They aren't paying extra for their added activities why should you?

 

Campers do pay fees. They rent that spot of ground for the night.

Boaters that leave their boats in the lake all summer pay a fee. For what, to rent a spot of water?

Geocachers will pay a fee for a spot of ground on which they place an ammo can (I am making the assumption that the CO willing to pay the fee will do better than a film can)

 

One major difference. If I'm camping, or boating, it's for my personal enjoyment. The park system spent lots of money to provide the infrastructure for me to do so. When I place a cache it's to provide recreational opportunities and enjoyment for others. I spend my time and money to do so in the first place. The park spends nothing and gets to add another recreational opportunity for visitors. On top of that I have to pay a $25 fee? Absurd.

 

They claim it's to pay for conducting a "review". You know what the "review" consists of? They plug the coordinates into a GIS mapping program. Takes as long as it takes someone to key in coordinates and hit submit. 30 seconds if he's a slow typist. Then it's another 30 seconds to check the map, maybe a whole minute if he has to click through a few layers. $25 for maybe a minute or two of work? I'll take that job.

 

With all due respect, I fail to follow your logic here. You camp or boat for your personal enjoyment as well as the enjoyment of those in your party. Why then do you cache? Is it not for your personal enjoyment? Placing a quality cache is hard work (at least my puzzle cache was a lot more work than my guard rail). You've placed a few caches :unsure: , would you agree it is work? And yes, I did it for my personal enjoyment as well as the enjoyment of a few others.

 

As far as the extent of the review, I am not a DCNR employee so I cannot speak from experience. I can only go by the statements from DCNR that I have read. Are you a PA DCNR Ranger? Have you been through the review process since this process was implemented? On what basis do you make the claim?

If I may jump in here, Briansnat was referring to placing a cache... an activity that costs him money already, and (according to Minnesota State Parks, at least) generates revenue for the park by its sheer existence. Why should somebody have to cough up an additional $25 for that act of generosity?
Link to comment

Geocachers are just hikers that play a game while hiking. Why should we have to pay extra when others do added things for free. Picnickers play Frisbee. Campers fly kites. They aren't paying extra for their added activities why should you?

 

Campers do pay fees. They rent that spot of ground for the night.

Boaters that leave their boats in the lake all summer pay a fee. For what, to rent a spot of water?

Geocachers will pay a fee for a spot of ground on which they place an ammo can (I am making the assumption that the CO willing to pay the fee will do better than a film can)

 

One major difference. If I'm camping, or boating, it's for my personal enjoyment. The park system spent lots of money to provide the infrastructure for me to do so. When I place a cache it's to provide recreational opportunities and enjoyment for others. I spend my time and money to do so in the first place. The park spends nothing and gets to add another recreational opportunity for visitors. On top of that I have to pay a $25 fee? Absurd.

 

They claim it's to pay for conducting a "review". You know what the "review" consists of? They plug the coordinates into a GIS mapping program. Takes as long as it takes someone to key in coordinates and hit submit. 30 seconds if he's a slow typist. Then it's another 30 seconds to check the map, maybe a whole minute if he has to click through a few layers. $25 for maybe a minute or two of work? I'll take that job.

 

With all due respect, I fail to follow your logic here. You camp or boat for your personal enjoyment as well as the enjoyment of those in your party. Why then do you cache? Is it not for your personal enjoyment? Placing a quality cache is hard work (at least my puzzle cache was a lot more work than my guard rail). You've placed a few caches :unsure: , would you agree it is work? And yes, I did it for my personal enjoyment as well as the enjoyment of a few others.

 

As far as the extent of the review, I am not a DCNR employee so I cannot speak from experience. I can only go by the statements from DCNR that I have read. Are you a PA DCNR Ranger? Have you been through the review process since this process was implemented? On what basis do you make the claim?

If I may jump in here, Briansnat was referring to placing a cache... an activity that costs him money already, and (according to Minnesota State Parks, at least) generates revenue for the park by its sheer existence. Why should somebody have to cough up an additional $25 for that act of generosity?

 

I know he is talking about placing a cache. Did I say something that sounded like I didn't?

Link to comment

I challenge all here to show me ONE PA state park cache that is being removed/archived at the end of its 3-year permit time solely due to this fee. I'm not talking about ones that got muggled too often, got washed away in a storm, or the cache owner moved away/lost interest.

I mean an archive note that says the CO cannot or will not pay the fee.

 

I'll offer to pay the fee for them.

 

(out of my purely selfish interests, if a whole bunch of caches show up in response, I get to choose which one, probably the one closest to me)

Link to comment

I challenge all here to show me ONE PA state park cache that is being removed/archived at the end of its 3-year permit time solely due to this fee. I'm not talking about ones that got muggled too often, got washed away in a storm, or the cache owner moved away/lost interest.

I mean an archive note that says the CO cannot or will not pay the fee.

 

I'll offer to pay the fee for them.

 

(out of my purely selfish interests, if a whole bunch of caches show up in response, I get to choose which one, probably the one closest to me)

Wouldn't we have to wait 3 years to know for sure?

Link to comment

I challenge all here to show me ONE PA state park cache that is being removed/archived at the end of its 3-year permit time solely due to this fee. I'm not talking about ones that got muggled too often, got washed away in a storm, or the cache owner moved away/lost interest.

I mean an archive note that says the CO cannot or will not pay the fee.

 

I'll offer to pay the fee for them.

 

(out of my purely selfish interests, if a whole bunch of caches show up in response, I get to choose which one, probably the one closest to me)

Wouldn't we have to wait 3 years to know for sure?

 

No, because there are plenty of existing caches out there that could be up for renewal. A statement was made in another thread that one was archived when it expired, because they couldn't pay. I don't know what cache it was.

Link to comment

<snip>As far as the extent of the review, I am not a DCNR employee so I cannot speak from experience. I can only go by the statements from DCNR that I have read. Are you a PA DCNR Ranger? Have you been through the review process since this process was implemented? On what basis do you make the claim?

I have been through two DCNR reviews and I know all the review was done from a PC. The reviewer kindly kept me in the loop during an intra-departmental email exchange. No one actually visited ether of my State Forest hides. Perhaps State Parks review differently, but I doubt it.

Link to comment

<snip>As far as the extent of the review, I am not a DCNR employee so I cannot speak from experience. I can only go by the statements from DCNR that I have read. Are you a PA DCNR Ranger? Have you been through the review process since this process was implemented? On what basis do you make the claim?

I have been through two DCNR reviews and I know all the review was done from a PC. The reviewer kindly kept me in the loop during an intra-departmental email exchange. No one actually visited ether of my State Forest hides. Perhaps State Parks review differently, but I doubt it.

 

Thank you for the response. You, as far as I can tell, are the first person in the thread with any actual first hand experience with the review process.

 

I am a bit disappointed, I would hope that they would check on the actual physical location at some point. What is the point of the permit at all if they don't look. Otherwise how can they tell if it really is or isnt in a sensitive (historical or environmental) spot. You can't tell from a map if it is IN the crumbling foundation of an old ruin, or just next to it. I think they should be looking.

Link to comment

For all those who say that plenty of people would be happy to pay, let's examine the caching situation in a few random NC state parks. NC has had a similar fee for many years in their state parks.

 

Lake Norman State Park 1 multicache 0 traditionals

 

5172497200_3041fdab4d_b.jpg

 

South Mountain State Park. 1 traditional cache

 

5171893429_e5a3f140da_b.jpg

 

Stone Mountain State Park possibly 1 traditional cache. Unclear if it's within the park

 

5171893413_0915f61a26_b.jpg

 

Hanging Rock State Park, 1, maybe 2 traditional caches

 

5171893367_2a8085bc97_b.jpg

 

Pilot Mountain State Park. 1 multi cache

 

5171893001_6ec0177f81_b.jpg

 

Yep, geocachers are flocking to NC state parks and willing to shell out that $25 fee

Link to comment

Briansnat,

I've been looking at NC parks on the map and am coming to the same conclusion. There are a definite dearth of caches in the ones I looked at. More than I would think would be from chance or spendthrift locals. There are some that have caches around the edges, but not inside. Not unlike national parks.

 

We will have to see how the fees will effect caching in PA state parks. Perhaps the new administration will be more friendly to cachers.

 

Oh, I would still pay it if I were in a position to place one. And my offer to pay to save a cache remains.

Link to comment

For all those who say that plenty of people would be happy to pay, let's examine the caching situation in a few random NC state parks. NC has had a similar fee for many years in their state parks.

 

Out of curiosity, have caches ever been outright banned in NC state parks ever? I think a big part of the reason that we and other Eastern Ontario cachers that we know would be willing to pay the fee is that caches have been banned in Ontario Parks.

 

A $25 fee is much better than simply not being allowed to hide caches in Ontario Provincial Parks.

Edited by Taoiseach
Link to comment

In Pennsylvania geocachers have vast tracts of Game Lands and State Forests in which to hide geocaches without paying a fee. Because of them, combined with other public tracts without a fee, I think most geocache hiders will look elsewhere before paying the fee for a placement in a State Park. I may be wrong, but time will tell.

 

...and Wal-Mart parking lots. :)

Link to comment

In Pennsylvania geocachers have vast tracts of Game Lands and State Forests in which to hide geocaches without paying a fee. Because of them, combined with other public tracts without a fee, I think most geocache hiders will look elsewhere before paying the fee for a placement in a State Park. I may be wrong, but time will tell.

 

...and Wal-Mart parking lots. :)

 

Sadly, the acreage of Wally World parking lots exceeds the acreage of Game Lands and Forests in my region (suburban Philly).

 

Time for some political action on our part. Unfortunately it seems that relatively few Pennsylvanians participated in this thread.

Link to comment

Yep, geocachers are flocking to NC state parks and willing to shell out that $25 fee

 

What did they look like before the fee was implemented?

 

Sorry, my time machine is in the shop.

 

I know the fee has been in place for quite some time and obviously has had a deletiorious effect on the sport in state parks. With many of the parks there are numerous caches right outside, but there is a big void within the parks. It effectively seems to be driving the cachers out of the forest and into the 7 Eleven lots and guardrails.

Link to comment

I think I may put a suggestion in the suggestion box at wal-mart for them to impose a $25 dollar fee for caches in their parking lots. With me getting a commission for giving them the idea. Either the caches disappear or I make money. Win-Win for me either way.

Link to comment

 

I know the fee has been in place for quite some time and obviously has had a deletiorious effect on the sport in state parks. With many of the parks there are numerous caches right outside, but there is a big void within the parks. It effectively seems to be driving the cachers out of the forest and into the 7 Eleven lots and guardrails.

 

Were caches allowed in the parks before there were fees? Banning geocaches from causes a void too. What is a deleterious effect? A small handful of geocaches in a park is, to me, better than none.

 

Blaming the fee for bad hides outside the park is sheer fallacy. People will place hides in parking lots and guardrails even when there are parks and forests available to them.

 

How much is the fee in NC? North Carolina's parks website isn't forthcoming with details. From what I've read on various forums, there's a lot of red tape involved in placing a cache in an NC park, above and beyond the fee.

 

Whenever I research these issues, I find it interesting to read the anti-geocaching arguments on various forums. Some of these very staunch "Leave No Trace" advocates seem to find geocaching *very* offensive. The fee and environmental assessment might be an attempt to appease two vocal factions.

Link to comment

 

Were caches allowed in the parks before there were fees? Banning geocaches from causes a void too. What is a deleterious effect? A small handful of geocaches in a park is, to me, better than none.

 

Blaming the fee for bad hides outside the park is sheer fallacy. People will place hides in parking lots and guardrails even when there are parks and forests available to them.

 

How much is the fee in NC? North Carolina's parks website isn't forthcoming with details. From what I've read on various forums, there's a lot of red tape involved in placing a cache in an NC park, above and beyond the fee.

 

Whenever I research these issues, I find it interesting to read the anti-geocaching arguments on various forums. Some of these very staunch "Leave No Trace" advocates seem to find geocaching *very* offensive. The fee and environmental assessment might be an attempt to appease two vocal factions.

 

No, you can't blame the fees for the quality of the caches surrounding the parks, but I think it is a reason for the quantity around the park as opposed to inside the park.

 

Looks like NC Parks imposed the fees in 2002. I don't think there is a practical way to get archived listings from back then.

 

Some of your other questions can be answered here, a page from the NC Geocachers Organization Link

 

And yes, I think the ultra environmental types as well as some poor cache placements are probably big factors in the fee's existence.

Edited by John in Valley Forge
Link to comment

Blaming the fee for bad hides outside the park is sheer fallacy. People will place hides in parking lots and guardrails even when there are parks and forests available to them.

 

For a long time I've contrasted the geocaching scene in northern NJ vs that in eastern PA just over the river. In NJ there are hundreds, if not thousands of caches in state parks, forests and other areas. The guardrail and parking lot hides were not common until recently and still are far from the majority. On the other hand, eastern PA has been a hotbed of strip mall hides, LPCs, etc. Of course eastern PA has its hides in forests and other natural areas, but the overwhelming majority of caches are the "park and grabs" in Home Depots and similar spots.

 

Two states right next to each other. Is there some sort of cultural anomaly that caused eastern PA cachers to prefer Home Depots to the woods and northern NJ cachers to prefer the opposite?

 

Or maybe it's the fact that PA state parks implemented a permit system early on, while there is no such system in place in NJ?

 

I think it's the latter. When people want to place a cache in a PA state park they have to go through a permitting process that probably is too much of an effort for many cache hiders to deal with. So they take the easy route, the local 7-Eleven. In northern NJ it's just as easy to place a cache in a state park as it is to place a cache in a strip mall.

 

For example.

 

A northern NJ state park

 

5177313726_0c33dc9028_b.jpg

 

Going over the river, the first PA state park I could find

 

5176709777_18087d2dbb_b.jpg

 

And this is just with a permit system. I'm sure most of the PA caches were placed before the fee was implemented this summer.

Link to comment

Blaming the fee for bad hides outside the park is sheer fallacy. People will place hides in parking lots and guardrails even when there are parks and forests available to them.

 

For a long time I've contrasted the geocaching scene in northern NJ vs that in eastern PA just over the river. In NJ there are hundreds, if not thousands of caches in state parks, forests and other areas. The guardrail and parking lot hides were not common until recently and still are far from the majority. On the other hand, eastern PA has been a hotbed of strip mall hides, LPCs, etc. Of course eastern PA has its hides in forests and other natural areas, but the overwhelming majority of caches are the "park and grabs" in Home Depots and similar spots.

 

Two states right next to each other. Is there some sort of cultural anomaly that caused eastern PA cachers to prefer Home Depots to the woods and northern NJ cachers to prefer the opposite?

 

Or maybe it's the fact that PA state parks implemented a permit system early on, while there is no such system in place in NJ?

 

I think it's the latter. When people want to place a cache in a PA state park they have to go through a permitting process that probably is too much of an effort for many cache hiders to deal with. So they take the easy route, the local 7-Eleven. In northern NJ it's just as easy to place a cache in a state park as it is to place a cache in a strip mall.

<<<<<SNIP>>>>>

And this is just with a permit system. I'm sure most of the PA caches were placed before the fee was implemented this summer.

 

NJ has no permit or review process at all? Wow, I would expect they would have some type of review. Or is it that the review process is practical?

 

I think there has to be some happy medium. I don't want draconian rules like NC, but I think that no oversight could lead to some unfortunate placements.

Link to comment

When people want to place a cache in a PA state park they have to go through a permitting process that probably is too much of an effort for many cache hiders to deal with. So they take the easy route, the local 7-Eleven. In northern NJ it's just as easy to place a cache in a state park as it is to place a cache in a strip mall.

 

My experience may be different because I live in a very cache-saturated area with many geocachers, but around here, if a spot meets the basic criteria for a cache placement, it will get used. There were plenty of guardrail and lamppost caches here long before the green spaces started to fill up.

 

Is "easy" really the cache placement standard you're aiming for? I think it's a good thing that Pennsylvania has a system in place that requires cachers to put a little more consideration and planning into their geocaches.

 

A park with only two traditionals in it seems like a great opportunity to plan a really cool multi-cache without the hassle of proximity rules.

Link to comment

When people want to place a cache in a PA state park they have to go through a permitting process that probably is too much of an effort for many cache hiders to deal with. So they take the easy route, the local 7-Eleven. In northern NJ it's just as easy to place a cache in a state park as it is to place a cache in a strip mall.

 

My experience may be different because I live in a very cache-saturated area with many geocachers, but around here, if a spot meets the basic criteria for a cache placement, it will get used. There were plenty of guardrail and lamppost caches here long before the green spaces started to fill up.

 

Is "easy" really the cache placement standard you're aiming for? I think it's a good thing that Pennsylvania has a system in place that requires cachers to put a little more consideration and planning into their geocaches.

 

A park with only two traditionals in it seems like a great opportunity to plan a really cool multi-cache without the hassle of proximity rules.

 

In Pennsylvania, where I live, there are plenty of county and town parks where you can hide a cache. I suspect that as existing permits expire, some will pay the fee and retain their cache location, some will work out a volunteerism alternative to payment, and many will simply pack it in and place them in a non-state park.

Link to comment

In Pennsylvania, where I live, there are plenty of county and town parks where you can hide a cache. I suspect that as existing permits expire, some will pay the fee and retain their cache location, some will work out a volunteerism alternative to payment, and many will simply pack it in and place them in a non-state park.

 

It's really up to the state parks to decide what they hope to get out of their relationship with geocachers. It's great for us that some parks are starting to open up and realize that they can use this game to their benefit, but the approach is going to be different in each jurisdiction.

 

In Ottawa, we're really lucky to have a substantial amount of land, managed by a Crown corporation, that has been completely open to geocachers for years.

 

This year, they asked us to remove caches and stay out of a section of one of their parks, but so far they don't seem to be interested in restricting us further. Still, the land they asked us to leave was home to some great geocaches, including the oldest cache in the province of Quebec. We weren't the only ones told to get out - they have closed trails, eliminated parking areas, and banned several other activities in that section of the park.

 

It's frustrating to see other geocachers stomping their feet and shouting about "money grabs" and taxes and so on. It's dangerous to approach these issues from a position of entitlement.

Link to comment

For all those who say that plenty of people would be happy to pay, let's examine the caching situation in a few random NC state parks. NC has had a similar fee for many years in their state parks.

 

Out of curiosity, have caches ever been outright banned in NC state parks ever? I think a big part of the reason that we and other Eastern Ontario cachers that we know would be willing to pay the fee is that caches have been banned in Ontario Parks.

 

A $25 fee is much better than simply not being allowed to hide caches in Ontario Provincial Parks.

Banning caching and paying a $25 extortion fee are not the only two options available to a park service willing to think and listen. Minnesota manages to make money from park visitors coming to find the caches, and I'm sure there are other states doing the same. Prior to that, caches were banned from MN State Parks.
Link to comment

Banning caching and paying a $25 extortion fee are not the only two options available to a park service willing to think and listen. Minnesota manages to make money from park visitors coming to find the caches, and I'm sure there are other states doing the same. Prior to that, caches were banned from MN State Parks.

 

True. But shouting about tax dollars and equating geocaching with frisbee, as some people seem inclined to do, won't get the parks to listen.

Link to comment

I forgot to check this thread for a few days and I'm the OP! Well, I'm glad it lead to a spirited discussion.

 

Like Briansnat, I have a comparison between PA and NJ that I think shows how PA's cache approval system inhibits hides even without the fee. There are two parallel state parks that follow the canals on either side of the Delaware river between SE PA and NJ in the area of Bristol to Easton. The Delaware Canal State Park is in PA and the Delaware/Raritan Canal State Park is in NJ.

 

The trails along the canals/river are scenic and great for walking, biking and caching. I like to mountain bike along the NJ side while geocaching. The PA side is nice to ride on too, but there are almost no caches, where NJ has many. Of course, caches on the NJ side don't require approval. The PA $25 fee is not much of a factor here because this is not a new phenomena.

 

Take a look at a Geocache map for the caches from Trenton north to above Frenchtown. You'll see the disparity I'm talking about. The caches (in the canal state parks) are almost all on the NJ side.

Link to comment

For all those who say that plenty of people would be happy to pay, let's examine the caching situation in a few random NC state parks. NC has had a similar fee for many years in their state parks.

 

Out of curiosity, have caches ever been outright banned in NC state parks ever? I think a big part of the reason that we and other Eastern Ontario cachers that we know would be willing to pay the fee is that caches have been banned in Ontario Parks.

 

A $25 fee is much better than simply not being allowed to hide caches in Ontario Provincial Parks.

Banning caching and paying a $25 extortion fee are not the only two options available to a park service willing to think and listen. Minnesota manages to make money from park visitors coming to find the caches, and I'm sure there are other states doing the same. Prior to that, caches were banned from MN State Parks.

 

The state parks in MN have really embraced geocaching. A some rent out GPS units so people can test drive geocaching. One near me does that. I went to 2 state parks this year one I hadn't been to in years and was perfectly happy paying the $5 entrance fee to there to find the state park cache there. I probably wouldn't have gone there other wise. That being said I don't see a whole ton of caches in any of the state parks where I am. It might be different in the more populated areas but they're still pretty devoid of caches which all in all I don't think is a bad thing. I suppose many people just doing caches willy nilly don't want to bother with the permit process in general for cache placement as it is harder than tossing a jar into a pine tree randomly.

Link to comment

Banning caching and paying a $25 extortion fee are not the only two options available to a park service willing to think and listen. Minnesota manages to make money from park visitors coming to find the caches, and I'm sure there are other states doing the same. Prior to that, caches were banned from MN State Parks.

 

True. But shouting about tax dollars and equating geocaching with frisbee, as some people seem inclined to do, won't get the parks to listen.

The problem is you think the park is entitled to money from placing caches. I agree they can charge when they agree to maintain my caches.

Link to comment

The problem is you think the park is entitled to money from placing caches. I agree they can charge when they agree to maintain my caches.

 

:mad:

 

The state *is* entitled to collect fees from land users as they see fit.

 

Being able to play this game on any land is a privilege. It's nice that some states, like Minnesota, have embraced the game and are successfully managing the drawbacks and reaping the benefits.

 

Using that land for geocaching is still a privilege.

Link to comment

The problem is you think the park is entitled to money from placing caches. I agree they can charge when they agree to maintain my caches.

 

:mad:

 

The state *is* entitled to collect fees from land users as they see fit.

 

Being able to play this game on any land is a privilege. It's nice that some states, like Minnesota, have embraced the game and are successfully managing the drawbacks and reaping the benefits.

 

Using that land for geocaching is still a privilege.

Sorry, I thought my tax dollars paid for the land and maintenance. Didn't realize the pa parks are owned by a private entity.

Link to comment

Sorry, I thought my tax dollars paid for the land and maintenance. Didn't realize the pa parks are owned by a private entity.

 

Is there an echo in here?

 

Tax dollars are spread pretty thin. The parks probably don't get very much money from taxes.

 

Besides that, do you really think that taxpayers should bear the costs of a niche activity? I don't.

 

State parks are publicly owned, and their care is entrusted to a parks department who has the authority to make rules and set fees.

Link to comment

Can I stop having my tax money allocated to them now? There's so many in the county let alone the state that I don't use.

 

While I don't object to regulation of the caches going into parks I'm not a big fan of park fees in general. Parks a non-taxable lands here. In the case of the newest state park here there was quite a discussion about it because it's land that is not that healthy and could have been developed into taxable land, however, wasn't and now it's just a drain on the state's resources realistically. No more money coming in just more going out.

 

I have to pay for that park up there and watch my taxes go up and up to support various things that now aren't getting money because of the money pit these parks become.

 

So really I don't see it as a privilege for me to utilize the parks for pretty much any activity. Some of these places (at least here where I am) are not pristine examples of wilderness but rather left overs after mining and logging moved through. Which I now have to pay an entrance fee for to even step into (on top of milking my tax money).

 

Yes they embraced the game and yes I support the regulation. But I'm not going to delude myself into thinking the state is all wonderful blessing me with the privilege of paying to enter land I already own as a tax paying citizen.

 

Edit to add... If the parks are having issues sustaining themselves within a budget set by the taxes then probably it's time to relook at where the money is hemorrhaging out of these places.

Edited by Chokecherry
Link to comment

Just doing some reading on the internet - it looks like Pennsylvania's state government is planning massive cutbacks to the parks and threatening the closure of 35 parks.

 

Tax dollars, huh?

 

Hey! That's great news! Now, if only the gubment would close the other 85! Then Pennsylvanians won't have to worry about paying to place caches, and they'll have a whole bunch of new parking lots to place 1/1 traditionals in!

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...