Permission

[sylven]

I wanted to begin a topic on cache permission; what it is, when it applies, is it something you practice on a regular basis.

 

I suppose I will give my opinions first, regarding my three questions on the subject, and look forward to reading constructive criticism on the matter. I realize this matter has been discussed in variation. I however wanted to take differnt spin on it, in an open manner. Anyway...here goes.

 

Queston 1 "What exactly is permission to place a cache?"

 

I actually looked up the word permission from several sources. Im not trying to lawyer anything here, it was for my benefit, so I could have a deeper understanding of the word. The one I found I really liked is from 1828 Webster Ditionary. "2: [Noun] Allowance; license or liberty granted. You have given me your permission for this address..." I just thought it applied a little more. liberty=freedom

 

So I suppose if I asked someone for their permission to place a cache on their property, I am asking if I have the freedom to enter their domain to place a game piece, and then have the same freedom to leave. I am also asking them to extend that same liberty to anyone else so choosing to follow the numerical path on and off said property.

 

Question 2 "When does needing permission apply to a geocache I want to place?"

 

I looked through the guidelines as to when you should get permission for a placed geocache. I really didn't have to look any further than here...

 

The "Guidelines that Apply to all Cache Types" states that "...Your cache may be hidden on public property with permission..."

 

If this guideline applies to a public cache location, then I would definately have to get permission to place a cache on private property, unless the property is of course my own. So what about areas in which no one really owns, such as "right of ways", etc...?

 

So I suppose I have some basic understanding of permission needed to place a cache. But I would honestly like to hear your input, perhaps there is something I am missing...

 

Question 3 "Is asking permission something you practice on a regular basis?"

 

My kids and I have been geocaching for a couple of years now. We have had a really great time. There came a time however we decided to split up into our own geocaching names. I have since helped them place their own caches, and three of my own. Most of these areas, except perhaps one, were right of way areas, not truely belonging to anyone. None of which I, nor my kids, asked for permission to place. The one which is questionable is outside of park property, and authority, but close by.

 

I have another cache placement coming up, and even though it is in an area that no one really owns, I stopped by the couple's house who lived near by and talked with them about what I wanted to do and asked for their permission, being that it could create minor traffic in the area. They happily agreed and said that would be fine. So pretty excited about that. This however, was the only time I even remotely (so far) obtained permission.

 

So how about you?

Edited December 6, 2010 by sylven

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

I'm in favor of getting permission to hide. I have 10 permits (or permission) for each of my hides. My other caches are on unowned land and on my property.

 

I think LPCs that at places like Burger King need to go. They most likely do not have permission and my caching team was asked my a manager what we were doing. He didn't seem very thrilled. Not sure if that cache was removed.

 

Getting permission and permits for caches is a bit harder work but I think it makes the CO more responsible.

 

I see far too many abandoned caches around here. I think every cache, even Walgreen LPCs, should get permission.

Edited December 6, 2010 by SeekerOfTheWay

[+Coldgears]

I'm in favor of getting permission to hide. I have 10 permits for each of my hides. My other caches are on unowned land and on my property.

 

I think LPCs that at places like Burger King need to go. They most likely do not have permission and my caching team was asked my a manager what we were doing. He didn't seem very thrilled. Not sure if that cache was removed.

 

Getting permission and permits for caches is a bit harder work but I think it makes the CO more responsible.

 

I see far too many abandoned caches around here. I think every cache, even Walgreen LPCs, should get permission.

 

No land owner is going to allow a cache in a lamp post, in there minds it's a liability to allow people to go into the electricity. If people had to do this I doubt many would get hidden at all.

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

I'm in favor of getting permission to hide. I have 10 permits for each of my hides. My other caches are on unowned land and on my property.

 

I think LPCs that at places like Burger King need to go. They most likely do not have permission and my caching team was asked my a manager what we were doing. He didn't seem very thrilled. Not sure if that cache was removed.

 

Getting permission and permits for caches is a bit harder work but I think it makes the CO more responsible.

 

I see far too many abandoned caches around here. I think every cache, even Walgreen LPCs, should get permission.

 

No land owner is going to allow a cache in a lamp post, in there minds it's a liability to allow people to go into the electricity. If people had to do this I doubt many would get hidden at all.

 

I agree. Ever since I read that blog how lamp posts have live wires sometimes exposed, I've been reluctant to hunt one.

 

That, knowing no permission was given, makes me feel like I'm trespassing.

Edited December 7, 2010 by SeekerOfTheWay

[+Harry Dolphin]

I'm in favor of getting permission to hide. I have 10 permits for each of my hides. My other caches are on unowned land and on my property.

 

I don't know about Florida, but here in New Jersey, every square inch of land is owed by somebody.

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

I'm in favor of getting permission to hide. I have 10 permits for each of my hides. My other caches are on unowned land and on my property.

 

I don't know about Florida, but here in New Jersey, every square inch of land is owed by somebody.

 

How do you find out who owns it? We call it "no mans land" here.

[+ZeLonewolf]

I agree. Ever since I read that blog how lamp posts have live wires sometimes exposed, I've been reluctant to hunt one.

 

That, knowing no permission was giving, makes me feel like I'm trespassing.

 

Well, let's stay on topic. A dangerous location has never been cause for denying a cache hide.

 

I would hate to increase a reviewer's work load, as they have enough to do already. However, a cache that is seen to be obviously on public property, such as a shopping center or similar, simply needs to have explicit permission.

 

I've seen the argument that since a shopping center allows the public to enter that adequate permission exists. A shopping center is simply not the same as a public park where general recreation is permitted. If I were to drive to my local shopping center parking lot with a couple of picnic tables, a BBQ grill, some frisbees, and 50 of my closest friends, I'm pretty sure I'd be asked to leave if I tried to hold a cookout. Just because the public is allowed in, doesn't mean we have carte blanche to engage in general recreation.

 

This would all be avoided if, whenever someone lists a shopping center cache, the reviewer verifies with the hider that explicit permission has been obtained. These types of hides have become so prevalent that new hiders that enter the game come to understand them to be legitimate and proliferate them further, often pushing the envelope. Case in point the recent thread where a CO was complaining about finders not using "stealth" on an almost certainly illegal placement. This problem could be fixed in a heartbeat, at least for future placements.

 

Otherwise, we continue the unspoken notion that geocaching often equates with mild trespassing.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

I'm in favor of getting permission to hide. I have 10 permits for each of my hides. My other caches are on unowned land and on my property.

 

I don't know about Florida, but here in New Jersey, every square inch of land is owed by somebody.

 

How do you find out who owns it? We call it "no mans land" here.

 

Go to the county or city assessor's office.

[+The Blorenges]

I actually bookmarked this reply to a similar question a few years back. It addresses the "adequate permission" concept...

 

"Keystone on Permission"

 

 

Bearing in mind that here in UK all land is owned by somebody, and given that the OP started the topic just after 9 this morning (UK time) I thought it possible that they may be a UK geocacher, in which this link may also be useful:

 

"Getting Landowner permission within UK and Ireland"

 

 

MrsB

[+dbrierley]

An earlier thread on permission:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=262732

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

I'm in favor of getting permission to hide. I have 10 permits for each of my hides. My other caches are on unowned land and on my property.

 

I don't know about Florida, but here in New Jersey, every square inch of land is owed by somebody.

 

How do you find out who owns it? We call it "no mans land" here.

 

Go to the county or city assessor's office.

 

Or even your town's website. I can get ownership of property in many towns in Rhode Island within 15-30 minutes. Some towns merely have PDFs of the paper plat maps and a link to the tax database. Other towns have a full-up GIS map with all of the info readily available. Some towns only have the tax database online, so you'd have to visit the town office to get the explicit plat.

 

(Edited for spelling)

Edited December 6, 2010 by BBWolf+3Pigs

[+Walts Hunting]

I find it very interesting that the original poster has never hidden or found a cache. Although a review of all his forum posts shows he has claimed to find some he has never bothered to log.

 

Sounds like someone who just wants to stir up everything about a subject that has been discussed ad nauseum and probably received several dead horse comments over the years.

 

I wonder if it is the return or that guy who got banned awhile ago?

[Mr.Yuck]

I find it very interesting that the original poster has never hidden or found a cache. Although a review of all his forum posts shows he has claimed to find some he has never bothered to log.

 

Sounds like someone who just wants to stir up everything about a subject that has been discussed ad nauseum and probably received several dead horse comments over the years.

 

I wonder if it is the return or that guy who got banned awhile ago?

 

Nice stalking err, I mean detective work. This is a zero find/zero hide account. I guess you can't say for sure if they're trying to stir the pot. But it certainly is a dead horse subject.

[+briansnat]

I find it very interesting that the original poster has never hidden or found a cache. Although a review of all his forum posts shows he has claimed to find some he has never bothered to log.

 

Sounds like someone who just wants to stir up everything about a subject that has been discussed ad nauseum and probably received several dead horse comments over the years.

 

I wonder if it is the return or that guy who got banned awhile ago?

 

Nice stalking err, I mean detective work. This is a zero find/zero hide account. I guess you can't say for sure if they're trying to stir the pot. But it certainly is a dead horse subject.

 

He mentions having cached under another account.

 

Keystone's statement as linked to by Blorenges is the best explanation of the permission issue that I've seen.

[knowschad]

I find it very interesting that the original poster has never hidden or found a cache. Although a review of all his forum posts shows he has claimed to find some he has never bothered to log.

 

Sounds like someone who just wants to stir up everything about a subject that has been discussed ad nauseum and probably received several dead horse comments over the years.

 

I wonder if it is the return or that guy who got banned awhile ago?

Didn't you read this in the original post? Geeze!!

 

My kids and I have been geocaching for a couple of years now. We have had a really great time. There came a time however we decided to split up into our own geocaching names. I have since helped them place their own caches, and three of my own.

[+Walts Hunting]

He mentions having cached under another account.

 

You do have to wonder when someone hides who they are to talk about a subject. Why don't they feel free to debate openly.

 

Think I will run him through WikiLeaks and see what happens.

 

Tom comment on knowschad he says he has hidden three of his own but there are none listed to this account.

Edited December 6, 2010 by Walts Hunting

[knowschad]

To comment on knowschad he says he has hidden three of his own but there are none listed to this account.

So what? I don't know the details of that, and it is none of my business. Perhaps he has two accounts. Not the first time its happened. The guy comes here and wants to discuss permission issues. He has that right. Edited December 6, 2010 by knowschad

[+Scooter Rider]

To comment on knowschad he says he has hidden three of his own but there are none listed to this account.

So what? I don't know the details of that, and it is none of my business. Perhaps he has two accounts. Not the first time its happened. The guy comes here and wants to discuss permission issues. He has that right.

 

Wile they have a right to discuss any thing they want but not here.

 

No one has a right to post on a web forum .

It called hosting a web site that means we are guests until we ware out are welcome.

 

Please reread the terms of agreement. Posts can be deleted and members banned at any time and for any reason.

[+Ecylram]

Mudding the waters a bit more (Comments related to US-only)...

 

One point that needs to be clarified is that 'public' and 'private' property is not the same thing as 'public access' & 'non-public access'. (I know...'duh'! But let me continue...)

 

There is 'public' (government-owned) property here that can get you shot if you trespass on it. It's 'public', but not 'public access'. Further, some governmental agencies often limit the access which can lead to bans on Geocaching activities.

 

Private property is also 'public access' & 'non-public' access. Some private property owners allow the public to use their property, usually in a commercial setting but sometimes not.

 

We can all agree that caches should not be placed on non-public access lands (public or private) without explicit permission. Where things get muddied in this discussion is what about public-access areas where other activities are implicitly allowed. In reality, activities that are in public-access areas are generally 'allowed' if they are not disruptive or until the property owner (public or private) explicitly bans the activity on their property.

 

For example, I've engaged in a number of activities on public-access property without explicit permission. For example I've: changed my wiper blades, added oil to the car, added windshield wiper fluid, used it as a meeting point, etc. I've seen kids play in green areas and adults go for walks as well. Legally, the public is allowed in public-access areas as long as it doesn't violate any posted rules BUT they must leave when asked. If they don't they are subject to a trespass arrest. (Side note: Sometimes the government requires specific types of public access to private property under 'public accommodation' theory.)

 

One thing that Groundspeak has been very good about is banning and removing caches where the property owner has said "no more geocaching on our land". They are very consistent about it and most cachers agree with this policy. Reviewers will and do enforce bans on caches in parks and malls were caching was explicitly prohibited.

[knowschad]

To comment on knowschad he says he has hidden three of his own but there are none listed to this account.

So what? I don't know the details of that, and it is none of my business. Perhaps he has two accounts. Not the first time its happened. The guy comes here and wants to discuss permission issues. He has that right.

 

Wile they have a right to discuss any thing they want but not here.

 

No one has a right to post on a web forum .

It called hosting a web site that means we are guests until we ware out are welcome.

 

Please reread the terms of agreement. Posts can be deleted and members banned at any time and for any reason.

I'm sure you know what I was saying.

[+keehotee]

...... My other caches are on unowned land and on my property.

 

Not being deliberately obtrusive - but I don't understand this as a concept.

 

If it's genuinely un-owned what's to stop me turning up, fencing off a couple of acres and building myself a house?

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

...... My other caches are on unowned land and on my property.

 

Not being deliberately obtrusive - but I don't understand this as a concept.

 

If it's genuinely un-owned what's to stop me turning up, fencing off a couple of acres and building myself a house?

 

I guess you can! That's a good idea!

[sylven]

I just wanted to give my apologies. I know how sensative some people can get about identity. I had forgotten that these particular forums don't link back to the original profile on geocaching.com. So for the sake of identity, my caching name is TheArtisan, mainly because I like to craft many things. WAY too many hobbies. hehe Below are a list of my current cache hides.

 

Microflux Georail Stabilizer

 

Steampunk Geobox

 

Lost Scroll of Geo

 

My son's cache, which as I stated helped him place.

 

Glitter and Shine

 

My daughter's cache, which I also stated I helped place.

 

Dino Cache

 

So hope this helps a little. I appreciate everyone's feedback. Thank you for the helpful links and such. My goal is education. Water stirring, and mud can be used for other things. Hot chocolate and pies come to mind... hehe. My apologies btw if this isn't debating openly. Seeing this is a public area, free to open discussion, I thought I was...

 

Anyway, back on subject. The Lost Scroll of Geo is perhaps the one in which I question as far as permission goes. The cache is located about 500 feet from the main road leading into the park. The cache itself however is not on park property.

 

Thank you again for the duscussion, look forward to reading more.

 

Sylven

AKA TheArtisan

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

I'm in favor of getting permission to hide. I have 10 permits for each of my hides. My other caches are on unowned land and on my property.

 

I don't know about Florida, but here in New Jersey, every square inch of land is owed by somebody.

 

How do you find out who owns it? We call it "no mans land" here.

 

Can you provide a link to one of your caches on "un-owned" land?

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

I'm in favor of getting permission to hide. I have 10 permits for each of my hides. My other caches are on unowned land and on my property.

 

I don't know about Florida, but here in New Jersey, every square inch of land is owed by somebody.

 

How do you find out who owns it? We call it "no mans land" here.

 

Can you provide a link to one of your caches on "un-owned" land?

 

Sure! Here's one: Nature Versus Nurture

 

See what you can find. Like I said, I have no problem obtaining permissions and I'd rather all my caches have permits or permission. I assumed this land was unowned because I see no signs! If it is, I'll get permission!

 

I have 2 caches waiting on permits before they're published in a state forest.

Edited December 6, 2010 by SeekerOfTheWay

[+dbrierley]

Sylven,

 

Check with the deeds or tax assessor office in your town or county for land ownership records. Many offer the information online. There's a directory for West Virginia government at:

 

http://www.statelocalgov.net/state-wv.cfm

[+GeoGeeBee]

[

Sure! Here's one: Nature Versus Nurture

 

See what you can find. Like I said, I have no problem obtaining permissions and I'd rather all my caches have permits or permission. I assumed this land was unowned because I see no signs! If it is, I'll get permission!

 

 

Charlotte County has an online GIS system. It took me about two minutes to find the tax record for that land:

Property Record

 

Here's how I did it:

I started with the Google Maps link on the cache page: Link.

 

I zoomed way in, until Google showed the gray property lines. Then I right-clicked next to the cache marker, and clicked "What's here?" Then Google told me that this parcel is 7466 David Blvd, Port Charlotte, Florida.

 

I then Googled "Port Charlotte FL GIS" and found this website. Clicked on "Enter Mapping Site," found the "Search by address" link at the bottom of the page, entered that address, and there it was.

 

I don't think there's any land in the USA that doesn't belong to somebody.

[+BBWolf+3Pigs]

 

Sure! Here's one: Nature Versus Nurture

 

See what you can find. Like I said, I have no problem obtaining permissions and I'd rather all my caches have permits or permission. I assumed this land was unowned because I see no signs! If it is, I'll get permission!

 

I have 2 caches waiting on permits before they're published in a state forest.

 

Owner

MENIADIS POLINA N

3115 34TH ST

ASTORIA, NY 11106

Situs

7466 DAVID BLVD

PORT CHARLOTTE

 

Charlotte County Tax Assessor Website

 

Less than 10 minutes. Longest part of the search was figuring out what town/county I had to look for.

[sylven]

I have to compliment you all on your ability to find ownership so quickly. The technique would really help greatly when trying to obtain permission.

 

I tried to check on my state's land deed or tax and came up empty as far as online resources. Im not saying its not there, only that I was personally unable to find it.

 

So I tried to locate it via the Google maps option using the coordinates for Lost Scroll of Geo N 38° 13.663 W 081° 38.213

 

I came up with County Route 42 Alum Creek, WV 25003, which is just the name of the road, and not the individual lot. I suppose my state doesn't currently support using this method as to idividual lots or land deeds. I did however try to place this in a search, but came up empty.

 

Perhaps its just not something I am use to looking at... maybe you will have better luck. If you do, please post, and the method you used to find it. Appreciate the good work. Just remember, no one is perfect, and not everyone has the same knowledge and know-how you do. Sharing is always nice though as we can all stand to learn something new every day.

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

Wow, awesome! Thanks guys! Not sure I could do that on my BlackBerry. I'll work on getting permission.

 

My other 2 caches just got their permits just now. Publishing now...

 

Thanks for all the info!

[+dbrierley]

I tried to check on my state's land deed or tax and came up empty as far as online resources. Im not saying its not there, only that I was personally unable to find it.

 

It looks like the Kanawha County web site doesn't have an online system. Perhaps you can e-mail the coordinates to the Assessor's Office and ask them to look it up for you:

 

http://www.kanawha.us/assessor/default.asp

[sylven]

Thanks alot Dbreirley. Knowing these folks too, Im sure there will be some sort of fee attached to it as well...

 

Im not sure about anyone else, but I have honestly learned alot today just by looking through alot of the material, and trying to put it to use. Just wanted to send out a thank you. Keep it coming.

[+j robin]

I find it very interesting that the original poster has never hidden or found a cache. Although a review of all his forum posts shows he has claimed to find some he has never bothered to log.

 

Sounds like someone who just wants to stir up everything about a subject that has been discussed ad nauseum and probably received several dead horse comments over the years.

 

I wonder if it is the return or that guy who got banned awhile ago?

 

Nice stalking err, I mean detective work. This is a zero find/zero hide account. I guess you can't say for sure if they're trying to stir the pot. But it certainly is a dead horse subject.

LOVE the stalking comment! I too, am a stalker detective. it's an unappreciated art.

[+John in Valley Forge]

I agree. Ever since I read that blog how lamp posts have live wires sometimes exposed, I've been reluctant to hunt one.

 

That, knowing no permission was giving, makes me feel like I'm trespassing.

 

Well, let's stay on topic. A dangerous location has never been cause for denying a cache hide.

 

 

She did not say that a LPC hides should be denied because they are dangerous. She said she is reluctant to hunt them because of potential danger which in her opinion, outweighs the value of the smiley.

[+ZeLonewolf]

I agree. Ever since I read that blog how lamp posts have live wires sometimes exposed, I've been reluctant to hunt one.

 

That, knowing no permission was giving, makes me feel like I'm trespassing.

 

Well, let's stay on topic. A dangerous location has never been cause for denying a cache hide.

 

 

She did not say that a LPC hides should be denied because they are dangerous. She said she is reluctant to hunt them because of potential danger which in her opinion, outweighs the value of the smiley.

My point was that the thread was about permission, and that there was no need to muddy the waters by talking about the danger of LPCs.

[+SeekerOfTheWay]

If you read the entire thread, instead of selectively quoting me, you'll see that LPCs permissions were brought up and someone mentioned that owners would not give permission to hide LPC because of the danger factor.

 

So it does fit in with the topic. LPCs usually have no permission from property managers (or whoever owns them) and permission probably would be denied because of the risk of injury.

Edited December 7, 2010 by SeekerOfTheWay

[+briansnat]

If you read the entire thread, instead of selectively quoting me, you'll see that LPCs permissions were brought and someone mentioned that owners would not give permission to hide LPC because of the danger factor.

 

So it does fit in with the topic. LPCs usually have no permission from property managers (or whoever owns them) and permission probably would be denied because of the risk of injury.

 

True, I can't imagine a property owner saying "Sure, by all means hide a cache on my electrical equipment so people can poke around it".

[knowschad]

If you read the entire thread, instead of selectively quoting me, you'll see that LPCs permissions were brought and someone mentioned that owners would not give permission to hide LPC because of the danger factor.

 

So it does fit in with the topic. LPCs usually have no permission from property managers (or whoever owns them) and permission probably would be denied because of the risk of injury.

 

True, I can't imagine a property owner saying "Sure, by all means hide a cache on my electrical equipment so people can poke around it".

True, but, how many of us, when first looking for a cache there said, "Hey, by all means, let's see if that brown square part lifts up so we can poke around the electrical equipment underneath!".

 

IF a property owner did give permission (and I have found a couple of LPCs that did state that they had permission), the property owner more likely said what we all said the first time... "Hey, clever! I didn't know those lifted up!!"

[+bflentje]

I find it very interesting that the original poster has never hidden or found a cache. Although a review of all his forum posts shows he has claimed to find some he has never bothered to log.

 

Sounds like someone who just wants to stir up everything about a subject that has been discussed ad nauseum and probably received several dead horse comments over the years.

 

I wonder if it is the return or that guy who got banned awhile ago?

 

Nice stalking err, I mean detective work. This is a zero find/zero hide account. I guess you can't say for sure if they're trying to stir the pot. But it certainly is a dead horse subject.

LOVE the stalking comment! I too, am a stalker detective. it's an unappreciated art.

 

Stalking Detective work is commonly used in forums to invalidate someones assertion, no matter how right or wrong they may be. While I've done it myself in the past, I think it's a passive aggressive behavior and demonstrates that the detective has no basis to refute the posters claims. Doesn't happen so much here. But check out political or religious vs atheist forums sometime. Crazy stuff.

[Clan Riffster]

Queston 1 "What exactly is permission to place a cache?"

As you mentioned, in applied to generalities, permission is just that. Someone saying "Yes, you can do that"

 

Question 2 "When does needing permission apply to a geocache I want to place?"

Off the top of my head, I can think of two places where the topic of permission is mentioned.

(there are probably more, but these two come to mind)

The first is the guidelines which act to govern our favorite hobby. They say:

"By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location"

Sometimes adequate means a written form from a land manager. Sometimes it means verbal consent. Sometimes it means you are free to place them where ever you want. This changes from place to place. For instance, Seminole County, Fl, (where I work), has two agencies that manage their public recreation places. Seminole County Parks manage areas that are no longer very natural. Lots of landscaping, paved paths, trimmed shrubbery, etc. Pretty sterile, in my opinion. Their official stance on geocaching is that the activity is benign, and well managed from within, so they don't need to know about placements. For those properties, adequate means do whatever you want, as long as Groundspeak is OK with it. However, Seminole County Natural Lands manages areas that are far more natural. Very little human intervention. They control strictly how many caches get placed on their properties, and how they get placed. For caches on these properties, adequate means written permission.

 

Another area where permission is mentioned is the Hiding Your First Geocache tips, which state:

"If you place a cache on private land, you must ask permission before hiding your cache"

To me, this seems pretty clear. It appears that Groundspeak is stating, if you hide something on private property, adequate means explicit. Yet, of all the hiders I've talked to about hides on Wally World/Burger King/Etc properties, not a single one obtained explicit permission. These hiders operate under the belief that, since the public is allowed to be there, and there are no prohibitions against our hobby posted, then it must be OK. From a legal perspective, I agree with them. But this is a debate about policy, not law. I would like to see Groundspeak revise their guidelines to say hides on private property must have explicit permission. I'm not holding my breath on this, as so many players these days are P&G fans who can't be bothered with walking more than 5' from their car in fear of accidentally burning a calorie. If Groundspeak takes action that results in these P&G caches being affected negatively, they lose income.

 

Question 3 "Is asking permission something you practice on a regular basis?"

As noted above, when I need to ask permission, I do.