Cherokee Nat'l Forest, TN District 8 Special Geocaching Permits

[+Hank30721]

I was informed today by a volunteer geocache approver that hides in the Cherokee National Forest have to be approved much in the same as they do in North Carolina in the Nantahala NF. The difference is there is a processing fee - I was quoted $112 from the district ranger's office to fill out the requisite paperwork, etc. The permit is good for one year and must be renewed each year for the same fee.

 

This is outrageous!! Is there something going on in the background I'm not aware of that has placed geocaching in the same situation as people building roads and other construction in the forest?

 

I placed a cache in the same forest a couple of months ago with no issue.

[knowschad]

Here is the policy, according to the Groundspeak Wiki (which I didn't even know existed until now!)

 

https://wiki.Groundspeak.com/display/GEO/Tennessee#Tennessee-CherokeeNationalForest

 

Cherokee National Forest

The Cherokee National Forest falls within the jurisdiction of Region 8 of the National Forest Service, which has a permit system in place for all geocaches on this property. All placements are at the discretion of the Land Manager and are subject to the policies outlined in Section 2724.44 of the Forest Service Manual, available here: National Forest Service, Region 8 Geocaching Policy

 

You will need to contact the land manager of the appropriate district office of the area where you wish to hide your cache. The district offices and their contact information can be found here: Cherokee National Forest District Offices, Contact Information.

 

The land manager may choose to issue permission for the cache placement on their authority, if so, you will need to include the name and contact information for the person granting permission for this geocache. If after the pre-screening of your application the land manager determines that a special use permit is required, then the permit will be a temporary permit (FS-2700-25) good for less than one year and the minimum fee is $59.00. There may be restrictions on where you can hide your cache and some off-limit places depending on the forest, so when you contact the district office you will need to have a good idea of where you want to hide it and then they can tell you what restrictions pertain to that particular forest. District personnel will provide you with the application, any documentation requirements and issue the permit and billing, if necessary.

 

In accordance with Forest Service policy, Traditional cache containers shall not exceed 12” on any side (height, width, or depth). Containers must be non-breakable, animal resistant, and have a closing mechanism to prohibit content exposure to wildlife and the environment. Containers must be permanently marked with the Holder’s permit ID, Name, address, and telephone number. Caches may not contain food, alcohol, tobacco, weapons of any type, fireworks, drugs, or other similar items. Caches may not be buried or hidden under water. Caches may not be placed in dangerous, inappropriate, or protected areas and habitats. Additionally, all geocaches should be placed in a manner consistent with Geocaching.com guidelines.

 

Once you have received permission and/or a special use permit, you may submit your geocache for publication on Geocaching,com. Be sure to include your name and the name and contact information for the Land Manager, in a reviewer note, so that your reviewer may verify their permission in accordance with National Forest Service policy.

 

[Keystone]

I am moving this thread from the Geocaching Topics forum to the South and Southeast forum.

[+Manville Possum]

I was informed today by a volunteer geocache approver that hides in the Cherokee National Forest have to be approved much in the same as they do in North Carolina in the Nantahala NF. The difference is there is a processing fee - I was quoted $112 from the district ranger's office to fill out the requisite paperwork, etc. The permit is good for one year and must be renewed each year for the same fee.

 

This is outrageous!! Is there something going on in the background I'm not aware of that has placed geocaching in the same situation as people building roads and other construction in the forest?

 

I placed a cache in the same forest a couple of months ago with no issue.

We are having the same issues here in Jefferson NF. My last listing published near NFS property was a little more difficult to get published. No problems for virtuals and waymarks. Seems the law has been on the books scince 2006, but GC reviewers are just becoming aware of it. We lost guard rail hides here in the Commonweath also, but there are threads here on both topics already.

[Clan Riffster]

I entered into conversation with Liz Agpaoa, Regional Forester, when this silliness was was being bantered about for Ocala, Osceola and Appalachacola National Forests. I pointed out the error in their interpretation of their own rules, and convinced them to waive any permit process, including fees, pending their development of a proper permit process. These three National Forests are back open to caching, for now. I'm not sure what the final outcome will be, but I remain hopeful.

[+geodarts]

Many national forests have a permit system and specific limitations for caches (such as a requirement that they be moved after a year). However the permit fee system goes beyond this. Special use permits and fees can only be applied in certain circumstances - generally they are applied to commercial activities, organized events, and the like. I do not have the citations in front of me (there are several other threads that have discussed that), but I would try to convince the national forest officials that these kind of fees do not apply to caching. In other words, the screening process should simply determine that you do not need a special use fee.

 

I would do a bit of research, ask for a meeting with the local office, get a couple of other cachers to come with you, and see what happens from there.

Edited August 9, 2011 by geodarts

[+JL_HSTRE]

I entered into conversation with Liz Agpaoa, Regional Forester, when this silliness was was being bantered about for Ocala, Osceola and Appalachacola National Forests. I pointed out the error in their interpretation of their own rules, and convinced them to waive any permit process, including fees, pending their development of a proper permit process. These three National Forests are back open to caching, for now. I'm not sure what the final outcome will be, but I remain hopeful.

 

Thanks, Riffster!

[+Coldgears]

I'd feel worried, but the fact that I have no national forests around for them to put the fee on makes me in the clear...

 

Errm, sorta. 80 percent of parks (Which are state) have $25. So... I'm used to stupid fee's.

[+ATXTracker]

I posted this idea: http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/2129907-work-with-national-parks-to-avoid-fees?ref=title

Edited August 10, 2011 by ATXTracker

[+Cliff's Notes]

With some of these parks with the fees and regulations a thought has occurred to me.

 

If the park is being irksome instead of one person at a time going in saying please, you get the geocachers in the area to form a group. The "______ Forest Geocachers Group" can then as a group go in with a proposal. Come up with a plan that the group takes responsibility for the caches placed in the park. All caches in the park will be published under the group's name. There are specific people that can be contacted in the group to cover issues. The group can have a yearly get together and raise a reasonable fee to cover paperwork on the park administration side. If you go in as a group the fee may be a one time yearly fee for the group as a whole.

 

Make a PayPal donation site to cover the groups fees. I know that if I was in a park or natl. forest and had a good time and saw a groups website and a link to support the group I would toss a few bucks their way.

 

I am sure I read somewhere that property managers allowing placement on land are given a premium membership as well, if this is the case mention that they will be able to have an account for monitoring activity for all the caches. Offer to help them with the account. Give them detailed info on all caches container pictures, take pics of cache in situ and stuff that they can keep in their offices. This way they know all there is to know.

 

This way you would be going as a group to the park officials saying we will do what you want (within reason) and will police our own. On all the cache pages for the park you can have an explanation of the rules the group has agreed to for the access to the park that way out of towners passing through may catch on before dropping a guardrail cache on their way out of the park never to return. And if they do drop a cache in the park as part of the groups agreement you would get the reviewer to pull it and retrieve the cache as part of the groups responsibility to keep park management happy or at best tolerant of the GPS wielding hordes.

 

This is not the best solution but it might be the best way to get the park on the map. If you have enough people in the group you can all find some of the other cachers hides in the park. Also once a group member has found a cache once they have the ability to maintain the cache at a later point should something come up.

[+Hank30721]

Some really good ideas here. After some further conversation with the local office, I was even further agitated...see my response to another similar thread:

 

"I work closely with USFS and NPS employees in my line of work. I understand the issues they face. My concern is that USFS regions run their areas completely different from each other. I have filed permits for placement in NC that were free of charge - very easy process. The supervisor there was a cacher himself. He thought this was a great way to get more people out in the forest to enjoy "their" forest.

 

In TN, I was quoted $112 to place A cache. That permit would need to be reapplied for each year for $112. I was told at the particular district office that geocaching was not a legitimate use of the forest along with rock-climbing, telescope use, orienteering, etc. He said they were working to keep as many people out of the forest as they could to make resource management easier. He said they were making great strides with motorized vehicle prohibition and equestrian use and now this was another issue they had to manage. He was very bitter and defensive - all I did was ask what was the authorization process....

 

I understand resource constraints and users that are less respectful of the land than they should be, but this isn't 3rd grade where we all have to stay after class because one idiot was chewing gum when he wasn't supposed to. Don't treat us like sheep. The national forests are there for public recreation - they should be managed to that end. I make compromises every day to live and work to not unduly infringe on my fellow man, forest management should take that same approach. Define cache placement specifically, determine what the appropriate punishment is for violating that policy and carry out discipline to those that violate.

 

I feel like the USDA is using logic again that they used in removing trash cans from certain areas in the forest - that way people wouldn't pollute?!!"

Edited August 10, 2011 by Hank30721

[+Hank30721]

I went and met with the office in question - I took 2 other cachers (one much older, and one much younger and female for a variety - no relation). I made an appt. and told them there would be three of us and that we wanted to discuss cache placement protocol.

 

When we arrived, the person we were to see took the day off. No one else could help us but to say that all geocaches required special use permits and it would be over a $100. They needed to see the container, which I showed them (micro) and they laughed at why I even needed a permit? I agreed!! They said to come back later when the special permit clerk was back. Another 2 hours of driving wasted.

 

If I treated an issue at my workplace with that sort of "devil may care" attitude I would be severely punished or dismissed especially with a business partner or vendor.

 

Is there anyone here who would like to go with me next time or form sort of association to represent us? Is there an association already in place that would be willing to take up some negotiation that I could join?

[+Monkeybrad]

The Cherokee NF has always been good to work with and have supported Geocaching as a good activity for their lands in the past. Be sure that the ranger won't just give permission before filling out the permits. I know that the rangers can give permission on their authority without a special use permit if they decide to. I have heard that several people have had good luck just asking for permission for their hides. I just wanted to clarify, since your reviewers can publish the listing with either permission from the managing ranger in the area or with a special use permit, we are just no longer allowed to publish listings without evidence of one of those things.

 

Hope that helps.

[+Hank30721]

I just thought I would follow up here. No luck on getting permission to place the cache. The district ranger in Cleveland TN said she understood the hardship the cost for the application would create but that it was the only way to cover their costs. She said they were being required by Washington to send a specialist to the proposed cache location to ascertain resource impact.

 

I made the argument that this was not a commercial activity and did not require a special use permit, but she said that any activity that brought people into the forest outside its normal use was special use. I said that these people would be here anyway and just geocache as an additional activity while here. She said that was not what the "geocaching organization" told them.

 

I said that this basically closed the forest to physical caches - and she gave me a sympathetic yes. Is there any group or individuals smarter than I am that can help pitch in to fight here?? It sounds like we are arguing over semantics.

 

Let's don't let the Cherokee National Forest be closed to geocaching.....

[Clan Riffster]

I said that this basically closed the forest to physical caches

Hank, you might try working your way up the food chain.

Rather than fighting a losing battle at a local level, go all the way to the national level. Ask the guy/gal at the very top why NFS is trying to outlaw geocaching, while encouraging other activities that have a greater impact, such as equestrian sports and mountainbike riding. Explain the issue you are having with Cherokee, and the convoluted misinterpretation of the NFS rules that the folks there are using to ban this activity.

 

It worked for me.