Private or not

[+geocachescout317]

I tried to hide a cache on land that I was 100% sure was public property but the reviewer still asked to have some permission from the land owner. Was I wrong or is there some rule where you still have to get permission anywhere?

[Dinoprophet]

Depends where it is exactly. National parks are public land, but caches are still forbidden on many of them.

[+Keelmann And Cici]

I tried to hide a cache on land that I was 100% sure was public property but the reviewer still asked to have some permission from the land owner. Was I wrong or is there some rule where you still have to get permission anywhere?

 

As far as I know, all land is owned and managed. If you mean a park, different parks have different policies about geocaching.

[+The red-haired witch]

If the land where your cache is placed is public (and not a park), maybe you can prove that to the reviewer. A link to a map of public land in your area might do, or some other source that demonstrates that you are allowed to place a cache there. Or maybe the reviewer has a reason to believe that this land is owned by someone? Discussing it with the reviewer might be helpful.

[+Shop99er]

Whether it's public land or private, we're supposed to have proof of permission if the reviewer asks for it.

[+GeoBain]

Heads up, op is in middle school. Go easy on him.

 

Generally, local Parks don't get flagged for explicit permission. But there are a lot of public lands where geocaching is not permitted or requires special permits.

 

Your reviewer is your best source of info for this. Send an email or leave a reviewer note asking for clarification.

Edited August 17, 2011 by Avenois

[+Fianccetto]

I did the same thing recently. I wanted to publish a series in a city park. I looked up who to ask and. Mailed them, their reply was they only cover rural parks and to contact the city council. The contact he gave me was out of date so I mailed the council to ask who to ask and my mail went on a council noticeboard 'for anyone interested'. I got the impression the council didn't care, and I thought all the caches were on public rights of way (not exactly) so I sent the caches for publication. It was only then that I found, from the reviewer, that they were within a SSSI (well 2 were) and was sent the link to a map showing where the restricted areas ares, and from this I could work out who to contact about setting caches there. I mailed her and retrieved the caches and am still waiting.

[+Manville Possum]

I tried to hide a cache on land that I was 100% sure was public property but the reviewer still asked to have some permission from the land owner. Was I wrong or is there some rule where you still have to get permission anywhere?

Permission is required and it is the reviewers job to make sure guidelines are being followed. And likely it was your local reviewer, and they checked your profile and saw this archived listing of yours. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=f356040e-bf7a-4b5d-af6f-5ca69e6134d6

You really have some really nice listings, and we have logged finds on some of the same Virtuals and EarthCaches. Most reviewers are easy to work with, just provide them with the information that they request, or be sure to include in your reviewer note that you have permission for the cache placement. My son and I worked on a EarthCache together, and I think that it would have been approved on the first pass. But we forgot to include in the reviewer note that we have permission for the listing. A good reviewer note has always helped me get my listings published quickly.

[+Hypnopaedia]

I did the same thing recently. I wanted to publish a series in a city park. I looked up who to ask and. Mailed them, their reply was they only cover rural parks and to contact the city council. The contact he gave me was out of date so I mailed the council to ask who to ask and my mail went on a council noticeboard 'for anyone interested'. I got the impression the council didn't care, and I thought all the caches were on public rights of way (not exactly) so I sent the caches for publication. It was only then that I found, from the reviewer, that they were within a SSSI (well 2 were) and was sent the link to a map showing where the restricted areas ares, and from this I could work out who to contact about setting caches there. I mailed her and retrieved the caches and am still waiting.

 

For the non Brit's (Including me) here is what I think SSSI means in this case:

 

"A Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) is a conservation designation denoting a protected area in the United Kingdom. SSSIs are the basic building block of site-based nature conservation legislation and most other legal nature/geological conservation designations in Great Britain are based upon them, including National Nature Reserves, Ramsar Sites, Special Protection Areas, and Special Areas of Conservation."

 

Keep in mind if you're using an acronym that is unique to your area, state, country, etc. it is helpful to provide the translation.

[+Fianccetto]

I did the same thing recently. I wanted to publish a series in a city park. I looked up who to ask and. Mailed them, their reply was they only cover rural parks and to contact the city council. The contact he gave me was out of date so I mailed the council to ask who to ask and my mail went on a council noticeboard 'for anyone interested'. I got the impression the council didn't care, and I thought all the caches were on public rights of way (not exactly) so I sent the caches for publication. It was only then that I found, from the reviewer, that they were within a SSSI (well 2 were) and was sent the link to a map showing where the restricted areas ares, and from this I could work out who to contact about setting caches there. I mailed her and retrieved the caches and am still waiting.

 

For the non Brit's (Including me) here is what I think SSSI means in this case:

 

"A Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) is a conservation designation denoting a protected area in the United Kingdom. SSSIs are the basic building block of site-based nature conservation legislation and most other legal nature/geological conservation designations in Great Britain are based upon them, including National Nature Reserves, Ramsar Sites, Special Protection Areas, and Special Areas of Conservation."

 

Keep in mind if you're using an acronym that is unique to your area, state, country, etc. it is helpful to provide the translation.

Thank you, I hadn't realised Sites of Special Scientific Interest was a UK specific term.

 

My point was, it does happen, it happened to me, it is a normal part of the process, publishing a cache is sometimes a one or 2 step process but be prepared for it to be something more complicated. It's fine.

 

To the OP, you might find that included in the email the reviewer sent you was some other information, such as maps, which allow you to better check if land is private, or who owns it. If so, you could use the maps to decide on where else you could hide your cache if you can't get permission. (If the reviewer knows it is private, where do they get this information from, have they passed that on to you?)

[+Hypnopaedia]

I did the same thing recently. I wanted to publish a series in a city park. I looked up who to ask and. Mailed them, their reply was they only cover rural parks and to contact the city council. The contact he gave me was out of date so I mailed the council to ask who to ask and my mail went on a council noticeboard 'for anyone interested'. I got the impression the council didn't care, and I thought all the caches were on public rights of way (not exactly) so I sent the caches for publication. It was only then that I found, from the reviewer, that they were within a SSSI (well 2 were) and was sent the link to a map showing where the restricted areas ares, and from this I could work out who to contact about setting caches there. I mailed her and retrieved the caches and am still waiting.

 

For the non Brit's (Including me) here is what I think SSSI means in this case:

 

"A Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) is a conservation designation denoting a protected area in the United Kingdom. SSSIs are the basic building block of site-based nature conservation legislation and most other legal nature/geological conservation designations in Great Britain are based upon them, including National Nature Reserves, Ramsar Sites, Special Protection Areas, and Special Areas of Conservation."

 

Keep in mind if you're using an acronym that is unique to your area, state, country, etc. it is helpful to provide the translation.

Thank you, I hadn't realised Sites of Special Scientific Interest was a UK specific term.

 

My point was, it does happen, it happened to me, it is a normal part of the process, publishing a cache is sometimes a one or 2 step process but be prepared for it to be something more complicated. It's fine.

 

To the OP, you might find that included in the email the reviewer sent you was some other information, such as maps, which allow you to better check if land is private, or who owns it. If so, you could use the maps to decide on where else you could hide your cache if you can't get permission. (If the reviewer knows it is private, where do they get this information from, have they passed that on to you?)

 

I've got to be honest, Sites of Special Scientific Interest is actually a pretty awesome name. I can't think of anything with that good a title here.

 

Just to add something on topic. I, recently, ended up having to move a cache (A 120mm ammo can) more than half a dozen times before I was able to get it published. (GC2T57F)

 

When it got published, I then got an email 30 minutes later from a local Geocaching Bigwig who (rightfully and correctly) informed me that I had not followed the rules of the park. I ended up having to archive it. I then found a spot that I had researched, and knew was publicly owned vacant land.

 

Even then I had to address issues with a designation of NGPA (Natural Growth Protection Area) for the spot. (GC2R02T) In some areas of my county, it is regarded as a no go area, and is displayed with a visible at eye level, clear sign to not enter. On the other hand the sign near my cache was small and much like a utility marker with a simple print with N G P A and no other easily visible words. On closer inspection, it reads as a notice against any construction activities.

 

When this happened I had to do quite a lot of research to determine the validity of my hide.

 

An example that shows an opposite situation is my recent attempt to place a cache in a Washington State Park, Iron Horse State Park, as a tribute cache (GC300N0).

 

Within Washington State Parks there is a law that concerns Geocaches:

 

In order to place a cache on state parks' property, an individual or organization must obtain a geocache placement permit from state parks. Any cache located on state parks' property that does not have a permit on file is subject to removal from its location, and after notification of the owner (if known), may be disposed of within ten days.

 

The geocache owner must check the geocache at least every ninety days unless an extension is approved by the park manager not to exceed one hundred eighty days. Proof of the check will be by e-mail, letter, or personal communication by the owner with the park manager or designee, and the owner's entry in the cache log book indicating the date of inspection.

 

The following items shall not be placed in the geocache: Food items; illegal substances; medications; personal hygiene products; pornographic materials; inappropriate, offensive, or hazardous materials or weapons of any type. Log books are required for each cache and are to be provided by the owner of the cache.

 

Any violation of this section is an infraction under chapter 7.84 RCW.

 

Usually this is a huge pain. In my case it was quite easy. The Land Manager was familiar with the previous cache and since the container and exact coordinates were the same he pushed it through much, much quicker than normal.

 

Don't know how informative this will be but those are two situations I have found myself in.

Edited August 17, 2011 by Hypnopaedia

[+keehotee]

I got the impression the council didn't care, and I thought all the caches were on public rights of way (not exactly) so I sent the caches for publication.

 

In England, at least, there is no "public" land. It's all owned by somebody - including Public rights of way. These only give you (the public) the right to "pass and repass" - and nothing else (including hiding tupperware ) without permission.

Edited August 17, 2011 by keehotee

[+Fianccetto]

I got the impression the council didn't care, and I thought all the caches were on public rights of way (not exactly) so I sent the caches for publication.

 

In England, at least, there is no "public" land. It's all owned by somebody - including Public rights of way. These only give you (the public) the right to "pass and repass" - and nothing else (including hiding tupperware ) without permission.

 

Exactly. I had found out who the landowner was, but my mistake was not looking at the magic maps to check for site specific sensitivity. I would guess that UK reviewers have to prevent/delay a lot of caches from being published for this reason and I'm cross with myself for wasting someone's time. I'm not wanting to be a reviewer botherer, or a council botherer.

 

It is a clunky map and I had taken a look at it some time ago and not realised its significance. Now I spend a lot of time perusing it! (And the bits I am interested in seem to have changed recently - or perhaps I'm using maps with different filters, need to check that.

[+dorqie]

I once placed a cache in a municipally owned park, however this park did not show up on Google maps, (or any other map I saw) and from the map, it looked like someones yard.

I personally knew a lot of the town council and they told me to go right ahead and put it there.

Even though I had permission, and the land was not private, I still had to prove it to the reviewer because from their position, they have no way of knowing that this spot was ok.

Google maps isn't always accurate, you may need a second source of verification.