Military Installation Geocaches.

[+Criminal]

OK, I admit that this forum thread will not change anything, but I wanted to open the topic for discussion.

 

I would like to know what the group thinks about opening up military bases/posts to hiding geocaches there. There are many with thousands of acres of open land just begging for a cache. Ft. Lewis here in WA is just such an example. People even hunt deer out there during certain months. Nearby, McChord AFB has miles of trails and gravel roads where a cache could be hidden as well.

 

I am aware of the pseudo-problem of explodey things, I’m referring to the wooded areas of an installation. Extra care would have to be given to ensure the cache is remote, well hidden, and labeled as a geocache. Obviously there would be no “urban” style caches allowed. Please avoid this topic in your response, I’m intimately aware of it and would rather not waste the bandwidth debating it.

 

The problem, the one that many will find insurmountable, is that you would need access to the base. No problem for military, dependants, retirees, and others who already have the decals on their windshield. So if you don’t fall into one of those groups, and don’t know anyone who does, the cache would be a niggling annoyance on your nearest cache list.

 

Your government (city, county, state, and federal) owns millions of acres of land. We cache on some and not on others. Done properly, a geocache on many installations would not cause a problem. Despite what some think, the folks in the military (well most of them anyway) are not mindless robots who would freak out if an ammo can was found in the remote forests of the installation. There are sensitive areas on the base as well as off.

 

http://fp1.centurytel.net/Criminal_Page/

[+sbell111]

I suspect that this is the least likely place for someone to freak out if they find a surplus ammo can. However, I think approval would be an insurmountable obstacle.

 

Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.

[gm100guy]

I have been out for a long time now now only in the reserves.

 

I guess if you have a pass to get on a base and it was not in a sensitive area it should be allowed.

 

It is almost like a members only cache and they don't seem to be a problem for most.

 

 

gm100guy

http://members.rogers.com/gm100guy/cachepage.htm

[+Sissy-n-CR]

If you can get Base Commander's approval there shouldn't be a problem. Any area open to the public could be fair game. Areas could be set up for such a pasttime.

 

The problem I see is the lack of open areas. I've been seeing fences going up where there weren't any before. Concrete blockades at the ready to close off public roads around the bases. Around here, I don't see many public accessible areas. ...and there is a lot of military land.

 

In fact, they are pushing back the public. A public road near here has been commandeered by the AF for "security."

 

I don't think now is a good time to be bringing this up with base security.

 

CR

 

[+Criminal]

If you're talking about Charleston AFB, I spent ten long years there. You're right, there's not really any "remote" areas there because it shares runways with the international.

 

http://fp1.centurytel.net/Criminal_Page/

[+Erawan]

I think most problems you will find this day in age is access. I have recently been to a number of bases in the States and have found many changes in security to include installation of fences and barracades. I know there are areas open for hunting and fishing at certain times, but those are usually for Active, Retirees, Dependents and such. The good thing is you have to sign in to go into such areas because of possible training being conducted. This is of course for safety.

 

Being Federal land, and to err on the side of caution, it would be best (or necessary) to notify the base PMO or Public Affairs folks. All this would be little pain to do (approval is another matter). I can also imagine having to sign a 'hold harmless' form releasing the military from any liability or responsibility for your actions or injury.

 

All this is contingent on access, which is based on the Bases Force Protection posture, and the Commanders insight and willingness to grant access.

 

Trying is most always good, but there are lots of folks that would be left out because they arn't or have never been part of the military.

 

Erawan

[+Poindexter]

I know of one cache that is on federal land that used to be a low frequency radio transmitter station that provided classified message traffic to navy submarines. It is owned by the Navy and is part of the Naval Academy in Annapolis Md. Most of the antenna towers have been removed and the sight has been turned into a wildlife refuge. I believe the person in charge of this area is aware of the cache and doesn't have a problem with it. The area is open to the public at specific times and supposedly by appointment but is not strictly enforced. I think most bases would not welcome this activity to the general public but would probably allow it to those who live and work there.

[iryshe]

I am with the folks who agree it is ok if the Base Commander allows it.

 

However...

 

If the cache is placed on a closed military base which cannot be accessed by civillians, the answer would be a definite no. The same rule goes for Nudist Colonies or private beaches/ropes courses, etc. The average citizen should be able to have access to the location to log the cache.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location™

[+Criminal]

I’m thinking you mean, “closed” as in entry restricted and not “closed” as in no longer operational. Almost all active bases are entry restricted right now. About two years ago there was no gate guard at Ft Lewis. Anyone could drive right on the post, but the signs made it trespassing and if you were pulled over you’d probably be escorted back to the gate.

 

Jeremy, we actually traded a few emails back and forth on this subject a couple years ago, the policy was not written at that time as I recall. Your point then was the same, general public or no approval. My point then and now is that most people either have access or know someone who does. I can and do appreciate your position on this, I’m in no way arguing to change the guidelines right now. Your policy, if I have it right, is that the community is allowed a say in it. And that’s the purpose of the tread, to get a feel for the prevailing opinion. (Knowing full well that if you’re against it then some certain types will fall in behind you even if they have no idea what the debate is about.)

 

I opened the tread with the qualifier that I am fully aware that the policy will not change. I’m not looking to change anything, just throwing up feelers. You used the words “average citizen” and in reality the “average” geocacher arguably does have access. (You do, just drop me a line, right?) Like I said, there’s just a whole lot of great wilderness land out there that we’re not utilizing.

 

http://fp1.centurytel.net/Criminal_Page/

[iryshe]

This is just a recent issue I had with a commissioned officer who was emailing me about caches in Ft. Knox land. We already have land managers calling us often about caches placed on their lands and don't want regular Joe geocacher to get stopped and arrested for looking for tupperware.

 

If it's a closed base (Like I believe Fort Ord in California) that would be fine as long as permission was given. However secured bases like my Alma Mater at the Presidio of Monterey (which until 9/11 was an open base) I would not allow caches there, for obvious reasons.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location™

[+travisl]

I don't feel strongly about this either way -- I just wanted to toss this out there as a data point:

 

American Lake had 15 finds, 8 by civilians. Yes, a few civilians were turned away (myself included), but that was part of the challenge of the cache, I suppose. I returned a few weeks later with my military father-in-law to successfully find the cache.

 

"I'm sure she would have been thrilled to find so much pooh in a little metal box."

[+Erawan]

Restricted entry as part of the challange?

I know what you are saying and what you mean. But I'll bet there are some folks that would jump a fence just to get to a cache. I would hate to be the one staring down the business end of an M4 carbine.

 

I know a lot of people that can't get access to military bases. Yea, some have contacts and can be signed in. But I think the amount of people that have access is slightly exaggerated, tho there are lots of civilians that work for the military.

 

I also know of certain areas just outside the boundries of installations (i.e. Fort Bragg, Fort Lewis, and Fort Campbell) that are very nice for caches. You really don't need to have access to the installation to do them...you just can't go on a nice long nature hike

 

Erawan

[iryshe]

Who do you think they call first when you jump a fence into a military installation? Me.

 

Thanks but no thanks. I have enough battles to fight here already, without the US Army breathing down my neck.

 

Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location™

[+Moosiegirl]

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=2930 is on Fort Hood, the nation's largest Army Training Center. The owner obviously went through channels and got approval for the cache and laid out strict guidelines for getting access to the area. Last find was just this weekend, so even with active training going on with upcoming depoloyments, the Army feels comfortable with people going into the training areas to hike and geocache, AS LONG AS THEY GO THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS. Maybe anyone who would like to place a cache on a Military Installation should ask the owner of this cache for assistance with following the proper channels. If Jeremy has not received calls on this one, they must have done it the right way.

 

Happy Trails,

Candy

 

quote:

---

... I can quit any time I like ... really, I CAN!!

---

 

Candy (Moosiegirl)http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CentralTexasGeocachers/