DNR

September 21, 2012

The end of geocaching as we know it. 10/1/12 dooms day

http://www.in.gov/nrc/files/item_8_nrc_sept_2012.pdf

September 21, 2012

I'm not seeing doomsday here. The Department of Natural Resources is merely requiring you to obtain a license to place caches and abide by already existing rules.

If you asked proper permission before placing any caches in their area before this amendment was written, there won't be much changes for you...

They're looking after their land, the plants and animals and they still allow geocaching. It's not a ban.

September 21, 2012

I agree with stijnhommes... INDNR has had published Geocaching rules (which were available online) in place since roughly 2004. Granted, some parks (and cachers!) didn't follow the rules, which is what I believe prompted this revision. If you were following the originally stated rules, then there are very few differences in this new model. Just a bit of clarification in some areas.

2k · September 21, 2012

I understand the need for some oversight and I have no problems with the "new" guidelines, although F under the restricted actions has me scratching my head since it appears you can hide(?) a containerless cache but not seek one! Not real sure why these rules weren't enforced in the first place, but perhaps it encouraged visitors to the DNR properties, which in turn brought more revenue into their coffers (for those properties that charge).

I think the issue will probably be with the existing caches in DNR properties. No more than 50 in each property will result in the removal of hundreds of caches unless they're grandfathered in, which probably won't happen. Clark State Forest in SE IN has over 150 caches, meaning that 100 of those will have to be pulled. Will the CO's actually go do it considering how many containers we're talking about? I would hope so, but that's a huge undertaking for those who have more than 20 caches.

If the maximum # of caches are held onto by CO's in each DNR property, no new placements will take place there, meaning that we'll probably get more suburban caching and less caching in parks and outdoor environments with less repeat visitors to DNR properties once they've cached the area.

I really think they're overreacting to something that wasn't really that much of a problem to begin with. Hunters cause as much or more damage environmentally than geocachers do, although I've seen some areas around GZ that were pretty trashed too. I've seen it firsthand, having found some hunter campsites while caching right after hunting season was over. It wasn't a very pretty sight (didn't smell very good either).

September 21, 2012

Maybe it's just me but someone who is posting this topic that's been an active cacher with this account since 8/26/12 with no finds seems to be a what we call it....______ starter. Maybe I'm just reading into it but, we've been over this topic so many times my head hurts. Follow the DNR rules and we will all be Okay, really we will. Remember the Y2K scare? Nothing happened! So, let's not get anyone all wound up for nothing.

Now let's all go out and find or place some caches. Okay?

September 21, 2012

It’s unfortunate that this is all said and done. I do know that some of the most experienced cachers in Indiana have been working with the DNR on getting the new guidelines adjusted for the numbers. A big thank you to those individuals for their efforts.

Like it’s been pointed out we will lose a very large number of caches in the forest areas of Indiana, so caching as we know it will be over, for the numbers anyway.

I hope that the people who have existing caches on public lands will permit there caches, but how many are likely to do it? It can be a pain in the … As it is now if you want to keep a cache you will be required to permit the caches beginning in October. (to my knowledge anyway) also set to meet the new guidelines. Bushwhacking caches are gone, and anything with a physical challenge will be gone.

How this is going to pan out I don’t know. I’ve been wondering what the process will be to make this change. Will we lose every cache in forested areas until people figure all this out, and begin the slow process setting new caches? Bottom line it sucks.

F.Y.I This is my caching alias name. I set it up for placing junk caches, and crazy cache pages. I have found over 600 caches in the areas affected, so it really bums me out.

2k · September 22, 2012

This doesn't really affect too many of the state parks. The only one that gets hit really hard is Spring Mill which will lose 10 caches, leaving only 6 for the park. Falls of the Ohio loses all its caches (3 including one that was placed in the first year of geocaching) as it's too small. If they count "containerless" caches in the total for each park, the number of caches lost becomes a bit larger for each park that is over the maximum #. Falls of the Ohio loses 6 ECs as well in that case.

The largest DNR division this affects is the State Forest. The forest farthest north is just above Kokomo and the rest are all mostly around Louisville (within 50 miles for a lot of them) with Bloomington having some close as well. Those cachers in the north won't be affected as there are no state forests up there. The cachers down south will see a large drop in caches based on the maximum # allowable under the new guidelines. We're talking about hundreds of caches. Clark State Forest will lose over 150 caches by itself.

Not trying to wind up anyone but certainly pointing out that southern IN cachers will be affected MUCH more than northern IN cachers. I'm guessing statewide it will result in the archiving of anywhere from 500-1000 caches. It represents 2-4 percent of the total caches in IN.

8.3k · September 27, 2012

The end of geocaching as we know it. 10/1/12 dooms day

http://www.in.gov/nrc/files/item_8_nrc_sept_2012.pdf

After a quick scan, not really worse than what is in place in Washington State. Last time I checked geocaching has not ended in Washington state.

September 30, 2012

I too wish I had gotten out and grabbed caches on DNR lands sooner than I did because I saw this posted on the Indiana DNR website:

Other DNR Policies & Forms

Geocaching - The policy is being revised to allow more flexibility for geocaching on our properties and to ensure that all caches placed are properly permitted. All existing caches will be archived by Groundspeak (geocaching.com) between October 1 - November 1, 2012 and new licenses for the placement of caches will be required. Cache limits on DNR properties will be enforced, but there will be more DNR sites available for caches, particularly those with no containers. The new license form will be available about November 1. Thanks for your patience.

So as far as this goes...there will be NO caches left on any State Parks or other DNR managed properties sometime this coming month. I'm sure it won't be all at once and all on October 1st but there surely will be a change. Some good, some bad. I for one avoided getting permits and placements upon DNR lands like the plague anyway as it just kinda seemed like a chore (which it really wasn't all that bad but just decided against ever messing with them). Also, there will probably be (hopefully) something done about some of the older caches in trying to preserve some of them but that's just a hopeful wish. I'm kinda with redneck on this one though...I enjoyed doing the bushwacking thing to find some caches....I just hope that they don't adopt any more stringent rules & regulations stating that off trail traffic of any sort is off limits on all DNR managed lands in an effort much like what the wilderness reclamation act is/has done. Setting aside the land for preservation is great.....but I've not ever met a cacher driving either a track-hoe or dozer out in the bush tearing things up. Kinda like coach said, I've seen some REALLY bad campsites after deer season is over in and around the Deam Wilderness and surrounding Hoosier National Forest lands. Don't believe me? Take a little trip just north of Robertson cemetery (just a bit North of Maumee area) at the Southfork Marshes and you'll see what I mean. People have actually cut down the metal gates and hauled them off and so they replaced them with huge limestone blocks that were pushed out of the way and people still drive back there with jeeps and such with ruts around 3-3 1/2 ft deep in places.

Anyway, just thought I'd share the posting I found this morning. It's at http://www.in.gov/dnr/parklake/2390.htm if anyone wants to investigate anything any further.

October 1, 2012

I hadn't seen this. They're going to have Geocaching.com archive all caches on DNR properties? We put a lot of work into our 2 earthcaches in Prophetstown SP and if they're archived, I'm not sure I feel like going through all that again. Aside from geocaching, we are regular campers who almost always choose DNR campgrounds over private ones. Not to mention that the spring and fall picnics often bring a good crowd to DNR properties. While I'm certainly not in panic mode, I'd be hard pressed to see this change as the positive that the DNR quote above tries to spin it as.

Mrs. Car54

grammar edit

Edited October 1, 2012 by Car54

October 2, 2012

Perhaps I was inaccurate (hopefully) in reading that.....seems like a second look MAY allow virtuals such as earth caches but who knows for sure. I wouldn't get too worked up until we see what's going to happen for sure. Worrying about something that you have no control over will just give ya a headache and a bellyache and you'll end up on the toilet for most of the day LOL.

Keep our fingers crossed! Enjoy what we have while we have it I say.

October 9, 2012

I got this email a few minutes ago:

Hello

This letter is to let you know that as of November 1st 2012, the Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) will be changing its geocaching policy.

What does this mean for you?

If you own a cache on IDNR land or want to place a cache on IDNR land, you must seek a new geocache permit from IDNR for each of your caches. You must then renew your permit(s) each year while your cache is on IDNR property.

In November, Groundspeak, the Indiana Volunteer Review Team and IDNR will provide more information about this new process. IDNR is currently in the process of creating a geocaching webpage that will include the new policy as well as instructions to apply for the permit. There will also be step by step instructions for current cache owners already placed on IDNR land.

On November 7th, 2012, all caches on IDNR property will be archived. You will then have 30 days to complete the permit and have your cache placement approved by IDNR through the new policy. Once this has been done and you have notified your local volunteer reviewer, the reviewer will enable your cache listing again.

We thank you for your understanding and patience while Groundspeak and the Indiana Volunteer Review Team help IDNR with implementation of its new geocaching policy. We hope to make this transition as smooth as possible.

If you have any questions please send an email to contact@geocaching.com attention Jessica.

Best Regards,

Groundspeak, Inc.

1.1k · October 9, 2012

Although I respect the DNRs right to manage our natural resources, I cannot help but feel these regulations regarding the hobby of Geocaching are more about power and control than resource management. Spring Mill State Park in Lawrence County receives approximately 300,000 visitors a year while one of the more accessible Geocaches in the park, Spring Mill Stonehenge (GCHZ73) averages 53 logs a year. Less accessible caches on trails are visited much less often. Similar comparisons could be made regarding Geocaching related resource issues in State Forest areas when contrasted with forest related issues resulting from other users such as hunters, hikers, bicyclist, etc. When put into perspective, I find it extremely hard to believe that the act of geocaching is responsible for appreciable damage to the natural resources of Indiana.

October 10, 2012

I agree with Indotguy.

As for our earthcaches, I will wait to see the "step by step instructions for current cache owners already placed on IDNR land".

I still believe this will prove to be a net negative for geocaching on taxpayer-owned IDNR property and we are taking that into consideration as we begin to plan our 2013 camping outings.

And for jmbed, I'm not worrying and I have no plans to spend the rest of the day on the "ter-lit" as Archie Bunker called it. :laughing:

Mrs. Car54

October 10, 2012

Too funny Car! I LOVED that show!

October 23, 2012

I completely agree that this is a net negative. I really don't see the point on multi-use type properties that my caches are on. It's ex-stripmine land for peat's sake. So what is the recourse? It seems the rules are already set with no input from the tax-payers.

This is currently on the IDNR site: "Geocaching - The policy is being revised to allow more flexibility for geocaching on our properties and to ensure that all caches placed are properly permitted. All existing caches will be archived by Groundspeak (geocaching.com) between October 1 - November 1, 2012 and new licenses for the placement of caches will be required. Cache limits on DNR properties will be enforced, but there will be more DNR sites available for caches, particularly those with no containers. The new license form will be available about November 1. Thanks for your patience."

2k · October 23, 2012

Nov. 6 is the archive date and DNR now has information up (including the permit) on their website.

http://www.in.gov/dnr/7488.htm

October 23, 2012

So have all cache owners been notfied? We haven't heard anything, so maybe "containerless" caches, ie virts and EC's, won't be archived?

Mrs. Car54

2k · October 23, 2012

I honestly don't know. Virtuals and ECs will only be archived if they're on properties that don't allow them, i.e. Fish and Wildlife properties apparently. Otherwise, if they meet the guidelines they should be fine and not need notification since they're exempt from licensing.

October 24, 2012

This doesn't really affect too many of the state parks. The only one that gets hit really hard is Spring Mill which will lose 10 caches, leaving only 6 for the park. Falls of the Ohio loses all its caches (3 including one that was placed in the first year of geocaching) as it's too small. If they count "containerless" caches in the total for each park, the number of caches lost becomes a bit larger for each park that is over the maximum #. Falls of the Ohio loses 6 ECs as well in that case.

The largest DNR division this affects is the State Forest. The forest farthest north is just above Kokomo and the rest are all mostly around Louisville (within 50 miles for a lot of them) with Bloomington having some close as well. Those cachers in the north won't be affected as there are no state forests up there. The cachers down south will see a large drop in caches based on the maximum # allowable under the new guidelines. We're talking about hundreds of caches. Clark State Forest will lose over 150 caches by itself.

Not trying to wind up anyone but certainly pointing out that southern IN cachers will be affected MUCH more than northern IN cachers. I'm guessing statewide it will result in the archiving of anywhere from 500-1000 caches. It represents 2-4 percent of the total caches in IN.

I am the owner of one of the Oldest Caches in Indiana. It is located on the Falls Of The Ohio State Park. I will be going through the permit process and hopefully be able to keep it in its current location. If not I will be moving the cache elsewhere. As for my other caches on DNR property, it really doesn't matter one way or the other if they are archived. I will just resubmit in a new area following the policy rules. New hides that conform to the IN-DNR policy is not that bad of a deal. Just more new caches to get out and find. Caching is not going away on the DNR properties as long as you follow their rules and permit regulations.

Kayak-Cowboy

October 26, 2012

I just got my contact tonight regarding the DNR postings and Nov 6th date.

Just wanna start by saying this is JUST my opinion....but, I'm hoping there won't be a BUNCH of people around our area (Bloomington, IN) that hurry to post new caches in/around the Monroe Lake area because I have 7 in the Crooked Creek area and there are another dozen or so in the Pine Grove area that are geared toward a more "adventurous" type cacher since there will be pretty strict limits (50 for Monroe Lake and it's the largest in Indiana so other reservoirs will be hit hard). Meaning either Kayak or Canoe are required to access the caches. I just feel that these types are able to be kept because a bunch of "hollow tree" or "beside the downed log/tree" types can be easily put elsewhere such as nearby Hoosier National Forest for ALL people to enjoy. This property, and I'm sure many other reservoirs, (again my opinion) would be greatly enhanced by boat type caches.....

I dunno...anyone else think this is unreasonable? Just seems like you'd go to a reservoir to either fish, swim or boat...seems like the caches should be catered to these types. (and I know not everyone has a boat but many places you can easily rent a canoe nearby).

Sorry for the long rant but just thought I'd throw the idea out there for a discussion....

October 27, 2012

I'm toast: "Caches may not be placed more than 25 feet from developed roads or trails." Mine, and several others in Bluegrass FWA are only accessible via watercraft. Again, Bluegrass is RECLAIMED STRIPMINE. You are not protecting any "sensitive species" on this FWA property. These actions seem to fly in the face of the purpose of having these wild areas—for people to use them and enjoy raw nature! I'll take 1 cache in the woods over 50 "urban" caches.

Bluegrass FWA will be limited to 12 caches. I'm guessing there are at least 70 there.

I don't understand why you can't have an Earthcache on FWA properties. This makes no sense to me.

I love the photo on the DNR page. A huge group of geocachers all happy and smiling. I'm currently not one of them.

Why is there not more outcry over this? Maybe when thousands of popular cache listings disappear in a couple of weeks...

2k · October 27, 2012

I don't understand why you can't have an Earthcache on FWA properties. This makes no sense to me.

Completely agree with you on this point. You can have containers on the FWA property (which I thought was initially not going to be allowed) but you can't have caches without containers. Sounds backwards to me!

October 28, 2012

Permit application sent for GC55E Falls of the Ohio cache.

2k · October 28, 2012

Permit application sent for GC55E Falls of the Ohio cache.

YES! Hoping they allow it to continue on!

1.1k · October 28, 2012

A solution in search of a problem.

1.1k · October 28, 2012

Permit application sent for GC55E Falls of the Ohio cache.

Considering it's size, I'm curious if the DNR will allow any caches in this park.

October 29, 2012

According to their new policy it's above the minimum 200 acres (220 acres actually) so I'm guessing that will be the only one allowed but who knows for sure. They're gonna do whatever they want regarding the interperation of their new policy.

2k · October 29, 2012

According to their new policy it's above the minimum 200 acres (220 acres actually) so I'm guessing that will be the only one allowed but who knows for sure. They're gonna do whatever they want regarding the interperation of their new policy.

Those extra acres are part of the fossil beds and I'm not sure (but really hope) that they count them in the total. Otherwise, the actual acreage is 165 (shoreline is edge of park boundary).

The other part is that parks up to 1000 acres can have up to 5 caches (regardless of acreage) if the property managers allow it. The one per 200 acres applies to parks larger than 1000 acres.

October 29, 2012

We've still not received any communication, so I'm guessing our earthcaches in Prophetstown SP are somehow exempt?? I'm a bit nervous about the timing because we're going to be out of state about 10 days in early November and wouldn't be able to do anything about our caches while we're gone.

Still don't know about virts - just to be safe, we headed down to Portland Arch yesterday to grab the final virt for the Epic History Virtual Challenge.

I, too, don't quite understand why there's not more of an outcry. Sensitive areas, sure, enforce some restrictions. Otherwise, isn't one of the purposes of public lands for the enjoyment and recreation of the public. Mr. Car54 for some time now has tongue-in-cheek felt that the purpose of "public" lands was to keep the land "from" the public.

So will we all still be eager to hold our spring and fall picnics on IDNR property? How about CITO's?

Mrs. Car54

October 31, 2012

I just received an e-mail from the IDNR and it included the following info:

"Earthcaches will NOT be archived - Groundspeak staff we are working with are communicating with the Earthcache team, and they are aware of what's happening. "

I thought I'd share that info for anyone else who might also be wondering as I was.

Mrs. Car54

2k · October 31, 2012

Great to hear. I hope the same thing applies to Virtuals as well, assuming they meet the guidelines as well.

October 31, 2012

Permit application sent for GC55E Falls of the Ohio cache.

Considering it's size, I'm curious if the DNR will allow any caches in this park.

Received approved Geocaching Permit per Property Manager. Good until 12/31/2013.

Geocache GC55E Falls of the Ohio

2k · October 31, 2012

Another great thing to hear is approved!

1.1k · November 6, 2012

Just checked out the Groundspeak Geocache map and was impressed by how nice and clean all the State Forest and DNR properties look without those silly smilies. I had "beat the rush" by archiving my IDNR caches in September. I noticed today that Groundspeak had re-archived them all again (just making sure they are "dead" I suppose). Anyway, I had a great 8 years Geocaching and I'm glad I was able to be a part of it.

November 7, 2012

Call me what you will…. But I don’t have a problem with saying what’s on my mind. I’m even hoping the powers that be within the DNR read this post. That is its primary goal.

I did not like seeing the DNR’s web page promoting Geocaching after the way they have handled Geocaching on PUBLIC property. I believe they do not have a clear picture of who finds, and sets the caches.I think they have been miss informed at some point. Woods caching (to me) does not appear such a family orientated game, I’m thinking that this is what they want it to become. I for one do not think it will be successful to the extent they are hoping it will be. I am 48 with my caching buddy at 40? Children are not part of our team, and I know of many cachers that do not use geocaching in the woods as a family event. Again, I believe they do not have a clear picture of who we are. A fair sized community of adults who love, and respect the outdoors that wishes to include geocaching as part our outdoor experience. Fifty caches per property is not adequate in my opinion.

I agree with Jmebd. Other users of public land cause MUCH more damage than geocachers. Horse’s and hunters are what come to mind first. Their advantage is they have money, power, and more organization than we do to combat change that they may not favor. We don’t, however that can, and hopefully will change. More to come on this subject.

Last thought, the idea that caches can only be placed 25 feet from a trail is ridicules. Caches set at that distance often cause trails to the caches, where as deep woods caches do not. I can’t count how many times I have gone to a cache site only to leave by a different route. So, I ask what’s the harm?

1.1k · November 9, 2012

I today received another correspondence from Groundspeak/IDNR regarding EarthCaches owned by me which are in noncompliance with the new policy and which I am requested to Archive. Since there was no indication of which EarthCache(s) were at issue and considering that in September I had already archived all Geocaches, EarthCaches, and Challenges which I determined to be on IDNR property, I am seriously considering archiving the remaining 55 of my owned items. I was recently advised by someone in Groundspeak not to quit the game now because it make it look like "they win". It seems quite apparent to me "they" already have.

Edited November 9, 2012 by Indotguy

November 9, 2012

Permit application sent for GC55E Falls of the Ohio cache.

I found this cache Labor Day weekend. It would be a shame to lose such history. I'm happy to hear it was approved so quickly! That gives me some hope.

Edited November 9, 2012 by ForTheLoveOfSunrises

November 9, 2012

TheCheatOSX asks why more people aren’t outraged. At the moment, I’m just stunned and in disbelief. We can add depressed to that too. As a deep wood’s cacher, I feel like I’ve been completely misunderstood. As many of you have pointed out, a cache in the middle of nowhere gets very few hits a year, sometimes zero hits a year. It’s not abandoned property. It’s a treasure waiting for someone like me. It’s a point on the map for me to find. That’s so much less harmful than heavy horse feet, a dragged deer carcass, or a young adult party throughout the night. It’s somewhat solitary and meditative. It’s certainly not logging. It’s not mudding (I’ve seen those ruts down at Southfork, Jamie.). I don’t understand how that’s a bad thing.

On the other hand, I’m terminally optimistic and seeing that permits have already been okay’d gives me hope. One of my biggest fears is that poor quality caches (the ones next to a log with a geo-cacher path to them because it’s so easy and obvious) will be all to find on DNR property. It cheapens the game. Seems like that would have been what the DNR should have tried to avoid instead. Anyway, there is hope. Change is painful.

I did get a great idea, though. We could go deep into the woods and find magnificent places, take pictures, and give them the same caption: “A really cool geocache used to be here.”

Now, I’m no longer sad for the moment. I AM MAD. --Sunrises

1.1k · November 9, 2012

Yes, congrats are in order for Kayak and his cache approval. I however am not going to bow and kiss the DNR ring for allowing this one cache on THEIR property, considering all the other excellent Geocaches they have required archived for no good reason. <_<

1.1k · November 9, 2012

Now that the IDNR has done their duty to rid the woods of GeoTrashers, maybe now they can start working on all the abandoned deer stands, beer cans, water bottles, abandoned water jugs, shotgun shell casings, ATV trails, etc. left behind by all the taxpaying "sportsmen" and other recreational abusers of the forest. By the way, those darn white tailed deer are a menace too, eating up all the greenery and leaving those damaging trails everywhere.

November 9, 2012

I love indotguy’s enthusiasm. That’s what’s needed now. I spoke with a friend of mine with this DNR this morning he give me a name of a person that may be helpful in bringing about a tweaking of the new polices.

I told him I was not sure if any changes could be made, his reply,” it depends on how many warm bodies you bring with you”

Now the question is.

How many warm bodies are there who would like to try for a more favorable change in numbers, and placement?

Let me know.

November 10, 2012

Indiana's Smilely Face is GONE!!!! Best experience on DNR land. I am so upset about this all. They made $10 off me for visiting Brown County to go caching this year. Not a single one I found was in poor condition. Did they really consult any actual geocachers on this?

I just don't get it.

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

November 14, 2012

Hopefully this garbage wont happen in MI. :unsure:

Most of our BEST caches are on DNR land...

December 5, 2012

Perhaps someone with Iowa, should have Indiana DNR take a look at this page: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=b4602c93-a3d5-4de3-997d-c2b8ba40a54f and then ask Iowa DNR what Geocaching did for Honey Creek Resort owned by Iowa DNR. All hotel rooms, cabins, cottages, etc. booked and full one year in advance. Also went back just this past November to another event there with over 100 attendees. Take a look at all the caches on DNR property around this place.

Edited December 5, 2012 by doug_hollyNKC

September 3, 2013

It's been nearly a year and I'm still pissed about this. I haven't look for a geocache since this happened. Sigh... I'm coming up on my 10 year geochaching anniversary too.

I've not paid much attention lately. Have there been any other developments to this situation? I see the FWA property I had my caches on doesn't seem to have any now. I guess that's because it's mostly water (reclaimed mine pits) and no real established trails to keep within 25 feet of.

September 3, 2013

No, nothing new to date. I didn't stop caching over this my feeling has been screw them, and I go on. Hoosier National Forest property's still have caches. A lot of local cachers have moved on to their property's.Caching goes on despite the F,ing DNR.

September 4, 2013

I understand the frustration this has caused to many but to give up caching over the DNR rules is only slapping yourself in the face. Get out and explore. That's what geocaching is about. Move on and enjoy life.

September 26, 2013

I understand the frustration this has caused to many but to give up caching over the DNR rules is only slapping yourself in the face. Get out and explore. That's what geocaching is about. Move on and enjoy life.

Agreed, jtb... I have hidden and hunted caches on DNR property since the revised rules have been published, and other than one simple misunderstanding regarding Nature Preserves (partially my fault, partially the fault of the Property Manager), I haven't had *ANY* issues. But then again, the caches I owned before the rule revisions made last year, were already permitted with the DNR and on file with Groundspeak per the DNR's previous set of rules published in 2004/05. Then they all fell within the new guidelines, so re-permitting them was easy peasy. And I've placed a few more on other DNR properties since (with plans to put out more!).

If you're mad at the DNR, don't hunt/hide on their property. Done. There is plenty of other non-DNR land in Indiana. But I, for one, will continue using a resource that our family has enjoyed for many years prior to our introduction to Geocaching in 2003. I guess I will just never understand why people would throw away a perfectly good hobby over this whole thing.

October 20, 2013

Frustrating this year. Going to Brown County again with the kids. We had a great time last year walking the trails and visiting some geocaches. Not this year. Not a single one in the park. It looks as if everyone has said "Forget the DNR" and moved to the National Forest just down the road. Did anyone actually go hunt all of the caches and remove them or is it all Geotrash now?

Amish Hacker

DNR

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment