When there are physical geocaches in National Wilderness Areas, or places sensitive to vandalism?

[Nick - Cacher]

I've noticed that there is a physical traditional geocache located in an area that has since been designated as Wilderness Area. The reason why it may matter, the geocache is advertising an "ungated natural cave", which happens to have cave forms sensitive to vandalism, such as stalactites and stalagmites. Just because it's already very common for caves to be vandalized, and many cave forms take thousands of years to form, in the caving community it's considered bad etiquette to publish coordinates for caves, especially when they're ungated with sensitive cave forms like stalactites or stalagmites.

 

Anyway, my question is what does everyone else here do when you don't want to come across as a tattle tale for getting a geocache removed, but at the same time don't want the reputation of Geocaching.com and geocaching in general to be ruined because there are geocaches placed where revealing a location to the public easily encourages vandalism?

 

Besides that, if it's in an area which has since been established as a National Wilderness Area?

[+cerberus1]

Didn't get an answer on yahoo?

[+cerberus1]

Yeah, I checked...

 

I think any "community" who feels that "others" may destroy/vandalize a sensitive area simply because now they'll go there too is pretty arrogant thinking and simply not true.

If the cave is ungated, the property owner (if they know of it) sure doesn't think it that big a deal.

 

Curious...

How exactly would simply revealing it's location encourage vandalism?

Are you now saying that geocachers can't be trusted too?

Do you have any idea how many hundreds of ungated caves are listed on this site?

Edited March 11, 2013 by cerberus1

[Nick - Cacher]

Yeah, I checked...

 

I think any "community" who feels that "others" may destroy/vandalize a sensitive area simply because now they'll go there too is pretty arrogant thinking and simply not true.

If the cave is ungated, the property owner (if they know of it) sure doesn't think it that big a deal.

 

Curious...

How exactly would simply revealing it's location encourage vandalism?

Are you now saying that geocachers can't be trusted too?

Do you have any idea how many hundreds of ungated caves are listed on this site?

 

Are you suggesting that encouraging people to place geocaches on National Wilderness Areas after a federal law was passed is good publicity for Geocaching.com?

[+cerberus1]

If anything, I'm suggesting you have an axe to grind or point to make.

Not finding it quick enough on yahoo answers, you posted here.

 

- So what's the real story?

[Nick - Cacher]

If anything, I'm suggesting you have an axe to grind or point to make.

Not finding it quick enough on yahoo answers, you posted here.

 

- So what's the real story?

 

How this affects all of us, and you, is when Geocaching.com gains a reputation for causing damage to multiple landowners' property, it's not good for the geocaching community.

 

It's not good for Geocaching.com because they're a private business, who'll make less money when more laws are passed against geocaching in general because of some who create a bad reputation for them. It's also bad for the geocachers in general, because more laws restricting us isn't good when vandalism is encouraged.

[Nick - Cacher]

You're asking me what the real story is???

 

Curious...

How exactly would simply revealing it's location encourage vandalism?

 

You may have noticed that on Waymarking.com, it says that the rules on waymarks for caves is they will not be published if they're ungated wild caves with sensitive cave forms inside (such as stalactites/stalagmites).

 

As far as why publishing coordinates for the general public is not good for wild ungated caves with sensitive cave formations inside, it's extremely extremely common for caves to be vandalized, and it's very tempting for a person new to caving to reach and pull on a stalactite to keep as a souvenir. Some of the many examples of cave vandalism:

 

- Bloomington Cave near St. George, Utah, is a big tectonic cave. Before a gate was put on it, it was a party place for teenagers who would graffiti all over inside and went to the bathroom all over the place. Finally after much clean up, a gate was placed over the entrance. How do people graffiti a place like that other than when the location is broadcasted out to the public.

 

- Hansen Cave on Timpanogos Cave Monument property in Utah was looted for many of its stalactites and other cave formations, until it was turned into a protected National Monument. Luckily, Timpanogos Cave wasn't discovered until later, so that cave within Monument boundaries was left much untouched. Remember, unlike if teenagers spray paint city hall, it takes tens of thousands of years for these delicate cave features inside to form.

 

- Logan Cave up Logan Canyon, Utah, used to be gated part of the year because a species of bat would hibernate part of the year. Then someone thought that killing the bats would remove the reason to have a gate part of the year. The guy probably thought he was a genius for killing bats, but it back fired, and now the gate is closed all year round.

 

- Neffs Canyon Cave, the 13th deepest cave in the United States, located in the eastern part of Salt Lake City, Utah, has had vandals remove the gate on the entrance more than once. Whenever the general public finds out about a cave, things like that, or regular vandalism, happen. It doesn't mean people shouldn't know about the cave, but rather when it's broadcast out to the public like that.

[+cerberus1]

I've noticed that there is a physical traditional geocache located in an area that has since been designated as Wilderness Area. The reason why it may matter, the geocache is advertising an "ungated natural cave", which happens to have cave forms sensitive to vandalism, such as stalactites and stalagmites. Just because it's already very common for caves to be vandalized, and many cave forms take thousands of years to form, in the caving community it's considered bad etiquette to publish coordinates for caves, especially when they're ungated with sensitive cave forms like stalactites or stalagmites.

 

Anyway, my question is what does everyone else here do when you don't want to come across as a tattle tale for getting a geocache removed, but at the same time don't want the reputation of Geocaching.com and geocaching in general to be ruined because there are geocaches placed where revealing a location to the public easily encourages vandalism?

 

Besides that, if it's in an area which has since been established as a National Wilderness Area?

"The reason why it may matter," and "Besides that," shows that your main concern is about this cave, with the NWA as secondary.

The National Wilderness Area briefly mentioned before and end is simply a means to bring the body of your question (the cave) more into your favor (hopefully) with others.

[+Spunkie92]

It sounds to me like there's some backstory here. I feel an argument coming along.

 

My 2 cents: in the (brief) time I've been caching, I've seen areas well taken care of, no vandalizing that I've come in contact with. And the one other couple I met was very very nice.

[+cerberus1]

Sorry, but the notion that geocaching (and it's related coordinates) are somehow responsible for, or encouraging vandalism, is bizarre thinking and I'll have to end this little spat now and take a nap.

[Nick - Cacher]

Sorry, but the notion that geocaching (and it's related coordinates) are somehow responsible for, or encouraging vandalism, is bizarre thinking and I'll have to end this little spat now and take a nap.

 

Okay, I just sent something in to "Contact Geocaching.com" with reference to the cache. If they don't do anything about it, I guess next I'll have to contact the part of the Federal Government who enforces the no caches on wilderness areas. I'm not going to let the reputation of geocaching be ruined just because some place geocaches in fragile areas, and on wilderness area which is against the geocaching rules anyway. There are some cachers who don't want to be associated with caches which ruin our reputation!

[+Condorito]

Sorry, but the notion that geocaching (and it's related coordinates) are somehow responsible for, or encouraging vandalism, is bizarre thinking and I'll have to end this little spat now and take a nap.

 

Okay, I just sent something in to "Contact Geocaching.com" with reference to the cache. If they don't do anything about it, I guess next I'll have to contact the part of the Federal Government who enforces the no caches on wilderness areas. I'm not going to let the reputation of geocaching be ruined just because some place geocaches in fragile areas, and on wilderness area which is against the geocaching rules anyway. There are some cachers who don't want to be associated with caches which ruin our reputation!

Can we see the actual cache in question? I think if we had the link we could all see it it would help a lot...

And why would GS say no to this cache? The CO could get permission from the national park authority... And anyway, isn't geocaching about finding new places and visiting great hidden gems? If we are going to be so picky, we might as well stop geocaching altogether, as at least one person could find a problem for most geocachers. We might say that people are being encouraged to vandalize when you place a lpc. They might vandalize the lamppost...

[+sparklefingers]

Sorry, but the notion that geocaching (and it's related coordinates) are somehow responsible for, or encouraging vandalism, is bizarre thinking and I'll have to end this little spat now and take a nap.

 

Okay, I just sent something in to "Contact Geocaching.com" with reference to the cache. If they don't do anything about it, I guess next I'll have to contact the part of the Federal Government who enforces the no caches on wilderness areas. I'm not going to let the reputation of geocaching be ruined just because some place geocaches in fragile areas, and on wilderness area which is against the geocaching rules anyway. There are some cachers who don't want to be associated with caches which ruin our reputation!

 

You're going the right way to upsetting your fellow cachers. They are not silly and will not vandalise the area. And muggles do not come onto this site as they don't overly know it exists. If they do they become cachers and treat areas with respect.

 

All I am going to say is other cachers have done a lot less and ended up with their own caches going missing. (Not that I agree with that, just saying)

 

Edit to add

 

You're not treating other cachers with respect. Or even the owner of the cache with respect by going over his/hers head. So why would they want to treat you with respect further down the line.

Edited March 11, 2013 by sparklefingers

[+briansnat]

Are you suggesting that encouraging people to place geocaches on National Wilderness Areas after a federal law was passed is good publicity for Geocaching.com?

 

I wasn't aware that a federal law was passed regarding geocaches in designated wilderness areas. Can you link to it? It will certainly change my understanding of the rules regarding geocaches in WAs.

[+JL_HSTRE]

Was the cache placed before the the area became a National Wildlife area? If so then it presumably just needs to have the CO ask the new land managers for permission. If it was placed after it was already a National Wildlife area then presumably the Reviewer would have required permission for placement. In either case, a simply message to the Reviewer should solve the issue.

 

The cave is irrelevant if the land managers give the cache permission to be there.

[Keystone]

- Bloomington Cave near St. George, Utah, is a big tectonic cave. Before a gate was put on it, it was a party place for teenagers who would graffiti all over inside and went to the bathroom all over the place.

Were any of these teens geocaching? If so, can you point us to the relevant cache page?

 

Logan Cave up Logan Canyon, Utah, used to be gated part of the year because a species of bat would hibernate part of the year. Then someone thought that killing the bats would remove the reason to have a gate part of the year. The guy probably thought he was a genius for killing bats, but it back fired, and now the gate is closed all year round.

Was the bat-killing genius geocaching? If so, can you point us to the relevant cache page?

 

- Neffs Canyon Cave, the 13th deepest cave in the United States, located in the eastern part of Salt Lake City, Utah, has had vandals remove the gate on the entrance more than once.

Were any of these vandals geocaching? If so, can you point us to the relevant cache page?

[+Spunkie92]

How are you to enjoy nature if you can't enter it? If there's an interesting, ungated cave, it's pretty darn likely that it's posted online somewhere. Most vandals (teens specifically) aren't gong to hike out just to spray paint rocks, they can do that behind Walmart. Geocachers are known for taking care of their trails and areas. Having that cache archived means less people will be able to enjoy the beauty of the cave.

[+rjb43nh]

I wasn't aware that a federal law was passed regarding geocaches in designated wilderness areas. Can you link to it? It will certainly change my understanding of the rules regarding geocaches in WAs.

 

There may be some areas where the regulations differ so you would have to go to the official site for that federal land manager and check the rule and regulations. In 2005 a new forest plan made one of my caches in a Federally Designated Wilderness Area in the White Mountain National Forest in NH illegal and it was removed. The USFS also removed all blazing and markers from an unofficial trail that had been there for years so geocaches weren't targeted. The end result was I worked with the USFS and our local reviewer for a while to screen submitted caches that could be in non-wilderness areas of the National Forest to see if there were any concerns. The Wilderness Supervisor was very willing to help in reviewing potential locations and this process worked well for all concerned.

 

Brian, check http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5363715.pdf in the upper right of the 3rd page for "The following restrictions apply to each of the six Wildernesses on the White Mountain National Forest:" where it states: "No storing of equipment, personal property, or supplies, including geocaching and letter boxing." Note that these regulations and rules apply to Federally Designated Wilderness Areas and not just areas that may be called 'wilderness' but aren't designated under the act. The 'abandoned property' phrase is generally applied to geocaches if they aren't specifically mentioned. The New England Wilderness Act of 2006 ( https://bulk.resource.org/gpo.gov/laws/109/publ382.109.pdf ) describes the areas in NE and the Wilderness Act of 1964 ( http://www.wilderness.net/nwps/legisact ) describe the background of all areas.

 

National Parks are entirely different and their policy is basically a blanket prohibition of all geocaches. Note that some of the regulations did specifically prohibit both physical and virtual caches.

[BlueRajah]

There are a handful here in Utah in Wilderness areas. Some cachers sought and got permission from the managing agencies, most were placed before Utah reviewers stopped publishing them, and others slipped in at some point.

 

We try and flag all of those that now appear. Conversations with some of the managing agencies have the "we don't care, just don't publish more without our permission, and we may ask you to remove them at any time"

 

They are left alone, and in place. If and when managing agencies contact us, they are dealt with. I have dealt with a few frauds wanting caches removed, including someone claiming to be from a National Park Service. However I had just spoke with the land manager by phone the day before about some Earthcaches. Most wilderness caches get visited less than 2-3 times per year, unless they are on trails. There are just not enough in the area that want to put that much work into finding a remote cache.

 

So... If you have a concern, feel free to contact your reviewer (me). If you have visited it and it appears there are specific issues, let me know.

[+The Jester]

... publishing coordinates for the general public ...

You keep repeating this phrase, which isn't true. You have to be a member before seeing the coordinates, which is not the general public.

[Clan Riffster]

You may have noticed that on Waymarking.com, it says that the rules on waymarks for caves is they will not be published if they're ungated wild caves with sensitive cave forms inside (such as stalactites/stalagmites).

You do realize that these 'rules' did not come from Groundspeak, right?

They came from whoever created the Waymark category. This speaks more to their particular bias against sharing locations of unobstructed caves than it does to actually protecting a particular cave. Letting in the 'unwashed masses' strikes directly against their inherent desire to protect the little secrets they keep.

 

Posting stories about non-caching knuckleheads damaging caves, and suggesting that this behavior is likely to come from cachers if they are allowed access to your 'secrets' is both alarming and ignorant, not to mention insulting to anyone who has ever created an account here. While there are certain remarkable exceptions, as a general rule, cachers are far better stewards of Momma Nature than other outdoor hobbyists.

[+The A-Team]

...How do people graffiti a place like that other than when the location is broadcasted out to the public...

Three words:

Word of mouth.

[+hzoi]

Brian, check http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5363715.pdf in the upper right of the 3rd page for "The following restrictions apply to each of the six Wildernesses on the White Mountain National Forest:" where it states: "No storing of equipment, personal property, or supplies, including geocaching and letter boxing."

 

It does sound like they are overall restricted from being in those areas. However, per BlueRajah's post, it appears they are aware of, and not overly concerned with, the extant caches.

 

No one wants to be "that guy," but we don't want geocaching to get the proverbial black eye over ignoring rules. So, nick - cacher, I think your heart is in the right place. But it does appear that this situation is under control. If there are other caches you're concerned about, it looks like you can contact BlueRajah regarding those.

 

National Parks are entirely different and their policy is basically a blanket prohibition of all geocaches. Note that some of the regulations did specifically prohibit both physical and virtual caches.

 

Not true at all.

 

I will grant you that the National Park Service has taken a cautionary, even restrictive, restrictive approach to geocaching overall. Take a look at the NPS policy on GPS related activities. It has overall guidelines on how to handle geocaches and other GPS-related activities. Other than that, it delegates the authority to approve or deny geocaches to individual park superintendents at their local level.

 

I had heard stories about how hard it was to get caches approved in national parks, and I didn't bother trying. Then I decided, heck with it, I want to get a listing going. It was not much different from my experiences dealing with city parks and three different state parks, other than that it took a little longer. Total time from concept to publication of our two ECs at Dry Tortugas National Park was about 5-6 weeks and involved about five phone calls and five emails.

 

edit: confusing posters

Edited March 11, 2013 by hzoi

[+hzoi]

...How do people graffiti a place like that other than when the location is broadcasted out to the public...

How did people find out about places before geocaching? By finding them and telling their friends.

 

Many geocaches have been placed in "cool spots" that only the locals used to know about. Which is one of my favorite aspects of geocaching: getting off the beaten path and finding (or showing people) places that you'd never know about unless someone told you or you stumbled upon them.

 

We as geocachers need to be sensitive to how our activity impacts places like this. But don't think for a second that removing geocaches is going to stop people from visiting, or even vandalizing, these places. It just means that no one will be hunting for that box anymore. And possibly that responsible geocachers will no longer visit and pick the place up, leaving non-cacher Billy Bob Nosepicker and his friends to get liquored up and trash the place as much as they want.

[BlueRajah]

 

National Parks are entirely different and their policy is basically a blanket prohibition of all geocaches. Note that some of the regulations did specifically prohibit both physical and virtual caches.

 

Not true at all.

 

I will grant you that the National Park Service has taken a cautionary, even restrictive, restrictive approach to geocaching overall. Take a look at the NPS policy on GPS related activities. It has overall guidelines on how to handle geocaches and other GPS-related activities. Other than that, it delegates the authority to approve or deny geocaches to individual park superintendents at their local level.

 

 

For those that were at the Earthcache mega event in Main last fall, there was a presentation from the NPS. The ban is not on caches in parks, the ban is on a cacher placing a physical cache without the parks knowledge, or permission. Parks can place caches, or work with cachers to place caches at the discretion of the Chief Ranger at the park.

[Mr.Yuck]

 

National Parks are entirely different and their policy is basically a blanket prohibition of all geocaches. Note that some of the regulations did specifically prohibit both physical and virtual caches.

 

Not true at all.

 

I will grant you that the National Park Service has taken a cautionary, even restrictive, restrictive approach to geocaching overall. Take a look at the NPS policy on GPS related activities. It has overall guidelines on how to handle geocaches and other GPS-related activities. Other than that, it delegates the authority to approve or deny geocaches to individual park superintendents at their local level.

 

 

For those that were at the Earthcache mega event in Main last fall, there was a presentation from the NPS. The ban is not on caches in parks, the ban is on a cacher placing a physical cache without the parks knowledge, or permission. Parks can place caches, or work with cachers to place caches at the discretion of the Chief Ranger at the park.

 

Yes, I'm staying in Michigan for MWGB in July, I've already scoped out the area, and there's a small, relatively recently created National Park in Michigan that has a cache.

 

Oh, and I've heard many comments along the lines of the OP from cavers over the years how they "don't wan't people there", due to either vandalism, or violating the habitat of certain bat species, etc...

[+hzoi]

 

National Parks are entirely different and their policy is basically a blanket prohibition of all geocaches. Note that some of the regulations did specifically prohibit both physical and virtual caches.

 

Not true at all.

 

I will grant you that the National Park Service has taken a cautionary, even restrictive, restrictive approach to geocaching overall. Take a look at the NPS policy on GPS related activities. It has overall guidelines on how to handle geocaches and other GPS-related activities. Other than that, it delegates the authority to approve or deny geocaches to individual park superintendents at their local level.

 

 

For those that were at the Earthcache mega event in Main last fall, there was a presentation from the NPS. The ban is not on caches in parks, the ban is on a cacher placing a physical cache without the parks knowledge, or permission. Parks can place caches, or work with cachers to place caches at the discretion of the Chief Ranger at the park.

 

And for those who weren't, here's a Latitude 47 post that sums up the presentation. Which I definitely wished I'd known about before I contacted the park -- that and the NPS guidelines I linked to above. Could have saved a few phone calls and made it easier to talk to the park staff.

[Nick - Cacher]

Sorry, but the notion that geocaching (and it's related coordinates) are somehow responsible for, or encouraging vandalism, is bizarre thinking and I'll have to end this little spat now and take a nap.

 

Okay, I just sent something in to "Contact Geocaching.com" with reference to the cache. If they don't do anything about it, I guess next I'll have to contact the part of the Federal Government who enforces the no caches on wilderness areas. I'm not going to let the reputation of geocaching be ruined just because some place geocaches in fragile areas, and on wilderness area which is against the geocaching rules anyway. There are some cachers who don't want to be associated with caches which ruin our reputation!

Can we see the actual cache in question? I think if we had the link we could all see it it would help a lot...

And why would GS say no to this cache? The CO could get permission from the national park authority... And anyway, isn't geocaching about finding new places and visiting great hidden gems? If we are going to be so picky, we might as well stop geocaching altogether, as at least one person could find a problem for most geocachers. We might say that people are being encouraged to vandalize when you place a lpc. They might vandalize the lamppost...

 

You asked for the link to the cache? First, some pictures of Goshute Cave and how sensitive it is:

 

Stalactites are very tempting for brand new cavers to break off and keep as souvenirs, Which is against the law if the cave is on federal land. They took thousands of years to form and thus irreplaceable, unlike if someone damages a lamp post because of posting coordinates publicly.

 

 

Flowstone which also took thousands of years to form, sensitive to oil from skin

 

These pictures found at The Death of Goshute Cave

 

Link to the geocache in question 4th of July (Goshute Cave) This geocache in the "Additional Hints" tells you to check out this sensitive cave, and the cache picture posted by the cache owner hints at going to it.

 

The geocache was "placed" before it was designated Goshute Canyon Wilderness in 2006, on BLM property. The BLM doesn't approve of geocaches being placed in designated National Wilderness Areas or Wilderness Study Areas within BLM boundaries BLM on geocaches in Wilderness Areas (at bottom)

[Nick - Cacher]

Are you suggesting that encouraging people to place geocaches on National Wilderness Areas after a federal law was passed is good publicity for Geocaching.com?

 

I wasn't aware that a federal law was passed regarding geocaches in designated wilderness areas. Can you link to it? It will certainly change my understanding of the rules regarding geocaches in WAs.

 

Earlier I called the Superintendent's Office of the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Utah, and talked to Kathy Jo Polluck, about wanting to place geocaches within that National Forest. She said she would contact a law enforcement officer who is in charge of citations. I called her back a few days later and she said she found out the officers earlier specifically had a meeting regarding geocaches, that they are not to cite people for littering if they place geocaches. She said an exception to the rule is it's generally accepted everywhere that geocaches within designated National Wildernesses can be cited for.

 

Many places to justify not having geocaches in their wilderness area will also point out how Federal Law specifically says, "no structure or installation within any such area". Wilderness Act of 1964 If it's not an installation, then it's the abandonment of property or litter, which is illegal in most Forest Service and BLM areas. Since many cachers claim geocaching shouldn't be cited as litter or abandonment of property because caches are permanent and maintained by the owner, then many can consider them installations.

[BlueRajah]

Speak to the owner. Let them know your concerns.

 

Speak to your reviewer or the reviewer of that area, if you feel that the problems are urgent and not being addressed.

 

Regardless of how you interpret the law, the land manager does not always interpret them the same way. Sometimes harder sometimes not. Land managers know about caching, many have accounts online and follow what is going on. I know most, BLM forest service, and National Parks do in Utah. Many watch what is taking place.

 

Yes some are fragile. You point out a particular cache, and I could see 12 or 13 cachers that have logged it since 2004, and none in the last 2+ years. If there was a stampede of cachers destroying the area, the BLM, Forest Service, and/or reviewers would deal with the cache.

 

I echo Keystones post http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=308453&view=findpost&p=5219619 Especially in the mountain/desert west, caches that far off the beaten path get few visitors. Most get info of these "special locations" from other spots on the internet, not from caching.

Edited March 11, 2013 by BlueRajah

[+J Grouchy]

Link to the geocache in question 4th of July (Goshute Cave) This geocache in the "Additional Hints" tells you to check out this sensitive cave, and the cache picture posted by the cache owner hints at going to it.

 

The geocache was "placed" before it was designated Goshute Canyon Wilderness in 2006, on BLM property. The BLM doesn't approve of geocaches being placed in designated National Wilderness Areas or Wilderness Study Areas within BLM boundaries BLM on geocaches in Wilderness Areas (at bottom)

 

Last found 2-1/2 years ago...with log for that date simply reading "cool".

[+The A-Team]

Most get info of these "special locations" from other spots on the internet, not from caching.

Exactly. Knowing the name of the cave in question, a couple of minutes of Googling resulted in a map of where it's located. I'm sure if I did a bit more sleuthing I could find some geo-tagged photos that would give a set of coordinates of at least a spot along the access to the cave, or even at the entrance.

 

If the OP is on a crusade to protect the cave from the unwashed masses, geocachers are the least of their worries.

[Mr.Yuck]

Most get info of these "special locations" from other spots on the internet, not from caching.

Exactly. Knowing the name of the cave in question, a couple of minutes of Googling resulted in a map of where it's located. I'm sure if I did a bit more sleuthing I could find some geo-tagged photos that would give a set of coordinates of at least a spot along the access to the cave, or even at the entrance.

 

If the OP is on a crusade to protect the cave from the unwashed masses, geocachers are the least of their worries.

 

Well, I'm probably going to tick off the OP, but I said in my first post I've seen that type of attitude, for lack of a better term, from cavers in the past. The link he posted is to a blog post called "the death of Goshute cave". I think there's a little hyperbole going on there. There was no "death", the cave was not destroyed by the airsoft gun wielding Boy Scouts. Sure, they were inconsiderate, and they are their leaders need some spleunking education.

[+geodarts]

It is good to recognize that caves are unique places - even earthcaches in North American caves require special approval from the National Speleological Society before they will be published and governmental agencies have closed many caves due to White Nose Syndrome. In general I would agree that caves may not be the best place to leave a box regardless of whether cachers tread lightly (which I often do not find to be the case) or whether people can find out about locations through other means. But there are ways that specific concerns can be addressed and certainly the advice given from BlueRajah offers a reasonable approach.

Edited March 12, 2013 by geodarts

[+briansnat]

- Bloomington Cave near St. George, Utah, is a big tectonic cave. Before a gate was put on it, it was a party place for teenagers who would graffiti all over inside and went to the bathroom all over the place.

Were any of these teens geocaching? If so, can you point us to the relevant cache page?

 

Logan Cave up Logan Canyon, Utah, used to be gated part of the year because a species of bat would hibernate part of the year. Then someone thought that killing the bats would remove the reason to have a gate part of the year. The guy probably thought he was a genius for killing bats, but it back fired, and now the gate is closed all year round.

Was the bat-killing genius geocaching? If so, can you point us to the relevant cache page?

 

- Neffs Canyon Cave, the 13th deepest cave in the United States, located in the eastern part of Salt Lake City, Utah, has had vandals remove the gate on the entrance more than once.

Were any of these vandals geocaching? If so, can you point us to the relevant cache page?

 

They may or may not have been geocaching, but they were definitely caving.

[+Spunkie92]

They may or may not have been geocaching, but they were definitely caving.

 

Sounds to me like you need to keep the cavers out of caves

[+briansnat]

I wasn't aware that a federal law was passed regarding geocaches in designated wilderness areas. Can you link to it? It will certainly change my understanding of the rules regarding geocaches in WAs.

 

There may be some areas where the regulations differ so you would have to go to the official site for that federal land manager and check the rule and regulations. In 2005 a new forest plan made one of my caches in a Federally Designated Wilderness Area in the White Mountain National Forest in NH illegal and it was removed. The USFS also removed all blazing and markers from an unofficial trail that had been there for years so geocaches weren't targeted. The end result was I worked with the USFS and our local reviewer for a while to screen submitted caches that could be in non-wilderness areas of the National Forest to see if there were any concerns. The Wilderness Supervisor was very willing to help in reviewing potential locations and this process worked well for all concerned.

 

Brian, check http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5363715.pdf in the upper right of the 3rd page for "The following restrictions apply to each of the six Wildernesses on the White Mountain National Forest:" where it states: "No storing of equipment, personal property, or supplies, including geocaching and letter boxing." Note that these regulations and rules apply to Federally Designated Wilderness Areas and not just areas that may be called 'wilderness' but aren't designated under the act. The 'abandoned property' phrase is generally applied to geocaches if they aren't specifically mentioned. The New England Wilderness Act of 2006 ( https://bulk.resource.org/gpo.gov/laws/109/publ382.109.pdf ) describes the areas in NE and the Wilderness Act of 1964 ( http://www.wilderness.net/nwps/legisact ) describe the background of all areas.

 

National Parks are entirely different and their policy is basically a blanket prohibition of all geocaches. Note that some of the regulations did specifically prohibit both physical and virtual caches.

 

A local regulation is not the same thing as a federal law. I asked about a federal law that address geocaching. Fact is that there are caches in some wilderness areas and they are often there with with the knowledge and occasionally the express permission of the managing agency.

[+briansnat]

They may or may not have been geocaching, but they were definitely caving.

 

Sounds to me like you need to keep the cavers out of caves

Precisely my point.

[+geodarts]

A local regulation is not the same thing as a federal law. I asked about a federal law that address geocaching. Fact is that there are caches in some wilderness areas and they are often there with with the knowledge and occasionally the express permission of the managing agency.

 

It may, of course, have the effect of federal law, which is why Congress authorizes regulations to be made in compliance with various administrative procedures. However, I certainly agree that there is no national regulation or Congressional law that forbids caching in wilderness areas. Some areas have a blanket policy that prohibits caching in wilderness areas. Some, like the BLM in Oregon state that caching in designated wilderness land or or in fragile areas (such as caves) present special concerns and may require a "letter of agreement" with special stipulations.

 

For that matter, some national forests require special permits for any cache, others require that caches be moved periodically, others have no stated policy. But in any event, I am not aware of any wildnerness area where a cache could currently be placed without express permission. Do you know of any?

 

As to federal law, I don't think Congress passed a law restricting dogs on certain federal lands in my area, but a friend ended up in federal court after unknowingly violating a local regulation. Caching is like most other activity on federal lands, you need to know your local rules.

Edited March 12, 2013 by geodarts

[4wheelin_fool]

I suppose some will be happy only when all caves are closed off to all visitors.

 

Years ago I discovered a cave in the Smoky Mountain National Park. There were large metal bars about 30 feet in, which blocked most of it off. However I discovered that one of the horizontal bars near the floor was missing, with a few large rocks piled in front. I noticed that it left a hole about 18 inches wide and a foot deep, just enough to slide in feet first, so I did. It was an amazing exploration, but I didn't stay long as I was nervous. Didn't touch anything and was careful to not even leave footprints. I covered it back up with rocks as it was when I found it and left. When I returned a few years later the section was welded up and there was no way for anyone to enter, and a few years after that I noticed a virtual cache was listed there.

 

I suppose someone could get upset at me for going in, saying that it was a sensitive area, despite not touching anything, but it's not really. In the 1920's it was a commercial cave and the Gregory family was charging 50 cents a piece for folks to tour the cave. They even had plank walkways and battery powered lighting. Then during the cold war it was a fallout shelter complete with stocked food and water with a rated capacity of 1000 persons. In the 50's when the park service had a amphitheater just outside and did programs concerning the cove and the park service. In 1954 the Missionary Baptist Church had services in the main room. But now? Nobody enters. It is blocked off and preserved from everyone, despite hundreds or even thousands having entered it for a hundred years or more. I really don't like to see areas like that vandalized, but some of the preservation efforts go a little overboard. No geocacher has visited the OP's cave in question for 2 1/2 years, but suddenly it's a concern?

[+Condorito]

I suppose some will be happy only when all caves are closed off to all visitors.

 

Years ago I discovered a cave in the Smoky Mountain National Park. There were large metal bars about 30 feet in, which blocked most of it off. However I discovered that one of the horizontal bars near the floor was missing, with a few large rocks piled in front. I noticed that it left a hole about 18 inches wide and a foot deep, just enough to slide in feet first, so I did. It was an amazing exploration, but I didn't stay long as I was nervous. Didn't touch anything and was careful to not even leave footprints. I covered it back up with rocks as it was when I found it and left. When I returned a few years later the section was welded up and there was no way for anyone to enter, and a few years after that I noticed a virtual cache was listed there.

 

Sounds cool as...

 

I suppose someone could get upset at me for going in, saying that it was a sensitive area, despite not touching anything, but it's not really. In the 1920's it was a commercial cave and the Gregory family was charging 50 cents a piece for folks to tour the cave. They even had plank walkways and battery powered lighting. Then during the cold war it was a fallout shelter complete with stocked food and water with a rated capacity of 1000 persons. In the 50's when the park service had a amphitheater just outside and did programs concerning the cove and the park service. In 1954 the Missionary Baptist Church had services in the main room. But now? Nobody enters. It is blocked off and preserved from everyone, despite hundreds or even thousands having entered it for a hundred years or more. I really don't like to see areas like that vandalized, but some of the preservation efforts go a little overboard. No geocacher has visited the OP's cave in question for 2 1/2 years, but suddenly it's a concern?

this is funny, just goes to show how some conservationists take things a little too far...

[Clan Riffster]

I suppose some will be happy only when all caves are closed off to all visitors.

No, not all visitors.

That would prevent their little secret caving society from visiting.

Then they wouldn't have anything to feel smug about.

[+K13]

Some cachers found out about the cave from others, then found the cache near by......

 

Found With New Mexico

 

View Log new mexico

 

Premium Member

 

 

967

 

Found it 07/10/2010 Some friends brought us to the cave so we had to get the cache while we were in the area. We will be back to explore more of the cave. TFTC,SL

 

[Andronicus]

This is the exact kind of thing that prevents new generations from caring about the wilderness. When you can't see it, you don't care to protect it. These kinds of efforts actualy backfire years down the road. When you protect a cave from everyone, what are you protecting it for? Wow, the staligmite too 1000 of years to form, but what good are they if no one can see them? They add no value if no one can admire them.

[+cerberus1]

I suppose some will be happy only when all caves are closed off to all visitors.

No, not all visitors.

That would prevent their little secret caving society from visiting.

Then they wouldn't have anything to feel smug about.

I (sadly) have to agree...

Unfortunately, few good caves today can be visited without joining a grotto.

They've bullied their way to having many caves open only to them, as they say they're protecting them.

It's simply they're own private play area, really.

[Andronicus]

...Link to the geocache in question 4th of July (Goshute Cave) This geocache in the "Additional Hints" tells you to check out this sensitive cave, and the cache picture posted by the cache owner hints at going to it.

...

That is not what the additional hints says. They are just answering everyones question "Where is the cave the cache title mentions?" This cache is not even at the cave. It is near the cave, and apparently not near enough that you can even see the cave.

 

Much ado about nothing!

[Nick - Cacher]

I (sadly) have to agree...

Unfortunately, few good caves today can be visited without joining a grotto.

They've bullied their way to having many caves open only to them, as they say they're protecting them.

It's simply they're own private play area, really.

 

If you're going to say they want them for themselves and are elitists, then maybe you can explain why they take non-grotto members to caves?

 

That doesn't make any sense why they do that then?

[Clan Riffster]

I (sadly) have to agree...

Unfortunately, few good caves today can be visited without joining a grotto.

They've bullied their way to having many caves open only to them, as they say they're protecting them.

It's simply they're own private play area, really.

 

If you're going to say they want them for themselves and are elitists, then maybe you can explain why they take non-grotto members to caves?

To show off?

Being smug does little for one's self esteem unless you have someone to flaunt your elitist status to.

[Nick - Cacher]

I used to think it was weird how they don't publish coordinates for caves, until I discovered that they're not actually against people knowing where caves are at. Basically, I emailed a caving group who has a large database of GPS coordinates for caves. I was told because of how common vandalism is, they're not actually against people knowing where they're at. Instead, it's considered good etiquette to rather than telling someone the cave is, show them in person where it's at. Then that person to show the next in person, and so on down, as a way to limit cave vandalism to make it so future generations can enjoy these caves too!

 

The same goes for if someone is wanting GPS coordinates. It's not bad for someone to have coordinates, but rather considered bad form to tell another or to publish them online. Instead, it's considered good etiquette to bring the curious people in person to the cave, then they can use a GPS to get their own coordinates, and so on for the people in the future who may be interested.

 

I used to not understand what the big deal was, until I found out just how common cave vandalism is, and how it would be neat if we'd still have caves worth visiting in the future. Along with that, quite a few caves have had cement poured into their entrances to seal them because someone died inside, thus ruining it for future cavers (why many would rather take you there in person rather than give you directions to the cave).

[Nick - Cacher]

I (sadly) have to agree...

Unfortunately, few good caves today can be visited without joining a grotto.

They've bullied their way to having many caves open only to them, as they say they're protecting them.

It's simply they're own private play area, really.

 

If you're going to say they want them for themselves and are elitists, then maybe you can explain why they take non-grotto members to caves?

To show off?

Being smug does little for one's self esteem unless you have someone to flaunt your elitist status to.

 

First of all, I'm not a grotto member, or part of a caving group.

 

However, I can tell you one of the big reasons they also don't publish coordinates is often they get a key from the government to go inside gated caves on Federal Land. Since it's FEDERAL LAW that the Federal Government is not supposed to give out locations of caves on Federal Land as a conservation measure (unless it's reasonable to believe no harm will come from it), caving clubs need to have a reputation with the government of not giving out locations publicly, if they want to continue going to these caves which require a key. (And yes, it's pretty common that gated caves have their gates removed by vandals, so the Federal Government often does not appreciate coordinates being published publicly)

 

The Federal Law: Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988, section 4304, specific wording from UScode.house.gov

The Federal Government can give out locations if it could help with conservation, such as how the Carlsbad Caverns National Park is published, and became a National Park long before the law was made.

Edited March 12, 2013 by Nick - Cacher