Geocaching in Wilderness

[+Panther&Pine]

My issue with this whole thread is that I sense an agenda here; the OP has a definition of "wilderness" that is rather vague and is not willing to share his questions publicly.

 

I have a well-earned aversion to having my words used against me by "journalists" promoting an agenda. My experience tells me not to trust journalists in general; I expect that pretty much anybody who has dealt with them to any extent has the same hesitancy. Without a great deal more information from the OP, I have no intention of engaging in a discussion of the topic with him.

You weren't the only one, although I'm still waiting for the questions to be posted as promised.

[+nthacker66]

My issue with this whole thread is that I sense an agenda here; the OP has a definition of "wilderness" that is rather vague and is not willing to share his questions publicly.

 

I have a well-earned aversion to having my words used against me by "journalists" promoting an agenda. My experience tells me not to trust journalists in general; I expect that pretty much anybody who has dealt with them to any extent has the same hesitancy. Without a great deal more information from the OP, I have no intention of engaging in a discussion of the topic with him.

You weren't the only one, although I'm still waiting for the questions to be posted as promised.

 

+3 here. its a new account, being very vague and my initial speculation is this some sort of official seeing if there are any caches where they shouldn't be.

 

it isn't to say we are trying to be mean here, we are more than willing to help, some of us very well versed in knowledge of certain land restrictions (briansnat being one of them). Just try not being so elusive.

[4wheelin_fool]

Anything remote rarely gets visited. There are other activities that have a much greater impact. We found a few remote ones in a state forest last week near a trail, no one had been there in six months.

[+e-bird67]

A couple of us have been in contact with the OP. No "agenda" that I can see, other than trying to write an assigned paper for a class. I took a very similar course while at the University of Montana. This isn't a scathing exposé here, on its way to the cover of the New York Times- it's a term paper.

[+K13]

My issue with this whole thread is that I sense an agenda here; the OP has a definition of "wilderness" that is rather vague and is not willing to share his questions publicly.

 

I have a well-earned aversion to having my words used against me by "journalists" promoting an agenda. My experience tells me not to trust journalists in general; I expect that pretty much anybody who has dealt with them to any extent has the same hesitancy. Without a great deal more information from the OP, I have no intention of engaging in a discussion of the topic with him.

 

WISDOM, especially in this day and age of "journalism".

[+DonB]

A couple of us have been in contact with the OP. No "agenda" that I can see, other than trying to write an assigned paper for a class. I took a very similar course while at the University of Montana. This isn't a scathing exposé here, on its way to the cover of the New York Times- it's a term paper.

Then why not post his questions on the forum, then everyone can contribute.

[+e-bird67]

The questions were very similar to what she posted here. Is geocaching allowed in designated wilderness areas? If so, what is the impact? Should it be allowed? Do I know anyone who has cached in designated wilderness areas? Given that she originally proposed meeting a local cacher for coffee, I doubt it's some agency spy. Best I can tell, it's a paper topic she was assigned for her class. I think the biggest confusion is attempting to parse out "wilderness". Federally designated? Locally designated? BLM? Some patch of land on the edge of town with a swamp? As a librarian who deals with students fleshing out paper topics every day, I'm sensing she's still in the stage of articulating and refining her topic.

Edited September 14, 2013 by e-bird67

[+nthacker66]

http://coord.info/GLC7FEWH

 

I was here today...and caching. so it comes back to what i originally said - it depends on the area and on the land manager. I think you will get more valuable and credible information out of those rangers who manage these areas than most cachers because most of us simply speculate - even reviewers.

 

if you go here http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en.html

 

You can drill down to state/regional offices and get contact information there. You will find different land managers have different ways they manage the land. Some are staunchly against ALL foot traffic, some against geocaching, some opened to limited caching, some more lenient. It just all depends on the land and the managers.

[+nthacker66]

and here is another incredible and wildly good resource...i am a conservation activist and find myself peeking at this to get ideas, sorry i thought i posted it before http://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/stateView?state=AK

Edited September 15, 2013 by nthacker66

[+nthacker66]

I will digress and again answer best I can though (hoping those resources will give more insight and access to the other side of this discussion for a proper and objective term paper)

 

1) Is geocaching allowed in designated wilderness areas? - One lat time. It great varies. Some do some dont. You need to ask the lamd manager of the designated wilderness area.

 

2) if so, what is the impact? Any designated wilderness area that allows caches does so on a limited basis - they all have to be pre-approved (where, what container type, how far off trail, etc). There are more wilderness areas that don't allow any caching and the ones that do, don't have a lot. The cachers who hide them there are usually avid hikers, outdoors people and are respectful of the types of containers they use, how the hide them aware of the wildlife that could affect the container and vice versa, and try to negate any negative impact a container may have. I don't have hard numbers, but you can rest assured, you will very very rarely find a cache hidden in a wilderness area in a sensitive area, be it cache nailed into a tree, in a tangle of rhodendondrrums (i know i spelled that wrong), in a nesting area, etc and so on. You will also find that a majority of the people who go to find them are also well experienced back country hikers or cachers with back country hikers who will inform them what to step on what not to step on, don't snap that sapling, etc. And because these cachers are usually n remote tough terrain, they won't get a lot of foot traffic in a year (10 - 12) per year. So the impact is essentially insignificant.

 

3) Do I know anyone who has cached in these wilderness areas? yes, me. As well as some of my friends. Again, all respectful; and of course with the permission of the land managers.

[+Maingray]

http://coord.info/GLC7FEWH

 

I was here today...and caching. so it comes back to what i originally said - it depends on the area and on the land manager. I think you will get more valuable and credible information out of those rangers who manage these areas than most cachers because most of us simply speculate - even reviewers.

 

That's not in the Wilderness-defined area, and would have only required permission from the NFS. But yes, the NC state caching organization brokered a permit system with the NFS in NC, which originally wanted all caches out *that day* statewide (Uwharries, Pisgah..). The wilderness and NFS areas in NC have dedicated Rangers assigned to each district who actually interact with cachers and other activities for permission. It's great to see them now allow some caches even in their Wilderness areas. It's a great area, not too rough or hard hiking, and there are still some restriction on proximity to trails, renewal etc.

 

Working together, statewide, is cool.

 

PS While you may think the Rangers on the ground have the best knowledge, it's usually not the case when it comes to things like geocaching permission. They often give folks bad information "on the trail". And while Reviewers may speculate, they usually know the overall caching picture in the area..and advocate for it's best interest and make sure no caches are placed offimits. They use maps and permit numbers, not speculation. Which, back to the OP, is something that should be in his / her final dissertation report .

Edited September 15, 2013 by Maingray

[+nthacker66]

That was a lovely decorative wilderness sign in my picture

 

Seriously though, when talking about some of the vast wilderness areas, permits are actually needed for camping overnight, like on the john muir trail, or even day permits for places like half dome. They do this for a variety of reason, two specific to safety and "traffic control" - they want to limit the amount of people in a general area so it doesnt overcrowd giving everyone who backpacks these types of areas for an experience of solitude, as well as controlling impact. The second of course is to let the official know who people are and where their entry and exit points are - this is for safety reasons that helps the SAR people out in case someone turns up missing.

Where caching is concerned in these areas, that again is solely up to the land managers (who are very well aware of geocaching - note i said land managers, not necessarily the rangers who patrol the parks). My personal take on that is I see "designated" camp sites which to me show a heck of a lot more impact on its spot than any geocache ever did.

[+e-bird67]

I would add that, as someone else pointed out, true rugged wilderness caches tend to be lightly hit. Where I live, these are often found in swamp areas and require hip or chest waders. There may be one or two small groups who hit these every year, but, by and large, these groups leave very minimal impact. I think cachers tend to self-police. In the rare cases that we find a cache that appears to be hidden on forbidden properties, we tend to report these caches to our reviewers, whom, in my experience will immediately archive it. It does not further our hobby to anger land managers, so most of us try to play nice. I would never hide a cache in an area that appears ecologically sensitive, such as a nesting area, or an area with sensitive vegetation, whether we have blanket permission on these lands or not.

[+Cherokee Bill]

Well, here in Virginia, most National Forests now require a "PERMIT" (pure "BS")before the cache is planted & approved by Geocaching.com

 

I will say no more, so as to stay out of trouble

Edited November 13, 2013 by Cherokee Bill

[+NeverSummer]

Well, here in Virginia, most National Forests now require a "PERMIT" (pure "BS")before the cache is planted & approved by Geocaching.com

 

I will say no more, so as to stay out of trouble

I'm sure that you feel that it is, but the fact of the matter is that Groundspeak and the land managers for the National Forests you reference have come to an agreement about how the game can be played on their lands.

 

Be thankful that you can place a cache on those Virginian National Forest lands at all.

Edited November 13, 2013 by NeverSummer

[+jellis]

I've cached about everywhere in the U.S. including Montana and some around Missoula.

My absolute favorite places are remote wilderness areas.....I use a pick up truck but it's not 4WD so I'm limited how far I can go on dirt roads,( we like hiking but don't do overnight backpacking) etc. One of my favorite geocaching jaunts was a drive between Clarkston, WA through Idaho on U.S. 12 to Missoula. I'd be hard pressed to pick a favorite state for remote caching but it could well be Utah followed by New Mexico.

 

Do you believe that geocaching in a low impact activity in wilderness? In other words, should there be limitations on where one can geocache?

Is this backwards? Should read "should there be limitations on where one can place a geocache?" Of course if there are caches there, then there is no limitations to find them. If there are no caches in a wilderness area you got to ask yourself "why isn't there one there?"

Edited November 13, 2013 by jellis