Fees to access GZ

[+Team Canary]

Can a Traditional Cache be placed in an area that requires an entry fee?

[+niraD]

9 minutes ago, Team Canary said:

Can a Traditional Cache be placed in an area that requires an entry fee?

Any cache or event can be placed in an area that requires an entry fee. There's even an attribute for "Access/parking fee".

[+Team Canary]

1 minute ago, niraD said:

Any cache or event can be placed in an area that requires an entry fee. There's even an attribute for "Access/parking fee".

Ta. I’m surprised. 

[+niraD]

5 minutes ago, Team Canary said:

Ta. I’m surprised. 

Why?

[Keystone]

How much is the fee, and who is charging it?

 

A fee charged by a commercial business - no go.  A fee charged by a nonprofit or governmental entity - possible.

A $5 entrance fee at the gate to a county park - fine.  A $40 admission charge to an art museum - nope.

[+Team Canary]

6 minutes ago, Keystone said:

How much is the fee, and who is charging it?

 

A fee charged by a commercial business - no go.  A fee charged by a nonprofit or governmental entity - possible.

A $5 entrance fee at the gate to a county park - fine.  A $40 admission charge to an art museum - nope.

Centrepoint Tower in Sydney. 
 

https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC9M58R

[+Max and 99]

And I thought $12 a person for a cache here was high!

[+Team Canary]

50 minutes ago, niraD said:

Why?

 

Promoting private businesses.

[+cerberus1]

15 hours ago, Team Canary said:

Centrepoint Tower in Sydney. 
https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC9M58R

 

Odd, no description either.  First log (write note) explains it well though.    Yikes!      I'd never pay those kinda bucks just for a smiley...

A state nearby has fees to enter most of their state parks.  Ours are free to enter.  A fee is charged to place a cache.

Guess it'd depend how badly I want caches in that area to cough up the bucks to visit. 

[+The Haywood Hornet]

I seem to remember that the cost was quite a bit higher to get to the Virtual ($65?) in San Diego zoo.

[+barefootjeff]

46 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

dd, no description either.  First log (write note) explains it well though.    Yikes!      I'd never pay those kinda bucks just for a smiley...

 

Maybe a bit of perspective. On Monday I drove up to Newcastle and back for lee737's new Pi Day cache. The return trip is about 200km and my RAV4 reckons it was gobbling up about 8 litres per hundred kilometres on that run, so at today's price of $2.09 per litre that's about $33 for the return trip. Likewise for any caching I do in central Sydney, which I usually go to by train. A full adult return fare from here is $18, then if I did my usual ferry trip across the harbour to Manly or Watsons Bay it'd be another $16. Fortunately, being retired now, I get a concessional fare rate which is capped at $2.50 a day, another reason why I'd rather take the train than drive. So maybe the Sydney Tower access fee isn't all that exorbitant compared to what most of my smileys cost me just getting to GZ these days.

Edited March 17, 2022 by barefootjeff
Spelling

[+Mudfrog]

Imo, a fee is a fee. Whether it be private or not for profit, they both cost us money.  It should not matter as long as permission is given for the cache placement.
There are a lot of caches placed that we sometimes have to put on our ignore list for one reason or another. Caches hidden in the top of trees, ones we feel are too dangerous, and ones that cost more to get than we want to spend are all examples.  

[+niraD]

3 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

Imo, a fee is a fee. Whether it be private or not for profit, they both cost us money.

Sure, if the only issue was whether it cost seekers money to access (or park at) GZ.

 

But the commercial content guidelines also matter, and they draw a distinction between private businesses, government agencies, and nonprofit organizations.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Hmm...   Did the virtual atop the Empire State Building in 2004.  Think the price then was about $20.  Now it's over $40.  But it is a great spot!!!  Went back in 2007 with my sister.  They would not let us take pocket knives up the elevator.   (And were surprised when we asked for them back on our return down the building.)  It does have over 1000 favorite points...

[+kunarion]

On 3/17/2022 at 12:57 AM, Max and 99 said:

And I thought $12 a person for a cache here was high!

 

Several county-operated parks where I live have initiated a required yearly pass for "out of county vehicles" for 2022.  Parks that each have 10 or so caches with permission.  The fee is $300 per year (up from $5 for a day), good at all the parks.  That's kind of embarrassing -- some of those caches are mine.  But other counties had similar fees for years.  But it's also a little different, because of the "out of county vehicle" thing.  Find a friend with county tags on his car to give you the grand tour (the Cache Owner, for example), and you're golden.

[Darwin473]

Just putting out my unwanted and worthless opinions.

 

For a place like Centre Point tower, then I would think it's a valid placement due to it being a tourist destination. Someone who is a tourist and going there anyway would be happy to get a cache there for no additional cost. Though I do understand someone who wasn't planning on going there and had a Pokemon mentality would be upset at being "forced" to pay an entry fee to get that smiley. Having one inside a real estate agency or a fancy electronics doo-dad shop wouldn't be valid, for the reasons others have already covered.

[+barefootjeff]

17 minutes ago, kunarion said:

The fee is $300 per year (up from $5 for a day), good at all the parks. 

 

Gosh! For New South Wales national parks, a multi-park annual pass is $65 (about $US50) which covers all parks except Kosciuszko National Park. For those parks that have a day use parking fee, it's typically $8, but the majority of national parks here are still free entry.

[+kunarion]

On 3/18/2022 at 6:29 PM, barefootjeff said:

 

Gosh! For New South Wales national parks, a multi-park annual pass is $65 (about $US50) which covers all parks except Kosciuszko National Park. For those parks that have a day use parking fee, it's typically $8, but the majority of national parks here are still free entry.

 

There are a whole lot of complicated fees or yearly passes for various other Georgia parks (National Park, WMA, Historic Site, State Parks).  In addition to these particular county parks, which have somehow developed an astonishingly high fee.  And the rest of them still have an optional daily park fee, if any.

 

The Fayette County parks are all at reservoirs, and the one where my flagship caches are, is a huge draw for bass fishing.  People arrive on a weekend with huge boats, and there are even fishing derbies there, it's hilarious!  It's not exactly the largest body of water ever.  But evidently, record-setting bass have been caught there.

 

But that fee.  Yeah.  You'd need to visit 60 days per year to break even, assuming you paid the $5 per day previously.  I've been told it had to do with "parties"... so lately a whole lot of out-of-county vehicles arrive and the place gets trashed?  Seems like the County could handle that specific situation a different way.  But if the Government Officials looked at the number of out-of-county visitors and think that they'll rake in a fortune with this new plan, they have another think coming.  110% guaranteed, it doesn't work that way.  So I guess the plan is, the county makes all the money from parking tickets.  Imagine how much one parking fine will cost.

 

Anyway, The Sheriff has only one job, and he's attentive.  So I had to add the info to all my cache pages.  Travelers who used to cross their fingers and jump out and grab all my caches, that plan seems more risky today. 

 

And I need to be sure my caches are not just a bunch of pill bottles with a soaking wet piece of paper to sign.  At the very least, people are going out of their way to hunt these.

 

Edited April 9, 2022 by kunarion

[+Jayeffel]

The only place I am aware of the you need to pay a fee is in a Maryland State Park that has some caches. The only other place I ran across so far is in Gettysburg. Pa., there is a cache on the round square that if that is all you want will cost you a $3.00 parking meter fee, so maybe plan for some sightseeing ( or risk paying a fine).  I have not tried that one yet, but am acquainted on what to look for. There are  a few other caches a good walking distance.

[+Ministro]

Small, reasonable access fees are considered OK but significant fees are not. My measure is anything under $5-10 is OK.

[+fizzymagic]

Remember grandfathered caches, such as virtuals at Disneyland, would not longer be allowed.  Earthcaches in National Parks are allowed despite what can be a hefty entrance fee.  Generally park entrance fees for government-owned parks are accepted.  Private entrance fees not so much.

[+JL_HSTRE]

There are a number of Virtual/Earth Caches in the Dry Tortugas. You can get them without paying a park admission fee, but the only ways to get to the Island is the charter ferry or a seaplane. You could take your own boat, if you had one capable of making an hour-long open ocean trip...but think of the fuel cost! Realistically, 99% of cachers would be paying a triple-digit de facto access fee, but it's a national park and not an admission fee nor must the fee be paid to a specific business. I suspect similar situations apply to lots of other island caches. 

[+Max and 99]

A cache was archived because it is required an entry fee. I guess because it's a private, commercial business.

 

Edit: I see now, it is owned by an entertainment group. Yikes the fee! And FTF brought a throw down with them just in case it was missing! 😁

Edited March 22, 2022 by Max and 99

[+fizzymagic]

14 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

A cache was archived because it is required an entry fee. I guess because it's a private, commercial business.

Edit: I see now, it is owned by an entertainment group. Yikes the fee! And FTF brought a throw down with them just in case it was missing! 😁

When was said cache published?

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, fizzymagic said:

When was said cache published?

 

It was published on the 17th of March, got three finds then was archived on the 22nd. There's another find log post-archival on the 22nd.

[+Mudfrog]

On 3/18/2022 at 2:28 PM, niraD said:

Sure, if the only issue was whether it cost seekers money to access (or park at) GZ.

 

But the commercial content guidelines also matter, and they draw a distinction between private businesses, government agencies, and nonprofit organizations.

 

Yes, I know that a big part of this is because of the commercial guidelines. Imo, the multitude of guidelines that Groundspeak has implemented over the years has taken away a lot of the fun and creativity of our hobby. There were basically three guidelines back when I started in early 03 but clicking on the link you've given brings up tons of guidelines, pretty much rules, that cover just the hiding of a cache. 

 

Shouldn't matter if the cache is hidden on private, commercial, government, or a non-profits property if permission is obtained. Whether it be a venue we don't agree with, the requirement of a high fee, a cache's difficulty, etc,,, we all have the ability to ignore those that we don't like.

[+Wet Pancake Touring Club]

I agree with Mudfrog for the most part. We do have the ability to ignore caches we don't like. But, we need to be provided with the information on which to make that decision.

 

Using the Centrepoint Tower cache as an example, it did have the Access/Parking Fee attribute set. But, no mention of the complexity involved in figuring out what that cost would be. (Check the logs on the cache, the finders explained how they only had to pay $6.) And, with something like the Tower, some might assume that is it publicly owned. (It does not appear to be, according the Wikepedia.) For me, the amount I will pay for access depends on who I am paying, and what other benefits I get for the cost. I've paid an $80 access fee for one cache, because it was going to the National Park Service. My standards for access for commercial ventures are quite different, and generally approach $0.

 

If we do allow caches that require paying a fee to a commercial organization, how much information would need to be provided so I can make the decision on whether or not to go after the cache? And, would it become part of the reviewers job to verify it? If the cost changes, or the ownership changes, is this grounds for a NM? And, I'm sure that others will have even more requiremens/questions.

 

I just see lots of negative feedback from cachers regarding placement of caches in commercial locations that require an access fee. I think that most people are OK with non-commercial fees. I am, because the national, state and local parks near me have geocaching guidelines, and my money is going to a group that directly or indirectly supports geocaching. 

[+lee737]

On 3/19/2022 at 3:15 AM, Mudfrog said:

Imo, a fee is a fee. Whether it be private or not for profit, they both cost us money.  It should not matter as long as permission is given for the cache placement.

I have no problem paying a fee to access an area for a cache, depending on how much it is, and what else we'd get for our money.  This weekend we're going on a cache drive, regional explore roadtrip - after accommodation, food and fuel, I doubt I'll see much change out of $1k. I'm having trouble thinking of more than a few times we've paid money purely to access a cache location....

[+barefootjeff]

4 minutes ago, lee737 said:

I have no problem paying a fee to access an area for a cache, depending on how much it is, and what else we'd get for our money.  This weekend we're going on a cache drive, regional explore roadtrip - after accommodation, food and fuel, I doubt I'll see much change out of $1k. I'm having trouble thinking of more than a few times we've paid money purely to access a cache location....

 

Yeah, Lord Howe Island is a good example of this. Unless you own a vessel capable of crossing the 600km of ocean between the island and the mainland, or a private plane or helicopter I suppose, the only way to do the caches there is to take a commercial flight (return fare currently about $1400) and stay at least one night at one of the island's commercial resorts (day visitors and campers aren't allowed). My ten or so finds on the island, spread over two visits, were undoubtably my most expensive smileys!

[+Wet Pancake Touring Club]

Looking at this from a different point of view, assuming that commercial caches were allowed, what would prevent a commercial entity from creating a cache listing in an area where they charge an entrance fee. They wouldn't even have to create the actual cache. Just list it with a high difficulty. Get a few cachers to pay the fee, and ignore the DNF's, NM, etc. (Or use a disposable e-mail to get it published.) When it finally gets archived, wait a bit, and post another one. 

 

To me, this would turn gc.com into a giant spam pit.

[+lee737]

14 minutes ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

Looking at this from a different point of view, assuming that commercial caches were allowed, what would prevent a commercial entity from creating a cache listing in an area where they charge an entrance fee. They wouldn't even have to create the actual cache. Just list it with a high difficulty. Get a few cachers to pay the fee, and ignore the DNF's, NM, etc. (Or use a disposable e-mail to get it published.) When it finally gets archived, wait a bit, and post another one. 

 

To me, this would turn gc.com into a giant spam pit.

 

There are so few active cachers around here now, no commercial entity would bother!

[+fizzymagic]

On 3/22/2022 at 3:10 PM, barefootjeff said:

It was published on the 17th of March, got three finds then was archived on the 22nd. There's another find log post-archival on the 22nd.

 

Then archival makes sense.  It did not meet the guidelines when published.

 

My point being that considering fees for new caches is important but complaining about them for grandfathered caches is not helpful.  And that hiding fees from the reviewer during cache submission is a big no-no.

[+Gill & Tony]

I did two caches at Jungfraujoch and, while it is theoretically possible to climb the mountain, most people have to take the train to the highest station in Europe.  Cost for the train ride is around CHF100, depending on where you pick up the train.

 

As others have said, it is a tourist destination, most people up there would be going there anyway and finding the cache is a bonus

[+colleda]

The cache is still being logged. Perhaps it should be locked?

[+geodarts]

On 3/23/2022 at 4:09 PM, barefootjeff said:

 

Yeah, Lord Howe Island is a good example of this. Unless you own a vessel capable of crossing the 600km of ocean between the island and the mainland, or a private plane or helicopter I suppose, the only way to do the caches there is to take a commercial flight (return fare currently about $1400) and stay at least one night at one of the island's commercial resorts (day visitors and campers aren't allowed). My ten or so finds on the island, spread over two visits, were undoubtably my most expensive smileys!

 

We had booked flights and passage on a cargo boat to go to Pitcairn Island, then I had an accident that probably precludes a future visit, just before Covid shut the island down.  But that type of trip always makes me wonder how much a cache influenced our decisions to go there. It would have been an expensive smiley for sure.

 

There was, and may still be, a grandfathered virtual at a Las Vegas tower that reminded me of the Sydney cache.  And we have taken tramways, ferries, or made expensive arrangements to get to certain areas that just happened to have a cache.  

 

Apart from the disclosure issue then, I think there ideally should be a distinction between tourist activities and other forms of commercial enterprises. But I can also see where that might be a headache as people try to stretch the boundaries. We might not have lost virtuals back in the day if people used more common sense in what they chose to submit.  I imagine people arguing that their store is a tourist destination.  Then it would come down to the Wow factor.

 

 

Edited April 1, 2022 by geodarts

[+Former Hawkeye]

With the rising inflation, the virus still around and being on a "fixed income" (retired), I have a tendency to avoid caches where there are fees.   I kept this in mind when I placed my virtual (no admission fee).

 

 Yes-My caching has been reduced to a small sideline when I am in an area for another reason (medical, shopping or family reunions etc.) to the most part.

 

 

 

[+terratin]

On 3/17/2022 at 9:56 PM, barefootjeff said:

 

Maybe a bit of perspective. On Monday I drove up to Newcastle and back for lee737's new Pi Day cache. The return trip is about 200km and my RAV4 reckons it was gobbling up about 8 litres per hundred kilometres on that run, so at today's price of $2.09 per litre that's about $33 for the return trip. Likewise for any caching I do in central Sydney, which I usually go to by train. A full adult return fare from here is $18, then if I did my usual ferry trip across the harbour to Manly or Watsons Bay it'd be another $16. Fortunately, being retired now, I get a concessional fare rate which is capped at $2.50 a day, another reason why I'd rather take the train than drive. So maybe the Sydney Tower access fee isn't all that exorbitant compared to what most of my smileys cost me just getting to GZ these days.

 

Oh come on! Sure I could complain that I spent a lot of money traveling to the 54 countries I've cached in. I, you (ok, for the sake of it as I know you don't have many caches around: everyone) could cache in their local area for free. Interacting with a business is against the placement guidelines, and as the cache description didn't mention this it seems pretty clear that the CO was rather aware of it and avoided writing about this little fact.

 

[+Goldenwattle]

I once found a cache that required a fee. The local population was VERY poor and had almost no income. It was a lovely place to visit and I was pleased to give them some money to help them. More dignity in that than charity. Except for a few people like me who visited, they had virtually no income. And to remove that income would be cruel.

Edited April 8, 2022 by Goldenwattle

[+niraD]

2 hours ago, terratin said:

Interacting with a business is against the placement guidelines

Sure. And I think that has been well established in this thread.

 

But that was not the point that barefootjeff was addressing. He was addressing an objection to any fees to access cache locations, regardless of whether those fees were charged by businesses or by state parks.

[+barefootjeff]

6 hours ago, terratin said:

Oh come on! Sure I could complain that I spent a lot of money traveling to the 54 countries I've cached in. I, you (ok, for the sake of it as I know you don't have many caches around: everyone) could cache in their local area for free. Interacting with a business is against the placement guidelines, and as the cache description didn't mention this it seems pretty clear that the CO was rather aware of it and avoided writing about this little fact.

 

I thought it was clear my post was a reply to cerebus1 saying "Yikes!      I'd never pay those kinda bucks just for a smiley... ". The point I was making is that the $31 access fee to the tower isn't that exorbitant compared to what I pay in travel costs for most of my smileys these days. Sure, the cache in question violated the interacting with a business guideline, but my post wasn't about that, it was just about the amount of the access fee and trying to put that into perspective.

Edited April 8, 2022 by barefootjeff
Spelling

[+Goldenwattle]

On 3/24/2022 at 10:09 AM, barefootjeff said:

 

Yeah, Lord Howe Island is a good example of this. Unless you own a vessel capable of crossing the 600km of ocean between the island and the mainland, or a private plane or helicopter I suppose, the only way to do the caches there is to take a commercial flight (return fare currently about $1400) and stay at least one night at one of the island's commercial resorts (day visitors and campers aren't allowed). My ten or so finds on the island, spread over two visits, were undoubtably my most expensive smileys!

That argument could be made about any cache in the world that isn't local to you. For Australians, that means any other country. For mainlanders, and Tasmanians in reverse, for any on the opposite island to them. They need transport to get there. The argument I would make there is that those caches are available for locals (even if they are few in number) and they don't need to pay to find them.

[+Goldenwattle]

On 3/17/2022 at 3:21 PM, Team Canary said:

Centrepoint Tower in Sydney.

Wow, $31 ($24 for seniors) is ridiculous. Telstra tower in Canberra was $7 last time I visited it, and it has a nice view too.

[+barefootjeff]

31 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

That argument could be made about any cache in the world that isn't local to you. For Australians, that means any other country. For mainlanders, and Tasmanians in reverse, for any on the opposite island to them. They need transport to get there. The argument I would make there is that those caches are available for locals (even if they are few in number) and they don't need to pay to find them.

 

There are plenty of places with caches but no local cachers. Kosciuszko National Park charges a $29 park entry fee during the winter months ($17 at other times) and I wouldn't baulk at that if there was a specific cache in the park I was keen to find. There were even plans for a Geocaching NSW event on the summit of Kosciuszko but that got scuttled by COVID. Locally, some of the national parks charge $8 per vehicle per day so it'd only take four of those to exceed what it costs to go up the tower. Nobody's forcing anyone to do a particular cache and, compared to other costs that are regularly incurred in caching, I don't think the tower's charge is sufficiently excessive to bar it on that basis alone. I wouldn't pay it, mainly because I grew up in Sydney and know what the view looks like, so it's not a cache I'd find particularly appealing, but others apparently do and consider it worth the money. Shouldn't it be their choice?

Edited April 9, 2022 by barefootjeff

[+Goldenwattle]

30 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

Kosciuszko National Park charges a $29 park entry fee during the winter months ($17 at other times)

I wanted to find a cache in a town in the snowy area (not mentioning the town), but that normally costs money to visit. Which I find wrong, as it's TOWN, and access for resident's visitors and others shouldn't cost. However, I was travelling with a handicapped passenger and we were allowed free entry because of that. We were given a special sticker for the car. Handy, and I found that cache. The drive south though to Victoria is free and you are allowed through for that if you tell the Park's person on the entry where you are going and that you are not visiting the town. Chancy, but there is back entrance. You will need to have that coffee stop in the previous town. However, the entry is not always peopled. You can be lucky, and then it's free, sort of.

 

I do understand the commercial aspect of this, but sometimes it's taken to extreme, such as the time I mentioned in a multicache of mine, that you would pass the local shops and would be able to have a break for coffee. (Coffee culture is strong in Australia and we often go to cafes and sit at tables on the footpath, and it's a big part of urban caching for my caching friends and me.) I was told that was commercial, despite having attributes for food available. Several cafes there, so I was not advocating a single business. Just what I would like to know and look for. Where are the local cafes? The multicache still passes the shops, as a 'civilised' urban walk should. People can spot the cafes themselves.

Edited April 9, 2022 by Goldenwattle

[+barefootjeff]

22 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

I do understand the commercial aspect of this, but sometimes it's taken to extreme, such as the time I mentioned in a multicache of mine, that you would pass the local shops and would be able to have a break for coffee. (Coffee culture is strong in Australia and we often go to cafes and sit at tables on the footpath, and it's a big part of urban caching for my caching friends and me.) I was told that was commercial, despite having attributes for food available. Several cafes there, so I was not advocating a single business. Just what I would like to know and look for. Where are the local cafes? The multicache still passes the shops, as a 'civilised' urban walk should. People can spot the cafes themselves.

 

Yes, the commercial guideline can seem like a pretty grey area at times. There are a bunch of caches on a Sydney harbour island which, as far as I know, is only accessible by ferry (I don't think there's anywhere you can moor a private vessel or even go ashore from a kayak). The ferries used to be government-run so I guess that was okay, but a few years back they were privatised although the government still owns the boats. I'm glad I'm not a reviewer!

[+niraD]

47 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

Yes, the commercial guideline can seem like a pretty grey area at times. There are a bunch of caches on a Sydney harbour island which, as far as I know, is only accessible by ferry (I don't think there's anywhere you can moor a private vessel or even go ashore from a kayak). The ferries used to be government-run so I guess that was okay, but a few years back they were privatised although the government still owns the boats. I'm glad I'm not a reviewer!

Yeah, that's why they get paid the big bucks!

[+colleda]

5 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Wow, $31 ($24 for seniors) is ridiculous. Telstra tower in Canberra was $7 last time I visited it, and it has a nice view too.

You wouldn't want to search for caches anywhere near Balmoral Beach, Sydney. Mosman council has raised parking fees to $10 an hour. Take a bus.

[+Goldenwattle]

1 hour ago, colleda said:

You wouldn't want to search for caches anywhere near Balmoral Beach, Sydney. Mosman council has raised parking fees to $10 an hour. Take a bus.

My favourite way of caching in central Sydney is taking the train. One reason I like SideTracked caches.

[+barefootjeff]

39 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

2 hours ago, colleda said:

You wouldn't want to search for caches anywhere near Balmoral Beach, Sydney. Mosman council has raised parking fees to $10 an hour. Take a bus.

My favourite way of caching in central Sydney is taking the train. One reason I like SideTracked caches.

 

Yes, I've done a couple of caching trips to Balmoral Beach, taking the train to Circular Quay, the ferry across to Taronga wharf and then walking around the harbour foreshore to Balmoral. The return trip was a bus back to the ferry wharf, which was a bit quicker than walking.

[+kunarion]

On 4/8/2022 at 10:16 AM, Former Hawkeye said:

I have a tendency to avoid caches where there are fees.   I kept this in mind when I placed my virtual (no admission fee).

 

Some of my creative cache boxes could not endure anywhere else where I live, cool for a few caches that are different from the norm.  The fee is part of what causes fewer visitors, and therefore keeps the caches safe.  And that park is gated closed at dark, with that fee for "out of county vehicles".  For one cache, I added an easy puzzle to make it a very quiet cache.  Easier to maintain, found with swag, unmuggled.  Yet these are mostly out in the open and kids can walk right to them.

 

Something like "Visit Horton" (which originally was an ammo box until the plastic elephant degraded) doesn't exist in most suburban parts of the area where I live.  The closest thing is another park (no fee) where the rugged terrain and a forest of thorn vines keeps muggles away.  I've also noticed that the majority of cachers don't attempt a cache that they can't reach from their car.  But that's another topic.

 

There are a bahzillion free places to find caches.  It's OK to not hunt the few where there's a fee. That's part of my evil scheme.

 

Edited April 9, 2022 by kunarion