Support for a Nonprofit Association?

[+Brokenwing]

My timing is horrible, based of a recent forum post, but I've been wondering for a while now what the feeling is for the creation of a national or international association whose stated purpose was to promote the sport and be a voice for geocaching with land use agencies.

 

PLEASE NOTE: this would not be an organization that would in any way try to compete with, or replace geocaching.com. I invision a cooperative and cordial relationship with Groundspeak.com for our mutual interests.

 

What do you think?

 

Scott / Brokenwing

http://www.cordianet.com/geocaching

[+Brokenwing]

I'm glad to see folks are participating in the poll, but don't be shy about explaining the reasons for your vote as well.

 

I can see valid reasons both for, and against such an organization, so I'd like to hear what you all think.

 

By the way, I hereby declare this a NO BASHING ZONE! All should feel free to voice your opinions without the fear of being slammed for it. All points of view are welcome.

 

Thanks!

 

Scott / Brokenwing

http://www.cordianet.com/geocaching

[+Brokenwing]

I'm glad to see folks are participating in the poll, but don't be shy about explaining the reasons for your vote as well.

 

I can see valid reasons both for, and against such an organization, so I'd like to hear what you all think.

 

By the way, I hereby declare this a NO BASHING ZONE! All should feel free to voice your opinions without the fear of being slammed for it. All points of view are welcome.

 

Thanks!

 

Scott / Brokenwing

http://www.cordianet.com/geocaching

[Eric O'Connor]

If what you have in mind is an unbiased voice that represents the hobby as a whole, I can see value in that.

[teamwsmf]

I dont like the groups that become these huge far reaching lobby organizations with politcal implications way beyond the core of thier creation.

 

I would hate to see some sort of geolobby spring up that would jump in and out of bed with the NPS, BLM, FS, FWS etc etc and whose memebers would do little more than argue amongst themselves on the sematics and minutia of each and every twitch in the air.

 

There are so many "organzied" efforts to "spend" ones time on, I dont want to see geocaching get stuck in that particular pit.

 

I prefer loose associations of people whose goals happen to come togther in very defined points of interest.

 

-tom

 

----------------------------

TeamWSMF@wsmf.org

[+Web-ling]

A national or international organization could be extremely beneficial to the sport. Some of the potential benefits include:

 

Coordination of efforts to keep areas open for geocaching, as well as opening up new areas.

Coordination of publicity / public information.

Increased impact on GPS manufacturers - Getting new features we want on new models of GPSs

Coordination of national/international conventions, etc.

Coordination of efforts to have laws placed and/or kept on the books favoring geocaching.

Lobbying the IOC to have geocaching included in the next Olympics (OK, maybe not...)

 

There can be drawbacks, but I think the benefits would outweigh them.

 

[+Web-ling]

A national or international organization could be extremely beneficial to the sport. Some of the potential benefits include:

 

Coordination of efforts to keep areas open for geocaching, as well as opening up new areas.

Coordination of publicity / public information.

Increased impact on GPS manufacturers - Getting new features we want on new models of GPSs

Coordination of national/international conventions, etc.

Coordination of efforts to have laws placed and/or kept on the books favoring geocaching.

Lobbying the IOC to have geocaching included in the next Olympics (OK, maybe not...)

 

There can be drawbacks, but I think the benefits would outweigh them.

 

[+Brokenwing]

Web-ling, thanks for that list.

 

Chob, is that what you were looking for, or was it something else? What did you mean exactly by "unbiased"? If it existed, I think such an organization should certainly try to be as unbiased as possible in all things, but I think we all have our own personal biases on many issues. It might be hard to keep the personal biases of the officers of such an organization from creeping into certain areas. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. If, for example, the membership is mostly biased toward a particular side in an issue, then it's probably OK for the officers to allow their beliefs to become apparent. As an example, I happen to be biased toward more open access to park land. I certainly hope the organization would be somewhat biased in this regard too.

 

Is that clear, or did I muddy the water?

 

Can you give some examples of areas where you feel that an unbiased approach is needed?

 

Finally, now that Web-ling has given us a well thought out list of pros, anyone else want to tackle a list of cons?

 

Scott / Brokenwing

http://www.cordianet.com/geocaching

[+Byron & Anne]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TeamWSMF:

I dont like the groups that become these huge far reaching lobby organizations with politcal implications way beyond the core of thier creation.

 

I would hate to see some sort of geolobby spring up that would jump in and out of bed with the NPS, BLM, FS, FWS etc etc and whose memebers would do little more than argue amongst themselves on the sematics and minutia of each and every twitch in the air.

 

There are so many "organzied" efforts to "spend" ones time on, I dont want to see geocaching get stuck in that particular pit.

 

I prefer loose associations of people whose goals happen to come togther in very defined points of interest.

 

-tom

 

----------------------------

TeamWSMF@wsmf.org

---

 

I think there's ways to avoid the megaclub thing. I do think that there will be an International organization someday. To create an organization like your last statement I suggest that some of the existing organizations be looked at to gleen the best of what's out there. One that is very loose like Tom is advocating is the National Wood Carvers Association. They have a web site at http://www.chipchats.org

[+Tedoca]

... mainly because right now, at this stage of the game, I think the best approach is to stick with the more local/regional efforts.

 

Once these groups have established themselves and made significant headway towards the acceptance of our activity in their respective areas, then the merging of ideas and experience into a broader reaching body would make more sense to me.

 

JMHO

 

Regards,

Tedoca

[+geospotter]

I prefer the smaller organizations. I'm not sure there is an advantage, when approaching say the NPS, to having 1 organization with xxxx number of members, over having 100 organizations with xxxx members.

[+Iron Chef]

Small organizations tend to me impotent when it comes to enacting change from within an organization such as the NPS. One organization with xxxx members will be more effective in stating their position than 100 organizations with x members each and their own special agendas.

 

Since early last year people have been bringing up the idea of forming some sort of organization that would do something in the way of lobbying. With the number of places that have banned geocaching on the rise and other park systems that refuse to acknowledge it as a legal activity, something will have to be done at some time in the future. It's just a question of when and how.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by geospotter:

I prefer the smaller organizations. I'm not sure there is an advantage, when approaching say the NPS, to having 1 organization with xxxx number of members, over having 100 organizations with xxxx members.

---

 

______________________

Iron Chef

[+geospotter]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Iron Chef:

One organization with xxxx members will be more effective in stating their position than 100 organizations with x members each and their own special agendas.

---

 

And therein lies the problem. One organization speaking THEIR position for all cachers. Smaller organizations, such as the Georgia Geocachers Association, can much better address the needs of Georgia's geocachers than one based in Washington, or Oregon, or Massachusetts. When it comes to lobbying in Washington, it's numbers (votes) that count. Having some organization in, say, Massachusetts just isn't as impressive as having 100 organizations covering the entire US (and other countries).

 

I'm also not sure that each of the smaller organizations have "their own special agendas".

 

But I do agree that we need some sort of collective voice. Perhaps one organization that represents all of the smaller ones for purposes of lobbying, but has no overriding power over the smaller ones

[teamwsmf]

There is no reason whatsoever to think that there can only be a BIG org OR dozens of SMALL orgs.

 

The deal is this, the smaller localized ors can join up at CERTAIN times and on CERTAIN agendas to form a much greater force.

 

Think of this as the Mighty Morphing Power Geocachers method. (MMPG)

 

Indivualy each group can act on its own and in times of need band togther. This way localized items stay on the local level and higher scale actions stay on the higher end scale.

 

The MMPG sized org would be made up of representitives from the localized groups.

 

A centralized infromation center (web site) can be set up to keep all the local groups aware of potential problems that would require banding togtherness as well as keeping tabs on the current problems being tackled (like a joint response to the NPS and other agencies).

 

Ive been a part of this type of system ona number of occasions. It works really well so long as the represenation is kept in check by the local memebers.

 

For an example of how this system can break down, if its not kept in check, look at the US Senate and Congress.

 

Just some ideas.

 

-tom

 

----------------------------

TeamWSMF@wsmf.org

[+Web-ling]

Perhaps the best option would be a national "federation" of local clubs. Keep the emphasis and control at the local level. The local clubs could then choose to join the national organization or not. Each club would have input into what the national federation does. Organize it with a "bottom-up" as opposed to a "top-down" structure. The national group would have no power to "enforce" rules on the local clubs. We would maintain the small, local club emphasis while gaining the benefits of a larger organization.

 

[+exConn]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Iron Chef:

me impotent

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

Oh, and on this topic I am on the fence. I voted to see what aims such a group would have...

 

-exConn

 

What is Project Virginia?

[+exConn]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Iron Chef:

me impotent

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

Oh, and on this topic I am on the fence. I voted to see what aims such a group would have...

 

-exConn

 

What is Project Virginia?

[+KD7MXI]

if you pay them money they make a profit.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI

[+KD7MXI]

if you pay them money they make a profit.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI

[+Brokenwing]

I'm glad to see that folks are still voting and voicing their opinions.

 

For those of you on the fence, what would it take for you to have a favorable opinion of such an organization? What should the aims be? How should it be organized?

 

Thanks.

 

Scott / Brokenwing

http://www.cordianet.com/geocaching

[+geospotter]

I'd go for Web-ling's idea.

 

geospotter

[+Tedoca]

Brokenwing,

 

I think Webling put it best...

 

Organize from the bottom up keeping the emphasis at the local level. I'd like to see each local group maintain a database of contact names and addresses, parks that are geocaching friendly, areas to avoid etc... Work to establish a dialog with the local officials first. These groups, once established and experienced at lobbying sucessfully for acceptance of the activity in their area, then become the basis for a larger group.

 

I think we all know what the core issues are but each area has it's own unique barriers. BLM land seems to be an issue out West while here near the Nation's Capitol we are running up against opposition from the NPS, for example. Where I live we have very little 'wilderness' area but we have lot's of local community and regional parks. The officers that patrol these areas are my neighbors, indeed, there are at least two who live right on my street. I just think they would be a bit more receptive to one of their neighbors than they would be to an unknown name in a letter from say, Iowa.

 

I'm all for coordinating the efforts of each local group in some way but I think in the end it's going to come down to the members of a local group dealing with the local officials. Anyone up to putting together a web page where all the local groups (and individuals) could post info on their contacts, their progress, friendly/non-friendly parks etc.? I think that would be a good start. If I was dealing with a local official and could point to an instance in another State where geocaching had been introduced sucessfully it could be of great benefit.

 

Just as an aside, we had an event cache yesterday here in Maryland. Bag-A-Load-A-Cache, it was quite sucessfull and lot's of folks turned out despite the cold, wet weather. The event itself was held on Maryland National Capitol Park And Planning Commission (MNCPPC) land and during the event some NPS officers showed up. I missed the little meeting, but apparently they said that what we were doing was fine on MNCPPC land but not OK on NPS land. They then informed the group that they had removed two nearby caches that were on NPS land. They also asked for ID from everyone and wrote down names and addresses. Another cacher in the group also passed around a baggie containing the exploded remains of another nearby cache that had been discovered and dealt with by the bomb squad.

 

Regards,

Tedoca

[+sbell111]

I voted not sure. In light of recent events, I am not sure of the direction that is planned for geocaching. Without being sure of this, I could not support an organization to support tis efforts.

 

Further, on a global scale, the is little agreement as to what geocaching means. Until this is all resolved, this association would not be beneficial.

 

At this time, I believe that the smaller, regional organizations are more appropriate.

[clarencio]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scott Thomason:

My timing is horrible, based of a recent forum post, but I've been wondering for a while now what the feeling is for the creation of a national or international association whose stated purpose was to promote the sport and be a voice for geocaching with land use agencies.

 

PLEASE NOTE: this would not be an organization that would in any way try to compete with, or replace geocaching.com. I invision a cooperative and cordial relationship with Groundspeak.com for our mutual interests.

 

What do you think?

 

Scott / Brokenwing

http://www.cordianet.com/geocaching

 

I always thought that a good old pickup softball game on the corner sandlot was much more fun than any organized Little League game with all their rules.

clarencio

[+Byron & Anne]

quote:

---

Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah:

if you pay them money they make a profit.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI

 

Tell that to ENRON

[+Byron & Anne]

quote:

---

Originally posted by james f weisbeck kd7mxi terra utah:

if you pay them money they make a profit.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest_cache.asp?u=KD7MXI

 

Tell that to ENRON

[+inceptor]

I can just see it now....... after a national organization next comes the Olympics, then these people will turn pro. Teams will spring up all across the country owned by people with more money than sense. Huge parks will be built funded by the taxpayers and ticket prices will be outragous. The players will demand multi million dollar salaries and hold a national strike until there demands are met, leaving the fans with nothing to watch on tv.

 

Just kidding!!

 

Orginally I was all for a national organization. But, after reading all the posts here, I have rethought my position. I agree with the majority that the basics should stay with local or state organizations. As each area is unique and has it's own problems, solving these locally would be much easier at the local level. While there are national issues to be addressed, each local organization could elect someone to represent their area. I know that this has been accomplished by other organizations and the same could work here.

 

Just my humble opinion.

[+inceptor]

I can just see it now....... after a national organization next comes the Olympics, then these people will turn pro. Teams will spring up all across the country owned by people with more money than sense. Huge parks will be built funded by the taxpayers and ticket prices will be outragous. The players will demand multi million dollar salaries and hold a national strike until there demands are met, leaving the fans with nothing to watch on tv.

 

Just kidding!!

 

Orginally I was all for a national organization. But, after reading all the posts here, I have rethought my position. I agree with the majority that the basics should stay with local or state organizations. As each area is unique and has it's own problems, solving these locally would be much easier at the local level. While there are national issues to be addressed, each local organization could elect someone to represent their area. I know that this has been accomplished by other organizations and the same could work here.

 

Just my humble opinion.