You can change the NPS geocaching policy!

2.3k · July 29, 2003

YES! YOU CAN! Get involved and let the NPS know that you want to allow geocaching in OUR parks! I did!

Call or email the Director of the National Parks Service:

202-208-3818 / Fran_Mainella@nps.gov

2.3k · July 29, 2003

GEOCACHERS UNITE!!

Come on, don't just look at this one and pass it by...here is your chance to make a difference as a group! You don't have to post to this, just take one minute out of your day and write an email, that's all...

1k · July 29, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by TEAM 360:
YES! YOU CAN! Get involved and let the NPS know that you want to allow geocaching in OUR parks! I did!

A question to get a good discussion going on this particular topic.

Why is it so important to allow geocaching in National Parks? Most geocaches I've seen have involved some off trail work which tends to degrade the natural ecosystem of a particular area, no matter how careful everyone is.

National Parks are the most visited areas and get more foot traffic than most other areas of comprable size and destination. The wear and tear on the landscape by more geocachers going out and creating more new trails in areas, just so we can say we found one in a National Park, doesn't justify the need imo.

Maybe it's good that there are areas that are off limits.

_________________________________

Webfoot

Tromping through the underbrush looking for Ammo cans, Tupperware containers, & little round disks.

4.2k · July 29, 2003

I disagree. Geocaching is a great way to get outdoors and get excercise while having fun at the same time (for those who don't typically like to just walk).

Likewise, children LOVE to Geocache and what better way to introduce them to the beauty of our National Parks than to give them a McToy after a long hike (ok, tongue in cheek about the McToy).

It gives us a chance to teach them about preservation, history, and many other great things that the parks have to offer.

No self-respecing Geocacher is going to blaze new trails and dig up the lanscape.

I'll be sending an email now

July 29, 2003

I visit national parks on my vacations and hike on their trails and explore off trail sometimes. I would enjoy finding caches in national parks while I'm getting to know them. I think it would create little more use than is already occuring. When I find caches on my vacations it seems like I have to go out of my way and route to get to other public land that already have caches hidden there.

1.2k · July 29, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Webfoot:

quote:
Originally posted by TEAM 360:
YES! YOU CAN! Get involved and let the NPS know that you want to allow geocaching in OUR parks! I did!

A question to get a good discussion going on this particular topic.

Why is it so important to allow geocaching in National Parks? Most geocaches I've seen have involved some off trail work which tends to degrade the natural ecosystem of a particular area, no matter how careful everyone is.

National Parks are the most visited areas and get more foot traffic than most other areas of comprable size and destination. The wear and tear on the landscape by more geocachers going out and creating more new trails in areas, just so we can say we found one in a National Park, doesn't justify the need imo.

Maybe it's good that there are areas that are off limits.

Hmmm, you actually do ask a great question, but I think you already knew it was a very limited question and you ask it to do just what you said, stimulate discussion.

My personal answer is that there is no great requirement to hide caches in NPS areas, however, doing so will cause a lot less damage to the environment that many activities already allowed in these areas. I do not believe anyone wants or expects unlimited ability to hide caches without any supervision or involvement from the NPS, at least I hope not. Proper registering of caches with NPS personnel and their involvement in the placeing of any cache to ensure none are placed in areas of particular sensitivity would be a minimum requirement in my view. But to say there just is no reason for caching to be allowed is to say there really is no reason for us to be allowed to do it anywhere. NPS lands and parks are actually our lands and parks. The NPS is charged with protecting those areas in order for them to be enjoyed by the public now, and in the future. If it can be convincingly shown that Geocaching will cause enough damage as to prevent the NPS from accomplishing that mission, I'll be on the side of those saying we shouldn't cache there. Otherwise, it should be allowed under rules, not guidelines, and violators of those rules should be disallowed of placing caches anywhere in the NPS system. This does not seem all that unreasonable or difficult to do, heck, we have databases of Elvis memorabilia for crying out loud, I think we could keep a database of those who fail to respect our sport and the NPS mission. I would applaud the NPS if they would at least bring the issue up and debate it, allowing all who feel they can contribute to the debate to do so.

Give me caching, or give me the couch....lol.

"Trade up, trade even, or don't trade!!!" My philosophy of life.

July 29, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Webfoot:
Why is it so important to allow geocaching in National Parks?

Hmmmm. Maybe the answer has something to do with "Freedom". I always thought thought that Freedom was a fairly important concept in the U.S. (Freedom to choose ; freedom to roam; freedom to enjoy the splendor of my country. Those are all pretty important to me).

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.

1k · July 29, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Breaktrack:
Hmmm, you actually do ask a great question, but I think you already knew it was a very limited question and you ask it to do just what you said, stimulate discussion.

It was with some trepidation that I posted this in the first place, for fear of getting flamed.

quote:
Proper registering of caches with NPS personnel and their involvement in the placeing of any cache to ensure none are placed in areas of particular sensitivity would be a minimum requirement in my view.

Agreed. IF (that's a big IF) the NPS were to provide proper rules for the placement of caches and people were to abide by them, it would probably make a good fit. Too often though, people tend to make their own rules about everything and there is no guarantee that all geocachers will abide by the set rules. Tracking offenders via a database would be a good start.

I think the big hangup would be the communication between Geocaching and the NPS. It would appear that every cache hidden in a National Park would need a two-tiered approval, once first by the NPS and then once by Geocaching. I would be willing to bet that the NPS would insist that caches be approved BEFORE they are hidden, which in itself is not such a bad idea. Coordinates would be submitted and the NPS would rule on whether it would be approved or not. Then the cacher would go out and hide the cache and then submit it to geocaching for final approval. The two-tierred approval might reduce the number of "caches for caches sake" that seem to be popping up all over the place as well which I also think is a good thing.

Thanks for your comments.

_________________________________

Webfoot

Tromping through the underbrush looking for Ammo cans, Tupperware containers, & little round disks.

July 29, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Webfoot:
Why is it so important to allow geocaching in National Parks?

Hmmmm. Maybe the answer has something to do with "Freedom". I always thought thought that Freedom was a fairly important concept in the U.S. Freedom to choose ; freedom to roam; freedom to enjoy the splendor of my country. Those are all pretty important to me (subject of course, to reasonable restrictions).

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.

1.2k · July 29, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Webfoot:

quote:
Originally posted by Breaktrack:
Hmmm, you actually do ask a great question, but I think you already knew it was a very limited question and you ask it to do just what you said, stimulate discussion.

It was with some trepidation that I posted this in the first place, for fear of getting flamed.

quote:
Proper registering of caches with NPS personnel and their involvement in the placeing of any cache to ensure none are placed in areas of particular sensitivity would be a minimum requirement in my view.

Agreed. IF (that's a big IF) the NPS were to provide proper rules for the placement of caches and people were to abide by them, it would probably make a good fit. Too often though, people tend to make their own rules about everything and there is no guarantee that all geocachers will abide by the set rules. Tracking offenders via a database would be a good start.

I think the big hangup would be the communication between Geocaching and the NPS. It would appear that every cache hidden in a National Park would need a two-tiered approval, once first by the NPS and then once by Geocaching. I would be willing to bet that the NPS would insist that caches be approved __BEFORE__ they are hidden, which in itself is not such a bad idea. Coordinates would be submitted and the NPS would rule on whether it would be approved or not. Then the cacher would go out and hide the cache and then submit it to geocaching for final approval. The two-tierred approval might reduce the number of "caches for caches sake" that seem to be popping up all over the place as well which I also think is a good thing.

Thanks for your comments.

Very reasonable and reasoned response. As stated by others, freedom really does have a lot to do with how I feel about the issue. I also feel even freedom has to be measured, reasonable, and responsible in it's practice. I think the two tiered approval is exactly what I intended and you instantly picked up on that. Right now our own admins are as alert as possible to the attempts by some to place physical caches in NPS areas, that is a good thing, but not foolproof. By getting everything approved by the NPS in advance, and involving them in the process, they are in control of the situation and can even be helpful in the determination of areas of interest that are conducive to caching.

Have no fear, no flaming here. You seem open minded and able to listen to other's arguements and be reasonable in your response, whether you agree or not. Keep up the good work. Good questions with a well thought out premise keeps us honest.

"Trade up, trade even, or don't trade!!!" My philosophy of life.

2.3k · July 29, 2003

After seeing all the problems displayed in the Park system on the last episode of 20/20, it would really be in the National Parks best interest to allow ANY family-friendly activity in order to boost their visitor numbers and dissuade the undesirable elements from coming into the Parks in the first place.

Just think what might be changed if every cacher wrote a 2-minute email to the Director?

I don't mean to turn this into another thread about the environment. God, I can just see Nincehelser posting in here already and taking on everyone. The email and phone number I posted in the first message are for those who wish to use it, if they want to. If not, hey, keep on clicking the "Back Arrow".

As a large group, we should be active to effect change, not to "get our way", but to instill a change which would benefit BOTH parties.

2.3k · July 29, 2003

I thank you guys for keeping it civil in here. The 2-tier idea seems great, and I am sure that if the NPS approved a cache, it would have no problem getting by the Admins here. So write the Director an email and propose just that idea!

July 29, 2003

The two tier idea sounds good, but I think that other rules might have to apply. Some parks get overwhelmed with visitors, while others go largely unnoticed. It may be easier to get permission in a lesser used park, than say Yellowstone or Yosemite. Or maybe allow 1 or 2 caches in the busier parks and more in the lesser used parks as a way of promoting them. The only problem is that there will be people who will assume that since it is allowed in the NPS, they have a right to place them as they please. I know of one cache here (Hoosier Prairie) that was removed by the Indiana DNR and a note was left according to the logs on it. The Hoosier Prairie is actually part of the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, and is administered by the Indiana DNR. According to the logs posted, it was removed for having been placed without permission. I know of other caches placed in city parks here that do not have permission to be there. When I talked to the Hammond City Parks Administrator, he knew nothing of geocaches in the parks. After I explained it to him, he granted me permission to place caches and doesn't have a problem with the other ones. If it happens on the local level, it will (and probably already does)on the national level, giving all of us a black eye. I think that starting on a local level and making the sport look favorable, then moving up to the county and state levels and on to the Federal level would be the way to go. Having your city, county, and state park departments behind you wouldn't hurt.

Maps?!? I don't need no stinking maps! I got coordinates!

There's a fine line between Geocaching and mental illness, I just not sure which side of the line I'm on!

July 29, 2003

I'm all for getting caches approved in NPs. If a two-tiered system is necessary to accomplish that, so be it.

I'm hesitant to believe that it will be anything but impossible to get their policy changed, however. NPS staff are already underpaid, understaffed and overworked. Asking them to visually inspect every cache/cache site (which would be one of their requirements, I'm sure) would be pretty time consuming for an organization without any time to spare, not to mention the amount of time, effort and political manoeuvering it'd take on our parts.

--

Pehmva!

Random quote:

sigimage.php

24.7k · July 29, 2003

I agree that the NPS should have strict rules due to the sheer amount of visitation as has been pointed out. When the rocks are worn smooth from people walking and there is a butt shaped groove 6" deep from people sliding down a rock ramp you know there is visition.

Since the NPS would set the rules they would determine if a two tiered system is appropriate. Or not.

38.2k · July 29, 2003

quote:
Why is it so important to allow geocaching in National Parks? Most geocaches I've seen have involved some off trail work which tends to degrade the natural ecosystem of a particular area, no matter how careful everyone is.

If this issue is such a concern to you, then how can you justify your participation in this sport? Personally, I haven't seen this.

quote:
Most geocaches I've seen have involved some off trail work which tends to degrade the natural ecosystem of a particular area, no matter how careful everyone is.

All human activity involves a "degradation" of the "natural ecosystem". There are many high impact sports (compared to geocaching) allowed in national parks. The NPS allows the use of snowmobiles, horses and ATVs. It also allows camping, trail building and marking, the grazing of livestock and the building of roads, concession stands and hotels.

In light of this, should planting a Tupperware contaner in a pile of rocks be even an issue? Give me a freakin' break.

"Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day" - Dave Barry

[This message was edited by BrianSnat on July 30, 2003 at 03:03 AM.]

July 29, 2003

I am reminded of the late 70's, when the NPS was giving serious consideration to allowing MCA (Yosemite's concessioner) to build a tramway up from the valley to the top of Yosemite Falls. Geocaching pales by comparison...

"...clear as mud?"

July 29, 2003

None of the responses even mention that to a certain extent, this could be an additional source of income for the NPS to boot. Considering many NPS areas are "Fee" areas, I know that I would splurge the $50 annual fee for the access pass that would allow me to escape the fee. Actually, I buy one annually anyway, but it's that much more incentive.

And I'd have to agree with BrianSnat. I can pay $70 annually for an Off-Road permit to drive my diesel 4x4 offroad on NPS property... and do so almost weekly.. Geocaching is more environmentally damaging than that?? Come on now..

Sometimes a majority only means that all the fools are on the same side

July 29, 2003

the earth was made for man to tear it up, beat the sh*t out of it then move on to another planet and waste it too. do you think the earth natural resources will last forever? man will suck all that he can out of the earth and spit it out, in the end, the earth will have it's revenge by dying and taking all of mankind with it.... to hell..... i will see you all in hell.

Creativity Within The Bounds Of Conformity

1.7k · July 30, 2003

Ah, no you won't. I plan on being in heaven in the end.

***************

Till a voice, as bad as Conscience, rang interminable changes

On one everlasting Whisper day and night repeated -- so:

"Something hidden. Go and find it. Go and look behind the Ranges --

"Something lost behind the Ranges. Lost and waiting for you. Go!"

Rudyard Kipling , The Explorer 1898

3.8k · July 30, 2003

....And this was going so well...

==============="If it feels good...do it"================

**(the other 9 out of 10 voices in my head say: "Don't do it.")**

.

July 30, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by georapper:
the earth was made for man to tear it up, beat the sh*t out of it then move on to another planet and waste it too....

Don't know if that was sarcasm, or your genuine belief....either way, your home must be SUCH a fine place to visit (that WAS sarcasm).

"...clear as mud?"

July 30, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by seneca:
Hmmmm. Maybe the answer has something to do with "Freedom".

Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose.

Seriously, the freedom angle just doesn't work. You aren't free to walk into my backyard and plant a geocache 'cause it's my land, not yours. Similarly, you aren't free to walk into the NPS land and plant a cache becuase it too isn't your land. We may agree that it is our land, but that "our" part imparts a greater responsibility to ensure that the activities are not an imposition on freedoms of the other constituents of "our".

On a similar note, I don't see it being favorable to argue that it should be allowed because there are other high impact activities taking place. The argument should stand on it's own. What are the benefits to the NPS and the public to allow geocaching on NPS lands? And, what are the possible consequences and how can they be mitigated?

I can see geocaching working quite well in many NPS lands and there are many sound arguments that could support it, including the added awareness of the lands that it brings to participants, trail cleanup, etc. And I think most of the negative consequences raised can be mitigated through thoughtful restrictions. Worried about trails, limit a cache placement to two years. Worried about adminstrative costs, charge an application fee for the cache. etc.

I think it is a good idea that Team360 had brought forward and I think the GC community could be very well served if a strong, common argument, is put to the NPS.

-=-=-=-=-=-

GPS_Brian

=-=-=-=-=-=

P.S. I'm thinking of a first cache request to be placed somewhere around 39.64864N 77.46430W. Hmm... I wonder if I should wait for approval before attempting to place it?

2.1k · July 30, 2003

Hehe I'm surprised someone hasn't said, "here goes another trying to change the rules"...

I imagine they have their reasons. Perhaps lack of interest or lack of people asking htem about it. Maybe people who want to cache in those areas should email them or do up a petition. But as far as the point of that they allow other things that already due harm, adding something else (although probably doing less harm) does not make it any better. Plus those other things they allow have been around a lot longer than geocaching. I think the NPS has taken on a different approach to things lately in protecting what they have, and just as geoacaching "grandfathered" caches that would not be allowed now, they have done the same to the activities which they already allow.

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

1.6k · July 30, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Webfoot:

Why is it so important to allow geocaching in National Parks?

While some national parks probably could stand being restricted from geocaching, and some parks have ecologically sensitive or unsafe areas that should be restricted from most people's access no matter what they are there for, that does not mean that all park lands are like that. Many parks are quite stable and would be nice areas for VC's or micros. I wrote to the NPS yesterday and asked that they consider a permit system like they have set up for mountain climbing. They have a permit system for leaving climbing spikes. If nailing spikes into El Capitan is OK, then leaving a tupperware container hidden in the brush along a trail is OK too.

Secondly, we have to understand that the NPS, FWS, and BLM control large tracts of the nation west of Omaha. Many areas (ie: Albuquerque) are boxed in by federal land. Tough to leave geocaches in good locations when the land is all off limits to the dangers of geocaching (yet ironically open to the benign, gentle sport of mountain bike riding...)

If we can get the NPS to bend, the FWS will follow and the BLM can be brought to the table.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nebraskache/

2.1k · July 30, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by GPS_Brian:

Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose.

Seriously, the freedom angle just doesn't work. You aren't free to walk into my backyard and plant a geocache 'cause it's my land, not yours. Similarly, you aren't free to walk into the NPS land and plant a cache becuase it too isn't your land. We may agree that it is our land, but that "our" part imparts a greater responsibility to ensure that the activities are not an imposition on freedoms of the other constituents of "our".

On a similar note, I don't see it being favorable to argue that it should be allowed because there are other high impact activities taking place. The argument should stand on it's own. What are the benefits to the NPS and the public to allow geocaching on NPS lands? And, what are the possible consequences and how can they be mitigated?

I can see geocaching working quite well in many NPS lands and there are many sound arguments that could support it, including the added awareness of the lands that it brings to participants, trail cleanup, etc. And I think most of the negative consequences raised can be mitigated through thoughtful restrictions. Worried about trails, limit a cache placement to two years. Worried about adminstrative costs, charge an application fee for the cache. etc.

I think it is a good idea that Team360 had brought forward and I think the GC community could be very well served if a strong, common argument, is put to the NPS.

-=-=-=-=-=-

GPS_Brian

=-=-=-=-=-=

Ditto 100%.

Brian

As long as you're going to think anyway, think big. -Donald Trump

1k · July 30, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by BrianSnat:

quote:
Why is it so important to allow geocaching in National Parks? Most geocaches I've seen have involved some off trail work which tends to degrade the natural ecosystem of a particular area, no matter how careful everyone is.

If this issue is such a concern to you, then how can you justify your participation in this sport? Personally, I haven't seen this.

Perhaps the word "Most" was used incorrectly. I think I should have said some instead. But the problem does exist in some areas which is what the NPS will bring up in arguments against allowing geocaching.

Their resources are stretched thin enough as it is and this is one more activity that they will need to enforce should they decide to allow it. How do we go about convincing the NPS that geocaching is an activity worth the expenditure of additional resources and manpower?

quote:
All human activity involves a "degradation" of the "natural ecosystem". There are many high impact sports (compared to geocaching) allowed in national parks. The NPS allows the use of snowmobiles, horses and ATVs. It also allows camping, trail building and marking, the grazing of livestock and the building of roads, concession stands and hotels.

In light of this, should planting a Tupperware contaner in a pile of rocks be even an issue? Give me a freakin' break.

I'm playing Devil's advocate here. Many of these activities you mentioned have been grandfathered into the system, while others (grazing of livestock) have been allowed in some areas to get park approval in the first place (Great Basin NP).

There have been other activities that have been disallowed over time. I can remember going to Yosemite NP in the 60's and watching the firefall. That doesn't happen anymore. I think snowmobiling in Yellowstone is happening today only because the present administration decided that it was important to keep. It looked like it was on the way out due to studies conducted under the Clinton Administration.

What we need is a coherent, well thought out plan of attack, if we want to see geocaching allowed in national parks. If we all just send emails, demanding our right to geocache anywhere we want to, the NPS will probably turn a deaf ear. I wanted to find out what others think about this and possibly get some ideas on how best to approach the NPS with a possible solution.

_________________________________

Webfoot

Tromping through the underbrush looking for Ammo cans, Tupperware containers, & little round disks.

20.7k · July 30, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Webfoot:...
National Parks are the most visited areas and get more foot traffic than most other areas of comprable size and destination. The wear and tear on the landscape by more geocachers going out and creating more new trails in areas, just so we can say we found one in a National Park, doesn't justify the need imo...

There is no reason cachers cannot currently go to NPs. In fact, many current visit these parks, they just don't place or find caches there. Therefore, I don't believe the placement of caches will significantly change the number of visitors to a NP.
The bulk of the volume of people who currently visit NPs (and perhaps cause damage) will not be visiting any placed caches. Therefore, the amount of people currently visiting NPs should not be a barrier to geocaching. Remember, also, that there is relatively few geocachers within the population.
Since only cachers will visit caches, we can look at caches placed outside of NPs to see if there will be problems. It has been my experience that most caches do not generate enough traffic to do serious harm to the land. Most caches that I have visited get a few dozen visits in the first month. After this initial period, they typically get no more than a few per week. This amount of traffic will not harm most off-trail areas, imo.
I don't believe that anyong is suggesting unregulated caching in NPs. Certainly a permission-based system can be established to ensure that caches are not placed in sensitive areas and that no damage is being done due to the placement of caches. Currently, there are a number of park systems that require some sort of formal permission before cache placement. The regulations in these areas typically ensure that caches are not placed in sensitive areas and that they are moved (or removed) if any damage to the area is beginning.

July 31, 2003

If the ioff-trail damage is their real concern, perhaps the parks could just forbid children in the parks? Based on observation, they're the real culprits for that damage.

Don't EVEN get me started on those pesky animals that parade through the park at all hours!

I've written a note, as part of my duty in this hobby. My emphasis? "You're turning down the opportunity to make more money by involving yourselves with a new and exciting activity. These people normally wouldn't have a reason to set foot in a national park. They are customers looking for a market! YOUR market!"

July 31, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by mckee:

I've written a note, as part of my duty in this hobby. My emphasis? "You're turning down the opportunity to make more money by involving yourselves with a new and exciting activity. These people normally wouldn't have a reason to set foot in a national park. They are customers looking for a market! YOUR market!"

I don't know about that; I probably visit the local national parks less now, since I'm visiting new places every weekend instead of returning to old favorites...

Ron/yumitori

---

Remember what the dormouse said...

July 31, 2003

I may be the only one who thinks this way, so I've put on my flame-proof suit.

I don't see any problem with approved caches in many areas of some NPs, but my guess is that most cachers (like most visitors to NPs) will remain primarily in the popular areas. I, for one, do not want to see a number of caches piling up near Old Faithful or other popular areas.

It has already been stated that after the first month the number of visitors to a cache diminishes. After the first year there may be very few visitors. With hundreds of thousands of visitors to NPs each year just imagine the number of unmaintained caches there will be after just a few years. Even if only a fraction of a percent place caches, how many will return to maintain those 'vacation' caches they placed when they visited Yellowstone last year? What are they then? Litter. And THAT'S what the NPS is worried about.

So we have to work WITH the NPS. The suggestion to write is a good one. If we don't care, they don't care. An approval process that works is another good suggestion.

I'd like to make one more. I've mentioned it before, but it was over a year ago (I think).

Since many cachers claim "it's the hunt not the cache", why are we trying so hard to place a cache? Approach the NPS about setting up a system that would allow us to use our GPSs in the park to 'find' something. Have them set up specific locations (virtual caches) that would be of interest to cachers. Cachers get to hunt and the NPS gets to control where you go. Perhaps get some sort of 'prize' if you complete the entire course. This system was done successfully in a local park by a cacher working WITH the park service rather than trying to fight them. If you read the log entries it looks like a WIN-WIN situation. My guess is that the NPS might go for something like this.

Just another suggestion...

geospotter

July 31, 2003

quote:
Approach the NPS about setting up a system that would allow us to use our GPSs in the park to 'find' something. Have them set up specific locations (virtual caches) that would be of interest to cachers.

Although a fine idea in theory, in practice it reinforces the idea that virtual caches are something that would appease geocachers who request permission to place a real cache.

As someone who paid $100 for a Special Use Permit and had it restricted to virtual caches I can tell you it's not a good strategy. The superintendent had called his peers to ask about geocaching and was told that we'd be happy with virtuals. So that's what I got.

I just sent my e-mail to the address at the beginning of this thread. It can't hurt.

~erik~

July 31, 2003

Yellowstone has a nice virtual at Old faithful. We enjoyed the Yellowstone virtuals last Memorial day weekend. I would have enjoyed a traditional cache just as much. Except it would have been almost impossible to open a cache in that area without giving it's location away to the hundreds of other people standing there with us. At least with the "read this plaque, fill in the blanks" virtual, we could be unobtrusive when caching. I am all for traditional caches where they can fit and be enjoyed without being found easily by muggles & plundered.

Permission to place in national parks would be a great step towards geocaching being allowed in more parks.

-Jennifer

Age does not bring wisdom, but it does give perspective.

July 31, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:
With hundreds of thousands of visitors to NPs each year just imagine the number of unmaintained caches there will be after just a few years. Even if only a fraction of a percent place caches, how many will return to maintain those 'vacation' caches they placed when they visited Yellowstone last year?

Vacation caches - regardless of whether or not they're in NPs - are not allowed. If a person can't maintain a cache, it won't be approved. At least, that how I understand the VC rule...

--

Pehmva!

Random quote:

sigimage.php

July 31, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by Cruzin!:
Vacation caches - regardless of whether or not they're in NPs - are not allowed. If a person can't maintain a cache, it won't be approved. At least, that how I understand the VC rule...

My guess is the cache will be placed while on vacation. Once the placer gets home he/she will try to get it listed here only to be declined. Then what?

1.6k · July 31, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by geospotter:

quote:
Originally posted by Cruzin!:
Vacation caches - regardless of whether or not they're in NPs - are not allowed. If a person can't maintain a cache, it won't be approved. At least, that how I understand the VC rule...

My guess is the cache will be placed while on vacation. Once the placer gets home he/she will try to get it listed here only to be declined. Then what?

Part of the permit process might be that you have to arrange maintenance either by yourself or some local person. The thing is that NPS land (as well as FWS and BLM land) often occupies the best trails and the best locations for caches in an area. Many locals or near locals use NPS land as if it were a state park and would place maintainable caches.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nebraskache/

July 31, 2003

quote:
My guess is the cache will be placed while on vacation. Once the placer gets home he/she will try to get it listed here only to be declined. Then what?

The cache approvers hope that people read the geocaching guidelines linked off the cache submission page before hitting the submit button.

Keep in mind too that not all NPS administered parks are on the order of Yellowstone or Yosemite. I have several NPS administered National Recreation Area parks within a dozen miles of my house that are perfect for geocaching. Cache maintenance would not be a problem for me or anyone else who lives in the area.

erik - geocaching.com admin

38.2k · July 31, 2003

quote:
As someone who paid $100 for a Special Use Permit and had it restricted to virtual caches I can tell you it's not a good strategy. The superintendent had called his peers to ask about geocaching and was told that we'd be happy with virtuals. So that's what I got.

Talk about getting screwed. I'd ask for my money back. There is nothing that keeps us from placing virtuals in NPs now.

"Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day" - Dave Barry

July 31, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by GPS_Brian:

quote:
Originally posted by seneca:
Hmmmm. Maybe the answer has something to do with "Freedom".

Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose.

Seriously, the freedom angle just doesn't work. You aren't free to walk into my backyard and plant a geocache 'cause it's my land, not yours. Similarly, you aren't free to walk into the NPS land and plant a cache becuase it too isn't your land.

My remark was in response to the question: "Why is it so important to allow geocaching in National Parks?” The suggestion that the right to use public lands is a privilege, for which one must first provide justification before being “allowed” just bothered me, and seemed somewhat strange to be made (and apparently supported) on an American based forum. The right to use public lands should not be a privilege for which one needs to provide justification. A government that operates by granting privileges to its citizenry is the hallmark of a dictatorship - it is in fact one of the main tools that a dictatorship uses to maintain power. For me the starting point should be: All citizens are free to use public lands without having to provide any justification. Of course, as I previously stated, that freedom may be restricted by a democratically elected government that demonstrates such restrictions are reasonably required for the common good. (this was the context of my previous post, which context you conveniently left out of your quote)

Your assertion that a citizen’s right to enter upon and use public lands is basically the same as the right to enter upon private lands, is completely erroneous, both legally, and morally.

By the way, I have never really liked the old Janice Joplin expression, “Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose.” Although it is perceived to be true by a number of cynics, I always found it to be demeaning to the fundamental tenant of western democracy. I have much preferred the other famous Joplin lyric, “Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t know what you’ve got til its gone”

I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.

38.2k · July 31, 2003

quote:
The right to use public lands should not be a privilege for which one needs to provide justification. A government that operates by granting privileges to its citizenry is the hallmark of a dictatorship - it is in fact one of the main tools that a dictatorship uses to maintain power.

Well said Seneca! I hope you don't mind if I steal it and repeat it until people get sick of reading it.

As an aside, I believe the term "Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose" was actually written by Kris Kristofferson, the well known anti-American, Marxist songwriter and lousy actor. Also "Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t know what you’ve got 'til its gone” was written by Joni Mitchell.

Not that this invalidates your point. I just felt like being a pedant.

"Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day" - Dave Barry

[This message was edited by BrianSnat on July 31, 2003 at 08:09 PM.]

August 1, 2003

I don't want this to turn into another dreadful debate on American politics. The lyric (which Janis was merely one of many who have sang it, she did not write it), was provided toungue in cheek, hence the "seriously" comment that followed.

My only point was that the assertion that we should all be allowed to do something simply becuase of our rights and freedoms is not enough of an argument to convince the powers that be. I don't necessarily disagree with you sentiments ... I just don't think such sentiments ever carry an argument of this nature.

The NPS lands may be public but as much as you may wish or feel that you should be able to have free use of those lands, the reality is that you do not. There are many things that you cannot legally or morally do on those public lands, just as there are many things that you cannot legally or morally do on my private land. The logic to this is quite clear because they are not merely unclaimed land but land that has been acquired and established for use by the collective and in so doing a representative adminstration must be established to ensure that the lands are enjoyable by all. This is done through the placement of restrictions and regulations, a point which you have noted ... and which rather abates the notion that "freedom" gives you the rights to enter the land and do what you will.

Underlying your argument I beleive is the inference not so much that the freedom necessarily gives you the right to do what you will, but rather it places the burden upon the NPS to first establish that what you are doing is in conflict with the common good and that until that is established you should be able to do it. On the surface this seems reasonable. However, you can undoubtedly imagine activities which may appear to some to be quite obviously contradictory to the goals of the park land. Certain things we probably wouldn't want to wait until they were done before restricting. It would appear that geocaching may fall into one of these categories for the NPS, out of fear from the disturbance of historical or archeologically significant areas to the creation of ecologically devestating trails. Mind you, I'm not arguing that these are necessarily even valid concerns, but they may be real concerns and even misguided concerns but they nonetheless would result in the creation of restrictions to protect the common good. The approach to working to adjust the types of perceptions that has led to our undesired protection then is not to simply cry foul for having our freedoms abridged but by rather educating the NPS as to why geocaching is a positive activity for the common good and how we can work together to mitigate any real concerns that they do have.

quote:
My remark was in response to the question: _"Why is it so important to allow geocaching in National Parks?” _The suggestion that the right to use public lands is a privilege, for which one must first provide justification before being “allowed” just bothered me, and seemed somewhat strange to be made (and apparently supported) on an American based forum. The right to use public lands should not be a privilege for which one needs to provide justification. A government that operates by granting privileges to its citizenry is the hallmark of a dictatorship - it is in fact one of the main tools that a dictatorship uses to maintain power. For me the starting point should be: All citizens are free to use public lands without having to provide any justification. Of course, as I previously stated, that freedom may be restricted by a democratically elected government that demonstrates such restrictions are reasonably required for the common good. (this was the context of my previous post, which context you conveniently left out of your quote)

Your assertion that a citizen’s right to enter upon and use public lands is basically the same as the right to enter upon private lands, is completely erroneous, both legally, and morally.

By the way, I have never really liked the old Janice Joplin expression, “Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose.” Although it is perceived to be true by a number of cynics, I always found it to be demeaning to the fundamental tenant of western democracy. I have much preferred the other famous Joplin lyric, “Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t know what you’ve got til its gone”

_I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me._

http://www.cslaw.ca/geol4.JPG

-=-=-=-=-=-

GPS_Brian

=-=-=-=-=-=

1.6k · August 1, 2003

The thing about the NPS and the FWS, the BLM, and the other federales is that they sit on land that is not geologically unique, fragile, dangerous, or otherwise unsuitable for human use. In the western parts of the nation sometimes over 80% of an entire state can be controlled by these agencies. They allow other sports to go on without regulation that are vastly more dangerous to the habitat. They could develop a permit process for geocache placement with rules attached to park land caches that prevent caches in restricted areas, vacation caches, and other no-no's.

If the permit was a more reasonable fee (say $50) and required permanent maintenance and regular check ins with the rangers as part of granting the permit, those of us who live near federally controlled land would be willing to pay the money to put caches in these lands.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nebraskache/

August 1, 2003

You know....., as cash strapped as the NPS is these days, has anyone used the "permit as a source of income" argument in their correspondence?

Over the past couple of months I have sent several short and very polite notes to the NPS requesting that they reconsider the no caching rule. To date no one there has replied.

I wonder if anyone there is listening?

August 2, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by seneca:
Hmmmm. Maybe the answer has something to do with "Freedom". I always thought thought that Freedom was a fairly important concept in the U.S. (Freedom to choose ; freedom to roam; freedom to enjoy the splendor of my country Those are all pretty important to me).

Freedom to enjoy the country is not the same as freedom to harm it. If something is found to do harm...then maybe it should be thought through a bit. Maybe the alternative is to allow Virtuals only....or something like that. But I do agree that the parks should at least try something on a limited basis to see how it goes.

If God is your co-pilot, it's time to change seats!!!

http://www.mi-geocaching.org/

4.5k · August 2, 2003

Laws, rules and regulations are written to prohibit whether it's public or private nature. They do not allow. For example, you cannot steal, you cannot smoke in public places, you canot geocache, you cannot spit on the sidewalk; and for private you cannot trespass.

In effect everything starts with a clean slate and you can do everything until the prohibitions are legalized.

So the BLM and NPS etc do not allow you to do anything as you can do everything except for the things they prohibit.

This is not a play on words but a fundamental legal principal.

Alan

You can change the NPS geocaching policy!

Recommended Posts

Join the conversation