Permission DENIED by Mojave National Preserve

[Guest CJLinst]

Here you have it, folks. This individual seems to think they have the authority to speak for ALL national parks. Has anyone asked the USDA about national forests?

 

http://www.qnet.com/~cjl/x/mojaveroad-200103/geocachedenied.pdf

[Guest Lucy]

NPS may have rules about geo-caching activities - like the letter said. But it could be that this would be something that would need to be added to their "Use activities" - if the issue was properly addressed. Right now there is no legal, federal definition of geo-caching - just the notion that you are not allowed to leave personal property in our national parks.

just my personal opinion.

As for the NF's - anybody else know?

[Guest bubba232]

Here's an idea. Just place a powerbar (subsistence) and a band-aid (health) in the cache and your set.

 

Have GPS, will travel.

[Guest bubba232]

Here's an idea. Just place a powerbar (subsistence) and a band-aid (health) in the cache and your set.

 

Have GPS, will travel.

[Guest CJLinst]

Is it our land or the King's land? Considering the people gave the federal government strictly limited powers of land 'ownership', via the Constitution:

 

They can 'own' and exercise exclusive jurisdiction over:

1. The seat of the government (Currently Washington DC)
2. Or lands "for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings"

 

That is a complete list. There are no other delegated instances where the federal government can 'own' land.

 

Something tells me I won't be finding any of the aforementioned military activities on Mojave Road.

 

Oh well. We get the government we deserve.

[Guest bubba232]

This bring to mind a question regarding the land designations.

 

Are the laws different on a "Preserve" than a "wildlife refuge" vs "National Forest" vs "Open Space"?

 

I would imagine the N.P.S. has a basic set of laws and then supplemented with laws that follow under a "Preserve"?

 

Any Rangers out there?

 

Steve

[Guest jeremy]

k service so far, and the owner had been contacted in both cases. I do not know of a situation where someone has been cited.

 

I'm working on some wording in the FAQ and guide to finding a cache. It will be up soon. I'm also trying to think of ways to do more virtual caches, so I'll propose some ideas to the group when I have something more concrete. I'm also thinking of some ways that the NPS can take an active role and possibly create "geocaches" that are officially sanctioned in national parks, which would be a lot of fun and encourage visiting parks and using GPS units.

 

Jeremy

[Guest robanna]

I have yet to see it here in Colorado , but in New York, most trails have log books. I think it is to keep track of who goes in and makes sure they come out. Some of the log books are a half mile or so into the trail. I could see then seting up a log book somewhere that you could "find." maybe at an overlook or something.

 

Just a thought

[Guest mcb]

This makes me very mad. People in positions like "cheif ranger" let there position go straight to their head. My first instinct would be to ask Jeremy to make a anonymous account for all to use and let us post caches on park land to the website untraceably. Its so infuriating that people are this close-minded. I would not actually do the above because I like geocaching too much but it is very frustrating.

 

It would be pretty cool if we could convince parks to let us put approved caches in the parks. If we manage to approach the right people in the correct way we might get a chance. It could be great for all parties involved. We would get more place to hide (with permission) and seek more caches and the parks would be visited by more of the people that pay to have those parks there. We?ll see, just remember to be polite and cooperative with the park systems in your area. We don?t want to get on the parks bad side. As a mountain biker I know that if you piss them off they will make your activity a crime. And then you will never change there mind your activity will be stamped "EVIL" never to be allowed in a park. The park system is very stubborn once you have angered it.

 

mcb

 

[This message has been edited by mcb (edited 03-19-2001).]

[Guest Markwell]

What about having a location that has just the Geocache logo on it. We're all so concerned about finding the cache box, logging it in the book, etc., etc. - yet we all maintain that the hunt, and the interaction with nature is the driving force.

 

If we have a specific scenic overlook, find the marker or information sign, and have a 1"x1" sticker with the Geocaching logo. That way: we're not leaving abandoned property (although it might be considered minimally defacing), the finder knows that they've gone to the right location, and we can then come back and log our visit in the virtual log books on the site.

[Guest CaptHawke]

Our British cousins have 21,000 letterboxes scattered across their Dartmoor National Park.

 

Granted, there are differences between letterboxing and geocaching, and between the

Dartmoor National Park Authority and the US NPS. But they are all more similar that different. Both activities involve finding a hidden 'treasure'. Both agencies are mandated to conserve natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage.

 

Maybe we botched it in 1776.

[Guest CaptHawke]

On the other hand our British cousins must be extremely frustrated right now: All the trails through Dartmoor have been closed to public access due to foot and mouth disease.

Nasty stuff.

[Guest n1niq]

I think a better solution to Markwell's idea would be to utilize existing signs/markers without using any type of sticker. Stickers could be viewed as something which defaces property or litter. Instead, you could have clues which say you need to look for a sign of a given size (in inches). Another possibility would be to have the hunter send the cache owner the dimensions of a given object at the site. The owner would then validate the answer and inform the hunter.

In the long run, it is going to be easier to work with existing laws or change them rather than sneak around them.

[Guest CJLinst]

I say we thumb our noses at the federales and cache anyway. Nobody actually gets a forest adventure pass either, do they?

[Guest Mike_Teague]

I'm still using the Northwest Forest Pass I bought sometime last summer (i never marked the day down I was supposed to use it on)

 

hahahaha

 

I even sent them an email asking if they actually ever check, and what they do if they see someone parked without one.. never got a response..

[Guest BigFig]

caching was a legit and responsible "sport".

 

Ain't not big deal (here, in the East) - lighten up a bit.

[Guest bubba232]

Here in Calif. things are a little different. You practically can't dig a hole in your OWN yard without submitting an Environmental Impact Study!

 

You might distrub some endangered earthworm.

 

I'll admit that I haven't placed a cache yet. But I would really be surprised if they (green police) would allow it out here.

 

Hopefully I'm wrong. Are there any Cal cache stashers out there with feedback?

 

[This message has been edited by bubba232 (edited 03-21-2001).]

[Guest Vagabond]

check California Geocaching, look for Loma 1

it was hidden on 2/11/01 three different

parties looked for it and got busted lucky

they weren't fined, cache was confiscated

[Guest BigFig]

Loma #1 does not appear in the list of CA caches??

[Guest Zar]

Jeremy, and others. You said you didn't know of case where someone was cited? Well, you got one here.

 

I placed a cache in the Daley Ranch area of San Diego, and was just informed by a Ranger via E-mail that I could come to the Ranger Station to claim my cache...AND my citation. The offense is "going off-trail" in a park. This sucks.

 

I have heard a couple more cases of this happening (caches being confiscated) in these forums and in cache notes, and I'm starting to get worried. I don't know if this Ranger found the cache because of the writeup in our local newspaper, or because he found it on the site, or what. He wasn't very happy about it.

 

Whatever the case, it's not good for geocaching.

 

We run a real risk of becoming antagonists with the Park Services at the national, state, county and city levels. This happened in the 1970's with the off-road people, and it led to a very nasty 10 year fight that went all the way up to the Supreme Court. Eventually they shook hands and now work together to share the resources. If possible, I'd like to avoid this happening to us.

 

If we don't do something, we're going to have some problems in the future -- I can just see it now. Interest in geocaching is growing every day. I've been invited to two different Boy Scout leader councils to discuss geocaching. Search and Rescue teams are hiding caches to encourage people to learn to use their GPS's. Outdoor interest is up, and the GPS vendors love this new sport. I'd hate to see this all get messed up.

 

I would like to see us start a new forum here (not just a thread) for issues like this. Jeremy, I'd volunteer to moderate the forum. The title could be "Legal/Policy Issues" or "Government Cooperation" or anything like that. I feel like we need to come up with a suggestion list, a code of ethics (like GoodDogSD proposed), establish an MOU (Memorandum Of Understanding) with the Park Service, get some public support, news media coverage, etc. I would be happy to take the lead on getting something going, but I'm going to need a top-level forum for discussions, and of course, participation and ideas from other cachers/searchers.

 

Whaddya say?

 

thanks,

bruce

 

 

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

[Guest bubba232]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zar:

I would like to see us start a new forum here (not just a thread) for issues like this. Jeremy, I'd volunteer to moderate the forum. The title could be "Legal/Policy Issues" or "Government Cooperation" or anything like that. I feel like we need to come up with a suggestion list, a code of ethics (like GoodDogSD proposed), establish an MOU (Memorandum Of Understanding) with the Park Service, get some public support, news media coverage, etc. I would be happy to take the lead on getting something going, but I'm going to need a top-level forum for discussions, and of course, participation and ideas from other cachers/searchers.

 

Whaddya say?

 

thanks,

bruce

 

 

---

 

I'm with ya Bruce! A forum where we could discuss (intelligently) these issues. I think it would be great for the sport and (hopefully) for the park service(s). I would like to see more park rangers, etc. in the forum also, without second hand interpretations.

 

Steve

 

Bummer about the cite.

[Guest bubba232]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zar:

I would like to see us start a new forum here (not just a thread) for issues like this. Jeremy, I'd volunteer to moderate the forum. The title could be "Legal/Policy Issues" or "Government Cooperation" or anything like that. I feel like we need to come up with a suggestion list, a code of ethics (like GoodDogSD proposed), establish an MOU (Memorandum Of Understanding) with the Park Service, get some public support, news media coverage, etc. I would be happy to take the lead on getting something going, but I'm going to need a top-level forum for discussions, and of course, participation and ideas from other cachers/searchers.

 

Whaddya say?

 

thanks,

bruce

 

 

---

 

I'm with ya Bruce! A forum where we could discuss (intelligently) these issues. I think it would be great for the sport and (hopefully) for the park service(s). I would like to see more park rangers, etc. in the forum also, without second hand interpretations.

 

Steve

 

Bummer about the cite.

[Guest Ron Streeter]

is a stamp which the finder can use to stamp a

piece of paper to prove that he has visited the site. The web site showed

the location of at least two letterboxes in parks. The parks have been

notified, but the Service has not yet contacted the webmaster or game

managers. The Degree Confluence Project (www.confluence.org) is another

web-based activity where people try to visit various latitude and longitude

integer degree intersections and report their findings on the web site. In

this case, however, no objects are placed in the ground, and there are no

apparent regulatory violations in areas where cross-country travel is

allowed or where the confluence is not on a protected site. There has been

no attempt to contact the project organizers.

 

Additional comments referring to sections of the Code of Federal

Regulations: The depositing of the cache, be it a bucket or other type of

container, could be in violation of a few regulations like digging up plants

if it was being buried. Additionally, it is against regulations to leave

property unattended for more than 24 hours without it being subject to

impoundment. If people are "hunting" for something, it could certainly take

more than 24 hours to find. Lastly, some areas are closed to off-trail

hiking which could prohibit someone from going off trail to place or

retrieve a cache.

[Guest Ron Streeter]

I apologize if this gets posted twice..first time didn't seem to "take".

 

If you are not on "the list" you will have missed this email from an editor at Outdoor Magazine.

 

I am enclosing his introduction and then the material from the NPS.

 

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

Greetings,

 

I am the editor at Outside magazine that assigned our January story about

Geocaching. I have been following the NPS discussion and thought you might

all be interested in this. It comes from the "Morning Report" that is

emailed to all regional offices and headquarters of National Parks

nationwide.

 

-James Glave

 

Geocaching - There is a new web-based activity called geocaching that has

affected several National Park Service areas. The Ranger Activities Division

asked Olympic NP SA Mike Butler to investigate. Here's his report:

Geocaching is an activity in which participants hide a cache and take a

position at the location using a GPS receiver. The position is then

published on the group's web site with an invitation to search for the

"treasure." Caches often contain a notebook or log book and something the

finder may take. The finder is asked to put another item in the cache for

others to discover and will often report the find on the web site. Several

caches have been found in National Park Service areas. The webmaster for the

site (www.geocaching.com) has been contacted. He was very surprised that

geocaching is illegal in NPS areas, and understood NPS concerns about the

damage geocaching has and can cause to historic, archeological and natural

sites. He agreed to work with the Service to discourage further geocaching

activities in parks.

 

Two related activities were also discovered.

Letterboxing (www.letterboxing.org) is a phenomenon similar to geocaching in

that a player takes directions from a web site and uses those directions to

find a hidden object. In letterboxing, the directions come in the form of a

riddle and the hidden object is a stamp which the finder can use to stamp a

piece of paper to prove that he has visited the site. The web site showed

the location of at least two letterboxes in parks. The parks have been

notified, but the Service has not yet contacted the webmaster or game

managers. The Degree Confluence Project (www.confluence.org) is another

web-based activity where people try to visit various latitude and longitude

integer degree intersections and report their findings on the web site. In

this case, however, no objects are placed in the ground, and there are no

apparent regulatory violations in areas where cross-country travel is

allowed or where the confluence is not on a protected site. There has been

no attempt to contact the project organizers.

 

Additional comments referring to sections of the Code of Federal

Regulations: The depositing of the cache, be it a bucket or other type of

container, could be in violation of a few regulations like digging up plants

if it was being buried. Additionally, it is against regulations to leave

property unattended for more than 24 hours without it being subject to

impoundment. If people are "hunting" for something, it could certainly take

more than 24 hours to find. Lastly, some areas are closed to off-trail

hiking which could prohibit someone from going off trail to place or

retrieve a cache.

[Guest CaptHawke]

Here's the URL for the MORNING REPORT for March 21: http://www.nps.gov/morningreport/msg00806.html

 

"...NPS concerns about the damage geocaching has and can cause to historic, archeological and natural sites."

 

"Has"? Anybody care to enlighten me as the the damage that has been done?

[Guest makaio]

So if one decided to place a cache in a Natioanl Park regardless of the rules, he/she could integrate the Letterboxing philosopy into the hunt. Post the coordinates of the start location and then provide riddles which will guide the hunter to the cache. At least this way you're not simply posting the exact location. At the same time you're providing a challenging hunt to geocachers and a more difficult search & remove project for the NPS

[Guest makaio]

So if one decided to place a cache in a Natioanl Park regardless of the rules, he/she could integrate the Letterboxing philosopy into the hunt. Post the coordinates of the start location and then provide riddles which will guide the hunter to the cache. At least this way you're not simply posting the exact location. At the same time you're providing a challenging hunt to geocachers and a more difficult search & remove project for the NPS

[Guest robanna]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zar:

Outdoor interest is up, and the GPS vendors love this new sport.

---

 

Maybe the GPS Vendors should be notified about issues placing caches. If caching goes away so does alot of there business. It would be nice to have a lobby group in our corner.

[Guest Exocet]

mething and leaving something, it's having a good reason to go to a new place and play with your GPS.

 

A stake in the ground is: less noticable and probably isn't 'junk' in the NPS's view. Or perhaps it is. Nonetheless, we do need to talk to the rangers, NPS people, whoever and explain to them that:

 

- We're using the park. That's why it was invented, right?

- We'd like to pay for the use of the park. IE, we're not freeloaders.

- We're probably more environmentally aware about what off-trail use does and thus it won't be as bad as someone else's off-trail use.

- It's not a threat, but this is a popular sport that's only going to get more popular, so see the next point:

- We'd like to work with you [NPS, et al.] to make this all legal, but you have to work with us, too.

 

...And other stuff I haven't thought of.

 

It's in everyone's best interest to be reasonable about this, but to take it up with official-type people. If they shoot you down, regroup and try again with someone else, or try again later. It will probably take awhile to convince the NPS that Geocaching is benefitial to the parks, not detrimental.

 

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

[Guest CaptHawke]

Hey Exocet,

I have already considered it and sent off the following email to folks at the NPS last Friday (4/23):

 

-----------Here's the email------------------

 

Hi,

 

The following was in the NATIONAL PARK SERVICE MORNING REPORT, Wednesday, March 21, 2001.

 

"Geocaching - There is a new web-based activity called geocaching that has affected several National Park Service areas. The Ranger Activities Division asked Olympic NP SA Mike Butler to investigate. Here's his report: Geocaching is an activity in which participants hide a cache and take a position at the location using a GPS receiver. The position is then published on the group's web site with an invitation to search for the "treasure." Caches often contain a notebook or log book and something the finder may take. The finder is asked to put another item in the cache for others to discover and will

often report the find on the web site. Several caches have been found in National Park Service areas. The webmaster for the site (www.geocaching.com) has been contacted. He was very surprised that geocaching is illegal in NPS areas, and understood NPS concerns about the damage geocaching has and can cause to historic, archeological and

natural sites. He agreed to work with the Service to discourage further geocaching activities in parks. Two related activities were also discovered. Letterboxing (www.letterboxing.org) is a phenomenon

similar to geocaching in that a player takes directions from a web site and uses those directions to find a hidden object. In

letterboxing, the directions come in the form of a riddle and the hidden object is a stamp which the finder can use to stamp a piece of

paper to prove that he has visited the site. The web site showed the location of at least two letterboxes in parks. The parks have been

notified, but the Service has not yet contacted the webmaster or game managers. The Degree Confluence Project www.confluence.org) is another web-based activity where people try to visit various latitude and longitude integer degree intersections and report their findings on the web site. In this case, however, no objects are placed in the

ground, and there are no apparent regulatory violations in areas where cross-country travel is allowed or where the confluence is not on a protected site. There has been no attempt to contact the project organizers. [Mike Butler, SA, OLYM]"

 

This leaves me a bit concerned on a couple points. First, the statement "...NPS concerns about the damage geocaching has and can cause...". I can understand that almost any human activity carried to extremes and unregulated can cause damage to our parks. But the word "has" bothers me. Would you please explain the damage that has been caused, other than a violation of the abandoned property regulation?

 

My second concern is with the outright total prohibition on geocaching and letterboxing. It stikes me that this is going to be hard to enforce and cause an undo burden on NPS Rangers. Do you really want to dispatch Rangers deep into the backcountry to retrieve a Tupperware box containing a Beanie Baby? Will every park vistor carrying a GPS be strip searched for rubber stamps? Let's get real folks, Rangers are overworked and underpaid already. This is just plain silly. Letterboxers and geocachers aren't toting guns and chainsaws into the wilds aboard ATVs and jetskis. There is no damage being caused here. If you fear that things might get out of hand then please regulate these activities: no digging, size limits on cache containers, sensitive areas off limits, fees($$$!), etc. Prohibition is not regulation. These activities are growing too fast and if the statement above is your last word on the topic, people are just going to ignore you and have their fun. You will have to get Tupperware sniffing dogs patroling the trails in order to control things.

 

Look at reality. here is the NPS mission:

"...to promote and regulate the use of the...national parks...which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."

 

In Great Britian the National Park Authority has the following mission:

"The Statutory purposes of National Parks, which the Authority has the duty to pursue, are: To conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area; To promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the area's special qualities by the public."

 

In the US the NPS bans all letterboxes/geocaches as harmful. In the UK there are 21,000 letterboxes in Dartmoor National Park alone. Yes, 21,000. Our British cousins have developed a code of conduct that works for both the Park Authority and the letterboxers. Isn't that a more rational approach?

 

Please consider working with us on this. Do a bit more research and think things through. Everyone will benefit in the long run.

 

http://letterboxing.org/

http://www.geocaching.com/

 

Cephas Hawke

Bedford, NH

'Live Free or Die' - Gen John Stark

-----------end of email-------------------

 

I sent this off to the head of the Ranger Activities Division (the division that produces the Morning Report) at WASO_RAD_Chief@nps.gov and asked him/her to forward it to the proper person(s). I haven't heard anything back yet. If I don't get a reply within a week, I have a list of a couple dozen other NPS addresses to try.

 

By the way, the NPS Morning Report can be interesting reading. http://www.nps.gov/morningreport/

 

C. Hawke

[Guest ALacy]

Has anyone else on this thread seen the log for the "Stump Barron"?http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=1241

 

Prospects don't look good for placing caches on "National Wildlife refuges."

[Guest Quinnow]

OK...Not sure if they will fall for this or not, But what If we were to just say our cache was there first and they built the park around it and we would like the park removed?

 

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

Quinn Stone

Rochester, NY.14616

www.Navicache.com

[Guest Quinnow]

OK...Not sure if they will fall for this or not, But what If we were to just say our cache was there first and they built the park around it and we would like the park removed?

 

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

Quinn Stone

Rochester, NY.14616

www.Navicache.com

[Guest CaptHawke]

Quinn,

 

In thr UK's Dartmoor National Park, our letterbox cousins were practicing their sport

97 years before the park was officially established. They can actually make the claim that they were there first.

 

Our NPS is saying we have caused harm. Yet 97 years of letterboxing in Dartmoor(starting in 1854) did not disqualify the area from becoming a park in 1951. And at latest count, 21,000 letterboxes are in that one park! In 1991, 4.96% of the park's visitors were there primarily for letterboxing. Using the US NPS arguement, Dartmoor should be a wasteland.

 

C. Hawke

Bedford NH

Live Free or Die

 

A little info of letterboxing in Dartmoor:

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian/issues98/apr98/letterboxing.html

[Guest Jason Murphy]

I am going to take the unpopular view on this, but I am glad they ban GeoCaching in Federal Parks.

 

My view is simple. You have to do everything you can to keep people on the trails. If you put a cache in plain view, its going to get stolen. If you put it off the trail, then people have walkout trample around to find it.

 

There simply to many stupid people in the world to let off the trails. Trails are there so we can preserve what we're there to see.

[Guest CaptHawke]

The NPS has not made off-trail travel an issue, only geocaching. Since Olympic NP was mentioned by name in the NPS Morning Report, I visited the Olympic website and found their off-trail guidelines: http://www.nps.gov/olym/wic/travel.htm#Off-Trail

In a nutshell: "Before hiking cross-country, know how to navigate using a map and compass. Travel in small parties and spread out to prevent damage to fragile plants. When traveling cross-country, follow good Leave No Trace practices. Off-trail hiking is permitted throughout the wilderness, however it is wise for first-time visitors to plan trail hikes."

 

And before anyone says that geocaching violates Leave No Trace practices I suggest that you become familiar with the program. A careful cacher can easily work within the LNT principles. http://www.lnt.org

 

In a world where all stupid people are required to stay on the trails, only stupid people will.

 

Cephas Hawke

Bedford NH

Live Free or Die

 

[This message has been edited by CaptHawke (edited 04-04-2001).]

[Guest ScottJ]

"As it turns out, Geocaching caches are considered "Abandoned property." At first I thought this was absurd, as it's not exactly abandoned, but the rule for abandoned property is "property left unattended for more than 24 hours" or something to that effect. So legally, caches are off-limits by law."

 

Assholes. Gung-ho, hyper-regulatory, self-important assholes. *sigh*

 

Scott

[Guest Zar]

Well, my suggestion to start a forum for discussing working with the park people appears to have died for lack of support. It's sad -- ultimately I think it will be a thorn in the side of geocaching, and here we had a chance to address it early...

 

Maybe later, when the thorn has drawn more blood.

 

cheers,

bruce

[Guest Mike_Teague]

I didnt notice any such message suggesting a new forum, but I just skim for the most part .. Perhaps send an email directly to Jeremy asking for a new forum on this site...

 

(indeed, I looked back thru this particular thread and noticed you mentioned creating a new forum, but jeremy probably skims thru these threads quicker than I do, as he has much to do already...)

 

If he does set one up, and there is no discussion, then perhaps you are right... But then consider that very few geocaches have been placed in national parks to begin with...

 

 

[This message has been edited by Mike_Teague (edited 04-04-2001).]

[Guest Mike_Teague]

I didnt notice any such message suggesting a new forum, but I just skim for the most part .. Perhaps send an email directly to Jeremy asking for a new forum on this site...

 

(indeed, I looked back thru this particular thread and noticed you mentioned creating a new forum, but jeremy probably skims thru these threads quicker than I do, as he has much to do already...)

 

If he does set one up, and there is no discussion, then perhaps you are right... But then consider that very few geocaches have been placed in national parks to begin with...

 

 

[This message has been edited by Mike_Teague (edited 04-04-2001).]

[Guest trilobites]

at all cost.

Some probably are unreasonable----- well find another park.

At our meeting in KC, we seemed to agree that if the cache is placed with consent, doesn't seem that it is "abandoned" property. But if you guys out there continue to push the issue with "cowboy caches" (placed without permission), there indeed may be a directive fron Park Central banning all caches, letterboxes, etc. The purpose of our caches is education and that is what I've stressed. Yes its, fun, but we've had more than 60 visitors to the 3 Santa Fe Trail caches, most all have indicated they never knew of the sites or the history beforehand. So try a little tact, find a unique spot that has some cultural, geologic, and psyiographic quality that makes it worthwhile to educate people about. I also make a big point to include NPS brochures, park info, etc. in the caches. Also stress, its a "family sport". Good luck, remember name calling isn't going to get us very far.

[Guest DrunkenBard]

I would have to agree that a forum specifically for discussion of the legal fight for use of our land is a good idea. It would give us a place to share any responses we receive, and help to determine what approaches are working well.

 

Here's the slightly updated version of something I posted on the email list a few days ago...

 

> Who, exactly, do we speak to with regards

> to identifying/changing/clarifying the

> applicable rules?

 

Go to the top. Let it filter down from on high:

http://www.house.gov/writerep/

http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm

 

But always copy the little guys to give them a chance to straighten up before the big bosses start looking closely:

http://www.nps.gov/pub_aff/e-mail/

 

I can't find a general email address for the DOI itself, but what the heck, spring for a stamp:

U.S. Department of the Interior

1849 C. Street N.W.

Washington, DC 20240

 

> Others have reported numerous conflicting

> conversations with park and public

> personnel, each pointing their fingers in

> other directions.

 

Then that's something else that should be addressed in your letter.

Incidentally, is there someone out there who can make up a form letter to send? That tends to encourage a lot more people to make themselves heard.

 

I'd like to have someone who's also involved in Letterboxing write up a nice letter regarding both sports, since numbers are the primary weapon in these situations, and teaming up with the US Letterboxers will effectively increase our ranks, while working towards a mutually beneficial outcome.

 

Jeremy; can you add the above links, any other contacts high enough in the

NPS/DOI to have an effect, and the letter, if it becomes available, to the

site?

 

> Nobody seems to want to take

> responsibility for quoting "The Rules",

> so who _do_ we talk to for a reliable

> answer?

 

When all else fails, go over everybody's head. The people at the top will either have an answer, or will make one up and make it stick. With enough people writing in wanting to cache, and no movement against it, the answer we want will be the easiest one for them to give.

 

 

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

DrunkenBard

http://www.drunkenbard.com

[Guest DrunkenBard]

Something I forgot to mention:

 

Write to your state and local governments and park officials as well. They control parks, and we don't want to lose the state and city parks.

 

For those of us in TX, here are the people to contact:

 

State Parks:

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department

4200 Smith School Road

Austin TX 78744

 

Also find your TX state legislators at http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/cgi-bin/db2www/fyi/zip.d2w/input

 

US Army Corps of Engineers Parks:

Southwestern Division Public Affairs

ronald.ruffennach@swf01.usace.army.mil

 

Remember that the primary goal here is to get them to let us cache and hunt with minimal damage to the land, so indicate that we are willing to work with them in order to develop guidelines within which GeoCaching and Letterboxing can operate with their support and cooperation.

 

If you can, get a local Scout troop involved, and have them write in as well. Nobody likes to tell the BSA they can't have a particular educational activity in the park, and no elected official hoping for another term wants to go on record as unsupportive of Scouting.

 

 

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

DrunkenBard

http://www.drunkenbard.com

[Guest colink]

Title 36--Parks, Forests, and Public Property

Dept of Interior

Part 1-- General Provisions

Sec. 1.4 What terms do I need to know?

(a) The following definitions shall apply to this chapter, unless modified by the definitions for a specific part or regulation:

 

Abandoment means the voluntary relinquishment of property with no intent to retain possession.

Title 36, Volume 1, Parts 1 to 199

 

Under same heading:

Possession means exercising direct physical control or dominion, with or without ownership, over property, or archeological, cultural or natural resources.

 

?WHAT?

[Guest Cape Cod Cache]

I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV...

I've tallied the general 'Cacher's demographics, and they look whoulsome.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000064.html

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/vbb/Forum2/HTML/000124.html

 

I started the Scout thing, and 'nomad' started the general thing. I think we may be presented as a

'34 yo male. married. former Boyscout....

 

DrunkenBard.. your name doesn't offend me, might not be the best to present to others...

 

There was a post about the word 'friggin'... I think there is a good bunch of pretty good people here, we don't overtly offend, help 'newbies' and are generally 'Good Citizens'

I've been working in my community for a marina, MAJOR nightmare !, but with a bit of mediation it may happen. I have 2 town boards in favor of 'Cache. Polite, yet impassionened diplomacy works. I hope the work I did will be used for some good

[Guest DrunkenBard]

After all, the various credentials I tend to like to attach to those letters are in my real name.

 

 

 

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

DrunkenBard

http://www.drunkenbard.com

[Guest DrunkenBard]

After all, the various credentials I tend to like to attach to those letters are in my real name.

 

 

 

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

DrunkenBard

http://www.drunkenbard.com

[Guest 22]

The NPS is now a politicised Politically Correct arm of the ever more arrogant and tyrranical federal government.

[Guest dogpile]

dadgum, I thought the National Parks belonged to the people of the United States, not the Federal Government....mmm

[Guest glcanon]

Originally posted by bubba232:

Here in Calif. things are a little different. You practically can't dig a hole in your OWN yard without submitting an Environmental Impact Study!

 

That's the reason Calif is in such an energy predicament. Now CA wants the rest of US to bail them out!? Texas may have some smoggy cities that generate power, but (1) you don't have to live there, and (2) We have a 15% surplus which we sell to states like yours at a good markup (supply & demand).