On Permission And Pantywastes

[+Bloencustoms]

First off, thanks Criminal, for putting into words the feelings many of us share.

 

Originally posted by CO Admin:

 

Adequate permission does not mean that you MUST obtain permission for each cache you place. It does however, mean that if permission is required you get it. There are many places in the country that do not require permission to place a cache so no permission is need. That is adequate permission for that cache.

It's nice to know that the way I have been placing caches intuitively was correct. If there's no policy against geocaches in a given area, then there is implied permission. As Criminal stated, we are as free as we choose to be. A very good reason (that has been mentioned before) for not bringing a perfectly harmless, wonderfull sport like geocaching to a land manager's attention is that if a anti-caching policy results, existing caches will be removed. No one wants that to happen.

[+nincehelser]

It amazes me how some people just make up their own rules as it suits them. This site clearly states:

 

"Please make sure to obtain permission from the landowner or land manager and read the guidelines for reporting a cache prior to placing your geocache."

 

Why is that so hard to understand?

 

Source: http://www.geocaching.com/seek

 

This has nothing to do with "freedom". All this jingoism is poor support for boorish behavior.

 

George

[+Doc-Dean]

Oh boy... new word...

 

jingoism - 1:Extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism.

2: an appeal intended to arouse patriotic emotions [syn: flag waving]

3: fanatical patriotism [syn: chauvinism, superpatriotism, ultranationalism]

 

[+CO Admin]

It amazes me how some people just make up their own rules as it suits them. This site clearly states:

 

"Please make sure to obtain permission from the landowner or land manager and read the guidelines for reporting a cache prior to placing your geocache."

 

Why is that so hard to understand?

 

Source: http://www.geocaching.com/seek

 

This has nothing to do with "freedom". All this jingoism is poor support for boorish behavior.

 

George

Completely correct.

 

In areas where permission is not required you do not have to obtain permission since its not required. This is in line with what I stated previously

[+Bloencustoms]

OK, for the official stance, does "no policy" mean "permission is not required" if the land is otherwise open to the public for recreational purposes?

 

EDIT: New material

 

I don't believe I need to ask permission to place a cache on public land that has no geocache policy any more than I feel the need to ask permission to park my car on the side of the street. If there is a policy against it, I won't park there. Otherwise, it's my right to do so.

Edited November 29, 2003 by Bloencustoms

[+Dave_W6DPS]

I get permission for my caches when needed (like those places where there is an established policy). I try to get permission all the time. I think permission is good!

 

The only time I haven't gotten permission is when I was not able to identify the land manager or it is obviously public property where no one would care.

 

Having said that, I would hate to have to jump through some hoops to prove I had permission before approval. I can see this significantly adding to the work load for approvers and cache owners.

 

I really think most situations can have a bit of common sense applied.

 

If you mis-judge and the land manager wants the cache removed, then I think the owner has a responsibility to remove it. Reasonable negotiations may be helpful, but you should accept no for the final answer.

 

If you can't find someone to give you permission, you place the cache, and no one has a problem with it--WHY COMPLICATE THINGS????

 

Dave_W6DPS

[+nincehelser]

I don't believe I need to ask permission to place a cache on public land that has no geocache policy any more than I feel the need to ask permission to park my car on the side of the street. If there is a policy against it, I won't park there. Otherwise, it's my right to do so.

A hole in that argument is that even though there may be no geocaching-specific policy, there may be other policies in place that preclude such an activity.

 

For example, a park may have a policy against leaving personal property in the park. There's no specific policy that says I can't store my snow tires in the park's gazebo, but you can pretty certain the "personal property" policy will be invoked and my tires will be removed.

 

George

[+Geosophers]

It amazes me how some people just make up their own rules as it suits them. This site clearly states:

 

"Please make sure to obtain permission from the landowner or land manager and read the guidelines for reporting a cache prior to placing your geocache."

 

Why is that so hard to understand?

 

Source: http://www.geocaching.com/seek

 

This has nothing to do with "freedom". All this jingoism is poor support for boorish behavior.

 

George

Yep

[+Confucius' Cat]

Good job criminal.

 

(I'd say AMEN!, but that would probably just get deleted anyway- RELIGIOUS dontcha know)

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

Follow Me is all I'll say,

Another great post made today.

Freedom leads I will follow,

The Little stuff ain't hard to swallow.

For if you Assume anything to be,

It will make an A** out of u and me

 

Enjoy your freedom,and

Happy ................................................................................Geotrails

 

[edit typo]

Edited November 29, 2003 by GEO*Trailblazer 1

[Jeremy]

From one of the guys that receives the angry phone calls from land managers who accuse us of placing a container on those lands, please help us out and ask permission.

 

I hear you, but please try to work with these guys. Hydee and the approvers have all done wonders turning around angry land managers and owners, and so have the regional folks who have worked with their local land agencies. These agencies appreciate the help we give when a troublesome cache ends up on their lands, and it has ultimately contributed to open lands for geocaching (and easy permits).

 

Personally I've seen that over the past 3 years, what participants have given back to these lands far outweigh the footprint of the individual caches out there. Those less inclined to go outdoors have rediscovered a new way to exercise and awareness of their locale. Their area has benefited from it. I hope this continues.

[+seneca]

From one of the guys that receives the angry phone calls from land managers who accuse us of placing a container on those lands, please help us out and ask permission.

Sorry Jeremy, but I find it hard to believe that you could take any land manager seriously who goes out of his way to telephone you and rant because he found a tupperware container on the lands he manages. I would treat him like a troll on these forums. Humor him for a bit, and then quietly hang-up. Don’t encourage him by taking him seriously. You are dealing with an over-the-top, power-tripping attitude that should be ignored.

[+CacheCreatures]

Not to fan the flames but...

 

Why is it automatically assumed that its all about power? Isn't there the slightest chance the park official(s) have a valid and compelling reason for complaining? The fact that they take the time to complain (rather than just remove the cache and be done with it) indicates they might be willing to listen.

 

More to the point: consider the lock picking example. As was said here, picking someones lock = getting shot. Isn't that analogous to placing a cache w/o permission = angry and uncooperative park official? I'm willing to bet that if you knocked first before busting into that persons house, you wouldn't get shot.

 

I'm afraid for this sport. I've seen it before with mountain biking. 20 years ago, so much of this same discussion (albeit not online) was taking place. Bikers exercised their "freedom" and created new trails, went off on their own and promptly got themselves kicked out of most state and national parks. Today's riders are now limited to very select (and most would say boring) routes because of the actions of some who refused to work the system from within.

 

So whats my point... we all agree to live in a society that has laws. That, by definition precludes you from breaking them. The true freedom you have is either to leave said society, or change it from within. You simply are not free (no matter how much you'd like to believe that you are) to disregard any part of it. Knock before entering someone's house, and ask before placing a cache on "someones" land. This F-You attitude is probably why we are even having this discussion in the first place.

[+Mr.Benchmark]

Why is it automatically assumed that its all about power?  Isn't there the slightest chance the park official(s) have a valid and compelling reason for complaining?  The fact that they take the time to complain (rather than just remove the cache and be done with it) indicates they might be willing to listen. 

I think people perceive this as being about power because many have a difficult time seeing any significant difference between geocaching and many of the other activities that are allowed by park officials. Unlike a private home, a public park, by definition, allows the public to visit and as such, has a responsibility to treat the guests of that park in a reasonably even-handed fashion. For example not disallowing people of different ethnic groups, or people with unpopular opinions from their parks. Unlike most other activities, we go out of our way to make sure ours leave no trace. Are we perfect? No. Do they ban hiking because some hiker drops a bit of litter every now and then? No. What is the difference - why single us out?

 

I'm not sure the parks can win this one - but I do think it's worth trying to avoid all out war with our park officials. I don't really see how they can stop us in the long run - but they do have the power to make our lives difficult. We shouldn't cower in fear and give in to any unfair demand they make - but failure to acknowledge the fact that they do have some leverage on us doesn't seem terribly bright to me. As a very extreme (and hopefully incredibly improbable) example, suppose one of them files a successful injunction against gc.com and other websites, effectively shutting the sites down for a while. I can't imagine such a thing would stand, but by the time the courts decided this was wrong, it might well be a moot point - gc.com might well be no more. I think your example of limiting us to tiny, uninteresting areas is also plausible, and we should prevent this! Again, I don't think we should just give in to them, but if they can be worked with constructively, that seems like the right thing to try at first, at least to me. (I do think it's irritating that we'd have to do this at all - I really don't see the problem with this game!)

[ju66l3r]

Sorry Jeremy, but I find it hard to believe that you could take any land manager seriously who goes out of his way to telephone you and rant because he found a tupperware container on the lands he manages. I would treat him like a troll on these forums. Humor him for a bit, and then quietly hang-up. Don’t encourage him by taking him seriously. You are dealing with an over-the-top, power-tripping attitude that should be ignored.

Wow, this is such the wrong approach in so many ways.

 

Whether it is a flex of power or an environmentally-concerned ranger or any other reason that led a manager to call Jeremy/Groundspeak to deal with a cache that they found in their park, the best response is always going to be to introduce dialogue and work to correct misconceptions and advocate tolerance and develop a working relationship.

 

Not taking him seriously by humoring him and patronizing his complaints will only lead to serious problems with getting anything accomplished at a later date when the next cache shows up on his doorstep by someone wholly uninvolved with the first potential fiasco.

 

Also, these land managers *DO* have power over the lands they manage (apt title, don't you think?) and if they choose to flex it simply to be a jerk that is often perfectly within their rights! You may not like it and you may need to get them fired if their boss also agrees that their attitude is interfering with their ability to compentently manage the land, but in the meantime, you must accept that they have made their decision whether you like it or not.

 

Ask a 20+ year veteran if he ever had to obey a direct order from his superior officer even though he didn't like the order. When you are on their lands (public or not, citizen or not) then you have to abide by their rules and decisions. That is what we (the people via the government) hired them for, even if we hired a person who does not like geocaching.

 

As an aside, I also agree with the earlier person who stated that the whole "freedom" schpiel was jingoistic and unnecessary to the argument.

 

My view: Permission is good. Working with the land managers is good. Not checking with them simply because they didn't put a sign up is bad.

[+sea_dragon]

Criminal, rock on! I totoaly agree with what you've said about freedom, laws, etc. I've alwasy stuck to a pretty basic code of behavior, of which there are two main points: 1) be willing to accept what you've got coming to you, and 2) tread lightly.

 

For the first point, Criminal does a good job. Basicly I've always figgured that if the risks and reprecussions of an activity are something that I can deal with, then full steam ahead. Yeah, we all break laws all of the time, often by telling ourselves those little white lies. Think about the last time you were late for work folks... did every one of you stick to the speed limit? I'm thinking that that's a definite 'no'. So we all bend or break the rules, it's bound to happen. The main factor is how do you deal with it when you do get caught. So as to the topic at hand, if one were to place a cache and later be asked (or forced) to remove it by a land manager/property owner, what do you do? My thoughts on this tend to be along the lines of, 'well, I shouldn't have done that, I guess it's time to move the cache'. Yet how many of you out there would be more inclined to tell the manger/owner where they could put that cache? Which brings me to the second point...

 

Tread lightly. Maybe it would be a good idea to stop and think about the actions before going through with them. Getting into a heated argument with a land manager or property owner may not be the best route to take. Why? Well, it's probably going to make you feel better for a short while, but how about when one goes too far and ends up having all cahes banned from an area? Or how about being blacklisted from a park on a personal level? Does anyone out there seriously want that? Methinks that perhaps the best way to tackle the situation is to do your homework and find out if permission is needed at all. Secondly, why not hear the complaining party out? Maybe there is a good reason why a cache can't be placed. Maybe the complaining party will change their mind once they've heard you out. You never know until you go there. I think that working with the system is not a means or giving up ones freedoms, but rather a way of exercising them. Getting the appropriate premission seems to me to be a matter of respect. Respect for the individuals who maintain the lands that we all cache in. Respect for those at the top who have to deal with irate land managers. Respect for those people who make this sport possible.

 

I guess to make a long post short (probably too late, I know), I think that CO Admin and the GC.com guidelines as far as getting permission for the placement of a cache are dead on. It may be easier to beg forgiveness than it is to ask permission, but who want's to beg in the first place?

 

An after thought here.... many posts up it was mentioned that geocaching being in the spot light is a bad thing, and that something along the lines of a magazine article would be this kiss of death. I beg to differ. Yes, there will be many people who will find out about this sport who have no business here in the fist place, but along with them will come the very lifeblood of the sport- dedicatied cachers who want this activity to persist. Open your arms to these our breathren, for the others will drive back home in their SUV's wondering whay anyone would do something like take their car out into the middle of nowhere an have it get all dirty. It's happend before. Look at any other outdoors activity, flyfishing, biking, SCUBA diving. As soon as the novelty wears off they will be gone. And then you can buy their GPSr cheap!

[GeoVet]

I think it's so cool that 200+ years later, in this great experiment of Democracy, we can still have a sprited discussion of our fundamental values. Freedom is many things to many people. Criminal has once again stirred up a vital and proper debate. Passions run high where belief systems are "on the block". I second the nomination!

[+CacheCreatures]

I think people perceive this as being about power because many have a difficult time seeing any significant difference between geocaching and many of the other activities that are allowed by park officials. Unlike a private home, a public park, by definition, allows the public to visit and as such, has a responsibility to treat the guests of that park in a reasonably even-handed fashion.  For example not disallowing people of different ethnic groups, or people with unpopular opinions from their parks. Unlike most other activities, we go out of our way to make sure ours leave no trace. Are we perfect? No. Do they ban hiking because some hiker drops a bit of litter every now and then? No. What is the difference - why single us out?

To me, that is exactly why a dialog needs to be opened. How long did it take this country to tolerate differing ethnic groups. Can it be said this country really does? Would the rights of anyone who is not white be where they are today if the "freedom" argument from above was applied. The movement may have started there, but it certainly has evolved into something far more constructive for both sides.

 

Look, I think we need to admit we are different. We are not a typical sport in that we come, we play and we leave. In our sport, we come, we often trample, we find, and we replace what we found. To someone unfamiliar with this, who was never consulted about its validity, this could be infuriating. Am I the only one here who thinks about the possible black side of caching? Drug hideout, cache bombs, weapons store, a lure for victims... If the park officials/legislator were to offer a blanket approval, they'd essentially be giving anyone who wanted it a free pass to potentially do harm (from their point of view) on public land. When you place it there without talking to them first, you only exacerbate this potential threat in their minds. By forcing us to communicate with them, they are undoubtedly sizing us up. Are we terrorists or not. Will we use this for helpful or harmful purposes...

 

To further the above: what would happen to us if a jackass did rig a cache to blow and someone (a child) looses a hand or worse. Now lets assume the cache was there without permission. We absolutely would be shut down (probably by the legislature if the wrong people got wind of the incident). They would be the ones acting first, and apologizing later. Does this sport have the financial resources to do combat in a court of law?

 

PS: The freedom issue raised is inappropriate for this discussion. The kind of freedom that is written about above does not exist (and IMHO rightfully so) in our country. We enjoy conditional freedom. There is a huge difference. Your willingness to stay here indicates you support conditional freedom, and I'd suggest you all learn to be comfortable with that.

 

Edit: Typo

Edited November 29, 2003 by CacheCreatures

[Dru Morgan]

Shocking! Simply shocking!

 

I mean, it's shocking that 5 paragraphs inspires comments such as, "Phew, I made it through the whole thing." and "I'll have to take some time to digest this."

 

Is that what the Internet has done to us? Anything more than a 'caption' on a cartoon in considered heavy reading.

[+Mr.Benchmark]

Look, I think we need to admit we are different.  We are not a typical sport in that we come, we play and we leave.  In our sport, we come, we often trample, we find, and we replace what we found.  To someone unfamiliar with this, who was never consulted about its validity, this could be infuriating.  Am I the only one here who thinks about the possible black side of caching?  Drug hideout, cache bombs, weapons store, a lure for victims...  If the park officials/legislator were to offer a blanket approval, they'd essentially be giving anyone who wanted it a free pass to potentially do harm (from their point of view) on public land.  When you place it there without talking to them first, you only exacerbate this potential threat in their minds.  By forcing us to communicate with them, they are undoubtedly sizing us up.  Are we terrorists or not.  Will we use this for helpful or harmful purposes... 

While I won't argue with you about the need for dialog, I do disagree with you about the difference in our sport. You know what's different about our sport? What's different is that there are a few websites that coordinate the activities of 99.9% of us. Because of this, it's easy for them to discover where we hide our caches, and it's easy for them to harass us, so some of them do. This certainly feels like abuse of their authority to me! (Not neccessarily malicious abuse - they may not understand this game well enough to be making an informed decision about it.)

 

The objections I've heard to geocaching are:

1. We step on stuff when we walk around. Fine - so ban hiking too if this is such a big problem! Stuff grows back. Really fast most places.

2. We leave stuff in the park. Yes, no closer together than 0.1 miles we place something. You know, if there were only one bit of litter every 0.1 miles, I bet the folks who are in charge of our parks would be happy indeed. Many other activities have the potential for their participants to leave some object behind in the woods. Do they ban these activities? No, they do not. And unlike those other activities, we can tell you PRECISELY where our caches are located, so that it's easy to deal with the rare cases where one is placed badly.

3. We remove property from the park that has been abandoned there - ie trading from geocaches. (This one is really unbelievable.)

 

The fact is, most of these places would have no problem with me and my family going to them with a picnic lunch in april and hiding some easter eggs for our kids to find. So the fact that they single us out just seems wrong. Banning our activity seems like a response far out of proportion to the problem.

[+seneca]

  Am I the only one here who thinks about the possible black side of caching?  Drug hideout, cache bombs, weapons store, a lure for victims...  If the park officials/legislator were to offer a blanket approval, they'd essentially be giving anyone who wanted it a free pass to potentially do harm (from their point of view) on public land.

You fall into the first category of persons that Criminal referred to: You accept that you are not free, and you will do nothing without approval. The "Park officials/legislators" that you refer to have no right to give "blanket approval". The concept of a free society is that approval to do as you wish is a given right (strongly supported by your wonderful constitution). Specific aspects of that freedom can then be regulated away, after due process, when it can be demonstrably shown that it is in the public good to do so. Criminal (and I) take the position that we are free to enter and use public lands so long as specific prohibitions have not been rightfully enacted. On most public lands I cannot imagine any justifiable reason, in a free country, to prohibit playing hide 'n go seek with tupperware. This is very different than legislating against using public lands for the "drug hideouts, cache bombs, weapons store, or a lure for victims" that you referred to.

 

I don't need any park official to "give" me a "free pass". So long as I live in (or visit) a free country, I have one.

Edited November 29, 2003 by seneca

[Tahosa and Sons]

Very well said, as a Vet I really know the true price of freedom. Someone wrote the document but someone had to start the march down that road on the bridge at Lexington and Concord. And its those marches that gave us permission to enjoy our freedoms.

 

And young men and women are still paying the price so we can sit here and bitch back and forth.

 

Some countries are like a song of Simon and Garfunkel "Sounds of Silence" and if they speak their peace they are dealt with very promptly in a way we do not condone.

 

Thanks Criminal for a very well composed thread.

[+CacheCreatures]

Case, point, match. Go ahead. Rationalize all you like. It is because of beliefs like that we will end up fighting to get back what we already have.

 

How can you say your free to do as you please? It sounds like a child stomping around whining that since he can't do anything he wants everywhere, he's going to make darn sure he does what he wants somewhere. As a result, the rest of us will suffer. Do your research. Prove me wrong. Show me any example of this kind of attitude amounting to something constructive in the modern era.

 

On a fundamental level, you have agreed to give up your freedom. Therefore you must adhere to the law of the land and obey the rules you support. Since IMO the freedom issue strays off topic (do some homework, don't take for granted the word, learn what history feels about freedom, understand the philosophical Juggernaut your playing with, realize some of the greatest minds this world has ever seen couldn't say they were free and why, then decide) I won't address it further

 

I will say this: as a member of the geocaching community you have a responsibility to the rest of us. Your actions will effect our ability to enjoy the sport. My guess is you still wont care, and as a result we all will see just how your freedom kills ours.

[+bigredmed]

I hear from this discussion is an unwillingness to deal with people who will give you one answer on Monday and the completely opposite answer on Tuesday. This is (sadly for GC's admin) not all that uncommon, in fact, probably more common than to get a stable and generally appliable rule. Probably only second to the land managers who base decisions on inaccurate data or presumptions that are in conflict with land uses already allowed (can't walk on grass to the caches, but we can allow sleeping bags and tents to crush the grass).

 

The other thing I hear is concern that we are giving up freedom by asking for permission. I don't see it this way. I see it as a form of respect to the land, but most importantly as respect for my fellow cachers. Who would want to go to the expense and trouble of setting up a cache just to have one of your friends take his kids to the cache and get arrested in front of them? None of us. By setting up stable, generally appliable, and non-exemptable (ie: geocaching is allowed in all state parks except for any that don't want them) rules, we get a game that we can take to the next level, by making it a game that can be both for the family as well as for those of us who want a greater challenge. If we keep losing land access, pretty soon all places that the federal gov even leases will be exempt and every state will have loopholes that allow caching to be banned for any reason at all, even for reasons that make no sense, and fail the tests of both internal logic as well as the equal protection clause.

 

BTW: It would be interesting for geo-attorneys to comment on the relevence of the equal protection clause when it comes to banning geocaching at federal reserve areas, but allowing hunting. I see shell casings along deer trails and human trails. This activity clearly "leaves behind personal property", yet is allowed (hmmm?)

[+seneca]

How can you say your free to do as you please?

 

If you were referring to my post, I did not say this. Much of my conduct is regulated by many laws, most of which I respect, and all of which I abide by. Democratically passed laws, pursuant to the constitution of a free country, are a reasonable and necessary restriction on certain freedoms.

 

Since IMO the freedom issue strays off topic ...

 

??? The topic is about freedom - specifically freedom to go Geoaching. (I just read the entire first post again to make sure).

 

I will say this: as a member of the geocaching community you have a responsibility to the rest of us. Your actions will effect our ability to enjoy the sport. My guess is you still wont care, and as a result we all will see just how your freedom kills ours.

 

Where did you get the notion that I plan to, or am likely to act in an irresponsible manner, to the detriment of other geocachers? Now that's off-topic, but if you are interested I suggest that you look at my posts on topics that deal with responsible Geocaching. I do however believe that Criminal made some very good points on how acting in a manner that presupposes we do not have the freedom to Geocache, is the most likely way that we will lose our freedom to do so.

Edited November 29, 2003 by seneca

[+Criminal]

You are fully expected to obtain permission wherever permission is required.

 

I’d like to know where in that statement anyone is seeing me say that it’s OK to trespass, or that we should not get permission. WTF, over? I’ll be the first to admit that the Joe Flunky park official may be an over generalization. You’re right; some are truly dedicated and do their job with integrity. I’m speaking from experience only, your results may vary.

 

The bottom line is this, when you and your family pull up to the park to picnic and the kids bound out of the car to throw their baseball or wander in the nearby forest, are you wringing your hands fretting over whether their actions are proper and legal? I sure hope not. Life is short, enjoy it! If you’re doing something wrong, believe me, someone will tell you. There’s a whole mess of people out there who live for nothing more than to tell you something. Don’t sit on the sidelines of life like some namby-pamby worrying over everything. Geocaching will survive. Please don’t a**ume you have all the answers, I dadgum sure know I don’t. I do, however, have enough common sense to live and breathe and move about the firmament without constantly agonizing over whether or not I’ll suddenly be arrested.

 

I do not see this as a power issue, that is entirely too specific. There are any number of reasons for and against placing a geocache in a park or wherever. My point from the beginning has been this; if you know of no prohibition against what you are doing (Frisbee, whiffle-ball, geocaching) then do it! And while you’re doing it, take a moment to remember the people past – present – and future who have – are – or will give up some or all to give you what you cannot bring yourself to enjoy.

[+Zartimus]

I agree with most of the points Criminal has made. There is no policy on geocaches in the city parks and outdoor recreational areas where I live and I'd prefer it to stay that way. I want to keep this game a little secret lest the powers that be find out about it and ruin it like they have a bad habit of doing in most cases (It's not prohibitted, it's not private property and what they don't know won't hurt them).

 

I'm just waiting for a newbie to take it upon themselves to start up an un-asked-for dialog with them just so TPTB can get all creeped out and say no.

 

I have met far too many people in positions of power that fall into the 1st catagory Criminal mentions. They say no to what they do not understand. Trying to explain it to them sometimes simply annoys them and it is simply easier to deny instead of investigate and comprehend. What do we have in most State and Provincial parks? A no-geocaching policy.

 

Ridiculous. I can understand locking up those cave-paintings in France to protect and preserve them, but aside from that... Mother nature is a pretty tough old girl who can split concrete with a blade of grass.

[+DustyJacket]

....I want to keep this game a little secret......

Therein lies one of the problems.

 

A lot of folks are seeking to publicize Geocaching. Newspaper articles, magazine articles, and TV spots have now informed a land managers about the existence of the sport.

 

What you could do when geocaching was unknown will be different now that is is known. Now, land managers and geomuggles alike are hearing about this web site and check on existing caches in their areas.

 

The world is changing for geocaching, and there is nothing we can do to stop it now.

 

Like the dinosaurs, we have to adapt or die. (i.e. the sport will be suppressed.)

Edited November 29, 2003 by DustyJacket

[+Brenin Tegeingl]

Here in the UK 17 caches have just been returned by the Land managers of a large area of land, due to negotiations being opened by GAGB( Geocaching Association of Great Britain) which was set up by a group of UK cachers to negotiate with large land owners. Until these negotiations, the caches were just removed, and no attempt was made to return them to the owners. Hampshire County Council (= to a state in the US) has given blanket permission to place caches on land owned/managed by them after negotiations with them, subject to certain guidelines, which includes informing the local manager/ranger after placing, of its location. So as can bee seen asking permission dose work, it depends how you go about asking and to whom. Dave

[+seneca]

Land managers removing caches on the lands they manage is a different issue. That problem may have possibly been avoided by asking for permission in the first place - or on the other hand it might actually have been caused/triggered because someone asked for permission, and thereby tacitly acknowledging that it might be a problem for some land managers. The negotiated manner in which you convinced land managers to leave caches alone was obviously successful and commendable.

Edited November 29, 2003 by seneca

[+bons]

I can see not asking permission on the grounds that permission should be explicit.

 

However, do you think the land managers have a right to know what's placed on their land and where it is?

[+CacheCreatures]

Seneca, while you did give voice to a apparent commonly held believe, I was not (nor did I indent to) attack you. If I've offended, I apologize. I think we should agree that this forum is no place to attempt view altering debates. The point/counterpoint debate could go on for 100's of posts.

 

When I say freedom is off topic, I mean that in my view, freedom has little to do with cache placement permission; what it seemed to me Criminal was talking about. Perhaps your correct though, and that is not what he wanted to address.

 

As for my last comment, it was directed at everyone who shares the view expressed by Criminal (assuming you're viewing the topic of this post as I did).

 

Assume, for a moment that the premise of this post was cache placement permission. In that light, the comments expressed should be of concern. Isn't it my responsibility as a cache placer to understand, to every last detail, the rules and regulations of the placement site? I'm not reading that concern in this thread. I'm reading things like "approval to do as you wish is a given right" and "... [the problem with bringing] geocaching to a land manager's attention is that if a anti-caching policy results, existing caches will be removed. No one wants that to happen." Those approaches have failed miserably in the past, and will fail this time if allowed to be the dominate attitude expressed by geocachers.

 

You accept that you are not free, and you will do nothing without approval

Please don't presume to judge. You simply do not know me and have nothing to base that on. Besides, the two categories Criminal has outlined are incredibly narrow and demonstrate a shortsighted view.

 

This country is great because we all are allowed (notice I didn't say free) to discuss this and pretty much anything else, without fear of persecution. However we are not free to take an action without first understanding all of the ramifications. As has been so eloquently put, none of us know everything. Therefore, we should make every effort to consult those that know more than we about a given topic. Then and only then are we "free" to make an educated decision.

 

Now, away with the debate and to the cache we go!

Edited November 29, 2003 by CacheCreatures

[+Criminal]

I can see not asking permission on the grounds that permission should be explicit.

 

However, do you think the land managers have a right to know what's placed on their land and where it is?

I'm unsure of what "right" to which you refer. There is a park here in Gig Harbor. In this park is a gazebo with a BBQ pit and some restrooms. Behind the park is some forest owned by whoknows. There are some tennis courts and a baseball diamond. To use the gazebo, you have to get a permit, only to avoid confusion and allow large parties to plan ahead.

You don’t have to let the park manager know before you use the restroom.

You don’t have to inform them you will be playing tennis

You don’t have to ask to play baseball on the field

You aren’t required to let them know you’ll be parking in the parking lot.

You may throw your frisbee around in the grassy area all you like, without checking in.

You can lie on the grass on a blanket and make out; no previous coordination with park officials is necessary.

 

So if I want to hide a cache there, why would I presuppose I need to get their OK first? Now, if a tree needed removal first, then it might be in my best interest to seek approval in advance. (That’s hyperbole to show the stupidity in the idea that a cache causes harm.)

 

EDIT: Typo

Edited November 29, 2003 by Criminal

[+bons]

What I'm referring to is basicly putting myself in the shoes of the land manager.

 

If someone is going to hide something on land I'm responsible for, should I be expected to know that it's there?

 

I think it's reasonable to assume that eventually the land manager is going to find out that it's there. Either a muggle will find it or a muggle will see something suspicious, or the manager will stumble across it while doing park maintanence or they'll learn what geocaching is and see the cache when they visit the site.

 

So my question is:

"Do they have a right to know that the cache is on the land they're responsible for?"

 

I'm not talking about asking permission. I'm talking about informing them about my decision. Should they be told that the cache is there?

[+nincehelser]

You don’t have to let the park manager know before you use the restroom.

You don’t have to inform them you will be playing tennis

You don’t have to ask to play baseball on the field

You aren’t required to let them know you’ll be parking in the parking lot.

You may throw your frisbee around in the grassy area all you like, without checking in.

You can lie on the grass on a blanket and make out; no previous coordination with park officials is necessary.

 

So if I want to hide a cache there, why would I presuppose I need to get their OK first?

In all of your examples, you aren't leaving material behind, except perhaps as waste, which facilities have been provided for proper disposal.

 

Geocaching has a fairly unique component where the playing pieces are intentionally left behind. (game fields and courts don't count, because they are constructed with approval).

 

If you can store tupperware under a tree, why can't I keep my snowtires in the gazebo? I promise I'll tie them up in the rafters where they won't be a problem.

 

George

[+seneca]

You don’t have to let the park manager know before you use the restroom.

But Criminal, you must admit that in some cases, it might be the polite thing to do.

[+Criminal]

You don’t have to let the park manager know before you use the restroom.

But Criminal, you must admit that in some cases, it might be the polite thing to do.

If they remove my cache because I didn't aks permission, that's exactly what I'll do. I'll get his home number and call each and every time I need to use the park.

[+New England n00b]

Heh, I'm not sure about the tone of Criminals first post, but I sure agree with the content.

 

Thank you Criminal!

[+Bloencustoms]

I don't believe I need to ask permission to place a cache on public land that has no geocache policy any more than I feel the need to ask permission to park my car on the side of the street. If there is a policy against it, I won't park there. Otherwise, it's my right to do so.

A hole in that argument is that even though there may be no geocaching-specific policy, there may be other policies in place that preclude such an activity.

 

For example, a park may have a policy against leaving personal property in the park. There's no specific policy that says I can't store my snow tires in the park's gazebo, but you can pretty certain the "personal property" policy will be invoked and my tires will be removed.

 

George

The problem is that the only way to play the game is to leave (not abandon) property somewhere. In the case of caching, you could view caches as public property, because the nature of caching is to entrust that property to the public that finds it. Public property, privately managed and mainatined would best describe a geocache. So, in the context of the game, a cache is not private property, it is open for anyone to enjoy, much like the parks it is placed in.

[+Confucius' Cat]

Ask permission to use the restroom? What restroom? Oh, you mean that oak tree over by the cache! (now where did I write that ranger's phone number?)

 

As to others leaving things behind, I sure find a lot of golf balls (not just in caches).

[+Jeff24]

I agree with the fact , if it is public land, city or park, why do we have to ask permission. But Privite, State,or Federal land , yes PERMISSION is NEEDED. If you don't get it , good luck. JEff24

[+Confucius' Cat]

I agree with the fact , if it is public land, city or park, why do we have to ask permission. But Privite, State,or Federal land , yes PERMISSION is NEEDED. If you don't get it , good luck. JEff24

OK. I'm confused.

 

Isn't State and Federal land by definition PUBLIC land?

 

Last time I checked I was a taxpayer and the State and Federal lands were bought and maintained with MY money.

 

Am I missing something here?

 

By "State and Federal" if you mean land that is not open to the public, such as water treatment plants, or storage facilities for crashed space alien vehicles, then your point is fine and I might add "DUH...". Who would ever think about placing a cache there and even if the cache owner GOT permission, I doubt I would hunt it.

 

But if you are referring to public (park) land which is open to the public for a variety of other activities, including "unspecified" activities, then what's the point?

 

Have you ever seen a park sign specifically granting permission to play football or baseball or to fly a kite? (correct answer to this rhetorical question is "no")

 

If an activity is normally legal, moral, and ethical, and not specifically prohibited by law or duly enacted regulation, then there is no need for permission. It then becomes simply a matter of courtesy to ask permission if you so desire.

 

Maybe next time I go into a State park, I should ask if it is OK to play catch with my kids (assuming they don't have a sign saying "OK to play catch here")

[+bons]

Just to beat this dead horse in the ground (and since no one seems to be answering the question):

 

Dave: Should the land manager be told that you're adding a "public" feature to their park for everyone to enjoy? Since they're responsible for the park, should they know there's now a cache there?

[+Bloencustoms]

Just to beat this dead horse in the ground (and since no one seems to be answering the question):

 

Dave: Should the land manager be told that you're adding a "public" feature to their park for everyone to enjoy? Since they're responsible for the park, should they know there's now a cache there?

To put it simply, no. Not if their response will be to freak out and ban caching. Untill you can read minds you won't know what their reaction will be.

 

EDIT: Additional material

 

A cache is not owned by the park. The land manager is responsible for the land, not the stuff people cary with them. If someone throws a pile of trash on the ground, the land manager doesn't get fined, the person that threw it there does. They are not responsible for stuff being stolen from your car, you are. They are not responsible for your behavior, you are. And they are not responsible for your cache either. Guess who is.

Edited November 30, 2003 by Bloencustoms

[+HartClimbs]

But if you are referring to public (park) land which is open to the public for a variety of other activities, including "unspecified" activities, then what's the point?

 

Have you ever seen a park sign specifically granting permission to play football or baseball or to fly a kite?  (correct answer to this rhetorical question is "no")

 

If an activity is normally legal, moral, and ethical, and not specifically prohibited by law or duly enacted regulation, then there is no need for permission.  It then becomes simply a matter of courtesy to ask permission if you so desire.

 

Maybe next time I go into a State park, I should ask if it is OK to play catch with my kids (assuming they don't have a sign saying "OK to play catch here")

Actually, crazy as it sounds, the code in some state and county Parks is written to specifically list the activities permitted. Anything not specifically listed is banned and up to the discretion of the enforcing authority.

 

Bizzare - agreed. But this code has been used to ban "bouldering" (basically, climbing around on rocks without ropes) in many of our parks. It's not listed as an "allowed" activity - so it's not permitted.

 

It seems strange to me (and I often risk a ticket or fine for bouldering), but even though they're "public" lands - they're regulated by the fed/state/municipality.

 

For example - the Grand Canyon's "public" land - but don't try rafting or backpacking without a riverrunning or wilderness permit. It's the cost we pay - allowing land managers to act as stewards of the land. Sometimes they just go overboard (after all - why not let boulderers climb at their own risk...sheeesh - not like we're gonna hurt the rocks!).

 

That said - I still think it's best to ask forgiveness rather than ask permission and use discretion. That's probably the best advice.....

[+bons]

Bloencustoms:

If I'm understanding you, you think land managers shouldn't be told because you fear their actions.

 

It sounds like there's a lot of pantywastes on both sides of this discussion.

 

As for responsibilty, the land manager is usually the guy who is picking up other's trash. They are responsible for the condition of the park. As such I belive they are responsible for the permanent features of the park. And it seems to me that a cache that is going to be there for any significant length of time becomes a feature to the park.

 

I belive that caches improve traffic to the park, and that CITO helps the appearence of the park. Therefore it seems to me that we are adding a feature to the park (much like a tennis court or a disc golf course) at no cost to the city and without interference with other park use.

 

As for being responsible for behavior, I would think honesty and disclosure would be a part of being responsible. I have to question the "responsibilty" of a cache owner who is afraid of talking with the people responsible for the land the cache sits on.

Edited November 30, 2003 by bons

[+Confucius' Cat]

Ever consider it might not be "afraid" as much as not knowing who to ask? Or perhaps not wanting to wait, perhaps for years, while the first person you talk to tries to find someone above who is willing to take responsibility?

 

This is the essence of type one people... it is easier to say "no" and get on with the duties of the day than to say "maybe" and spen days trying to get you an answer.

[+nincehelser]

The problem is that the only way to play the game is to leave (not abandon) property somewhere. In the case of caching, you could view caches as public property, because the nature of caching is to entrust that property to the public that finds it. Public property, privately managed and mainatined would best describe a geocache. So, in the context of the game, a cache is not private property, it is open for anyone to enjoy, much like the parks it is placed in.

The problem with that argument is that you're trying to make the world conform to geocaching. That's a pretty big task. In the above paragraph you would have to convice the policy makers that:

 

1) Leaving a piece of tupperware under the tree is not abandoned property. That's going to be a tough sell to any jury in the country.

 

2) You're donating a cache as public property. Nice thought, but it doesn't mean the public would accept your gift. I know lots of people who want to donate property to "the public", but "the public" doesn't want it, usually because there's some kind of liability or other problem involved.

 

You're correct if you assume you're "in the context of the game", but the majority of the people out there don't even know what the game is.

 

If you get an official endorsement (i.e. permission) from the land manager, this whole issue goes away.

 

Why are people so scared that someone is going to say "no"? Are they not just not willing to try to convince the managers of the merits of geocaching, or are the just too lazy and try to hide behind the silly "freedom" argument?

 

If one is truely interested in the concept of freedom, then go ahead and TELL the land managers that you're going to hide a cache on the property. Inform them that it is your right to place a cache wherever you want. Send them the "Declaration of the Right to Geocache" or something like that.

 

Let's test the conviction of those who declare "rights" and "freedom" of geocaching. My guess is that not many are willing to step up to that task...they're too afraid someone might say no. They live in fear someone might say no. Kind of cowardly if you ask me. Is that really freedom?

 

Proclaim your rights if you think you deserve them. Don't hide your caches in secrecy or fear. Place them proudly and loudly. Get geocaching out of "the closet". Freedom isn't free, as "they" say. It's going to take some work and risk.

 

Or you could just simply get permission through the usual channels.

 

George

[+Confucius' Cat]

Actually, crazy as it sounds, the code in some state and county Parks is written to specifically list the activities permitted. Anything not specifically listed is banned and up to the discretion of the enforcing authority.

 

Bizzare - agreed. But this code has been used to ban "bouldering" (basically, climbing around on rocks without ropes) in many of our parks. It's not listed as an "allowed" activity - so it's not permitted.

Perhaps someone should do a test case by perhaps playing chess or checkers or knitting a scarf or some other innocous but unlisted activity and see if they really MEAN "if it aint listed you caint do it".

 

The prospect of specifically listing every permitted activity is laughable. Surely they have better things to do with their time.

[+Alan2]

Two points:

1. Storing tires in a parks' gazebo is just that - storage. A cache is not being stored but is part of the hobby or sport in the same way a minnow bucket may be left by a fisherman overnight or for a few days without ID. There's really no diference except for the amount of time. No one would consider a bucket as abandoned property or storage and they would leave it alone respecting it is private property. I also doubt if there's a policy statement that say you can leave your minnow bucket. (How about water storage caches for hikers oin the desert? Maybe our SW friend can add their input).

 

2. Why is everyone assuming that most land managers have not heard of geocaching at this late stage. I would think that they or at least one of their subordinates would have brought it to their attention. And they would have been curious to check to see if any caches were on "their" land. So if you cache is still in the woods and you're wondering, maybe the manager already gave his silent blessing and has no problem with it.

 

A year ago I went to check on one of my caches in the woods of a NYC park. The park manager posted his find two months earlier in the log book only, not on the web (he found it accidentally while checking on the fauna in the area). He posted a note asking that cachers stay off the new plantings they made and left a couple of new trail maps in the container. And then he rehid the cache!

 

What a guy!

 

Alan