Hamilton Conservation Authority -- Tew Nice Cache

[J.A.R.S.]

Got a message from the HCA to move the Tew Nice cache. I'm going to temporarily disable it for the next week. If we can't find another spot we'll archive it. Thought others might like to see the message.

 

Of interest is the last part of the message that says the HCA is drafting a geocaching policy.

 

Any advice on how we should respond?

 

J.A.R.S.

 

--This message was sent through the Geocaching.com web site--

 

I am with the Hamilton Conservation Authority, and have been reviewing

the locations of geocaches on HCA property, especially in regard to the

protection of our environmentally sensitive areas and liability. It has

come to my attention that the "Tew Nice" cache is located on HCA lands

within the Spencer Gorge Conservatoin Area. It is my understanding that

this cache is located off of the marked trails in a location that could

pose a threat to both the integrity of the Spencer Gorge

Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA), but moreso to personal safety. The Spencer

Gorge is home to a large number of extremely sensitive flora, fauna, and

wildlife habitats upon which it is designated as an ESA, all which become

endangered when many individuals choose to not use the designated

public trails and recreation areas for recreational purposes. I would like

to ask you to please relocate the cache in an area that is close to or

within a publicly designated trail or recreation area, and also

in an area that does not pose a risk to personal safety, within 7

days of my sending this message to you. After that time, park staff will

remove the cache. I encourage you to please contact me with any thoughts

on this matter, as HCA is currently in the process of drafting a policy

in regards to safe and environmentally-conscious geocaching on our

lands, and your thoughts would greatly assist us.

 

Thank you very much!

[Jomarac5]

Sounds to me that they're willing to discuss the matter. It would probably be best if you contacted them to see what they have in mind or to give them some perspective of the positive aspects of caching, i.e., trash in, trash out, etc.

 

I thought that the 'personal safety' comments were a bit comical -- I guess they've never been in the wilderness before.

 

You might want to get in touch with cache-tech as it appears he is currently involved in talks with Ontario Parks and may be able to offer you some helpful advice.

 

*****

Edited December 6, 2003 by Jomarac5

[+TheGertridgeExplorers]

I got permission from the Otonabee Conservation Authority to place my cache Testing, testing, 1..2..3.. it has been in place for over a year with positive response. I also forwarded my correspondance to another conservation authority (I can't remember specifically - maybe Aurora), and they were also very excited about the activity. John Williams is my contact at Otonabee Cons. Authority

 

-Donna G

[J.A.R.S.]

Cache-tech will be contacting HCA regarding policy. I'll email back and let them know the cache has been temporarily disabled and we will remove it from its current location asap. If a decent new location for a physical cache can't be found perhaps we can turn it into a virtual (with HCA and gc.com permission).

[+TrimblesTrek]

The spot you had the physical cache is nothing short of breathtaking. Moving the cache to a different location somewhere along the trail would mean that many cache hunters may never experience the awe inspiring view of what nature has provided us with at this site.

 

This is, and has always been one of my favourite cache locations. I know I'm not alone in this opinion.

 

In my opinion, you did the absolute best you could in placing the micro cache where you did. There is nowhere nearby for a normal cache. If the Hamilton authorities want it moved, then I would hope that the GC.com approvers should allow this to be converted into a virtual. It fits all the criteria.

[lessenergy]

I am familiar with this general area although not this particular location. This area has a very deep gorge with an initial vertical cliff that would cause very serious injury or kill you if you fell. It is one thing to walk into the woods. It is another to direct someone to the edge of a cliff.

 

IMO, simply converting this to a virtual cache is contrary to the intent of the land manager as the complaint is primarily about safety. Not only would that be discourteous, it could very well sabotage any future co-operation you may get from them.

 

Just my thoughts. "The Peak" is in the same area, it visited regularly but has a wall to protect visitors from falls and provides an amazing view. Why not put the cache near there (assuming the land manager agrees) and direct visitors to go the peak for a look before they leave the area?

 

Les.

Edited December 8, 2003 by lessenergy

[tlg]

I am familiar with this general area although not this particular location. This area has a very deep gorge with an initial vertical cliff that would cause very serious injury or kill you if you fell. It is one thing to walk into the woods. It is another to direct someone to the edge of a cliff.

 

IMO, simply converting this to a virtual cache is contrary to the intent of the land manager as the complaint is primarily about safety. Not only would that be discourteous, it could very well sabotage any future co-operation you may get from them.

 

Just my thoughts. "The Peak" is in the same area, it visited regularly but has a wall to protect visitors from falls and provides an amazing view. Why not put the cache near there (assuming the land manager agrees) and direct visitors to go the peak for a look before they leave the area?

 

Les.

You're kidding right? 40+ posts, no hides and no finds? And you expect someone to lend credence to your advice? How many "ells" in troll? Why do the moderaters even allow you to keep posting?

[Purple Fever]

give me a break, Les.... there's a lookout platform with rails. The last time I was there someone was in a wheelchair! Why tell them to put it somewhere else if you don't even know the spot being discussed? Maybe it could just be moved a few more metres away from the edge of the cliff, but near enough so that the falls are in view? It would be a shame to not have that cache at or very near there.... as a physical or virtual.

 

And Les - that part about there being a 'cliff'...? Should we just stay away from the escarpment altogether, and maybe even ALL great views, because most have a dropoff nearby!?

 

Too bad, though, and I hope the authorities don't go too crazy... I didn't feel nervous at all going for this cache... Now, that 'Webster's Falls Cache' on the other hand - THAT'S dangerous. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, and I'd love to see that one gone. Doing it was one of the dumbest things I have done caching...

[+Amazon Annie]

Tews Falls was a memorable cache for me. I am TERRIFIED of heights and believe me, if this were risky in ANY way I would not have done it. Did I mention I hate heights? I have left a couple of caches off my list because they were way too dangerous and I am not willing to risk even a bit to get a cache.

 

I'm sorry to see this one go. I'm hoping that a virtual is possible because this area is gorgeous and worth the trip out there.

 

Thanks J.A.R.S for the great cache.

[Purple Fever]

Ummm... I was just reading the Parks Ontario thread started by Cache-tech, and I was wondering if Les actually is the one who got the HCA involved!? Based on his note there it seemed like he is in contact with them.

 

Les, who are you? and why are you so involved here when you DON'T actually GEOCACHE!? and did you wake the 'sleeping dog', as res2100 referred to them?

[+res2100]

I recall we loved the Tew Nice cache and the whole area when we found it back in April, and I would also be sad to see it go, although a virtual would be just as rewarding. I remember throwing snowballs into the river with my son and grandma and watching them go over the falls...yes there was still lots of snow here in April. We actually spent extra time there because we liked it so much and went to the upper lookout too. Now thinking back though, I did think this was a little dangerous as I remember going around the lookout and actually underneath it to retrieve the cache, and of course holding on tight as not to fall off the cliff...Hmm, I wonder if I should have just leaned over and felt around to where the cache was instead. Or maybe I am confusing this with another cache, but I do recall going under the platform in trying to find the cache. Harmful to the environment? Not really as it's at the lookout platform, so that reason doesn't make sense why they would want to have it moved closer to a public/trail area. Ask Cache-tech if he/she would make it into a virtual. 2nd highest waterfall in Ontario, right? That has to be something special.

 

If it wasn't for geocaching I never would have knew that this place even existed or even found that that Niagara Falls is not the only waterfall in Ontario, and I lived here all my life.

Edited December 8, 2003 by res2100

[lessenergy]

Hi guys.

 

I think I pretty clearly said that I was not familiar with the particular spot that this cache was placed so if it entirely safe then let HCA know that. I am familiar with the general area though. People get hurt there fairly regularly. I think it is understandable that the land manager wants to ensure that any geocache is not going to get someone hurt. If this particular cache is safe, then let the land manager know that and convince him or her of that. What's the big deal?

 

If it is unsafe, in the landmanager's opinion, then don't you have an obligation to do what he or she asks? Don't you also have a responsibility to the people that will go to this cache as well?

 

And the secondary consideration that they do not want a cache in an environmentally sensitive area makes sense. If you don't know where these areas are, shouldn't the person who placed the cache have asked?

 

It sure seems like HCA is willing to co-operate with you which is more consideration than the sport has recieved from other land managers. Go for it. Please convince them of the merits of the sport (and there are many) but, please accept with some grace the reasonable limits the land manager wants to place on your activities.

 

As to the rest of your comments:

 

As the sport becomes more visible to land managers these issues are going to come up again and again. I don't see any alternative to your learning to live with some restrictions on where you place caches. Some people are just going to disagree with your belief that you can place a geocache anywhere you want and some of them will have the authority to stop you.

 

Instead of complaining about it, hoping for the good old days when no one in authority knew what you were doing or suggesting people who disagree with you get banned because you do not like what they say, why don't you come up with some compelling reasons to demonstrate the benefits of geocaching. There are many. With some thought and co-operation, I am sure most land managers would allow the sport within some limits and it is only right that the land manager decides what those limits are.

 

Les.

[Purple Fever]

Les - I'm all for safe caching... this one wasn't too bad, but yes, this one has potential to be dangerous and if the powers that be want it moved for safety, then I would not complain. Also, I respect the rights and opinions of 'land owners' and want everyone to get along! It is also a fantastic spot, and comments here seem to be be mainly suggesting that JARS move it further from the cliff or try to convert it to a virtual cache. A virtual cache could involve simply getting to the platform, which IS safe.

 

It was more your posts that made me want to reply. I just thought it funny that you suggested putting the cache in a completely different spot for safety reasons, when you don't even know the spot in question! I also wonder why it says 'Geocacher' under your name (and why you talk like such an authority) when you have ZERO logged finds or hidden caches. Why have you taken it upon yourself (it seems, and you haven't replied to that question) to involve the HCA and ??? when you don't seem to be a participant in the sport? I have barely posted here at all (although I am an active geocacher), but I felt compelled to write when I saw that.... I am just wondering what your great interest here is? Is it personal safety? landowner rights? or something else?

[lessenergy]

Hi Purple.

 

Thanks for your reply. First of all, I only suggested the Peak because it is close to the cache and provides an amazing view and is maintained by the land managers so that it can be safely visited. Someplace closer is a better solution and you're right - a virtual cache right at the platform makes sense and may be eagerly accepted by the land manager as it would get people to an area that they want visitors. My understanding though is that many cachers do not like virtual caches. A traditional cache placed somewhere approved by the land manager with a note to the finder to go to the platform seemed like a good idea.

 

My interest in geocaching is simply this:

 

I want to make sure that the areas I use are protected for the future for the use of everyone who has an interest. To me this means that the land managers (who know better than anyone else) should decide how the land is used. My view on the sport has been modified greatly by participating on this forum and lurking here as well. I am much more sympathetic to the sport than I was before. I guess I learned something here.

 

I don't geocache yet since I don't own a GPS but I will get one soon and look forward to participating in the sport. I do not want to contribute to detracting from the land I search or place a cache on though. To me at least, that means ensuring that the land manager knows of and appoves the location of geocaches. This may amount to a blanket approval but in other cases, there may be the need to get specific permission. That is fine with me. I know I may be alone in this opinion on this forum. It does not mean that my opinion is in the minority for the general popluation however.

 

It is possible that I "woke up the dog". I did, some time ago, write the the HCA and ask about their policy as I could find nothing on it on their website. I know, I'll get abuse from some here if HCA has acted based on my bringing this issue up. Sorry about that. It is not my intention to make your life less enjoyable than it was but just to find out what their policies were and to ensure that the land they manage is protected in accordance with the specific knowledge and goals that only the land managers poccess.

 

Les.

[+EmmaBean]

We have also just been contacted by the HCA about one of our caches. The letter we recieved is almost identical to the one J.A.R.S. received. It would seem that they are now in the process of reviewing all caches on their property. Although, it seems positive that they are willing to work with the geocaching community to help establish some policies.

 

In our particular case they were concerned that our cache was too far off the marked trails and we were asked to relocated closer to the trials.

 

Quote removed on request - Cache-tech

 

We replied back telling them that we would remove the cache promptly and have currently disabled the cache page to insure no one else goes looking for it. We also mentioned the practice of CITO and that when we placed the cache we cleaned *alot* of garbage from a nearby firepit to help improve the immediate area.

 

we got this reply back this morning

 

Quote removed on request - Cache-tech

 

I think this is a very positive sign and this people are very willing to talk.

Edited December 8, 2003 by cache-tech

[lessenergy]

That's awesome. Good luck.

 

Les.

[+EmmaBean]

Just on another note, our e-mail appears to be legitiment.

 

So I would encourage any geocachers contacted by the HCA to cooperate with them and hopefully we can reach a mutual beneficial solution.

Edited December 8, 2003 by EmmaBean

[ecofinder2003]

Hello everyone,

 

The Hamilton Conservation Authority has been monitoring geocaching activity on their lands, via this website, for approximately 2 months. I can see that this topic has generated a lot of interest, and some concerns by those who geocache on our lands. I am not a geocacher, which I can see from previous messages that this is believed to "bias" one's view on geocaching. I have, however, been researching this topic quite a bit, and have become very familiar with the sport.

 

As you have read in the message left previously by “lessenergy”, HCA was questioned as to their policy on geocaching on our properties. My reply: we don’t have one. At this point, I chose to delve into researching the topic, and quickly discovered that a number of caches occurred on our properties. As many of you probably know, most of our properties have been designated by the City of Hamilton as special policy areas known as “Environmentally Significant Areas”. ESAs are designated as such for a number of reasons, the most common being:

 

§ Serves an important ecological function

§ Exhibits a high diversity of biotic and abiotic features relative to its size

§ Contains significant natural biotic communities

§ Provides habitat to significant flora / fauna

 

Through searching this website, I have found that the most commonly used ESAs under our jurisdiction include the Dundas Valley ESA and the Spencer Gorge ESA, but are not limited to only those areas. In addition to this, some of these areas are further designated by the province as “Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest”, or ANSIs, due to the presence of significant “earth science” or “life science” features. Again, the Dundas Valley and Spencer Gorge are designated as such, as well as the newly designated Eramosa Karst, to mention a few.

 

Our concerns with this sport lie primarily in two things, one being the integrity of our significant natural areas, and the second being liability. From everything I have read from geocachers that utilize our properties for this sport, I have developed an understanding that geocachers have a great love for the outdoors, since most caches offer fantastic vistas of our natural areas. In fact, the “cache-in, trash-out” program, wow, it is awesome. But the awareness of the significance of your surroundings, and most importantly, what is under your feet, is what really concerns us. Using the Dundas Valley as an example, this area is one of the only remaining core habitat areas in southwestern Ontario, meaning that there is at least 100 metres from its edge to its interior from all directions. The Dundas Valley has much more than this 100 metres, and is home to many endangered, threatened, and vulnerable species that rely on core habitat for their survival. Some of these species nest on the ground, in the roots of trees, along the edges of streams, and some yet rely on ground travel for their annual migration to breeding grounds. Others are plants which even a well-seasoned botanist may have trouble identifying. In this sense, I am not in a position to question the biological expertise of local geocachers, but I have a general feeling that not everyone geocaching in ESAs are biologists, or more specifically botanists, herpetologists, ornithologists, etc., and can knowledgably avoid these species when encountered, if they are even observed. The point I am trying to make here is that these areas have been designated to protect these species from human activity, and when the number of people utilizing these areas that are not designated for recreation begins to increase beyond those who perform the biological monitoring in these areas, so does the human footprint left behind. Based on the logs left by people who find each cache, I can see that many people are traveling to these sites.

 

Our second concern is liability. Although I personally believe that this would not come up as an issue with geocachers, since the disclaimer on your site explicitly states that the website is not responsible for the safety of their users, and that their activities are at their own risk. But does this hold true for the landowner, especially when the landowner has not been asked for permission to use the lands in this fashion? In any outdoor endeavor there is going to be a level of risk involved, which increases for the user when they travel into areas not designated for recreational use. Even if the “bushwacking” involves a simple hike through the forest to find a cache, who is to say that the user doesn’t go over on their ankle and break it by tripping over a hidden tree root or stepping into a hole? At an even bigger level, a number of our properties occur on the Niagara Escarpment. These areas I think go without saying that they are inherently dangerous for users, and should be avoided. Yet I find caches located quite close to the edge of the escarpment on our properties despite the obvious danger. Furthermore, I see that some people geocache in the middle of the night…I cringe at the thought of what could happen!!! So, many of you may think that this is a non-issue, as you participate in this sport entirely at your own risk, and wouldn’t think of the holding the landowner responsible for any injuries incurred while on their property. But that, in the end, is not sufficient, and in order to uphold our “due diligence” policies, we must discourage the use of areas not designated for recreation. Activities that do occur in the traditional non-recreation areas would require additional insurance coverage by both the user and us, as the landowner. But due to the nature of this sport, you could see that it would be difficult to implement.

 

In close, I would like to say that I really appreciate all of the positive feedback that I have been receiving on this topic, and the understanding of our perspective on this topic. It is important to note that, as some of you may have already noticed, not all of the caches on our properties have been archived, some due to the fact that they are not considered to be in sensitive areas, others which their exact location has not yet been confirmed to determine their sensitivity, and some which have not yet been dealt with by the user. As was stated in a previous message, we are in the process of drafting a geocaching policy on HCA properties, encouraging environmentally-conscious geocaching on our properties. I would like to hear everyone’s thoughts on this matter, be it through the forum or through contacting HCA. In the meantime, I will continue to monitor geocaching activities on our properties, the logs for each cache, as well as the forum.

 

Again, thank you to those who have offered positive comments and potential solutions on this matter to be through the forum and through email, and I hope that this process can remain positive and friendly for all of us.

[ecofinder2003]

Hi Jomarac5,

 

Hmmm...I think I haven't really explained my point as clear as I could have. As far as personal safety goes, of course I am concerned about people hurting themselves, and yes, in reality, we are always in danger of something happening no matter where you are. The unfortunate reality is that some individuals take it to the next level, and I am definitely not implying that any of our geocachers at hand here would do this, but if someone were to hurt themselves out in the back 40 and were to come back and sue the conservation authority despite our warnings, that would put us in a very awkward situation, and would also give a bad name to geocachers in general. We see this happening everywhere in society today, people slipping in a supermarket and suing the owner, people suing cigarette companies because of their cigarettes giving them cancer, etc. This is is the type of situation we obviously would like to avoid, so that is why it is necessary for us, as a public organization, to enforce this. All and all, we have to protect ourselves from this liability, plain and simple. I hope this clarifies my point for you. Thanks for your comment nonetheless!

[cachewidow]

Ecofinder2003, you have put forward a very reasonable and informed reply. Thank you for taking time to find out about geocaching, and being open-minded and interested enough to educate the community, rather than just shutting down the activity. I hope this can serve as a template for relations between users and managers to avoid unnecessary environmental damage and conflict over the resource.

cachewidow

[+Sparky-Watts]

EcoFinder2003,

 

Thank you for your positive insight and reply to the sport of geocaching. It is communication such as this that will best serve our sport and your land management programs. It is good to see someone in land management take the time to not only email your concerns, but to also sign up for the forums and post them here. To me, that is going above and beyond the call of duty in an attempt to reach an amicable agreement on both sides. I commend you on your positive attitude and responses!

[J.A.R.S.]

EcoFinder2003,

 

Thank you for your positive insight and reply to the sport of geocaching. It is communication such as this that will best serve our sport and your land management programs. It is good to see someone in land management take the time to not only email your concerns, but to also sign up for the forums and post them here. To me, that is going above and beyond the call of duty in an attempt to reach an amicable agreement on both sides. I commend you on your positive attitude and responses!

I'd also like to thank Ecofinder2003 for posting to the forum and continuing an informative and constructive discussion that all can share in.

 

The cache is archived and I've asked permission to create a virtual. Stay tuned.

[Purple Fever]

Yes, thanks a lot! Feel free to e-mail me with any questions or anything that I may be able to help with! I LOVE geocaching and want to help make sure that it is around for a long time...

 

And thanks for your reply as well, Les. Why don't you get yourself a GPSr for Christmas and join us - nothing like geocaching to keep you out and active through the winter!

[Jomarac5]

ecofinder2003 wrote:

I hope this clarifies my point for you. Thanks for your comment nonetheless!

Thank you for replying to my post (that used to be there). Yes, it does clarify your point although the ecological aspect alone is quite enough to warrant the stand that your organization is taking. My apologies if I appeared a bit agitated regarding the ever tiring "liability concerns".

 

Thanks for being open to discussion regarding the placement of caches on HCA land.

 

*****

[ecofinder2003]

Thank you to everyone who has taken the time to read my message and offer such kind and encouraging thoughts. Here, I'll use one of these smilies to show how I feel right now...

 

I look forward to discussing this further with you all such that we can come up with a mutually beneficial solution. Stay tuned!

[+The Daniel Boone Gang]

I'm also a Hamilton Geocacher.

 

Needless to say, your note is both concerning and encouraging. I'm always concerned when I hear of governments drafting policy on Geocaching - it's usually a negative.

 

However, I'm also glad to see that they're not just out-and-out banning the cache. They've taken the time to ask you to move it, and they've provided some very good reasoning, and they've invited dialog.

 

I would suggest that you:

 

1) Immediately move the cache

2) Thank them for contactacting you

3) Offer to meet with them over a coffee and explain how geocaching works.

 

Number 3 is important because this gives you an opportunity to stress some of the positive aspects of caching. Maybe some of the people involved would be interested to come with you on a couple caching adventures.

 

Depending on how it goes, they may be interested to meet with other cachers in the area, etc.

 

This could be turned into a real positive, and can influence how other communities deal with this issue.

[+Sparky-Watts]

I would suggest that you:

 

1) Immediately move the cache

2) Thank them for contactacting you

3) Offer to meet with them over a coffee and explain how geocaching works.

 

It appears to me that both your points 1 and 2 have been taken care of, and as far as your 3rd point, if you read the entire post from ecofinder2003, you should note that he already appears to have a pretty good grasp of how geocaching works.

[+The Daniel Boone Gang]

Our concerns with this sport lie primarily in two things, one being the integrity of our significant natural areas, and the second being liability.

Firstly, I have to say that I'm impressed that you've taken the time to research this issue rather than "error on the side of saftey" and just outright ban caching - which has happened in other communities (usually in the States). As a Hamiltonian, I'm glad you're on the job.

 

The first issue you mentioned is might be satisfied by having the cache owner obtain permission for a specific area, or simply remove the cache if asked. Sensitive habbitates, etc. must be protected and I think every geocacher will agree with that.

 

The liability issue is certainly tougher. A few questions come to mind:

 

1) What is the HCA's liability if for whatever reason I decide to leave a marked trail and break my leg? I would imagine that this type of thing can happen anytime on Conservation property.

 

2) How is this different from the HCA's liability if someone breaks their leg on Conservation property while caching?

 

3) Would it help if an HCA disclaimer is placed on all cache postings on HCA property?

[+Algonquin Bound]

Joxer's Spelunk

 

Is this yet another casualty of Les Energy's war against cachers? Hey Les. are you the person who alerted the Royal Botanical Gardens, too?

 

I haven't seen any reasonable explanation for your lurking here, nor any reasonable explanation for you contacting these authorities and alerting them to our largely harmless activities. As you can see, though, the authorities are co-operating with us and we are co-operating with them, so your little scheme is only slowing things down and so far, has had only one questionable cache removed for safety concerns. Perhaps, Les, you could focus on some of the Rocky Mountain caches, which require complicated climbing gear and professional expertise. People like you are the reason we end up with fences along the edges of cliffs, scarring natural beauty forever. If you are so concerned with safety, stay home and stay off our boards. We don't want you.

 

The problems with the internet, in general, are largely due to people like you, who lurk and poke their noses where they don't belong, just to prove that they can. Your discussion of the Tew's Falls cache was the perfect example, where you were advising about safety and ecological concerns, without ever having seen the location or the cache. Then back-pedalling, when people started mentioning a platform. Face it, you just don't know what you are talking about. That cache was not bothering anything ecologically and was completely safe. Yes, there would possibly be some concern in mid-winter, as there would be on any cliffside trail, but that could have been solved by moving the container a few feet away.

 

I have no problem with ecofinder2003, who speaks with knowledge and eloquence and completely valid concerns and has the position and authority to do so. He and anyone like him, including the RBG management, are completely justified in investigating caches on their property and drafting regulations, if they choose to do so.

 

You, Les Energy, have no such authority or right, except to ask us not to place a cache on your property. I'm sure, if you borrow a GPS and post your home co-ordinates here, we will be happy to stay away from you.

 

Your activities are the online equivalent of stalking or peeping. Voyeurism is just plain creepy, no matter what kind of Windows you are looking through.

[Purple Fever]

HERE, HERE. WELL SAID.

 

Say what you will Les, but the appearance is that you are trying to singlehandedly destroy geocaching in this area. This is a hobby that is getting MORE people out on the trails, MORE people cleaning parks and paying their park or trail fees, MORE people being healthy and active (including children), MORE potential volunteers, and MORE advocates of hiking and the beautiful trails and parks in the area.... and therefore should be encouraged, not stifled.

 

Watching some of the best caches around be archived is extremely disheartening. Why not be happy people are out USING these trails and therefore helping to make sure that they are there for years to come?

 

Yes, we do have a responsibility, as humans, to take care of nature... our responsibility, though, is ALSO to ENJOY it.

[+Amazon Annie]

Well, on my 1st page of unfound caches I now have 5 archived. (2 were previously archived before this whole kafuffle started). Hmmm 2 archived on my 2nd page....

 

Well, I am going to guess that I will have to do an up-to-the-minute check on any cache before leaving the house at this rate. This certainly changes my lazy mode of once a week downloads for my palm and GPS. I hope that this does not turn into a flame war. I'm thrilled that the HCA is open to dialog and I am willing to help out in any way possible. I know that others (i.e. the Land O Lakes Tourism Board) have turned this around to be a vehicle to bring people to their area. (See http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=37906 as an example)

 

Please feel free to contact me if I can help out.

[ecofinder2003]

Hello again everyone,

 

I think I am going to attempt to take some of the heat off of "lessenergy" (no pun intended), as his actions as far as "tipping off" the conservation authority are much less malicious that what is being interpreted in this forum. As far as "Joxer's Spelunk" is concerned, that cache has been taken off line at my request, and for a number of very valid reasons. This area is an Environmentally Sensitive Area, as well as an Area of Natural and Scientific Interest - these are municipal and provincial designations, respectively, that are in place to protect various ecological or geological features. In the case of the Eramosa Karst, the lands upon which this cache is placed, it is an extremely sensitive geological feature that is very rare in Canada, and is also very dangerous due to its inherent nature to collapse onto itself. Basically, it is a series of underground caves and watercourses, as well as features called "dolenes" that are essentially areas where the roof of the caves collapse. It is largely because of this karst feature that makes this site very dangerous from both above and below ground. I highly recommend everyone to look into this type of geology, it is pretty cool stuff. I hope upon reading more about karst topography that it will be come evident why we would not want people utilizing this site.

 

As for other local agencies cracking down on geocaches, that is a result of a joint meeting between local conservation authorities and their partners to discuss a number of topics, one which was geocaching on ecologically sensitive lands. As time permits, and as this topic begins to make its way all the way to Conservation Ontario, which it will undoubtedly do, I think that this is something that all geocachers are going to have to face at some point. Although I am in agreement with "Purple Fever" and others who are discussing this topic in this forum, that this sport is something that can ultimately lead to greater knowledge of our natural areas, and promote healthy lifestyles and the clean-up of our natural areas, I cannot guarantee that others will share this opinion within all of the conservation authorities.

 

Thoughts?

[+Cache-tech]

Everyone please just take a step back. I am going to assume lessenergy made their enquiry to the HCA in the interest of placing a cache there, since the other caches should have been place after asking permission, then we should not be having a problem. When a cache is submitted, by checking the box "Yes, I have read and understand the guidelines for placing a cache" which states permission is needed for placing a cache, then they are following the guidelines. If someone is just contacting all of the parks because they have nothing better to do, then this is a different story, but I am not going to accuse anyone of that and personal attacks will not be tolerated. Lets keep the attitude positive and work towards keeping caching permitted in all of our parks. Thank you for working with the HCA.

 

Cache-tech

Geocaching.com Admin

[J.A.R.S.]

Hello again everyone,

 

<snip>

 

As for other local agencies cracking down on geocaches, that is a result of a joint meeting between local conservation authorities and their partners to discuss a number of topics, one which was geocaching on ecologically sensitive lands.  As time permits, and as this topic begins to make its way all the way to Conservation Ontario, which it will undoubtedly do, I think that this is something that all geocachers are going to have to face at some point.  Although I am in agreement with "Purple Fever" and others who are discussing this topic in this forum, that this sport is something that can ultimately lead to greater knowledge of our natural areas, and promote healthy lifestyles and the clean-up of our natural areas, I cannot guarantee that others will share this opinion within all of the conservation authorities. 

 

Thoughts?

Can geocachers attend any of the meetings that will be discussing geocaching policy? Would the conservation authorities consider setting up a meeting with local geocachers to discuss policy?

[+Algonquin Bound]

Everyone please just take a step back.

 

Thank you for working with the HCA.

 

Cache-tech

Points well taken, Cache-tech. I only hope mine were, too. My intention is not to start a flame war with Lessenergy, or anyone else, but to keep reasonable discussion going with interested parties, ie. cachers and land managers. I do find it ironic that someone who professes a growing interest in our hobby, on one hand, is trying hard to ensure that land owners establish guidelines for caches, while in other forums, that individual is fighting with forum administrators about their rules being too stringent and unfair. Sounds like someone who just likes to stir up trouble where there is none.

 

However, I also like to give people the benefit of the doubt and hope that there have been some lessons learned. The benefits of geocaching to society and to parklands of all sorts have been well-documented here, as have the reasons for land managers to have guidelines. Let us hope things can be worked out to the good of all concerned parties.

[+DirtRunner]

Everyone please just take a step back. I am going to assume lessenergy made their enquiry to the HCA in the interest of placing a cache there,

 

-- SNIP --

How could he place a cache if he does not own a GPS ?

 

Just Wonderin'

DirtRunner

[ecofinder2003]

In response to JARS' questions:

 

1. So far there have been no organized meetings discussing geocaching. Everything has thus far been either discussed over the phone or mentioned in passing in other meetings.

 

2. In future meetings, I would definitely like to meet some of our local geocachers. I think their input will be invaluable to me and the creation of this policy.

[+Cache-tech]

Everyone please just take a step back.  I am going to assume lessenergy made their enquiry to the HCA in the interest of placing a cache there,

 

-- SNIP --

How could he place a cache if he does not own a GPS ?

 

Just Wonderin'

DirtRunner

We have exchanged emails which was mentioned a GPS was on the christmas wish list and I am giving the benifit of the doubt.

[+The Two Navigators]

We have exchanged emails which was mentioned a GPS was on the christmas wish list and I am giving the benifit of the doubt.

 

Just because it is on his wish list does not mean he will get it. I wish that I get a car for Christmas but I know that I will not get it. I will still cache using public transportation (Oc transpo).

Edited December 10, 2003 by The Two Navigators

[+Cache-tech]

We have exchanged emails which was mentioned a GPS was on the christmas wish list and I am giving the benifit of the doubt.

 

Just because it is on his wish list does not mean he will get it. I wish that I get a car for Christmas but I know that I will not get it. I will still cache using public transportation (Oc transpo).

Then I am giving the benifit of the doubt. I'd like to get a car for Christmas too, mine is broken.

 

Cache-tech

Geocaching.com Admin

Edited December 10, 2003 by cache-tech

[+The Daniel Boone Gang]

As far as "Joxer's Spelunk" is concerned, that cache has been taken off line at my request, and for a number of very valid reasons.  This area is an Environmentally Sensitive Area, as well as an Area of Natural and Scientific Interest - these are municipal and provincial designations, respectively, that are in place to protect various ecological or geological features.  In the case of the Eramosa Karst, the lands upon which this cache is placed, it is an extremely sensitive geological feature that is very rare in Canada, and is also very dangerous due to its inherent nature to collapse onto itself.

I remember doing Joxer's Spelunk.

 

When we got to the cache site I was amazed to find that it was a clearly used regularly for beer bashes and bon fires - the evidence was everywhere.

 

We cleaned some of it up, but weren't able to get it all as we didn't have enough bags. I'm sure we're not the only cachers to do that at this site either.

 

What amazes me in all this talk about how sensitive the area is, is that in all of this, we (the cachers) come out as the bad guys who need to be regulated and kept away from the sensitive areas.

 

I'm sure the smashed beer empties, the crushed cardboard cases, cigarette buts, etc. have had a real positive impact on this sensitive environment. While the cachers have been stopped from enjoying this area, I'm sure the parties will be allowed to go on.

 

I'm sure that the party goers will exercise the same care and concern for this area that the cachers did.

 

What is the point of saving these environmental wonders when nobody but the lowest type of people get to enjoy them?

Edited December 11, 2003 by The Daniel Boone Gang

[+The Two Navigators]

It seems that lessenergy has surfaced once again and this time he means to be a Troll. See the link to find out more.

Forum Page