What Does "stay On Trail" Really Mean?

[+Confucius' Cat]

What does “stay on trail” really mean?

 

Is there a difference between a “park” and a “nature preserve”?

 

Is trespassing an integral part of geocaching?

 

Is a cache owner liable for knowingly placing a cache in an illegal location?

 

How many caches are really legal, given park “stay on trail” rules?

 

These questions came to mind recently in a few cache quests in Ohio wherein at one of them I was informed by a park ranger that, at least in his district’s parks, “stay on trail” means “stay on trail” and that if I was caught off trail by even a few feet, I risked a $160 citation. He gave me a break.

 

I agreed to post a “needs archived” note on all the caches in their park system and email the owners to ask them to get permission or remove them. He gave me contact information, which I passed on as requested.

 

The cache owner (same owner for all 3) seems to think it is MY FAULT that their caches were archived because:

It is amazing what one e-mail can do and what an individual who can not be stealthy enough to NOT get caught.

 

So, I ask the questions.

 

Is our sport one in which we must break the law, or should we exercise our talents in a manner consistent with legal and ethical principles?

 

I believe the “off-trail” issue is a “gray area” in many cases. For example, a cache placed in a State Park, even though the park rules clearly state, “please stay on marked trails” (this is pretty much a blanket rule in nearly all parks), is IMHO not a problem if it is a “few” feet off the trail. (50-100 is IMHO a “few”)

 

My reasoning:

 

In general the trails are not well “marked” and in many cases go hundreds of feet between “marks”. The trails are generally just a timeworn path between the trees where the undergrowth has been eliminated and they are not much different and oftentimes indistinguishable from the “animal trails” nearby. This is typical in Indiana State Parks, although there are exceptions.

 

In this case, I don’t see where going off-trail a “few” feet makes much difference.

 

I also consider it somewhat significant that signs are not posted ON the trails.

 

On the other hand, there are those parks where the trails are very well defined, perhaps even asphalted or boardwalks, and clearly marked with appropriate signage at frequent intervals and conspicuously posted “stay on trail”. This is the state of the trails in the parks where I met the ranger.

 

In these cases, since it appears obvious that staying on the trail is a prominent concern of the park management, going off trail just a few feet could be a big problem. Why this is the case, I am not sure. The ranger in question at my incident said it was mainly an insurance issue. (DON’T get me started on THAT!) And there are several places (which did not have known caches), which were clearly posted as “reclamation” areas for fragile environments.

 

The caches in question were not in any unsafe areas and were at most 25’ off trail and in clear sight thereof. I would consider this no big deal, but I am not TPTB.

 

I also find it interesting that the park allows mushroom hunters to go off trail with a permit. Given this, I don’t see why geocaching should be denied and I don’t think it would be if the department was properly approached to get permission.

 

OK. So, clearly seeing the signs and noting the condition of the trails, I went off trail and found 2 of the caches. I knowingly broke the rules. I will go to confession. Flame on.

 

The third was in an area roped off and posted “no public access”. I have always held to the policy of not entering land that is CLEARLY posted against trespass.

 

Where should Geocachers stand on these issues?

 

The hornets’ nest is kicked. Gotta run now!

 

The floor is open for comments.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

Too many questions, have fun.

[+TeamK-9]

I tried reading through all that, but I lost my attention about halfway down. Basically, from what you're saying, in my opinion, caches need permission, but it basically depends, I mean if there's only one main trail through a park, yah, stay on it or as close to it as possible.

 

But unless the park rules specifically state directly staying on the cache, the highest rule we cachers can probably hold ourselves is not bushwacking until we're almost sure we're as close as we can get on trail...

[+RPW]

Too many questions, have fun.

 

Yeah, that was a long ramble by CCD. I think that his main point is that it is no fun to be hassled by a park ranger. Thus it is best for cache placers to find out what "on the trail" rules there are and to not hide caches in violation of the park rules.

[+retphoto]

CCD's post may of been Long Winded, but lots of parks do have senitive areas which is why Permission is very important. Obvisously the cache Hidder did NOT seek proper Permissions, or you would NOT of had this encounter with the Park official.

 

The issue about Mushroom hunters going off-trail with a permit, isn't about them going off trail so much as controling the number of them going off-trail. hense the permit.

 

The TPTB from my encounters with them are, that Hidders are to do everything they can to insure LEGAL placements, and correct those that are found to be in sensitive areas.

 

you did the right thing......

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

Too many questions, have fun.

 

Yeah, that was a long ramble by CCD. I think that his main point is that it is no fun to be hassled by a park ranger. Thus it is best for cache placers to find out what "on the trail" rules there are and to not hide caches in violation of the park rules.

Valid points but there will be caches properly placed and caches that won't be. Sort of a human issue there.

[+The Snail]

If "Stay on Trail" signs are placed to protect delicate ecosystems or endangered flora, I will respect their wishes and comply. However if they are concerned about insurance purposes, (a dubious excuse at best), or people getting lost in the woods, I would put on my stealth suit and find that cache. Even before I started caching, bushwacking and going off trail during a hike was more enjoyable than following the beaten path.

[gm100guy]

I think we need Les's input on this thread?

 

[+WalruZ]

Any park that has a ranger devoted to handing out $160 tickets for walking through the woods has a funding problem - they have too much.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

Any park that has a ranger devoted to handing out $160 tickets for walking through the woods has a funding problem - they have too much.

Here in Oregon you need a trail pass every year just to park next to a roadside to access a trail. Can't raise the taxes so they'll fine us poor I guess.

[+Prime Suspect]

Oh, great. CCD must be starved for attention again. Another of his "Hey everybody, look at ME! I'm being sooooo controversial!" posts.

 

Enough, already.

[+SamLowrey]

"Is our sport one in which we must break the law, or should we exercise our talents in a manner consistent with legal and ethical principles?"

 

Our sport is one that could take an otherwise slumbering serf-who-thinks-he-is-a-citizen-because-that-was-what-they-told-him-at-the-government-run-school and make him realize how out of control the government is becoming.....

[+TeamK-9]

I kind of like the idea of the mushroom hunters pass.

 

Maybe just to control cachers, state DCNR's and other organizations like that could give out geocaching permits to be off trail. But then and again, we'd get a bad name when the occasional newbie cached without one.

 

But see that's the one thing I've never understood about parks. I mean except for delicate areas, there's just all this land out there. I mean who wants to just spend all their time in a park on a trail going through it that in total is maybe 10-20 acres out of 100's...

[ghOzt]

Oh, great. CCD must be starved for attention again. Another of his "Hey everybody, look at ME! I'm being sooooo controversial!" posts.

 

Enough, already.

It's kinda harsh to say it, but you're right. There have been a couple of topics since the 'wilderness debate' by him that have been like this. They each end with:

The hornets’ nest is kicked.  Gotta run now!

If this line weren't added, I'd take the topic more seriously.

[+Runaround]

So you identified a couple of caches placed without permission and outside of park rules. You posted an archive log and caches were promptly archived. Case closed. I don't see the need for a mile long posting here.

[+Renegade Knight]

Stay on trail is a park rule. It's not a life rule. If a park has stay on trail it can be because they want you to stay on the paved trail and save wear and tear on the rest of the park. In Yellostone there are places where to go off the trail will get you killed.

 

Other places stay on the trail means "say on the trail in your vehicle" but you can hike anywhere as long as you drove to get there.

 

What it all comes down to is repect the rules of the land you are using to play the game. Nothing more. This isn't a hornets nest.

[+woo2]

Please, with 80,000 caches in 180 countries (or whatever it's up to now) placed by individual volunteers... It's inevitable that some will be placed, knowingly or unknowingly, in an impropper location. Since there is an open relationship between the placers and seekers, it's perfect for self policing by the geocaching community.

 

You were able to find an impropperly placed cache. I find it embarassing that you're making such a big deal of it and not simply addressing the issue discretely and politely. Maybe that's the reason for the flame from the cache owner, you seem to enjoy being the narc.

[Megamog]

ChurchCamp Dave is a snitch! Do not let him full you. I grew up running around the park systems in Cleavland Ohio and areas that where controlled by the federal government and I have only came across one guy the whole time that did not want me to be there. This camp dave guy post and never came back to contribute to this article, I believe he went to search for these cache and did not find them then got mad and decided to say he did and get the owner to archive them. Would that be a terrible way to get found logs, just go around reading the cache posts and find the ones breaking the rules, then have them archived and saying you found them.

 

I firmly state I have no problem bending the laws to get to a cache in fact when I go out cacheing I don't even keep the law in mind. It's a game I want to enjoy myself. However I have encountered a cache that was on someones porch, This I will not do, to creepy stalker people putting things to get you to come to their house=beware.

 

[+briansnat]

Placing a cache in clear violation of park rules is asking for trouble and will only serve to put this sport in a bad light.

 

Getting caught off trail by a ranger in a place where it's against the rules to be there, then telling him that you are geocaching doesn't help matters. You should have said you were mushroom hunting, then addressed the issue with the cache owner, and/or this website.

Edited February 15, 2004 by briansnat

[+RichardMoore]

ChurchCamp Dave is a snitch! Do not let him full you. I grew up running around the park systems in Cleavland Ohio and areas that where controlled by the federal government and I have only came across one guy the whole time that did not want me to be there.

 

The Cleveland Metroparks has only one rule about going off-trail. Bicycles are only permitted on paved areas, not on or off any of the other trails. You can walk pretty much anywhere you want, the only areas to avoid are the maintenance yards and such.

Motorized vehicles are, of course, not allowed anywhere but on the roads and parking areas.

 

RichardMoore

[+Confucius' Cat]

I am sorry, i am not a mushroom hunter and I do not like going to jail or getting fined. Lying to a law enforcement officer is a really QUICK way to land in jail.

 

Sorry you all think I'm the bad guy here.

 

I just wanted some opinions on the questions I posed.

 

Thank you to the FEW who saw fit to address those questions.

 

As to those who think I just go around looking for trouble, GET A LIFE.

 

I was in Ohio for a function my daughter was involved in in Troy OH. These were the closest caches. A park ranger was wearing coveralls and cleaning off the walkways.

 

I waited patiently for him to move on but instead, he aske me if he could help me find something, then identidfied himself as a ranger.

 

When it happens to you, go ahead and LIE. that helps the bail bondsmen make a living.

 

Maybe I SHOULD read the cache pages and go look for the ones that are placed illegally and "snitch".

 

Maybe SOMEBODY should. Trespassing is illegal and makes the whole caching community look bad.

 

Sorry to bother y'all

[lessenergy]

gm100guy asked for my input (although I think in jest) but even if it was, I'll add it.

 

If whoever placed the caches had permission to do so then this issue would not come up.

 

Every cache that is approved is only done after the cacher indicates that he/she had permission. If the cacher actually did what he/she said he/she did then this would not be an issue.

 

Les.

[+Confucius' Cat]

<snip un-called-for personal attack deleted>I firmly state I have no problem bending the laws to get to a cache in fact when I go out cacheing I don't even keep the law in mind.

</ snip emphasis mine CCD>

 

It's a game I want to enjoy myself. However I have encountered a cache that was on someones porch, This I will not do, to creepy stalker people putting things to get you to come to their house=beware.

 

So, since you, by your own admission, have no respect for the law. I conclude your opinion on this matter is worthless and should be disregarded.

 

Your final statement, though off topic, makes good sense. If I am reading this right, you are much more able to enjoy yourself if you do not put yourself in "creepy" (read DANGEROUS) situations.

 

I, too, am much more able to enjoy myself when I do not place myself in jeopardy. But, unlike you, I DO respect the law and I DO keep the law in mind as I persue my hobbies.

 

It is interesting that you bring up "stalking" because I am sure that is what it looked like, to the ranger, that I was doing, wandering around the trail, waiting for him to leave.

 

I am quite sure that if I had LIED to him about what I was doing, the next words out of his mouth would have been "GET ON THE GROUND AND KEEP YOUR HANDS WHERE I CAN SEE THEM!"

 

Instead, by "coming clean" I possibly recruited a new cacher, even though it was his SWORN DUTY toadvise me of the illegal placement and ask me to inform the owner.

 

 

The situations were posted as EXAMPLES and to explain what led me to post. They were not meant to be "goody 2 shoes" "look at me" "look how pious I am" displays. I apologize if they came across that way.

 

I posted this thread to get opinions on where to draw the line. To all who have addressed this issue, Thank You.

[+bigredmed]

I have a hard time with this rule as it seems to get used for 3 reasons:

 

1. To protect sensitive flora and fauna (cool with me).

2. To keep people off cliffs and other innately dangerous geologic formations (also cool).

 

and the one that really bugs me:

 

3. To keep the park safe from people ( or read: CERTAIN people). The National Park Service is good at this. Want to go rock climbing, knock your self out. Want to plant a cache, get arrested. The ecofascists and elitists that try to push other people out of the parks use these rules to squeeze us out, so they can have unfettered access.

 

I always prefer a sign that says: "Unsafe rocks, don't go there", or "These plants are endangered, don't bother them" to signs saying stay on trail. We have a park along the Missouri that has signs saying "Caution, Current is swift and dangerous". When you see that the current is moving as fast as it is, and you hear the white water under the bridge, you tend to stay on the trail without being told to.

[+bons]

The hornets’ nest is kicked.  Gotta run now!

When you kick the nest, you have to accept that the next person to get stung may be you.

[+Geo Ho]

Too many questions, have fun.

Ditto . . .

 

[+briansnat]

So, since you, by your own admission, have no respect for the law. I conclude your opinion on this matter is worthless and should be disregarded.

 

You're the one who was caught off trail where it was agaist the rules.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

So, since you, by your own admission, have no respect for the law. I conclude your opinion on this matter is worthless and should be disregarded.

 

You're the one who was caught off trail where it was agaist the rules.

Didn't he say he was standing on the trail waiting for the ranger to leave?

 

Was this ranger in charge of the park? Sometimes a subling acts as though they are in charge. Perhaps his boss did give the ok.

 

ya just never know.

[+Confucius' Cat]

CO admin considers this thread offensive so I'm closing it.

 

I regret that my sense of humor re "hornets nest" is not well received. It was not my intention to inflame or cause trouble.

 

I guess I have learned from this not to mix any form of humor in with a serious post. It seems no one is capable of differentiating the two if they are contained in the same post.

 

I am relatively new at internet forums and I guess that is something I should have known.

 

I thought my new avatar was cute also, but I'm sure it will prevent anyone from ever taking me seriously so i will change that also. It was fun photoshopping it though.

 

So as not to OFFEND everyone in the geocaching community, I'm outa here. When I have a question I will find another place to ask it other than these forums.

 

You may consider this my forum suicide note.

 

The clock is ticking.....