Impact Of Geocaching?

August 9, 2004

I'm a new Geocacher. I've only been doing this for a week now and I'm already starting to see something that causes me to question this all...

A couple of the places I've gone, have seemed like areas that probably shouldn't be "hiked" on. They were areas that were fields of weeds, or on hillside banks. While going "bushwacking" in some of these areas probably isn't a HUGE deal, but if GeoCaching gets more and more popular... and more and more people go bushwacking through those areas... then you will have created an unauthorized trail.

Perhaps I'm a little more sensitive to this since my state (PA) recently booted mountain biking off State Game Lands for similar reasons. So, I tend to think about impact more then I once did.

Another cache I went to, had an obvious entry location to a hillside bank, but after not finding it, I went down along the bush line a little more... and found another place where at least ONE other person had "gone up the bank". So, I decided to check it out... but now there have been TWO people who have gone up there... and possible there will be a third, and a fourth, and who knows, pretty soon, it will probably look like a trail.

Since I'm a newbie... has there been much discussion in the past on impact to the environment. Or stuff like that.

1.6k · August 9, 2004

That is one of the problems of Geocaching - it is inevitable that new paths and trails will be created if the cache is off the beaten track.

But is this a problem at all? I suppose so if rare flowers are damaged or large scale soil erosion occurs.

MarcB

3.1k · August 9, 2004

some have suggested it's a problem. I disagree.

I've seen some unauthorized trails all over the place and 99.99% of them have nothing to do with geocaching.

3.8k · August 9, 2004

In the Galapagos Islands, stepping off the "authorized trail" is strictly prohibited and enforced. There are other ecologically sensitive areas around the world where, I'm sure, the rules are similiar.

Most places, however, will not be significantly altered when unauthorized trails are created; most places will recover completely from impacted areas such as "geocache paths."

Although some controlled areas like the National Parks have prohibited geocaching inside their domains for this very reason, I personally feel that there are many detrimental activities more damaging than unauthorized trails. Consider the damage that can occur from horses, mountainbikes and ATVs. Consider the irreparable damage that may happen in technical climbing or caving.

And what about the thousands of litterers in our midst? <_<

Geocachers, I think, are particularly conscience of impacting the enviornment. Probably the biggest problem created by unauthorized geo-trails is the fact that, sooner or later, a muggle will get curious about the trail and stumble upon the cache.

And who's going to police the areas and prevent the deer and other natural residents of an area from creating unauthorized trails? :huh:

24.7k · August 9, 2004

Move the cache, the trial moves. Archive the cache and the trail goes away.

Make the cache remote enough and the area recovers between finders.

All caches are temporary in nature. None of my present caches will be around in 20 years, let alone 5. How temporary is the only question.

Lastly, these types of trails are only an issue where people have drawn lines around a patch of ground and said "we are preserving this park from the people for the people, so stay on the trail". Then you just place the cache so you don't have to leave the trail that the park provides (since if they didn't provide a trail they would get them anyway).

38.2k · August 9, 2004

I've been geocaching for 3 and a half years and I've seen very few "social paths" to geocaches. The few I've seen were for caches that were close to the trail, as people tend to follow the same route to the caches. I've yet to see these paths develop for remote caches placed far off trails, because the impact is spread out over a wide area.

The few social paths I've seen were similar to game trails created by deer. There was no compacted treadway, or other damage that would prevent the area from recovering immediately and being a trail maintainer, I can assure you these areas grow back fast, as I often have difficulty even keeping long time trails open for hiking.

Finally, don't be so certain the path is there because of the cache. When people go to place caches, they usually take the route of least resistance, which in many cases is an existing game, or social trail. Thus, to the casual observer, it may seem the cache is the cause of the path, but in reality the path is the reason the cache is there.

Remember, some trampled grass and a few broken twigs is not environmental damage. You're doing no more damage (actually probably less) than a few deer passing through. The grass will grow back quickly in most regions (I know desert areas are more sensitive) and often a few weeks later you'll never even know a cache was there.

Edited August 9, 2004 by briansnat

1.6k · August 9, 2004

I have seen a few social trails that were pretty impressive, but as previous posters have commented on, these tend to be caches that are close to an established trail. The caches that are more remote (say 100 meters or more off the trail) rarely have this problem as there are enough jumping off points to spread the impact out.

I disagree that the social trails are no more damaging than deer trails. Deer can truly mess things up, but some of the trails are so heavily developed, they could probably qualify for federal highway subsidy.

Another good thing to add to the "this is the good way to hide a cache" education session.

3.9k · August 9, 2004

has there been much discussion in the past on impact to the environment.

Hmmm. I can't recall one single topic on this subject. <_<

Of the 500 plus caches I've found I have yet to see any significant damage or social trails to the area around a cache. If you're the type of person who has heart palpitations every time you see a broken twig, you may need a different hobby.

Edited August 9, 2004 by JMBella

August 9, 2004

This is a very good question, we here in Middle TN take this very seriously to the point of at the Geo-Woodstock event here at a local large park there were eleven caches placed for the poker run where there had been one at each location over a year earlier.

While placing the eleven caches for the poker run we took pictures to make sure that the areas had indeed recovered from the previous placement of caches of a year earlier and they all had.

We took pictures while picking up the caches, ( caches were only out for 24 hours ) the afternoon of the poker run after there was a stampede of geocachers at least 100 in one day in and out of each cache location. Man the areas looked messed up bad.

30 days later ( one weeks ago ) we went in for yet another round of pictures, let me tell how surprises we were, everything looked just like it had before.

It was a win win situation for the parks and geocachers to be able to prove even after something like this the environment would have a full recovery.

I am not saying that all areas turn out this way, if you are careful in placement it can be controlled …………….. JOE

5.9k · August 9, 2004

What is an unauthorized trail?

I am authorized to stomp my fat foot practically any Fudging place I please.

1.3k · August 9, 2004

What is an unauthorized trail?

I am authorized to stomp my fat foot practically any Fudging place I please.

You should have seen the area around Criminal's cache in the Colonel Bob Wilderness.

Trees downed, grass burned, elk beheaded and their racks hung as a warning to others... He even carved a warning into the side of the mountain and then sprayed WD-40 and motor oil all over the trail to increase the terrain level.

Or -

I would've never known there was a cache there if I hadn't been looking for it. And even then it wasn't easy.

38.2k · August 9, 2004

You should have seen the area around Criminal's cache in the Colonel Bob Wilderness.
Trees downed, grass burned, elk beheaded and their racks hung as a warning to others... He even carved a warning into the side of the mountain and then sprayed WD-40 and motor oil all over the trail to increase the terrain level.

Or -

I would've never known there was a cache there if I hadn't been looking for it. And even then it wasn't easy.

Well we're waiting. Which was it? With Criminal ya never know <_< .

1.3k · August 9, 2004

Well we're waiting. Which was it? With Criminal ya never know .

I'm too tired to remember. When I got down I kind of got weirded out because I didn't remember passing some of the landmarks I passed on the way up.

Actually there were two caches on that trail in the wilderness area and no one and no animal will ever be the wiser unless they are looking for them.

9.4k · August 9, 2004

Most caches are placed right off existing game trails. IMO it is the chicken before the egg scenario. Normally the trail is there before the cache, in my limited adventures.

Of course this is all ancedotal, but the last cache we went to was 5 miles in, only found twice before, and we commented that the game trail it was located beside would be thought as being caused by a geocacher.

4.1k · August 9, 2004

The grass will grow back quickly in most regions (I know desert areas are more sensitive) and often a few weeks later you'll never even know a cache was there.

The few caches that we have placed in the 'desert', have had 40-45 finds with several people in the groups. When we go for cache maintance we have found no footprints after the winds go through (which seem like all the time). Not to mention the torrental rains we get that would take care of the remaining ones. We were wondering about one in particular cache, which is a rock hounders delight. But, we are now certain that it is fine.

It was our first cache, so therefore we have been back many times over the past year & no damage & more improtantly, NO TRAILS OR EVEN FOOTPRINTS! Fantastic how mother nature can take care of sand/dirt/grass/etc.

Shirley~

2.6k · August 9, 2004

I ran out during lunch today and did one that was on the border between a pine forest and a meadow. I'd come at it from the forest side. After I found the cache, I noticed a social trail on the meadow side. I was appalled.

Not because bent grass is an ecological catastrophe, but because -- shoot! If I'd seen that going in, I'd've saved myself the bushwhack!

People sometimes introduce unfortunate things into wild areas, like nylon fishing line, but we aren't trespassers. We're a proper part of the wilderness and always have been. Including when we stumble around making trails.

August 9, 2004

The biggest impact I have seen Geocaching have on the landscape is pulling McCrap toys out of public landfill and reboxing in nice, camouflaged Tupperware containers.

August 9, 2004

What you've got working here is liberal guilt (I know, I am one.) Guilt that you, evil dirty bad human you, shouldn't be out there despoiling beautiful virginal mother nature, who is way too good for hamhanded filthy louses like... people.

Get over it. People are, and should be part of nature too. A trail doesn't despoil the landscape. Your car does.

2.1k · August 9, 2004

can someone please define "Social Trail"

thank you -

August 10, 2004

Not because bent grass is an ecological catastrophe, but because -- shoot! If I'd seen that going in, I'd've saved myself the bushwhack!

hmmm, never seen two contractions in one word before!

</off topic>

I thought some grass was "made" to be trampled and cut, simulates cows or other animals eating it. Seems like I read that on the internet somewhere

If grass likes to be walked on, is there an impact? Something to ponder.

August 10, 2004

I do not see this being a problem myself. Then again we do not quite have the cache density where I live that others have. I also do lots of hiking in other areas and do not see big problems with off trail impacts.

As for mountain bikes they tend to get a bad rap also. Check out this study.

August 10, 2004

I'll try to do a blanket reply to all...

First off, I'm not worried about the twigs... I'm not a bleeding heart "tree-hugger". I'm just raising some potential concern about possibly seeing yet another hobby of mine ( a new one) get regulated of banned by the governing bodies that rule the woods in this state.

It seems to me sometimes in PA, the only "legal" reason you are allowed to enter the woods is to trap or shoot some sort of animal. But I won't go off on that tangent for right now.

I'm aware that Mountain Biking can create far more impact then many other forms of enjoying the outdoors. But that's why in this state, we've had to learn ways to build trails to prove that we can build sustainable traffic that doesn't succomb to erosion, heavy use of "skidding" and other heavy impact styles of riding... without santizing the trails to the point of boredom either.

I should document the areas I've found that have caused me to even question this. Like I said the one has a cache on a large bank, that with the new path(s) to get up to the cache through the bushes, now has sediment sliding down from the bank into the public park that was once held in check by the bushes. Did the GeoCachers cause this to happen or were the bushes dying out or improperly planted? I don't know, but I do know that it's becoming increasingly obvious that there is a "trail" where there once wasn't.

I guess I should go read some archives before posting a "beaten" topic.

2.7k · August 10, 2004

in my comments on my cache at Cumberland Falls State park (KY), I noted (and pictured) how "mother earth" was actively reclaiming very large chunks of concrete and steel that have been abandoned for many years. All the non-concrete parts of the structures have long ago succombed to nature's awesome healing power. (admittedly most were probably consumed in the fire that caused the structures' abandonment in the first place).

This is a finite Earth. Nothing is "permanent" it is just that some things have longer lives than others.

If the good earth can dispose of steel and concrete (the cited site has done a lot in just about 50 years), then a little trompled vegetation aint no big deal.

*beating dead horse*

Edited August 10, 2004 by ChurchCampDave

4.1k · August 10, 2004

Motoed: If you feel there is a problem with where a cache is placed or access to a cache is causing a problem, then the first thing you should do is to e-mail the owner a polite note stating what you see as the problem and any solution you may have for correcting the perceived problem. There is a follow up option if the situation continues to degrade, and that is to post an SBA (should be archived) log on the cache page explaining the problem in the log. Geocaching will then take over and try to resolve the problem.

By all means, feel free to post any geocaching topic in the forums, even the 'dead horse' ones. We are handy at putting links in our answers so you can (hopefully) find an answer you can live with.

Erosion is a never ending battle against 'mother nature' and what you're seeing may just be normal erosion with a few extra footprints giving the impression that it is caused by geocachers.

Giving the cache owner the first shot at the problem will go a long ways to getting a solution everybody can live with.

At least, that is how this oldfart sees it.

John

edit because of a stiff keyboard.

Edited August 10, 2004 by 2oldfarts (the rockhounders)

August 10, 2004

Gee, this sounds familiar. Hey, do what I did--Get over it! The sooner you realize that man is the new environmental factor and that cockroaches and scorpions will always outlive us anyway, the happier you'll be.

This may be off the thread, but since it happened today I thought I'd share. I went to a rather remote cache today. (1 mile uphill on established trail) When I found the cache, which was not easy, there was a log just before mine that said something like this: "I found this jar by mistake. I don't think we ought to be putting jars full of crap in our wilderness. Just to show you, I took all the good stuff and left this junk. Serves you right". Since when did OUR wilderness not include geocachers? Wish I had been there when he was. It would have been interesting.

Anyway, that kind of elitest attitude is what makes divisiveness among the users of the wilderness. Mountain bikers hate ATVs--hikers hate horsemen--on and on ad nauseum. Guess what--there's enough for everyone.

3.9k · August 10, 2004

Jeremy,

What's with the new professional looking head shots? I would go back to the one with the facial hair.

1.7k · August 10, 2004

How can one tell that geocaching caused the trail.

Last Friday, I was FTF on a cache that had "social trails" all over, yet I was the first cacher there. In fact, the cache was just off one of those trails.

Of course, there were dear and rabbits and people rode horses through the area, so maybe some of these trails blamed on cachers we caused by non-cachers or animals.

Who woulda thunk it?

August 11, 2004

eeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!

August 11, 2004

can someone please define "Social Trail"

I think it the trail that leads to outhouse because it always seems to be the place you meet others in a park and pass greetings onto.

Could this be a new name for "less energy"?

:rolleyes:

Edited August 11, 2004 by gm100guy

August 11, 2004

Look at it this way. In 1 billion years, there will be no sign that humans were ever on this planet. The land will have coughed up countless fountains of hot magma and covered every trace of our civilization in solid rock. Then that coagulated rock containing all traces of our civilization will be plowed back under by the relentless grinding forces of plate tectonics.

No one will ever find your trail, your concrete, your nuclear power plant, or your SUV. Your trinkets will be history too, along with any unclaimed geocaching game pieces.

And if that isn't good enough, in another four billion years, even the earth itself will be gone, toasted to a cinder and blasted to interstellar atoms by our sun gone nova.

Always think in terms of geological time. You'll save yourself a lot of headaches.

August 12, 2004

I always read the forums and cache often but rarely log my finds and this is my first post.

First off: A social trail is a trail formed my people's use with out any planning, stricky by peoples use of an area.

I am a land use manager and have placed several caches on the area's I maintain.

I have been to many cache's were people have formed a trail to them. While it is possible that they were placed near an existing trail in many cases (for the ones I have been to) it was not the case. I.e. the trail ends at the cache. I believe the responsibility falls on the cache placer to check for impact often. In many cases the over impacted cache's could have been moved several hundred feet one way or another without affecting the character of the cache. While I wouldn't prusume to speak for everyone I have a feeling the vast majority of cache placers I have do not ask before placing a cache. I have been to 60 on my departments land without one of them having had permision asked before it is placed. it is important to check with the land use manager as you may not be aware of all the factors in an area (are they trying to revegitate, is it a wildlife cooridor etc). I am by no means anti cache, if you are afraid they would tell you know about placing a container even though there is no policy against it, try asking if it is ok to walk over in an area or explore over there or let you kids run around in that area. It will give you an idea if it is appropriate to place the cache there.

I am in a constant struggle with social trails - not from caches. I have area's under my responsibility that are bear dirt that have been blocked off for revegitation for 10 years and are just begining to see regrowth.

I think most geocachers are very respectful. After all at least for me I do it becuase I want to see cool places outside that I have never been to (no urban micro's for me). The hunt is almost secondary. But realize that you picked the spot hopefully becuase of the scenery, other people who aren't going there to geocache are going there for the scenery and impact is exponential. Don't get lazy with your maintinace and move it a couple hundred feet every 30 or 40 vistors or so (depending on impact and time between visitors). Even if it is back and forth between 2 different spots. Or course these guidlines apply more to wilderness cache's as opposed to city parks.

While no tree hugger myself (I come from a forestry background) I think about leaving it nice for the next person. If you want them to see a nice waterfall and you can hide it good a few feet from the trail why hide it 200 ft from the trail?

NOw for the tree hugger part from the Nature Conservancy

In the end our society will be judged not only by what we create but what we refuse to destroy.

4.7k · August 12, 2004

hey, as long as somebody brought up the impact of mountain bikers on land, here's a fun story:

recently a local landowner closed his land to mountain bikers because there was eveidence of keggers near the trails.

dude! i have yet to see mountain bikers go to all the trouble of strapping a keg to a trailer and hauling it up trail for a few miles. thems' four-wheelers doing that, fer sure.

2.6k · August 12, 2004

While I wouldn't prusume to speak for everyone I have a feeling the vast majority of cache placers I have do not ask before placing a cache.

There's a private land management organization in my area and I'd like to put a cache in one of their small suburban parks. Definitely more "playground" than "conservation area." Their spokesman was quoted in a newspaper article saying that the trust isn't anti-caching, but they would really appreciate being asked first.

So I asked.

Two weeks later, I get an email saying they'll get back to me in a few weeks. I'm still waiting. I explained everything as carefully as I could, I promised to monitor the cache regularly and remove it instantly if it was a problem, I offered to show the land manager where it is.

If my actions cause them to issue a state-wide ban, I'm going to have to go into the witness protection program. They manage a lot of park property, some of it undoubtedly with fine old caches hidden by people smarter than me.

I can only imagine what it would be like to ask permission from a city or state employee!

1.8k · August 12, 2004

then you will have created an unauthorized trail.

Oh, no, the dreaded unauthorized trail.

We did a cache Monday back a long deer trail near a river close to a bike path. It had been found 5 days earlier, so I was looking for sign. No sign. Walked on by, and when I looked at the gps, I was 100' past it.

My yard is between the High School and the Stadium. When we bought it, there was a beaten path across the corner. Put a stop to that trail easily. People still walk on the grass. It's OK.

If my actions cause them to issue a state-wide ban, I'm going to have to go into the witness protection program. They manage a lot of park property, some of it undoubtedly with fine old caches hidden by people smarter than me.

I can only imagine what it would be like to ask permission from a city or state employee!

Yea, I had that fear too, but I got permission for a large reservoir (with a couple small restrictions) so other cachers will be OK.

1.8k · August 12, 2004

Gee, this sounds familiar. Hey, do what I did--Get over it! The sooner you realize that man is the new environmental factor and that cockroaches and scorpions will always outlive us anyway, the happier you'll be.

Check your science, man, check your science. The whole evolution thing falls completely apart if you just ask for ANY accurate science, reproducable experiment, for something that isn't just built on some previous person's fallable observations.

Sorry, it's OT.

August 12, 2004

A couple of the places I've gone, have seemed like areas that probably shouldn't be "hiked" on. They were areas that were fields of weeds, or on hillside banks.

What concerns me more is caches placed in sensitive areas. For example, a PA cache I visited a few months ago was placed along a trail system that goes through an area known for its abundant and diverse wildflowers. The cache was placed a few dozen feet off the trail, right in the middle of these flowers. You had to trample over the poor flowers to get to the cache, there was no other way. Couldn't figure out why the cache couldn't have been placed maybe 100' farther down the trail such that you were taken off the trail *after* you saw the flowers.

Edited August 12, 2004 by Jeeters

2.5k · August 12, 2004

This is a very good question, we here in Middle TN take this very seriously to the point of at the Geo-Woodstock event here at a local large park there were eleven caches placed for the poker run where there had been one at each location over a year earlier.

While placing the eleven caches for the poker run we took pictures to make sure that the areas had indeed recovered from the previous placement of caches of a year earlier and they all had.

We took pictures while picking up the caches, ( caches were only out for 24 hours ) the afternoon of the poker run after there was a stampede of geocachers at least 100 in one day in and out of each cache location. Man the areas looked messed up bad.

30 days later ( one weeks ago ) we went in for yet another round of pictures, let me tell how surprises we were, everything looked just like it had before.

It was a win win situation for the parks and geocachers to be able to prove even after something like this the environment would have a full recovery.

I am not saying that all areas turn out this way, if you are careful in placement it can be controlled …………….. JOE

Post the pics!

Seriously, though... This is the best point here... The earth is a dynamic constantly changing area that is made to regenerate itself as needed. Granted, there are some cache placements (like the wildflower example) that's just plain stupid, but alot of the times, cachers aren't the only ones that are around in certain areas. Chances are, I'm quite sure, that deer and muggles and whatever else make social trails too. We as cachers need to make sure that we're paying attention to what's going on at our own caches. If there's a social trail forming directly to our caches and then no further, if for no other reason than new muggle-ability, move the cache. But if the evidence of the cahcers goes away after a few days, leave it be.

August 12, 2004

I've hiked miles and miles of Texas trails. I have yet to see any 'environmental impact' from mountain biking. They say that it exists, and this is the reason mountain bikes are banned in several places, like NPS. However, the only erosion I come across either has hoof prints or tire treads. Although lacking evidence that mountain biking causes erosion, it is perceived (and assumed) to cause erosion. This has led to the bans. The same thing can happen, and apparently has happened with NPS, to geocaching. It won't matter if it actually does or does not cause erosion; What matters is the perception. Botttom line with geocaching is that a large number of people visiting a single area will cause erosion; The same thing happens to popular hiking trails. I just have yet to see 10 people a day every day hit the same cache.

August 12, 2004

I archived my first cache because a trail was forming, not becuase of the enviormental impact, but because you could follow the trail right to cache.

At the same time I was worried about this happening at my second cache, but I did a check up on it, and there is actually more vegetation there than when I placed it.

I found a cache that was placed in a ghost town that had been abandon for 40 year. Let me tell you, Mother Nature will take care of things.

Edited August 12, 2004 by Iplayoutside

August 13, 2004

I think this is a legitimate concern, which is why the topic tends to show up so often.

I only hope that the majority of cachers will geocache responsibly and tread lightly on the environment.

Govern yourselves, or someone will come along and govern for you. :lol:

38.2k · August 13, 2004

While no tree hugger myself (I come from a forestry background) I think about leaving it nice for the next person. If you want them to see a nice waterfall and you can hide it good a few feet from the trail why hide it 200 ft from the trail?

The further off the trail the cache is, the less likely it is that you'll see social trails and other damage. It's the caches that are close to trails where you see this kind of damage, as the geocachers all tend to turn off at the same spot.

The further off trail a cache is, the more impact is spread out because its less likely that any geocacher will take the exact same route, which gives the area time to recover.

August 13, 2004

I have been involved in off-roading, 2-wheels, 3-wheels, and 4-wheels, for over 35 years. I also do a good amount of hiking. Overall, the vast majority of public land users are good people who are not damaging nature. Yes, there are some bad apples out there, but they are the exception, not the rule. Unfortunately, the few bad ones make the biggest impression, and the rest of us get lumped in.

Out in the boonies, what is the earth shattering problem of a few short "social" trails, anyway? As has already been stated, those typically only occur when a cache is close to a trail, so by definition, the social trail is short. Is a short new social trail really going to cause climactic change that will wipe out wildlife in the area? Recently, my son and I attempted to hike to a cache that, because of a seasonal forestry road closure, required about 2.5 miles off-trail. Because of the terrain difficulty and snow at higher elevations, we had to give up after about 1 mile. But during that mile, much of our time was spent following deer trails through the brush. How are those any different than a trail made by humans? Didn't most "established" trails begin life as a "social" trail?

I'm sick of public lands being locked up to protect them from the public. What, we must save them so that our great-grandchildren have lands that they can't enjoy either? Don't get me wrong, I've always believed in the "Tread Lightly" philosophy, and do my best to leave any camp site better than I found it, simply because I want my kids, and my kid's kids to be able to enjoy those areas as well. But those who believe that "humans" ( including their "impact") are not just as much a part of the natural world as are "other" animals, rocks, and plants need a reality check. Unless someone can convince me that humans came from a different planet to populate the earth, I believe that I am a natural part of this world, and belong in this world, and will continue to live in and use this world, just as any other creature "uses" this world.

Edited August 13, 2004 by 4x4van

August 13, 2004

This has recently become a problem with Lums Pond State Park in Delaware. It's a shame, as I like this park, and there were several caches which I had little chance to find.

The park staff posted to each cache asking they be removed. Check out this one, to see what the LumsPondStaff said:

AJ's Cache

I'm not sure how I feel about this. I'm torn. I can sorta see what they mean, but frankly, there's a lot worse going on in the woods of that particular park. The volume of geocachers, compared to muggles running amuck, has got to be pretty insignificant.

I'm new to geocaching. (Have found two; went out twice in a little over a week.) I have been playing disc golf in this park for years. I won't stop going there for that, but I feel a little slighted by people that maybe don't really know what's happening, as far as geocaching goes anyway, in their park. I just get the feeling this is a knee-jerk reaction kind of thing.

Oh well. :lol:

There's a County park around here with a little-known history of being an amusement park. I want to put a cache in there related to that history. It looks, though, like I'll have to get in touch with the author of the book I want to include pictures from, and the stewards of the park, so we can maybe find some understanding about it. I'm a little scared to even bring up the subject with them.

2.6k · August 13, 2004

I'm new to geocaching. (Have found two; went out twice in a little over a week.) I have been playing disc golf in this park for years.

I read the cache page, and all their objections seem to revolve around what might happen as a result of caching.

I'd write them a polite letter, I think, considering you've been using this park for years for other activies. Especially if you have seen other stuff in thepark more likely to cause damage. I'd play up angles like CITO and the peer pressure cachers put on each other to behave well.

Eh. It's worth a shot.

1.4k · August 13, 2004

And if that isn't good enough, in another four billion years, even the earth itself will be gone, toasted to a cinder and blasted to interstellar atoms by our sun gone nova.

Always think in terms of geological time. You'll save yourself a lot of headaches.

Hey, why hasn't Jeremy hired you as their PR guy yet? At the least you should be the guy talking to park rangers. :lol:

August 13, 2004

I think the social trail created after a cache has been placed also spoils the hunt. A "line drawn in the dirt" right up to the cache is a giveaway.

3.9k · August 13, 2004

There's a County park around here with a little-known history of being an amusement park. I want to put a cache in there related to that history. It looks, though, like I'll have to get in touch with the author of the book I want to include pictures from, and the stewards of the park, so we can maybe find some understanding about it. I'm a little scared to even bring up the subject with them.

You said that Lums Pond State Park is the one that gave cachers a problem. Did you hear something about the county parks? If there is no policy regarding geocaching in the county park then hide away. As far as finding out information from the park regarding the old amusement park, you can do that without bringing up geocaching. Like you said the state seems to have made a knee jerk reaction about something they know little or nothing about. It's possible that the county might have the same reaction. Check with local geocaching groups and your local approver for more guidance.

August 13, 2004

Jeremy,
What's with the new professional looking head shots? I would go back to the one with the facial hair.

It's the cleaned up family version.

Either that, or he was able to afford a razor thanks to the new Jeep deal. :lol:

August 18, 2004

I work for Delaware State Parks, and I've put up a rather long post to let folks know what's going on with the parks and geocaching. Check out this thread

Impact Of Geocaching?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment