What Ever Happened To "earth Caches"

[ju66l3r]

You're incorrect. Read above. They're intentionally doing it.

I'm sorry, maybe I misunderstood. Intentionally doing what?

 

I did look further and saw that while it says "by XYZ (via EC Master)"...XYZ's user stats still do not display an earthcache placed. Of course, having geoaware "hide" all the earthcaches has a nice effect of being able to find all earthcaches in the system by looking at geoaware's profile. I don't know how team placements are credited when more than 1 geocacher places a cache, but I think that solution would work best here in terms of credit given. Ultimately, GSA is undertaking the placement approval for these virtual caches. Having them be a central point of contact for the NPS or other places where special permission is given seems very reasonable.

 

I do agree that the earthcache.org page is not as clear about the fact that you are essentially only reporting a location that would make a good earthcache and then GSA is essentially the ones to 'place' and maintain it. Using descriptions like "submit *your* cache" are misleading but I think the system as it is setup now is good and useful. The important point would just be clarifying that unless you are a GSA member involved in one of the sponsored projects, then you are just a scout for the GSA and Earthcache locations. Once you have reported a good Earthcache to them, then it becomes their baby to work with.

 

If that were a bit more clear in the earthcache.org site text, people would know better of what they were agreeing to and getting themselves into. Then would there still be a problem?

[South Surrey Scavengers]

There are several threads here about Earthcaches. You may find some of your answers at the thread titled "Earth Cache" in the Geocaching Topics forum.

[+geoaware]

Hi folks

 

It seems that there is quite a bit of mis-information about earthcaches. To start with www.earthcache.org is a site administered by the Geological Society of Amercia. The Earthcache Master (me) is the education director for GSA and yes, i happen to live in Australia. I have been caching for a while now and love it.

 

GSA is a not-for profit society that wants to promote a greater understanding of our earth. Earthcaching is part of the outreach program.

 

The concept of Earthcaches was to take the virtual cache and increase its educational focus so that visitors to the cache learn something, and not, as they do in some virtuals, just see a pretty view. As the concept developes we are getting better and making sure that this happens.

 

Earthcaches are developed by any cacher. They submit these through the www.earthcache.org web page so that we can check the appropriatness of the education and the lesson. About 30% get rejected...and most of these are asked to rework so they are more educational. Most developers are very happy to do this. Once we are happy that the cache meets those dealines they are sent to gc.com for approval.

 

Because of this step, currently Earthcaches are all linked to my account. This is not because i want to own them. GC.com and I have been discussing and working on getting the system adjusted so they can be transfered to the rightful owners. This only makes sense and is the right thing to do. All Earthcache developers who have asked know that we are working on this issue and it is our intent to get them ownership asap.

 

I have a small group of people from other countries (Canada, Germany, UK, USA and Australia) that I bounce ideas off and who provide valuable feedback (as does this forum)

 

No Earthcache developer has been paid to develop a cache. However, we do have the capacity to assist a cacher (some gas money) to work with a National Park etc, if the Nataional Park approachers us to have caches set up in their park. As yet this has not happened.

 

Earthcaches are a great way to take our game/sport and make a more formal education step. I am sure that this will open up geocaching to other groups, like schools and scouts and museums, which will just enrich the game.

 

I hope that people will be patinet as we develop the concept and be supportive of its aims. If you want to contact me directly...feel free glewis@geosociety.org

 

Cheers

 

Gary

[s4xton]

I could be wrong, but I recall from a discussion I had with another Earthcache placer was that there has been some talk along the lines transfering 'ownership' of these caches to the persons who placed them. I'm not overly upset about not 'owning' our cache, but I would like the ability to edit content if necessary.

 

That would make sense. It's your content, research and work, you should have ownership of that information.

 

As for your question about getting permission from the land managers,  I would think that since nothing is physically placed, and the land is open to the public, that permission would be somewhat implied.  As for private land, they do require you to get permission just like any other type of cache.

 

It makes it difficult for a group such as the Minnesota Geocaching Association to work with a group such as the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources about caching when geocaching.com is listing caches in their parks when the DNR does not allow geocaches. Even if they aren't physical geocaches. From what I gather, and I could be wrong here, the MN DNR would prefer not have anything listed on geocaching.com, virtual or not.

 

Paklid did an excellent job by creating this virtual using existing and open trails. What happens if someone else makes another one that uses public land, or in this case, a Minnesota State Park, but requires going off-trail or bushwacking? Just because it's virtual doesn't make it okay. I'm glad that Paklid created his on well defined trails and does not require any off-trail to find his.

 

As for Geoaware being in Australia....He's from Colorado, he just current lives in Australia.

 

I gathered this.

 

-Aaron

[+Team Tigger International]

QUOTE]As for your question about getting permission from the land managers,  I would think that since nothing is physically placed, and the land is open to the public, that permission would be somewhat implied.  As for private land, they do require you to get permission just like any other type of cache.

 

It makes it difficult for a group such as the Minnesota Geocaching Association to work with a group such as the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources about caching when geocaching.com is listing caches in their parks when the DNR does not allow geocaches. Even if they aren't physical geocaches. From what I gather, and I could be wrong here, the MN DNR would prefer not have anything listed on geocaching.com, virtual or not.

 

Paklid did an excellent job by creating this virtual using existing and open trails. What happens if someone else makes another one that uses public land, or in this case, a Minnesota State Park, but requires going off-trail or bushwacking? Just because it's virtual doesn't make it okay. I'm glad that Paklid created his on well defined trails and does not require any off-trail to find his.

 

-Aaron

Ok, I see your point. I wasn't aware of this. I know that Michigan has run into a similar problem with some parks having a permit system in place that all but discourages caches, make them effectively banned.

 

Wulf

[s4xton]

Hi folks

 

It seems that there is quite a bit of mis-information about earthcaches.

 

Well, finally we get an official reply. Thanks for responding.

 

GSA is a not-for profit society that wants to promote a greater understanding of our earth. Earthcaching is part of the outreach program.

 

Thanks for the clarification. This makes sense.

 

The concept of Earthcaches was to take the virtual cache and increase its educational focus so that visitors to the cache learn something, and not, as they do in some virtuals, just see a pretty view. As the concept developes we are getting better and making sure that this happens.

 

Earthcaches are developed by any cacher. They submit these through the www.earthcache.org web page so that we can check the appropriatness of the education and the lesson. About 30% get rejected...and most of these are asked to rework so they are more educational. Most developers are very happy to do this. Once we are happy that the cache meets those dealines they are sent to gc.com for approval.

 

Because of this step, currently Earthcaches are all linked to my account.

 

Jeremy and Co. should easily be able to make a form that allows individuals to submit earth caches and have them approved by you, and have them properly link to the appropriate person's account. Being they are a specific type of virtual, it would be easy for them to be queued for you in the system. It could also be easily created where an individual would have to pass through the guideline information specific to these virtuals before submitting. I'm surprised (and also not surprised) this wasn't established before it started. I assume that as Groundspeak is a "sponsor" of this, they will want to have a monopoly on the listing of these caches. It would only make sense to have the registration bit be integrated into the geocaching.com system. Unless, of course, are you planning on keeping your earthcache listings in the public domain. Have you considered also listing approved earthcaches on other geocache listing services? Wonder what happens if Groundspeak goes in a direction that doesn't jive with the GSA? I recommend not having all your eggs in one basket if you consider that a possibility. You don't have to publicly reply here about that.

 

This is not because i want to own them. GC.com and I have been discussing and working on getting the system adjusted so they can be transfered to the rightful owners. This only makes sense and is the right thing to do. All Earthcache developers who have asked know that we are working on this issue and it is our intent to get them ownership asap.

 

This is the right thing to do. I'm glad there's been an official response to this. This was one of my primary concerns, and I am glad to hear you're in the right frame of mind about it.

 

Onward, I recommend that the language here: "An Earthcache is an educational form of a virtual cache. The reward for these caches is learning more about the planet on which we live - its landscapes, its geology or the minerals and fossils that are found there..." is changed to "An Earthcache is a special form of a virtual cache. The reward for these caches is learning more about the planet on which we live - its landscapes, its geology or the minerals and fossils that are found there." There are other ways to explain that it's educational without implying the others are just a pretty view. I've explained my justification above.

 

I also ask that approvers do not approve any further caches of any type in Minnesota State Parks as they do not accept geocaches. It has not been clarified publicly if virtuals listed on geocaching.com are an exception. I do have the understanding, and I could be wrong here, that they probably would prefer to not have anything posted on geocaching.com that points inside MN State Park land. There has been special permission granted to Paklid for some of this, but I don't think the DNR was expecting it would end up on geocaching.com.

 

Lastly, just to keep things rolling: If *all* earthcaches are virtual "caches," why are they called caches in the first place? If you guys are creating waypoints of interesting and educational geological points around the earth and not trading anything, the word "cache" is misleading. Why not call it "earthpoints," "geopoints," "geospots" or get a wordsmith to create some nice word that's more accurate. These waypoints can be listed on geocaching.com the same way, and then you distance yourself enough away from the concept of people leaving a box of trash in the woods, yet it's still just as much fun for the people in the geocaching community. (For example: they don't call them "Benchmark caches," for instance. They're just "Benchmarks." They aren't caches.)

 

(...and to the forum trolls: don't chime in and explain to me what an event cache or a locationless cache is to justify a reciprocal point - I'm talking specifically to the GSA and their project, which I would (and I assume they would) like to separate from regular geocaching.)

 

-Aaron

[ju66l3r]

I'm talking specifically to the GSA and their project, which I would (and I assume they would) like to separate from regular geocaching.

Then e-mail Gary.

[+King Boreas]

Then e-mail Gary.

 

all righty then

 

suisare

[+geoaware]

Hi again

 

I really appreciate this debate on earthcaches...and I take some of the points made as being excellent feedback. Thanks! We are working on some Q&A for the www.earthcache.org website that will answer some of these questions as well.

 

I would like to point out though that I or GSA has nothing to do with www.earthcache.com or www.earthcache.com.au

 

Like all caches, the responsibility for permission to place a cache on ANY land is with the developer. We will be adjusting our submission form to ensure that this is clear to the developer. We will be asking for details of the land owner/manager that permission was sought from etc (name, phone, approval number). We take this aspect very seriously! If any Earthcache has been approved and this is not the case it will be removed.

 

And finally, Groundspeak and GSA have been talking about Earthcaching since day one of this idea and project. We are in partnership (and a good one) rather than one sponsoring the other. We have other partners as well, including NPS. Subaru America is proudly a sponsor and we appreciate their great support!

 

I hope that clears up most peoples concerns.

 

Cheers all

 

Gary (geoaware)

[+Nazgul]

Like all caches, the responsibility for permission to place a cache on ANY land is with the developer. We will be adjusting our submission form to ensure that this is clear to the developer. We will be asking for details of the land owner/manager that permission was sought from etc (name, phone, approval number). We take this aspect very seriously! If any Earthcache has been approved and this is not the case it will be removed.

Maybe I'm missing something because I don't comb throuhg all the forum debates and such, but with a virtual (non-physical) type of cache, which eathcaches are by definition, there doesn't seem to be anything in the cache listing requirements that mandate permission for placing virtuals. The section that mentions permission is specifically listed under the section for physical caches.

 

Furthermore, the mandatory contact information with "approval number" etc. isn't something that I have ever seen as a requirement for a *physical* cache, much less a virtual.

 

The idea that a virtual or earthcache on public land must be approved in this manner seems onerous and unecessary.

[+geoaware]

Hi

 

Sorry....the change to submission forms about approvals will be for Earthcaches - not through gc.com. We need this to keep the National Parks, Forest service and other groups happy and allow caching on these lands.

 

One of the biggest concerns that these groups have is that they are trying to protect some very sensative areas because of flora, fauna or even archeological reasons. A wrongly placed cache could damage these areas...and so they need to make sure that caches are placed in appropriate areas and/or way points are used to keep people on trails. I think that this is a fair and reasonable request and I understand that they want to be involved in the process.

 

In the long term I hope that these land managers will see that earthcaches can be a great way for them to attract people to see more of their parks, land etc

 

btw...i think its good manners to ask first before placing a cache on any land.

 

Cheers

 

Gary

[WH]

I just logged my first ever earth cache.

[+jeff35080]

We will be asking for details of the land owner/manager that permission was sought from

 

So who gave permission for Niagra Falls?

[+The Blue Quasar]

I really don't know how to start this, since after reading this thread and the one that I had started I am beginning to notice some things.

 

So, in brief..... I'm Canadian.... not American. I understand full well the difficulties that the Americans are having with the "National Park Service" since we in Canada have the same problems with Canada Parks and Ontario Parks etc.

 

Geoaware has been very good about replying to my concerns about ownership and he has edited my EarthCache (St. John's Conservation Area EarthCache) when I made two minor typos. I firmly believe that Geoaware has all the right intentions when it comes to EarthCaches and about getting them transferred back to their rightful owners. I don't see any motivation on Geoaware's part to "keep the Earth Caches for himself". If that was true, Jeremy would clamp down on that pretty quickly. However, for what I know, it is easy to transfer ownership of a cache from one account to another. There must be a 'logistical' reason for this and it is probably something to do with your NPS rules.

 

I have commented on this before though, I don't think that Canadian authorities are really concerned about the USA's National Park Service has to say about Geocaching or what in the NPS is acceptable. I am the Administrator of the Ontario Geocaching Association and like S4xton said about his area (I think it was Minnesota).... we have banned areas too. If an EarthCache gets approved there without consulting Ontario Parks, or Parks Canada.... they will not be impressed to say the least.

 

All I am saying by that is someone should know to contact a local representative. In Ontario's cases (and most of Canada by the way) it is Cache-Tech. He/She knows ALL the rules here. I keep C-T informed about Ontario, and I'm sure he/she has similar contacts in other provinces.

 

I am getting rather tired of some people's "USA-Centric" posts that imply that as long as National Park Service is happy then everyone is happy.

 

Ontario is 1,076,395 Square Kilometers (415,49 Square Miles) in size

Texas is 692,247 Square Kilometers (267,277 Square Miles) in size

 

Everyone has to be sure of the rules for their respective areas, and if anyone is going to approve an EarthCache that isn't local, they best find out from someone who is.

 

As for the Niagara Falls cache, that everyone seems to be 'commenting' on.... the land it is on is owned by Niagara Parks Commission. They (NPC) are currently developing Geocaching Policies for their lands. I have contacted them to offer assistance, as the Admin of the OGA. Yes there are also geocaches that are located in the Niagara Gorge.

 

So since everyone is quick to point out that the rules for Earthcaches were confusing, and open to interpretation and unclear and all that, perhaps everyone can give Team Tigger International a break. They took an area (Niagara Falls) that they thought would be a good EarthCache even though they live far away from it, researched the location, created the EarthCache and Geoaware thinks it is suitable. I live 15 minutes away from Niagara Falls, and I'm not going to lie, yes I do wish that a local had placed the EarthCache, but I can understand why TTI wanted to do it. It is an impressive geological location and most of the information that you learn on the cache page is not available at the EarthCache site itself. I didn't know the composition of the Falls themselves, and now I do. I just have to take the picture to prove I saw what I learned. Kind of like writing the test after studying for it.

 

As for the educational nature of EarthCaches vs. Virtual Caches.... A EC MUST be Earth Science educational.... a VC MAY be educational, but MUST be of interest to a Geocacher and a unique example of it's kind. I do agree though that there has been a implication that EarthCaches are better than Virtuals because EC's are educational. I like the "EarthCaches are a Special Kind of Virtual" that S4xton came up with. I don't think anyone meant to offend those that create VC's, it was just a woring issue, and hopefully it can be edited to explain better as to how EC's differ from other types of caches by promoting their aspects in specific ways, not generalizations.

 

Lastly... There is NO SUCH THING as public land! Everywhere is owned by someone... the city park, the state or provincial park, the tourist attraction, the crown land. And every public use land seems to have the same rule.... if you leave something behind without permission then you are littering. So get permission!

 

So in closing, if you have something to bring to the forum, then bring a solution with it.

 

The Blue Quasar

[+jeff35080]

FWIW, I'm not picking on TTI and I totally agree the the Falls are an awesome thing to see. I've seen 'em 3 times and each time was amazed by them. I am simply using the Falls Earthcache as an example.

 

Let me once again reiterate, I am not picking on TTI and if I lived close to the falls I probabyly would have attempted to do the same as they did and list the Falls