Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
RPW

Indiana Dnr Geocaching Rules

Recommended Posts

Does anyone have any information on if the Indiana DNR enacted their non-rule policy that they were suppose to discuss in the Nov. 2004 meeting?

 

Consideration of Adoption of a Nonrule Policy Document Addressing the Geocaching on Department of Natural Resources Properties (Information Bulletin #46), Administrative Cause Number 03-128T

 

Item #9 in the agenda (the link may be time dated since it refers to the 'current agenda' and not specifically to the Nov. agenda.

 

Perhaps they are going to carry over the discussion to the next meeting?

Share this post


Link to post

I just got a call from my contact at the DNR and she told me that this policy will go into effect on Jan. 1 2005. When I get a copy of the policy I will post it on the IN-Geo Site for all to read and I will then answer any questions that you might have. I will also supply a copy to geocaching.com for them to review and post.

By the way the policy was voted on and did pass at the Novembar meetein. We now have a meeting with them again in Jan to present the polict to the park managers. I will be there to answer there questions

 

Please see the agenda above for the policy as it stands with a few minor changes that I sugested.

 

Regards

MC

Edited by Mountain Climber

Share this post


Link to post
Please see the agenda above for the policy as it stands with a few minor changes that I sugested.

 

Regards

MC

Was there any change to the number of cache permits allowed (two) for one person at any particular DNR property?

 

Looking at Brown County Park, there are quite a few caches beyond that limit. It would be a shame to lose them. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

The only real change was the having to check on your cache every month. I asked the council to change it to every 6 months and they agreed to this. This means that you will have to check your cache one time during the year and then again at the end of the permit. I also suggested that they let us renew our permit for the same spot based on their decision and they agreed to this as well but not in writing.

 

I have 3 caches in BC State Park and I will have to remove one. They are limiting cache placements to 2 per person per park.

 

The property manager dose not have to enforce these rules but they are strongly sugested to do it.

 

Later

MC

Edited by Mountain Climber

Share this post


Link to post

The policy seems workable. At least Indiana did not try to attach a fee to the permit like Michigan did.

If someone has more than 2 "GOOD" caches in one state park, maybe they can get someone to adopt the others for them. I myself have 2 active caches in Potato Creek SP, and have been holding off updating them.

Share this post


Link to post

With the 2-per-person rule:

My husband and I cache as a team. Would we, the "Paws"itraction team, comprising 2 people, be able to place up to 4 in one park then?

 

They also list several exemptions, including parks that are administered by certain divisions (Division of Outdoor recreation, Division of nature preserves). Is there any way to find out what division administers the park of your choice?

 

It also says that the property manager is not required to approve any multi-cache. Does that mean that "no approval is necessary for a multi-cache" or "they're not obligated to approve one just because you want it"? How is that different from "they're not required to approve ANY cache", which is how I understand the rest of it to read? Is it just that they're under "less obligation", so to speak, with a multi than a regular?

 

Thanks in advance for any answers anyone has...

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for all your efforts to work with DNR so that we can freely continue to cache in these parks. It's really appreciated.

 

Strohem :P

Share this post


Link to post
The policy seems workable. At least Indiana did not try to attach a fee to the permit like Michigan did.

If someone has more than 2 "GOOD" caches in one state park, maybe they can get someone to adopt the others for them. I myself have 2 active caches in Potato Creek SP, and have been holding off updating them.

If adoption is an option, we'd like to get on the waiting list. We'd hate to see a good cache lost.

 

Wulf

Share this post


Link to post

The DNR "nonrule policy" on Geocaching went into effect about a week ago. Mountain Climber mentioned that there was going to be a meeting in Jan to discuss the policy with the land managers. It is possible that this will occur at the Jan. 13th, 2:00 PM DNR meeting at Ft. Harrison although it is not on the agenda and thus perhaps not. Maybe MC can clarify this. It would be handy to know when the land managers are up to speed on the new policy so that we cache hiders can approach them knowing that they should be prepared for our caching requests.

 

The DNR web site does not have a functioning link to the policy however this link to the Jan 2004 legislative code has the policy as the second one in the list. It will be interesting to see how the policy works in practice. I would be interested in hearing about people's experiences.

 

BTW: The latest Indiana Outdoor Recreation Guide might contain something on geocaching. At least the advert in the above link indicates this. Have we hit the big time with our hobby? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post

Well, we tried to do it up right. We printed out the license application and filled one out for each of our two caches in Pokagon State Park. Took the apps to the park on Saturday.

 

The person behind the desk had never heard of geocaching. The manager-on-duty had, however. She told us she couldn't authorize the licenses because she wasn't the property manager, so she took the paperwork and said she'd give it to the property mgr.

 

Only thing is, she was REAL unhappy that the IN-DNR actually made a policy about it, and was going to allow cache-placement-with-permit. She didn't say so in so many words, but the vibes I got from what she WAS saying and how she was saying it was that she'd be REAL happy if geocaching went away and never ever came back. She also wasn't happy that the people doing the programs at the Nature Center actually did a geocaching program AND used our cache as the "starting cache" of their program.

She hadn't heard anything about permits, and didn't even know that the IN-DNR was discussing permits - she thought it was still a case of "well, people do it but there's nothing we can do about it and I'm not happy about it."

We did everything right. We did everything we could to assure her that if placement of EITHER of our two caches was a problem we'd either completely disable it and take it out altogether or we'd move it to somewhere that wasn't a problem. We let her know that we understood the problems she had with it and we would do our best to mitigate or eliminate the problems, that we were good, responsible geocachers, and responsible cache owners. She didn't care. She just doesn't like geocaching.

 

So...if the Pokagon Property Manager is of the same mindset as the day-manager we encountered...we're sorry if we screwed up caching in Pokagon for everybody by trying to do the right thing. :)

Share this post


Link to post

o...if the Pokagon Property Manager is of the same mindset as the day-manager we encountered...we're sorry if we screwed up caching in Pokagon for everybody by trying to do the right thing.

 

You've got to do the right thing even if it does screw up everything else. Under the table will just cause problems in the long run.

 

I am going to approach Indiana's newest state park -- Prophetstown -- sometime this month in regards to putting a cache there. As Car54 posted earlier the park was not very receptive late last year. Maybe with the new rules they will like it more. Wish me luck!

Share this post


Link to post
You've got to do the right thing even if it does screw up everything else. Under the table will just cause problems in the long run.

 

Oh, I completely agree - that's a big reason why we went to all the trouble to apply for permits for our caches. It was just so doggone DISCOURAGING to have her be so negative and disappointed that the DNR went through with an approval procedure and permits for caches. Honestly - she was surprised and disappointed that they did it.

 

I am going to approach Indiana's newest state park -- Prophetstown -- sometime this month in regards to putting a cache there.  As Car54 posted earlier the park was not very receptive late last year.  Maybe with the new rules they will like it more.  Wish me luck!

 

Good luck! I hope you have no problems!

Share this post


Link to post

Wow. That's sad. Girlgeek finally got me pronouncing the name right and they do something like this... But it make sense why they were strongly against Trippy when he called about having the GeoBash there. They weren't just apathetic, they were downright nasty about it. Hopefully the overall manager will have a clue and better represent the people.

 

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post

So where is this illusive geocache permit? I have searched the entire DNR website as well as all of in.gov. If they do not want to share the permit applications, there will not be many geocaches out there.

 

Quite frankly I do not understand why everyone thinks this is such a positive step. I work with DNR staff on a DAILY basis with respect to environmental permits. They do not have the time nor energy to deal with this stuff. They can't deal with the workload they had before we threw geocaching into the mix. It would have been nice to DNR lay out their guidelines to the geocaching approvers and let them implement whatever guidelines were appropiate.

 

What's done is done, I am just sorry to see it turn out the way it has.

Edited by Rupert2

Share this post


Link to post

I got the permit application from RPW's "Item #9 in the agenda" link, above. I can understand them wanting some sort of control over where caches are placed - we were informed that there was the possibility of endangered plants near one of our caches. They obviously don't want a bunch of cachers stomping all over the endangered plants!

 

But I wish there could've been more information dissemination down the line. It's not a nice feeling to TRY to do things "the right way" only to be greeted with someone who's hearing about these permits for the first time from you - and they're not happy about it.

Nor is it a nice feeling for THEM to be greeted with a couple of geocachers who are presenting you with a new policy and a WHOLE LOT more work and effort, and you had no clue that it was even coming.

 

Communication is VERY important, but it looks like somewhere along the line, the communication ball got dropped, to very badly mix a couple metaphors.

Edited by "Paws"itraction

Share this post


Link to post

The three links that I have:

 

http://www.in.gov/nrc/policy/46.pdf -- the official policy (but no form.)

 

http://www.in.gov/nrc/minutes/nov04_agenda/item9.pdf -- the form via November's agenda. This link may be temporary.

 

http://www.azimuthconstruction.com/geocaching/Rule46.pdf -- Geode Hunter scanned in the policy and made a click-and-fill PDF document. It is available on what I suppose is his personal site. However it may not be very official.

 

I wish there were better links but these are all I can find. Unfortunately the DNR does not seem to publish their forms as standalone permanent downloads.

Share this post


Link to post
Quite frankly I do not understand why everyone thinks this is such a positive step.

 

It is only "positive" in the sense that the rules could have been a lot worse -- e.g., fees, checking on the cache once a month, or a complete ban. Look at Ohio or Michigan. I suspect that if you asked most people they would have prefered the older no-rules-but-moderated-by-geocaching.com standard to still be in force. What we have now is "workable" -- at least in theory -- and so we will work with it.

Share this post


Link to post

We've had a general permit process in place for ODNR since 2003 or maybe even the Fall of 2002. It does a few things that Reviewers can't.

  1. Rangers can suggest better places if the area floods annually or has endangered plants.
  2. Keeps Geocachers honest by needing to be able to show a ranger where the cache actually is. Some ODNR properties could strand people for days if they get injured looking for something with incorrect coordinates.
  3. Keeps the channels of communication open between Geocachers and our State officials. Our chief contact at ODNR is the Deputy Director of Parks and Rec, which covers everything except construction and the budget. I email with him and his direct reports about once a month. I'm sure others do, too.

Edited by Bjorn74

Share this post


Link to post

I am going to approach Indiana's newest state park -- Prophetstown -- sometime this month in regards to putting a cache there. As Car54 posted earlier the park was not very receptive late last year. Maybe with the new rules they will like it more. Wish me luck!

 

Good luck, RPW! I didn't push it with them, so hopefully they aren't starting off from a negative perspective.

 

Edit - Dadgum it! I used the "quote" button and everything and still managed to mess it up. Good thing I'm not that inept when we go caching! :mad:

 

Mrs. Car54

Edited by Car54

Share this post


Link to post

Hooray! We got an email from the approver at Pokagon over the weekend. He said they approved one of our caches, but the other one is on a Nature Preserve area, and therefore we need to remove it. He said that the Nature Preserve areas are off-limits due to their ecological significance. BUT we're free to relocate it to a non-nature preserve area (they're marked on the trail maps of Pokagon, found in PDF format here.

He thanked us for our interest in the park and for following their new guidelines.

 

We've already archived the listing for the non-approved cache, and retrieved it. We'll be placing it in a new location sometime over the spring.

 

So it looks like we have at least one advocate at Pokagon! :lostsignal:

Share this post


Link to post

Here's the reply we got from the DNR approver at Pokagon when we told him we archived and removed our cache that was in a protected (Nature Preserve) area:

 

Thanks for the understanding. We want to continue to allow geocaching

in the park, but our new geocaching policy outlines ecologically

sensitive areas that geocaching needs to avoid. Over the next month

or so, other geocaches in the Potawatomi Nature Preserve will need to

be relocated and registered at the Park Nature Center. We will be

contacting other cache owners whos caches will need to be moved, but

should you know any of them feel free to let them know, to speed this

process.

 

Eventually, all geocaches in the park will be registered at the Park

Nature Center. Thanks again for taking the initiative in relocating

your cache.

 

P.S. When considering your new cache location, most areas within

resaonable distance from a park trail or road will be approved, just

as long as they are not within the actual nature preserve. One other

point to ponder, though none exist there presently, trail 7 (bluebird

hills) caches will be approved on a cache by cache basis because of

the inherent risks in that area of the park due to multiple massasauga

rattlesnake encounters in the past by park visitors (including bites).

So be careful!

 

(bolding and underlining mine)

:laughing: Rattlers? I wasn't aware there were rattlers out there, although it makes sense. I consider us to be VERY lucky- there used to be a cache out there along trail 7 that was ideal for rattlers - and our dogs would've investigated anything that moves and makes cool noises like that.

 

We'll be applying for placement approval for Kai's Kache 2.0 in the spring - WELL away from trail 7, thankyouverymuch, and definitely not in any Nature Preserve areas! (We're already scoping out a couple spots that look really good and kid-friendly.

 

Thank goodness the approver is geo-friendly! Hopefully the more we work with them, the more people we can "win over"!

Share this post


Link to post

To see where this rule thing is heading see my post on March 8th, 05 "A Sad Day In Charlestown State Park"

Share this post


Link to post
:) Rattlers? I wasn't aware there were rattlers out there, although it makes sense. I consider us to be VERY lucky- there used to be a cache out there along trail 7 that was ideal for rattlers - and our dogs would've investigated anything that moves and makes cool noises like that.

We ran into a rattler in K-ville while caching. Poor little guy just couldn't figure out how to get past my steel toe boots, but he had a good time striking at them until I found a stick and moved him.

Share this post


Link to post

I know you have been waiting for some word on Caches placed on DNR property and it has been slow coming. I just got the official word and here it is.

 

If you have a cache on DNR Property already you will need to go to the office and fill out the paperwork (Registration form for a cache permit).

 

If you don't want to does this then please retrieve your cache and archive it. We need this to happen as soon as possible.

 

In some of the parks they have been retrieving caches and holding them at the office. They have not notifies the cache owners because they have not had the time to do so. They should be friendly and welcome you to the park. I would like to hear of there is any problems with the park official you talk to. Please understand that they are just doing there job as they interpret it and please don’t be argumentative with them. They are trying to be understanding and we don't want bad feeling to develop between the DNR and Geocachers. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. If you have problems with the rules I can not change them. I will however try to answer your questions to the best of my knowledge.

Regards

Mountgain Climber

 

MC@geocachingadmin.com

Share this post


Link to post

Mainly for Car54 but others might be interested.

 

I finally -- whew! -- got my submission into the Prophetstown state park people. We will see if they like caching. I expect to get an answer next week altough they are doing a lot of prairie burning and may be too busy to consider my request. I wrote a nice cover letter in addition to filling in the official form.

Share this post


Link to post

RPW,

 

Thanks for the update. We're keeping our fingers crossed for you! We're in the process of scouting out a spot for another ammo can hide, but I don't think it would work in Prophetstown. Be sure to post and let us know what response you get!

 

Rochelle of Car54

Share this post


Link to post

I am still waiting on an OK from the park manager at Prophetstown. They have been very busy in getting the camping area ready and general spring clean up thus my cache requests have been put to the side. I do have "permission" :) from Tom B. (the manager) to call every couple of days in order to see how the requests are doing.

 

Certainly having to go through the formal process is a pain however perhaps it will make for better caches in the state parks and for a better relationship with the park people. Time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post

QUOTE from Turlte's thread @ Mar 14 2005, 08:33 AM

 

......... We applied for our cache permits early. tentative approval was given to 2 of them. This did not stop the park from forcibly taking them out .........

 

Still no word about final approval. A few more months and maybe we will apply again for next year.

Share this post


Link to post

Still waiting for P-town approval. I have called Tom (the property manager)every 3-4 days. As I mentioned earlier they are very busy getting the new park ready. Plus Tom's assistant has been out of the office for a bit and thus they are more overloaded than expected. So I patiently wait.

 

I am sort of under the impression that they may thinking that they need to do actual work for the caches. I.e., instead of just signing on the 'approved' line and letting me do all of the work of placing the caches, maintaining the caches, etc. they may think that they have to do the placement, etc. But then I may be reading more into our conversations than is really there. I am sure that Tom is a consientious park manager that wants to make sure that everything runs smoothly and thus he takes his time to do things right.

 

However the entire process is making me think harder on why I place caches in general. Why do I go through such hurdles to provide entertainment to a bunch of strangers? I've always prided myself on putting out quality caches -- cammoed ammo boxes, good swag, a explanatory note, and so on. While I am not rich, the money spent on such caches (about $25) is not much of an issue. Heck, in a little while the price of the gasoline spent to drive to the cache might be more than that. [:(] But what is more precious is the amount of time spent. The long letter I wrote to P-town, the filling in of the application form, and worse, these repeated calls are making the cache placement process harder than before. For these particular caches in P-town, the answer to "why?" is obvious to me. I want to bring people to Indiana's newest state park and show them that there is "more than corn in the northwest part of Indiana" (to steal a line from Indiana Beach.) Call it local pride. I just wish the process was faster and easier. Perhaps next time it will be.

 

Oh well, that is my rant for the day. Have a fun geocaching weekend!

Share this post


Link to post

Got the P-town SP caches approved! At least by the state park system. Now to place them, get the final co-ordinates, and get GC.com to approve them.

Share this post


Link to post

RPW,

 

That is GREAT news! Once they are up and running, I will make sure I comment positively to the Prophetstown folks whenever we visit there. Our pop-up camping club is staying there in May and we have several geocachers in the bunch.

 

Ooooooo, I am so happy to hear this result!

 

Rochelle of Car54

Share this post


Link to post
Does anyone have any information on if the Indiana DNR enacted their non-rule policy that they were suppose to discuss in the Nov. 2004 meeting?

 

Consideration of Adoption of a Nonrule Policy Document Addressing the Geocaching on Department of Natural Resources Properties (Information Bulletin #46), Administrative Cause Number 03-128T

 

Item #9 in the agenda (the link may be time dated since it refers to the 'current agenda' and not specifically to the Nov. agenda.

 

Perhaps they are going to carry over the discussion to the next meeting?

http://www.in.gov/dnr/parklake/pdf/InfoBul..._Geocaching.pdf

Share this post


Link to post

So I have some questions/observations;

 

I was looking at the possibility of placing a cache on a DNR property, so I decided to look at the new "guidelines." The location I was going to place a cache already had a Letterbox - even by the same name as I was going to use! Makes me wonder if Letterboxes aren't covered by the DNR. That would mean 2 identical pieces of tupperware in the same hollow log - One needs a permit and the other doesn't. Maybe I'm reading something wrong there.

 

Nature Preserves, Historical Sites & Properties Administered In Whole Or In Part by The Division of Outdoor Recreation AREN"T SUITABLE FOR GEOCACHING (my emphasis). In other words - don't even try to get a license.

 

OK, so I looked; what exactly are those properties of that division: Knobstone Trail, a couple of off-road places AND EVERY CITY TRAIL IN THE STATE IT LOOKS LIKE. If that's true - a whole lot of caches will need permits or pulled.

 

I also notice that the one Nature Preserve listed for Marion County - I thought it was a City Park!!

 

Anyway - 2 main points: is there an inconsistency regarding letterboxes, and are all of the local bike or hike trails listed on the DNR's Division of Outdoor recreation really "off limits" for caches - or am I being too strict in my interpretation?

Share this post


Link to post

Good point!

 

The Rule #46 is written to regulate Geocaching. (any geocaching lawyers out there?)

 

It seems Letterboxing (not the geocaching hybrids) and all the other forms of the sport are not affected.

 

At the DNR advisory board meeting I attended with Mountain Climber, their intent was to regulate our sport in State Parks. The rule does not read that way. They still seem to be only interested in the state parks though.

Share this post


Link to post

There is a very distinct difference between a State Nature Preserve and a State DESIGNATED Nature Preserve. The designated preserves are typically not administered or managed by DNR rather some other municipality. DNR rules will not apply here. The designation is made primarily for tax purposes.

 

If I read the IC correctly (that is a big if), a nature preserve managed and maintained by IndyParks would be fair game. Someone else needs to give it a look.

Edited by Rupert2

Share this post


Link to post

As your ever helpful and friendly moderator and a good neighbor to Indiana I wanted to bump this thread as a reminder to my neighbors to the east. Be sure to check out this pdf for information about obtaining permits in Indiana State Parks.

 

Be sure to pass the info on to your non-forum reading friends, too.

 

Thanks!

 

Bret

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps I have been asleep on this subject but I just noticed that the DNR allows geocaches at historic sites. Quoting from their September meeting notes:

 

Consideration of Amendments to Nonrule Policy Document for Geocaching on DNR Properties to Authorize Geocaching Activities on Properties Administered by the Division of Museums and Historic Sites; Administrative Cause No. 05-147M

 

Kathleen McCary also presented this item. She said the nonrule policy document governing geocaching activities on DNR properties would be amended to allow the activity on historic sites “that we might encourage visitation of our properties.” Director Hupfer asked, “Are you at all worried that at some of these historical sites that an over-anxious participant might disturb something in their effort to place an item in the game?” McCary responded that, under the nonrule policy document, the property manager would “dictate” the placement of the cache. Stautz noted that youth groups and school organizations “are using this opportunity and there would be potential advantages to allow it on these properties, but within rules and limits.”

 

Rick Cockrum moved to approve amendments to the nonrule policy document for geocaching on DNR properties to authorize geocaching activities on properties administered by the Division of Museums and Historic Sites. Jane Ann Stautz seconded the motion. Upon a voice vote, the motion carried.

 

 

So ... good news there. And maybe, just maybe, if the historical sites can be opened up then perhaps other sites will eventually be opened up as well.

Share this post


Link to post

Rick Cockrum moved to approve amendments to the nonrule policy document for geocaching on DNR properties to authorize geocaching activities on properties administered by the Division of Museums and Historic Sites. Jane Ann Stautz seconded the motion. Upon a voice vote, the motion carried.

 

So ... good news there. And maybe, just maybe, if the historical sites can be opened up then perhaps other sites will eventually be opened up as well.

 

Great news!!!!! Hope is alive. :D

Edited by geode hunter

Share this post


Link to post

Okay, I'm going to look like a total newb to this (and I am), but I was unaware of the DNR's permit requirement. Anyone post a link for the rules on this stuff? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Does anyone have any information on if the Indiana DNR enacted their non-rule policy that they were suppose to discuss in the Nov. 2004 meeting?

 

Consideration of Adoption of a Nonrule Policy Document Addressing the Geocaching on Department of Natural Resources Properties (Information Bulletin #46), Administrative Cause Number 03-128T

 

Item #9 in the agenda (the link may be time dated since it refers to the 'current agenda' and not specifically to the Nov. agenda.

 

Perhaps they are going to carry over the discussion to the next meeting?

http://www.in.gov/dnr/parklake/pdf/InfoBul..._Geocaching.pdf

 

Oops! Nevermind! I just seen that.

Edited by TEAM RETRIEVER

Share this post


Link to post
There must be an exception to that rule-- theres 3 caches by the same cacher in Summit Lake.

 

I doubt if there is anyone at the "central DNR" looking over the individual park managers at any given state park. Thus the local people -- those "on the spot" -- have considerable latitude in interpreting the rules -- not only geocaching rules but other ones as well. They don't have to approve caches even though, in theory, we can have geocaches. Likewise they could slip in a couple of extra caches if they feel like it.

You will find that the official attitude towards geocaching at the Indiana State Parks varies a lot. Some of the park managers like it a lot (Salamonie Lake where the spring picnic will be held is a good example), some park people detest it and some just put up it as "yet more paperwork to file."

The more we show the park managers how nice geocaching can be then the more officials will become friendly towards geocaching. At least that is my hope. They do get together at their meetings and, I suspect, at least unofficially talk about us. Let's hope it is with praise instead of with complaints.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I happen to know the property manager at summit lake and I would think he would welcome geocaches. I know they do do some burning of the fields out there, so you might want to put any geocache in the woods. An island cache would certainly be possible out there too.

Share this post


Link to post

I wrote:

You will find that the official attitude towards geocaching at the Indiana State Parks varies a lot.

 

As further proof of this, I just got back from a 3-day family vacation to Spring Mill SP. There are several caches in it which are older than the 1 year limit of the "official" DNR rules. After the hoops I went through in putting caches in Prophetstown SP and then, recently, pulling them back out due to the year limit, I gave a sigh of jealousy. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
After the hoops I went through in putting caches in Prophetstown SP and then, recently, pulling them back out due to the year limit, I gave a sigh of jealousy.

 

Why didn't you just reapply, like other state park caches that have been permitted for a while?

 

It definately is affected by what the park manager has on his plate. Budgets are tight, and they aren't checking to make sure geocachers are getting their permits in. Spring Mill is in turmoil right now. The manager is a major pain in the rear, and the full-time interpreter finally was able to get transferred to a better park, after years not being able to do things that other interpreters do everyday in their job.

Share this post


Link to post
Why didn't you just reapply, like other state park caches that have been permitted for a while?

 

Because it is pain to do so. I would have to put in a new application (with photes); the DNR may want the cache moved (which means extra work); they may deny the application (which means extra pleading) -- I got the sense that the Prophetstown managers were less than enthused about geocaching ... but then I may have been reading them incorrectly.

 

However, more importantly, I wanted to give other people the chance to put caches in the park and I suspect that Prophetstown may limit the number of caches. Thus I decided not to overload the system with my own caches.

 

... Spring Mill is in turmoil right now. The manager is a major pain in the rear ...

 

Obviously not that major of a pain since the caches in the park should have gone through (or are going through) their second round of application approval by now. Once in early 2005 after the DNR rules were implemented and sometime in early 2006.

 

Of course I am assuming that the caches in Spring Mill are properly placed and authorized. Since some of them are owned by respected and knowledgable members of the Indiana geocaching community then I have presumed that most, if not all, of them are authorized by the DNR.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, we do unofficially talk about geocachers at meetings. Both good and bad. The goods come from geocachers that take the initiative about getting a cache permitted before placing it. The bads are the many geocachers out there that haven't bothered to permit theirs, knowing that most Park Managers (PM) are too busy to hunt them down.

 

Wondering about Spring Mill myself, I contacted them.

I was told, "Most Geocachers haven't bothered to register in the first place. We've created a policy that most PM's aren't enforcing at this point and probably won't unless something bad happens and they are pushed." A geocacher not reading the policy is more likely to make the individual park manager get pushed, and will give other geocachers in that area a black eye.

 

The best place to start for a permit would be to see the park interpretive naturalist. They are more familiar with geocaching then most park managers. Every state park has at least one seasonal naturalist. Many naturalists do the permitting, as they know the fauna and flora of the park that the policy is protecting. For P-town, I'd hit up Haley, over Tom.

 

I could probably compile a list of over 100 geocaches in the state that break or don't follow a certain agency's policy (DNR, ACRES, TNC, etc...) Should SBA notes be sent to all these?

 

A clarification from farther above, State Dedicated Nature Preserves do fall under the policy (Guideline 4, 2A) "(A) Division of nature preserves (including any property dedicated under IC 14-31-1)."

Share this post


Link to post

PNC is right. I have a DNR pal who told me much the same about the area they are responsible for. They know the caches are there, and where they are, and haven't had a bit of trouble with them so far. They know who to contact if there is a problem, or that they can contact one of a handful of cachers who will step up to handle the problem.

 

They see the permit process as an option at their disposal should they need to enforce a problem and hope that it doesn't come to that. (Probably because they don't like paperwork any more than the next guy).

 

As long as we do the right thing in that territory, it will stay that way. Mess up, and we get to play paper games.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

×
×
  • Create New...