+junglehair Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Just curious if you asked the Park Manager at Letchworth why this turned from an experiment at one park to the standard policy across the state. That one is definitely on my list of questions to ask! Quote Link to comment
+New York Admin Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 (edited) JMBella, when you have the permit, would you mind sending a copy to me. I will post it on the NYGO site as well. That should make the process easier if people only have to make one trip to the park. Junglehair, I believe you'll need to ask each park for their version of the pdf file. All parks have the same permit but personalizes it to their individual park. See where I marked the scan below. Maybe they will allow us to to write in the park name and address, that would be great. Also keep in mind the permit prints out on legal sized (8.5 X 14 inch) paper. Edited February 18, 2005 by New York Admin Quote Link to comment
+JMBella Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 oooo, that's pretty. Quote Link to comment
+geobernd Posted February 18, 2005 Author Share Posted February 18, 2005 Hey - had to check my drawer to see if my 60CS is still there after looking at the permit Quote Link to comment
+Alan2 Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Just curious if you asked the Park Manager at Letchworth why this turned from an experiment at one park to the standard policy across the state. That one is definitely on my list of questions to ask! You might ask them if they are aware DEC open their lands completely? And if so, why do they feel they need a permit system in their parks while DEC doesn't? Quote Link to comment
+Alan2 Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 However, the impact will be on both the dedicated high volume finder and the interested but casual hider who will find it too difficult for the process of hiding in parks. Don't worry about the high-volume finders. Most of them are used to traveling well out of their regions for cache clusters anyway. Actually, Po, if caches are remove, then new ones will be hidden so you'll be able to hit Harriman again rather than the Montana cache fields Quote Link to comment
+avroair Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 (edited) Actually, Po, if caches are remove, then new ones will be hidden so you'll be able to hit Harriman again rather than the Montana cache fields The onesy, twosy caches placed by people out of the game and the cachers not willing to remove their caches are where i see the problem. I called the Bear Mtn office and Bear Mtn \ Harriman park managers are having their meeting to discuss the permits Wednesday (23rd Feb) and they have no idea right now how they are going to move forward with the permits, so by the following monday we will know the procedures. Edit: grammar Edited February 18, 2005 by avroair Quote Link to comment
+geobernd Posted February 18, 2005 Author Share Posted February 18, 2005 Another question just came to my mind: Isn't it Bear Mountain State Park and Harriman State Park? If so should a cacher be able to hide 5 in Bear Mountain and 5 in Harriman? Quote Link to comment
+macatac1961 Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 I understand 5 max per hider in most parks but Harriman is like a small county. Hopefully they'll come up with some kind of acreage ratio. Quote Link to comment
+jonboy Posted February 20, 2005 Share Posted February 20, 2005 (edited) I removed all ten of my caches from Harriman, so it is now jonboy free. That only leaves 200+ left, so I'm not sure quite what I accomplished. My point is it's not good enough just to say there are too many caches in Harriman, you have to do something to demonstrate your sincerity. I am hoping that I will be able to put new caches in Harriman/Bear Mt in the not too distant future. Geobernd makes a good point when he points out that Bear Mt State Park and Harriman State park are actually two different units. As I read the map, all but one of my caches were actually in Bear Mt State Park. This is one of several significant rulings the park management will have to make, the biggest being what position are they going to take on the preexisting caches. My reasoning has been that if I am going to have to get a permit for a cache that is only good for two years, I might as well start the clock at the time I obtain the permit. I would have had to go out there and put stickers on them anyway, and I really couldn't see going through all that trouble for a permit that would last less than two years. I predict that it is this enforcement of the stipulations in the permit application that will provide the leverage for the park management to insist on removal of non-compliant caches, and thereby greatly reduce the number of caches. My fear is that the park management might insisit that preexisting caches either be brought into compliance or removed before new permits will be issued. If this is the case, I would advocate that the caches of the owners of caches who fail to respond to requests to obtain permits be removed by volunteers amongst the geocaching community, but only with the express authority of geocaching.com and the Park management. Edited February 20, 2005 by jonboy Quote Link to comment
+Team DEMP Posted February 20, 2005 Share Posted February 20, 2005 One bright side I see from this is if Jonboy places some new caches I'm sure they will be awesome!! I just feel bad for all the folks that missed out on the amazing spots you chose for those caches you just retrieved. Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted February 20, 2005 Share Posted February 20, 2005 One bright side I see from this is if Jonboy places some new caches I'm sure they will be awesome!! I just feel bad for all the folks that missed out on the amazing spots you chose for those caches you just retrieved. Yeah, like me. Quote Link to comment
+Team DEMP Posted February 20, 2005 Share Posted February 20, 2005 One bright side I see from this is if Jonboy places some new caches I'm sure they will be awesome!! I just feel bad for all the folks that missed out on the amazing spots you chose for those caches you just retrieved. Yeah, like me. Well, we have all the waypoints, and I'd be more then willing to hike to each and every one of them with you and anyone else that wants to go. We can't log a cache (though you could post a note on the pages I think even if it's disabled). Every one was a worthwhile hike. Quote Link to comment
+Squealy Posted February 20, 2005 Share Posted February 20, 2005 My fear is that the park management might insisit that preexisting caches either be brought into compliance or removed before new permits will be issued. If this is the case, I would advocate that the caches of the owners of caches who fail to respond to requests to obtain permits be removed by volunteers amongst the geocaching community, but only with the express authority of geocaching.com and the Park management. Listen, Deputy jonboy, no one hired you as sheriff. Most cachers will be compliant WHEN the EXACT rules come out and WHEN the SPECIFIC policy is handed down. Until that time, NO ONE has the right to remove another person's cache without the approval of the OWNER. To do this would make you a pariah. I appreciate your enthusiasm to do the right thing here - but it may be leading you down a path other than you intended. Besides, you can't find my cache that's in Harriman anyway! Quote Link to comment
+jonboy Posted February 20, 2005 Share Posted February 20, 2005 (edited) The specific rules have been formulated and the policy has been handed down, implementation by this individual park has yet to be finalized. No one has the right to expect that they can deposit items on public lands without permission, and that this abandoned property should remain untouchable. As a trails volunteer, I pick up litter all the time, and if the park has a cache removed from the website because the owner failed to comply with the new rules, it will be nothing but litter, and I would be happy to remove it with all the other trash. The fact that a you might consider me a pariah troubles me not in the least. I wouldn't waste my time looking for your cache because it was put in a stream bed and washed away in the hurricane flooding, no one has found it since. You could always prove me wrong by going out and checking on it, but it's a lot easier to just spew out insults. Edited February 20, 2005 by jonboy Quote Link to comment
+bigbill6 Posted February 20, 2005 Share Posted February 20, 2005 Although I am not in much of a position to do any caching these days,I have been following this closely.First of all,it seems to me that some of us are losing control.This is a time to band together and stop the fighting.Its a time to try and see how we can best handle all of this.So far I have not seen the one thing that I am looking for,and that is a time frame.Is it a policy already...is there a date to put it all into effect? Will they grandfather all the older caches...and start from a set date.I think we need some info before we talk about going in and removing caches. I have many,many caches in Harriman and i will archive them if I have to,but before I do..I want to see something offical,not just a lot of talk.Im hoping to be able to get around a bit by the summer time,it seems that the only hiking i will be able to do is go after my own caches,and im not even sure of that.That is a decision I will have to make later on.I have received many offers of help and cant tell you how much I appreciate it,but as things stand now,I want to try and go after my own caches.If anything..i will need the exercise.I hope in the days to come i can see something more offical. Thank you..we have a great bunch of people here and at a time like this...thats a BIG moral booster Quote Link to comment
+Squealy Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 The specific rules have been formulated and the policy has been handed down, implementation by this individual park has yet to be finalized. No one has the right to expect that they can deposit items on public lands without permission, and that this abandoned property should remain untouchable. As a trails volunteer, I pick up litter all the time, and if the park has a cache removed from the website because the owner failed to comply with the new rules, it will be nothing but litter, and I would be happy to remove it with all the other trash. The fact that a you might consider me a pariah troubles me not in the least. I wouldn't waste my time looking for your cache because it was put in a stream bed and washed away in the hurricane flooding, no one has found it since. You could always prove me wrong by going out and checking on it, but it's a lot easier to just spew out insults. So in other words, as I think Bill's post made abundantly clear, there is still a tremendous amount of confusion as to the exact policy, implementation, etc. for this permit system. No one has deposited anything on pulbic lands without permission. Was there a permit policy before the permit policy? Don't get on your soap box, because "don't ask don't tell" was good enough for you, the rangers and the rest of us. Just starting a policy and saying "OK now they're all out of compliance" would be ridiculous, I think the State's people know that as well. Notice, I did not say you ARE a pariah, I said that if you removed people's caches without their permission it would make you one in the GC community. Honestly, would you want to talk to you at an event knowing that you had removed your cache without permission? People harbor bad feelings, it's human nature. Actually, you already wasted a lot of your time looking for my cache in Harriman as evidenced by your logs. I look forward to proving you wrong. Oh wait, others already did. Quote Link to comment
+JMBella Posted February 21, 2005 Share Posted February 21, 2005 Don't make me turn this car around! Seriously. All of this is is pretty much a non issue. We're still allowed to cache on state park property and it seems that the 20 foot rule will be relaxed. Nobody's removing anyone's caches just yet so let's focus on the matter at hand. Which, right now is nothing until we start to utilize the permit system and see if it's a real pain in the a** or no big deal. Everyone just chill the fudge out. Now you two cut the crap before I put you both in time out. Quote Link to comment
+Rusty O Junk Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Yesterday Mrs Rusty and I returned to Saratoga Spa State Park to apply for a permit for the one cache she has there. She filled out the permit and was told by the intern handling geocaching that he would go out and check the cache then process the permit. I had been told earlier that my older cache (over two years old) would need to be moved before it could be permitted. Yesterday the same intern told me it could now stay and the two years would start from the permit date. I applied for a permit for that cache too and was also told he would be going out to check the cache. If you've been following this thread you know I applied for my first geocaching permit with Saratoga Spa Park on 2/14/07. Yesterday I was handed the approved and signed permit. along with the permit I was handed the Geocache Checklist you see below. I don't know how you guys handle maintenance but I always place caches in ammo cans for reduced maintenance. Unless a cache receives two or three DNF logs in a row or someone indicates in there log the cache needs maintenance I only return once a year (springtime) to check on it. From my experiences with other State Parks and geocaching permits I don't think this is normal. I think I'm dealing with an over zealous intern. I'm sure he means no harm to our hobby and wants to keep geocaching as another activity to offer park goers but he's killing it for me. Mrs Rusty and I have the only caches in Saratoga Spa State Park and if she was willing I'd be tempted to throw the towel in and pick them all up. For the most part park officials have welcomed me and geocaching with open arms. They have been very helpful and very flexible making it a positive experience. Don't be influenced by Saratoga Spa Park, they are the exception and an example of what could happen. I urge everyone to contact your park managers, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. They want the geocaches, they want our picnic events, they want us to help draw patroons to the parks. They want to help us to comply. Quote Link to comment
+junglehair Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 They are making MORE paperwork for themselves?? I would have thought the maintenance checks would be on the honour system. Quote Link to comment
+The Leprechauns Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 In the Central Ohio MetroParks, the maintenance obligation is twice per month... not twice per year. And the cache owner needs to submit a written report listing everyone who visited the cache, where they are from, and what items were taken from and left in the cache. Keep this in mind as you ponder the reasonableness of a twice-yearly maintenance check. Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 In the Central Ohio MetroParks, the maintenance obligation is twice per month... not twice per year. And the cache owner needs to submit a written report listing everyone who visited the cache, where they are from, and what items were taken from and left in the cache. Keep this in mind as you ponder the reasonableness of a twice-yearly maintenance check. Main Entry: id·i·ot·ic Pronunciation: "i-dE-'ä-tik Variant(s): also id·i·ot·i·cal /-'ä-ti-k&l/ Function: adjective 1 : characterized by idiocy 2 : showing complete lack of thought or common sense : FOOLISH Quote Link to comment
+Rusty O Junk Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 In the Central Ohio MetroParks, the maintenance obligation is twice per month... not twice per year. And the cache owner needs to submit a written report listing everyone who visited the cache, where they are from, and what items were taken from and left in the cache. Keep this in mind as you ponder the reasonableness of a twice-yearly maintenance check. That is absolutely ludicrous! I'm sure there are those who comply and place caches there anyhow but I for one wouldn't even consider it for a split second. There are just to many other places to hide caches. This is supposed to be a hobby, not a full time job tracking your own cache. As much as it pains me to say this, if it came down Central Ohio MetroParks rules I'd be doing a lot more fishing. Quote Link to comment
Keystone Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Hello, Leprechaun mis-spoke; he is such a dweeb. It is actually the Franklin County Metro Parks, not "Central Ohio," although that is where Franklin County is located(Columbus area). Here is a link to their policy for your further reading enjoyment. Since I became aware of the policy, I tell everyone who hides a cache in one of the covered parks that they need to follow the policy before their cache can be listed. I can only recall *one* cache actually being listed with a permit. If a park system wants to effectively eliminate geocaches while saying that they "allow" them, this policy is a good example. So is North Carolina's State Parks policy, which requires exorbitant fees of $120 per year per cache. What you have in New York is a far cry from either of those situations. It is not perfect; few government regulations are. But you could be starting from a far worse position than you're in now. Quote Link to comment
+avroair Posted February 23, 2005 Share Posted February 23, 2005 Leprechaun mis-spoke; he is such a dweeb. Hey Leps, are you still strutting your stuff in the St Pats day parade. which requires exorbitant fees of $120 per year per cache. Ouch! Caching for the rich and priviledged! The only way to make it work would be to charge admission to your cache! I'll take what we have in New York, but i am with Rusty here. There are far too many other places to place caches. DEC was off-limits for a while and that didn't seem stop people placing caches elsewhere. Quote Link to comment
+Alan2 Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 In the Central Ohio MetroParks, the maintenance obligation is twice per month... not twice per year. I think they should be reported to someone for creating a social trail to the cache. And after they do it, they probably pull the cache saying its damaging the environment. Quote Link to comment
+JMBella Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 In the Central Ohio MetroParks, the maintenance obligation is twice per month... not twice per year. And the cache owner needs to submit a written report listing everyone who visited the cache, where they are from, and what items were taken from and left in the cache. Keep this in mind as you ponder the reasonableness of a twice-yearly maintenance check. Main Entry: id·i·ot·ic Pronunciation: "i-dE-'ä-tik Variant(s): also id·i·ot·i·cal /-'ä-ti-k&l/ Function: adjective 1 : characterized by idiocy 2 : showing complete lack of thought or common sense : FOOLISH I just had a mild coronary thinking about what it would be like if I had to do that on all my caches. I would have no job, no finds, no money and no wife most likely. On the bright side, I'd be in really good shape. Quote Link to comment
mortonfox Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 In the Central Ohio MetroParks, the maintenance obligation is twice per month... not twice per year. I just had a mild coronary thinking about what it would be like if I had to do that on all my caches. I would have no job, no finds, no money and no wife most likely. On the bright side, I'd be in really good shape. Either that, or more caches will be of the drive-by log-only variety. Quote Link to comment
+JMBella Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 In the Central Ohio MetroParks, the maintenance obligation is twice per month... not twice per year. I just had a mild coronary thinking about what it would be like if I had to do that on all my caches. I would have no job, no finds, no money and no wife most likely. On the bright side, I'd be in really good shape. Either that, or more caches will be of the drive-by log-only variety. Not likely. I think I've reached my personal limit on hiding drive and dumps. Quote Link to comment
Ferreter5 Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 They are making MORE paperwork for themselves?? I would have thought the maintenance checks would be on the honour system. I agree. I can't believe they want the overhead of tracking cache maintenance visits. What do you have to do, stop by the park office and say, "Yep, just checked on my cache, permit #1234"? I'm not sure what it is with governments above a certain level in this country where everything has to incur more and more overhead. The larger government bodies obviously have way too many resources at their disposal to use up. Every town park director I've spoke with has basically said, "Geocaching sounds like a nice outdoor activity. We don't want to create any more work for ourselves. As long as we don't start experiencing some rash of problems with geocaching we don't care." I give them my home and work phone numbers, my e-mail address, and NYGO contact information. They know they can call me at any time for any geocaching questions or issues and I'll take care of them. They don't have to do anything other than call me. I think that's the difference between dealing with local officials and ones who are farther away -- you can go meet with them, you live in the same locale they do, you're their neighbor, you can cultivate a friendship with them. I think this is what geocaching organizations and/or individual geocachers should be doing with the folks at the state parks they live near. If they know who you are, know you're responsible, and know they can count on you, they are far more likely to listen to what you have to say. Hmmm... I guess I jammed two topics into one post. Quote Link to comment
+ChileHead Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 Luckily, most of the caches around here are in county and town parks. We're fortunate to have a pretty good system of county parks, and so far I know of no rules one way or another on county parks. I'd love to get some official county blessing like Ferreter5 has done from some of the towns, but I'm afraid to open a potential can of worms. Quote Link to comment
Stoneman and Company Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 I found the following quotes pretty interesting: "In the Central Ohio MetroParks, the maintenance obligation is twice per month... not twice per year. And the cache owner needs to submit a written report listing everyone who visited the cache, where they are from, and what items were taken from and left in the cache. Keep this in mind as you ponder the reasonableness of a twice-yearly maintenance check. " "If a park system wants to effectively eliminate Geocache's while saying that they "allow" them, this policy is a good example. So is North Carolina's State Parks policy, which requires exorbitant fees of $120 per year per cache." "I can't believe they want the overhead of tracking cache maintenance visits. What do you have to do, stop by the park office and say, "Yep, just checked on my cache, permit #1234"?" "I'm not sure what it is with governments above a certain level in this country where everything has to incur more and more overhead. The larger government bodies obviously have way too many resources at their disposal to use up." I'm thinking that the revised or re-written permit application should have a clause that allows for the cache owner to forgo the checking of the cache twice a year IF there are recent loggings (say within the last month, or whatever the state feels is applicable or appropriate) of the cache on the corresponding Geocache page that reports the cache operable and in good condition. So, say that at least once a month somebody logs that they found the cache (proof that it's still there) and that they signed the log (proof it's not wet or filled or missing) than the owner doesn't need to check the cache. Geocachers as most people know, will report when a log book is getting full, and/or if it's damaged. Finders are also diligent about reporting missing, damaged, wet, or moved caches. The state can save us, and them a lot of time and effort if they change the "rule" to say that the cache owner only has to check the cache if it is inactive (meaning no "finds" or reported logs) for say 6 months or so, or after say 3 "no finds" in a row. Wouldn't this make the most sense and help not only them (The state park personnel) but also the owners of the Geocache? The corresponding Geocache web page for the cache in question is probably the most honest, up to date, report on the cache, anybody would hope to have. Going further, perhaps the Geocache.com site can provide a check box for the NY State Park Geocache's (and other states too) that says: "Yes, the log book is dry and usable, the NYS Permit sticker is on the cache, and the cache is not damaged" . This could be in the form of a check box that all finders can check as they locate and log the caches. EASY, and it saves work for the Cache owner and the State! All the State (park personal) have to do is log onto the cache web site once or twice a year, and I'm sure they will do that routinely many times a year anyhow. Stony! Quote Link to comment
+Alan2 Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 Are you a tax accountant? Quote Link to comment
+matty714 Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 I dont't care about central Ohio!!! Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 (edited) In a just closed thread JoeK wrote this and I'd like to respond: A word about the rangers picking up any caches they come across. Go ahead and jump to conclusions, we found ten (10!) of our cache containers at the Sterling Forest State Park headquarters this afternoon. Laurel Meadow Ponds was there, and Ghost Town, also Ghost Towns replacement. They also rounded our earlier Indian hill caches (wondered where they all went). Worst of all, they took The Haunted Boy Scout Camp cache (we really liked that one).We met with Park Manager James R. Gell, who seemed a reasonable guy. He explained some of their concerns: ecoligically fragile areas, wackos placing dangerous things in caches that are not maintained (he mentioned poisons and explosives, and seemed surprised that we'd never heard of such a thing) and cache containers that are easily opened and exposed to wildlife. He also gave us a draft copy of the proposed Permit and Maintenance of Geocaches in State Parks. Local administrations will discuss this document and send their comments to Albany where all will be decided. Then there will be the printing of the permit applications and stickers. It sounded like a process that will take many months. There are another 5 or 6 containers at the headquarters building that did not belong to us, so anyone who is missing their caches go and pick them up. Mr Gell may be a reasonable guy, but he is woefully uninformed about geocaching. He seem surprised that JoeK never heard of of explosives and poisons in caches. Well that's because it doesn't happen. Where is he getting this hooey? (not to say that it never will, but the record's been quite good so far). As far as the caches that were pulled, were they actually in ecologically sensitive areas? I doubt it. As another example of their not thinking through their actions, they are pulling caches supposedly to protect the enviroment. Now people are going to be searching for caches that aren't there and will searcher longer and wider and cause far more damage (if they cause any) then they would have had they found the cache right away. Is this permit process a "proposed draft" as Mr Gell indicated to Joek or is this process in place? The waters are getting muddier as we move along. This all still sounds like a massive waste of resources and taxpayer dollars. I wish Mr Gell would go after the illegal ATVers if he's so darn concerned about protecting our forests. On the bright side, after pulling all these caches perhaps they noted the incredible lack of damage surrounding the caches and this may be a positive. Edited February 27, 2005 by briansnat Quote Link to comment
+New York Admin Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 I too would like to respond to Joek’s post. Let me assure everyone the New York State Parks geocaching permit system is fully implemented. Mr. Gell’s statement regarding the draft copy and park administrators sending their comments to Albany is true but outdated. The “draft” was sent to each park back in December for their input. I don’t recall what the time-frame was but that window has long since closed. The final permit has been drawn up and distributed to all the parks. The Stickers he refers to have already been printed distributed and many issued. I have several already on my own caches. I know of many permits that have already been issued in several regions. Mr. Gell is no doubt well intended but must be over worked and backlogged terribly since he is about 2 months behind the rest of the state. Permits are being issued all over the state with the exception of the Palisades region. While not the largest park or region in the state they do have the most caches and I’m guessing they are just as unsure how to handle this as you and I are. Would anyone going to the Sterling Forest State Park please check the log book of the caches that remain in the park office for identification. If the GC number is on the logbook great, if not then maybe the name of the cache or the coordinates. With this I’ll be able to disable the listing and contact the cache owner. I wish Mr Gell would go after the illegal ATVers if he's so darn concerned about protecting our forests. Geocaches are easier to catch, even traveling caches. Quote Link to comment
+matty714 Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 JoeK & Maddog, A word about the rangers picking up any caches they come across. Go ahead and jump to conclusions, we found ten (10!) of our cache containers at the Sterling Forest State Park headquarters this afternoon. Laurel Meadow Ponds was there, and Ghost Town, also Ghost Towns replacement. They also rounded our earlier Indian hill caches (wondered where they all went). Worst of all, they took The Haunted Boy Scout Camp cache (we really liked that one). Quote Link to comment
+Greymane Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 I am still trying to find a time when these people are in the office. Except for hunting season, I can't ever find anyone at the offices. I did notice, however, that about a hundred yards on one side of my cache, there is a HEAVILY used snowmobile trail and about a hundred yards on the other side is a hill that has ruts wore into the ground from sledding. I am not saying I oppose either of these activities, but I don't believe that an occasional search for a cache is going to bring any significant damage to the area. I just want to get my permit and be legal. Quote Link to comment
+jonboy Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 (edited) I also have had trouble finding my local State Park office (Fahnestock) open. I have been there four times, and only once found anyone in the office, a kid who knew nothing about it. Optimus Prime tells me that the best time to catch them is before 8:30 and after 4:30 on weekdays. As far as Sterling Forest, they patrol that park very zealously, even on ATV, and I have seen little sign of illegal ATV use in that park, especially compared to the anarchy on the New Jersey side. There are some very wealthy and influencial people living on inholdings along Sterling Lake, and I believe this is why they have a more generous budget and greater manpower than other more heavily used parks. I'm sure this is in at least partly why they built such an expensive visitors center here. I have to admit that I wish all the State Parks were so zealously protected, even if it meant more restrictions on geocaching and mountain biking. I place more priority on preserving the resource from abuse, and would gladly sacrifice my ability to do as I please, if such restraint was applied fairly to all users. Edited February 27, 2005 by jonboy Quote Link to comment
+GPS Guy Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 Here are the permit stickers for cache containers in NYS Parks. (OPRHP) They are a quarter inch too tall for a film can. Quote Link to comment
+avroair Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 They are a quarter inch too tall for a film can. At least that will cut down on the micros in the woods. Thanks for the info Marc G. Are they allowing grandfathered caches for special cases or go we have to unilaterally take out all of our caches? Anyone spoken to Ranger HQs lately. Quote Link to comment
+jonboy Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 (edited) I called the Fahnestock State Park Office (845 225-7207) and spoke to the assistant park manager, Paul Kaufman, who I have worked with before. He was friendly and knew about the cache permits. He took my name and number and faxed me a copy of the permit application. The copy was not very legible, or I would scan it and post it here, but the regulations are the same as those already posted on this site. This park is not requiring that all existing caches be removed, but they only had about 30 in Fahnestock and the Hudson Highlands to begin with, nine of which I have already removed. I did establish that the northern section of Breakneck Ridge, including Sunset Hill and South Beacon, as well as Fishkill and Scofield Ridges, are not in the park and hence not subject to the permit requirement. This means for me that my remaning caches on that ridge can stay. He was not sure if the two year limit will start from the issuance of the permit or the placement of the cache, I will have to clarify that with the park manager, Bill Bauman. He said I should call and make an appointment to meet with him in order to discuss these issues, which I will do shortly. Edited March 1, 2005 by jonboy Quote Link to comment
GPS Guy Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 (edited) **** Edited March 1, 2005 by GPS Guy Quote Link to comment
+GPS Guy Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Are they allowing grandfathered caches for special cases or go we have to unilaterally take out all of our caches? I think that depends on the individual park manager. Mine got to stay. They will have to move two years from now. I am archiving one because it is too close to another cache, and it would put me over the 5 cache limit for that park. Don't kill your caches until you talk to the manager of your park. You may be pleasantly surprised. Quote Link to comment
+JMBella Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 I met with our region today and gave them a brief description of what geocaching was. They were extremely nice and very cooperative despite the extra work they now have. They thought Albany was nuts for requiring permits for such a low impact activity. They also conceded that when it comes to the parks dept., the left hand rarely knows what the right hand is doing and it can be very frustrating. How the process was explained to them is that all cachers in the region would have to go to the park's headquarters for approval. Which make no sense what-so-ever. This would mean anyone who wants to place a cache in Valley Stream SP or Montauk Point SP would have to drive about an hour each way to get their cache approved. We're hoping for clarification on this as I'm sure this part of the process was misinterpreted or incorrectly explained. To help alleviate this problem I have added a link on the LIGO home page where you can DL the permit. From there all you should have to do is fax it to the parks HQ. I would also send a copy off to the park you have hidden the cache in as well. I'm not exactly sure what happens after that. I assume they take your word that you have hidden the cache within the guidelines and approve the application and issue the sticker. If this is how it has been handled in other regions then PLEASE someone have your region call my region and tell them that as they admittedly have no clue how to proceed. They feel like they are completely in the dark and have been left out to dry by Albany when it comes to the specifics. As it is, I don't see anyway to place a cache without visiting the cache site at least twice before getting the approval. Once to place the cache and again to apply the almighty sticker. It's unlikely to affect us much on Long Island as the longest hike would only be about 2 miles each way. But for parks like Harriman where it could be several mile to get to a cache, that's gonna suck big time for some people. At any rate, here the link to the terms and application. SP cache permit. Quote Link to comment
+jonboy Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 I see a proceedural catch-22 as this process is described. A cache cannot be approved without a permit number, yet the application asks for the website referencing the cache, which sounds to me like the URL of the particular cache, which cannot be obtained until the cache is submitted, which requires a permit number. Further more, most cacher placers will have to go home in order to log in the cache for approval and make a map of the cache location (presuming they have the mapping software to do this). I don't see the cache offices having wireless signal, nor do many people have a laptop and a portable printer. As it now stands, it is easier to get approval for caches already in place, requiring only one trip to the park office with the required documentation. and a trip to the cache to apply the sticker. For placing new caches, first one would have to go to the park office (which is usually only sporadically manned), obtain approval for the proposed location and place the cache. Then the cache placer will have to go home, print out a map, return to the seldom open park office, obtain the sticker and go out and place it on the cache, before finally be able to list the cache. One could shortcut this process somewhat by making a topo map (gridded with UTM coordinate lines) of the planned cache location in advance and manually plotting the location of the cache by converting the lat and long coordinates to UTM and using the metric scale bar on the bottom of the map as a template for a grid reader. I might also try and talk the park into giving me a sticker before I go out and place the cache, with the stipulation that the permit will not be in effect, until I return with the exact coordinates and the map of the location. This current set up favors caches that were placed without permission and as far as new cache placements, favors caches near the road as opposed to those in more remote locations. Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 see a proceedural catch-22 as this process is described. A cache cannot be approved without a permit number, yet the application asks for the website referencing the cache, which sounds to me like the URL of the particular cache, which cannot be obtained until the cache is submitted, which requires a permit number Further more, most cacher placers will have to go home in order to log in the cache for approval and make a map of the cache location (presuming they have the mapping software to do this) You can get around this by submitting your cache and unchecking the "yes, this cache is currently active" box. You'll then have the URL and GC# and if you use accurate coordinates, the Topozone printout. Quote Link to comment
+GPS Guy Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 the application asks for the website referencing the cache, which sounds to me like the URL of the particular cache, which cannot be obtained until the cache is submitted, which requires a permit number. Further more, most cacher placers will have to go home in order to log in the cache for approval and make a map of the cache location They only want to know which website the cache will be listed on, and the name of the cache as it will be listed. Not the GC number. As far as maps go, all you need is a copy of the park map with an indication of where your cache is. I don't think they expect you to create your own topo map. I usually can find maps at the trail kiosks or outside the park office. Or, just plan ahead and bring a map with you to the park. Quote Link to comment
+Rusty O Junk Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 My experience is the map is no big deal. All I've done is mark the approximate cache location on their little handout maps like this and they're happy. In the blank asking for "Website Referencing Cache" I just put www.geocaching.com and that's it. There's no need for the gc number or URL. The only cache identification they ask for is the cache name and coordinates. The application JMBella links to is a little different from the one the State Parks issues. The official one doesn't ask "Waypoint" nor does it ask "Your Geocaching Name". If your region will accept that one, good for you, but up here they want the application on the official 14 inch form they designed. I tried to photo copy one and it didn't fly, I had to rewrite the application on one they printed. Jonboy, if you are on good terms with your park manager you might be able to fill out the application with the general coordinates and get a sticker. At this point he will at least know you aren't in a sensitive or restricted area. Then go in and place the cache which now has the sticker already on it. The next day return to the park office and amend the coordinates. I wouldn't try to pull the wool over their eyes, let them know exactly what you are doing and why. The other solution would be to just place the cache, get the permit and place the sticker on your first maintenance visit or send it in with a trusted friend who goes looking for the cache. Quote Link to comment
+Rusty O Junk Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Here's a scan of the original permit application the state issues. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.