Nys Parks & Recreation Survey

[+jonboy]

I think the lists of cache owners with caches in the NYS parks should be forwarded to NYADMIN. There will be a tendency amongst some cache owners to say "Who put you in charge?". This request to obtain a permit will carry much more weight if it comes from someone with the power to enforce it. It will need to be made clear that failure to comply within a specified amount of time will lead to delisting and removal of the cache. None of us have the authority to remove a cache on our own, though some of us might be prepared to do so if delegated such authority. I think it is overly optimistic to think that most cache owners will comply without such compulsion. Many cache owners never visit a cache again after they place it. I do think that cache owners should be given specific instructions for each park, on who they need to talk to, whether or not they can apply by mail, and what the deadline is for that particular park. This type of information should also be gathered by volunteers, and forwarded to NYADMIN along with the list of cache owners. I think it is excellent that a version of the cache permit application has been posted as a PDF file on the LIGO website, but, as has been already pointed out, the version posted is not the same one that most State Parks are using. It would be nice to get a full version of both the application and the regulations and instructions posted on as a PDF file. The version I saw in the Fahnestock park office was on legal size paper, printed on both sides, printed in color, and the text was green. They only had one copy of this in Fahnestock, and were making black and white copies of it to hand out. I would be willing to contact the Fahnestock Office on behalf of other geocachers in order to clarify such questions as whether they will accept applications by mail, but they are really quite approachable in that office, and I think anyone could do it.

Edited March 5, 2005 by jonboy

[+junglehair]

I understand your point Jonboy, but it would take one person hundreds of hours to send out all those emails. NY-Admin asked that I forward a list of all the caches/cache owners to him/her once I have it compiled.

 

I will draft the form letter that will be sent to each of the cache owners, and will send a copy of that to NY-Admin for their input as well. I will post it here too for comments.

 

I am going to ask the Parks department for a list of contact names/numbers for each of the parks so at minimum we can provide that information along with the notification. Your suggestion that cache owners should be given specific instructions for each park is a good one.

 

We can look at this as a multi-stage project. The first stage is just to get the information out there to the cache owners. The letter we will send out is meant to inform them of the new policy and let them know what steps they need to take to get their cache approved. Obviously not everyone will take action immediately, but at least it should greatly reduce the number of non-compliant caches out there.

 

I imagine that the next step would be for NY-Admin to send a warning notice to the cache owners that do not comply to let them know their cache will be delisted if they do not take immediate action.

[+junglehair]

For anyone that's interested, here's a map showing all the geocaches in New York.

 

[cache_ninja]

ugh.

[Keystone]

I imagine that the next step would be for NY-Admin to send a warning notice to the cache owners that do not comply to let them know their cache will be delisted if they do not take immediate action.

Typically Geocaching.com and its volunteers only do this when the land manager has specifically asked us to do so. There are many caches in my review territory that are non-compliant with a land management policy passed subsequent to the cache placement date. If nobody complains, they just stay there.

[+junglehair]

For enquiring minds that want to know:

 

There are 396 caches placed by 163 different geocachers in 95 State Parks throughout New York.

 

If anyone would like a copy of the list, let me know and I will email it to you.

[+avroair]

I imagine that the next step would be for NY-Admin to send a warning notice to the cache owners that do not comply to let them know their cache will be delisted if they do not take immediate action.

Typically Geocaching.com and its volunteers only do this when the land manager has specifically asked us to do so. There are many caches in my review territory that are non-compliant with a land management policy passed subsequent to the cache placement date. If nobody complains, they just stay there.

Harriman is enforcing the 'find it, remove it' policy. They would like caches removed and permits obtained immediately. But I am not sure how they can place this policy without actually telling people. As far as I know, they do not look on geocaching.com or use it at all.

[+Mopar]

Every time I read this thread I think about this thread from 6 months ago. I think jmbellaNY Admin has every right to stick out his tongue and say "I TOLD YOU SO!"

[+JMBella]

For anyone that's interested, here's a map showing all the geocaches in New York.

 

Hmmm... I think I see some white spots there on Long Island. I gotta go take care of that!

[+JMBella]

For enquiring minds that want to know:

 

There are 396 caches placed by 163 different geocachers in 95 State Parks throughout New York.

 

If anyone would like a copy of the list, let me know and I will email it to you.

Yes, please email it to me.

[+avroair]

For anyone that's interested, here's a map showing all the geocaches in New York.

 

Wow! Syracuse, Rochester and Long Island are plastered! I guess New Jersey is even worse. I can help with any capacity that is required, (although I have to figure in the driving time to get to anywhere in NY )

 

Oh yeah, and I usually still manually enter tudes so asking me to run pocket queries may be an adventure (j/k)

[+briansnat]

Someone on Long Island has been busy.

[+jonboy]

Rockefeller State Preserve has decided to ban geocaching because it is a preserve, not a park, although geocaching will still be allowed in Rockwood Hall. They have already removed one geocache, which was described to me as being a blue container in the crook of a tree. This sounds like it could be "Town and Country", though I can't be sure. I was told they will be removing the others soon. I have archived mine, "Far From the Madding Crowd", the others affected by the ban are "Sleepy Hollow-1" and "Eagle Hill Holiday Cache", but I get the impression they will remove the caches in Rockwood Hall without permits. The person in charge of Geocaching permits in this office is Naomi Seffalo, but she is out of the office until Wednesday. The park office number is 914 631-1470. They said they will hold the caches they pick up for the owners.

[+JMBella]

Rockefeller State Preserve has decided to ban geocaching because it is a preserve, not a park, although geocaching will still be allowed in Rockwood Hall. They have already removed one geocache, which was described to me as being a blue container in the crook of a tree. This sounds like it could be "Town and Country", though I can't be sure. I was told they will be removing the others soon. I have archived mine, "Far From the Madding Crowd", the others affected by the ban are "Sleepy Hollow-1" and "Eagle Hill Holiday Cache", but I get the impression they will remove the caches in Rockwood Hall without permits. The person in charge of Geocaching permits in this office is Naomi Seffalo, but she is out of the office until Wednesday. The park office number is 914 631-1470. They said they will hold the caches they pick up for the owners.

Does the lable "preserve" make the land more sensitive? Someone educate me. Park, Preserve, Arboretum... in each of these examples I've seen areas that were no more sensitive than my front lawn.

[+Perfect Tommy]

jonboy Posted on Mar 7 2005, 06:19 AM

Rockefeller State Preserve has decided to ban geocaching because it is a preserve, not a park, although geocaching will still be allowed in Rockwood Hall. They have already removed one geocache, which was described to me as being a blue container in the crook of a tree. This sounds like it could be "Town and Country", though I can't be sure. I was told they will be removing the others soon. I have archived mine, "Far From the Madding Crowd", the others affected by the ban are "Sleepy Hollow-1" and "Eagle Hill Holiday Cache", but I get the impression they will remove the caches in Rockwood Hall without permits.

 

T&C is a clear Rubbermaid container with a beige top hidden in the hollow of a tree. The cache described by jonboy doesn't fit the description of any cache in the Park, err, Preserve, although since T&C is the closest to the Park offices, it would probably be the easiest for them to confiscate. Pity about Sleepy Hollow-1: it's the second oldest cache in New York State I believe. I don't want to duplicate effort so is anyone reaching out to Lucien and Hiker guy 1 about their caches? Turning to Rockwood, Evie's Surprise will probably have to be archived and retrieved unless the Tarrytown Horsemen respond to emails. Again, so as not to duplicate effort, is anyone sending the Horsemen an email?

[+jonboy]

It is difficult to know what to expect when dealing with so many different managers with so many possible management philosophies. The person I spoke to in the office said they didn't want anyone going off trail. One could argue that they allow people to fish in Swan Lake, and you can only do this by going off trail, that this is only a pretext for doing what they wish to do anyway, and you would basically be right. My experience has shown that park managers who have been trained as naturalists tend to be inclined to be more restrictive. In a preserve, resource protection is the primary goal, and recreation only a secondary one.

 

Along a more practical line, bear in mind that this land was donated by the Rockefeller family, with certain specific provisions stipulated. Also parts of the preserve directly abut some of the family land, right where "Town and Country" was placed. I have seen David Rockefeller driving his horse and buggy directly out of his estate into the park, I have also seen him driving around in a golf cart. It doesn't surprise me that officials might not want direputable geocaching types lurking around in the bushes.

 

It is up to the geocaching community to win the trust of park officials. I would argue that is best to comply with these initial rulings, even if some think they are capricious and unfair. We can press for changes later, once we have demonstrated our responsibility and willingness to submit to their authority.

 

I haven't e-mailed any cache owners to advise them of the new rules, I'm just figuring them out, and how they will be applied in each park myself.

Edited March 7, 2005 by jonboy

[+Squealy]

I want it in writing from each park manager, for each cache that I have in State Park lands. They should be identifying the caches and owners telling them about the timeframe for implementation permit process.

 

Perhaps that work will convince them to think about grandfathering all caches placed before the start of this year.

[+avroair]

I want it in writing from each park manager, for each cache that I have in State Park lands. They should be identifying the caches and owners telling them about the timeframe for implementation permit process.

 

Perhaps that work will convince them to think about grandfathering all caches placed before the start of this year.

On the one side, I was told I had to remove my caches immediately, on the other side the park manager expressed surprise that i had removed 11 already... she said and i quote "wow, you have been busy!" And didn't expect me to remove my others until the snow was all gone...

 

They work these things on geological scale times, while we are working on days, sometimes hours information they are working in scales of weeks and months...

[+junglehair]

I want it in writing from each park manager, for each cache that I have in State Park lands. They should be identifying the caches and owners telling them about the timeframe for implementation permit process.

 

Perhaps that work will convince them to think about grandfathering all caches placed before the start of this year.

More likely, that would result in them requesting that all caches placed before the start of this year be archived and removed immediately. Be careful what you wish for.

[+Squealy]

More likely, that would result in them requesting that all caches placed before the start of this year be archived and removed immediately. Be careful what you wish for.

Then I guess NYS should also have the ability to create new laws and regulations that go into effect retroactively, like let's say, hmmmmm, how about a 20% property tax increase starting with the year 1984. They can then reassess everyone and collect back taxes. The sad reality is most of you miss the bigger picture. But then again, I wouldn't expect anyone from upstate to get it because, even though you guys contribute less in terms of taxes, etc., you get more. (I'm using taxes as an example btw, I'm really not just insane and rambling).

[+Mopar]

Then I guess NYS should also have the ability to create new laws and regulations that go into effect retroactively,

You think they can't? They make retroactive laws all the time. Hell, New York City even makes laws for other states.

[+avroair]

Got my permits thru the mail for Harriman today. Looks fairly easy.

 

Do these apply to letterboxing as well?

[+junglehair]

I got finally got ahold of someone at Sampson State Park today to enquire about the geocaching permit for a cache I have there. They obviously knew about the new policy, but hadn't figured out how they were going to deal with it yet.

 

They took down my name and number, and the name of my cache and said they would call me back after the park manager has had a chance to look at the caches - probably some time in April.

 

I tried calling Chittenango State Park as well and left a message on their answering machine. I have 3 caches there. The trail that these caches are on is closed for the winter, so I probably won't be able to do anything with that one until at least April too.

[MapheadMike]

They have already removed one geocache, which was described to me as being a blue container in the crook of a tree. This sounds like it could be "Town and Country", though I can't be sure.

 

I found a letterbox that meets this description, at least the crook in the tree part. I'll write the owner.

 

Too bad the rangers didn't have the energy to open the object they confiscated and see if it had a name or contact info inside.

 

Do these apply to letterboxing as well?

 

Someone seems to have confiscated one. I can't see any reason why a park manager would treat the two hobbies differently.

[jhammer7]

If there is interest in a CITO event in Harriman, could someone please contact me? Thanks.

[+avroair]

If there is interest in a CITO event in Harriman, could someone please contact me? Thanks.

e-mail sent.

[Ferreter5]

I know of several caches in two State Historic Sites very near my house. Has anyone heard anything with regard to how State Historic Sites are being treated? I ask because State Historic Sites and State Parks are run by the same department.

 

I'm thinking of making some phone calls/stopping by.

Edited March 8, 2005 by Ferreter5

[+Squealy]

I'm thinking of making some phone calls/stopping by.

Doesn't anyone learn their lesson?

[+avroair]

I know of several caches in two State Historic Sites very near my house. Has anyone heard anything with regard to how State Historic Sites are being treated? I ask because State Historic Sites and State Parks are run by the same department.

 

I'm thinking of making some phone calls/stopping by.

It specifically says on the permit that caches cannot be placed at historical sites.

[+junglehair]

I know of several caches in two State Historic Sites very near my house.  Has anyone heard anything with regard to how State Historic Sites are being treated?  I ask because State Historic Sites and State Parks are run by the same department.

 

I'm thinking of making some phone calls/stopping by.

It specifically says on the permit that caches cannot be placed at historical sites.

Actually, it says caches are not to be placed on Historic Site Structures. I'm not sure that means they can't be placed anywhere else on the property. I agree with F5 that we should clarify this. Especially since one of the caches he's talking about is mine.

[+avroair]

I know of several caches in two State Historic Sites very near my house.  Has anyone heard anything with regard to how State Historic Sites are being treated?  I ask because State Historic Sites and State Parks are run by the same department.

 

I'm thinking of making some phone calls/stopping by.

It specifically says on the permit that caches cannot be placed at historical sites.

Actually, it says caches are not to be placed on Historic Site Structures. I'm not sure that means they can't be placed anywhere else on the property. I agree with F5 that we should clarify this. Especially since one of the caches he's talking about is mine.

The permit seems to allow for the park managers discretion in many of the cases. So it would probably get reviewed on a case by case basis which is excellent and far better than a 'sweeping ban'.

 

I am working on a CITO event for Harriman, if anyone else is considering something like this, lmk so we can coordinate rather than have matching sites.

[Ferreter5]

I don't think Ganondagan will have much of a problem with the existing caches. They've known about them for a few years and even wrote a very favorable article about them and geocaching in their newsletter.

 

While the place is an Historic Site it's very much like a State Park with a lot of land and really nice trails and views. It's not just an old building on a small plot of land.

 

I'll look into clarifying the issue with this site specifically. However, if NYAdmin or anyone else in the know has information about geocaching and Historic Sites in general, then please speak up and share the info.

 

As junglehair suggested, it'd be nice to clarify the issue in general.

Edited March 9, 2005 by Ferreter5

[Ferreter5]

I agree with F5 that we should clarify this.  Especially since one of the caches he's talking about is mine.

That's not the cache I had in mind at all!

[+junglehair]

The Parks and Rec Department are sending us a list of the Parks with their contact information. I'm hoping that list will help clarify which areas are affected by the new policy. The list that I compiled earlier was just for the State Parks - I may need to modify that to add the historic sites, etc.

[+Mopar]

I am working on a CITO event for Harriman, if anyone else is considering something like this, lmk so we can coordinate rather than have matching sites.

You might want to check with Harrald, since he hosted the Harriman CITO the last 2 years.

[+avroair]

I am working on a CITO event for Harriman, if anyone else is considering something like this, lmk so we can coordinate rather than have matching sites.   

You might want to check with Harrald, since he hosted the Harriman CITO the last 2 years.

E-mail aready sent.

[+New York Admin]

I know of several caches in two State Historic Sites very near my house.  Has anyone heard anything with regard to how State Historic Sites are being treated?  I ask because State Historic Sites and State Parks are run by the same department.

 

I'm thinking of making some phone calls/stopping by.

Historic sites are in fact covered under the new state parks geocaching permit system as are the state golf courses and ski areas. All caches on lands managed by OPRHP will need to be permitted. Go here for a list of parks and lands requiring a permit.

[Ferreter5]

Thank you for the clarification, New York Admin.

[+junglehair]

Ok, back to the drawing board. I need to update my list of caches within the State Parks and other areas requiring permits.

[+GPS Guy]

Go here for a list of parks and lands requiring a permit.

Just to draw a distinction on the map that NYADMIN links to. Two of the regions shown on the map are DEC managed areas, not OPRHP. They are the "Adirondack Park" and "Catskill Park" regions.

The only OPRHP facility within those regions that I can find is the John Brown Farm State Historic Site near Lake Placid.

Edited March 11, 2005 by Marc G.

[+jonboy]

I spoke with Tim Sullivan, the Bear Mt Park Superintendent, today by telephone. He has been given responsibility for issuing geocache permits for the Storm King Section of PIPC. He did not seem at all hostile to geocaching, in fact he is a long time friend of one of our geocachers, Outdoors Lady, but he did know very little about it. I took some time to explain what we do, why, what kind of containers we use and so forth. He did cite the rules to me, including a ruling that Geocaches are not going to be allowed east of 9W in Storm King because of the unexploded ordinance issue. This does not leave much, only Whitehorse Mt, but he did say he would be happy to approve any caches I wished to place there. He did say that he has no copies of the geocache permit application, only the rules, so anyone wanting a permit from him should bring an application, perhaps downloading the one from the LICO site: NY State Park Permit Application

The new ruling on Storm King means that I will have to remove one of my Storm King Caches (Butter Hill North), but the other (Butter Hill South) is not on State Park land and is not affected.

 

There is no mechanism to apply for a permit by mail, and this is badly needed. I have been trying for more than a week to get a permit for a cache in Rockwood Hall, including two visits to the Park office, with no luck.

[+avroair]

I have extras I can mail to you Jonboy. I can also scan them and post them as a PDF.

[+Perfect Tommy]

Rockefeller State Preserve has decided to ban geocaching because it is a preserve, not a park, although geocaching will still be allowed in Rockwood Hall. They have already removed one geocache, which was described to me as being a blue container in the crook of a tree. This sounds like it could be "Town and Country", though I can't be sure.

 

Last weekend I picked up Town & Country so they apparently haven't started to confiscate caches yet at Rockefeller Preserve and/or Rockwood. It appears they may have confiscated a letterbox as QOCMike previously pointed out.

[+geobernd]

He did cite the rules to me, including a ruling that Geocaches are not going to be allowed east of 9W in Storm King because of the unexploded ordinance issue.

I thought that the area has been fully reopened on 02/05/05. I can't find where I read that right now but either I am wrong or he didn't get updated yet???

[+jonboy]

The ban makes sense for those areas where the possibility of UXB exists, but it makes no sense for area "C": Map. Only an narrow corridor was cleared in areas "A" & "B", but there was never any evidence of UXB in area "C", which consists of more than half of the area under consideration. It is even more strange that geocaching is to be allowed in area "A" where the greatest number of UBX rounds were found. The ruling they have made is not only wrong, it is dangerous.

Edited March 16, 2005 by jonboy

[+Team KwikSilver]

UXB

And this means? (For those of us keeping score at home )

[+Cardinal Red]

Unexploded Bomb (UXB)

 

Unexploded Ordnance (UXO)

[+jonboy]

I was wrong in some of my facts on my last post, first of all the term is UXO not UXB, that was a television program. Secondly, there was no unexploded ordinance found west of Rt 9W, in Area "A".

Storm King Update

 

The fact remains that there is little justification for Geocaching restrictions in Area "C", but I'll admit that this is rather small potatoes in the overall NYS Parks geocaching issue.

[+GeoKender]

I was wrong in some of my facts on my last post, first of all the term is UXO not UXB, that was a television program.  Secondly, there was no unexploded ordinance found west of Rt 9W, in Area "A".

Storm King Update

... you mean you were wrong? How could this be?

 

>checking if hell actually froze over<

[+jonboy]

I received the first permit issued by Rockefeller State Park Preserve for Hearth on Hudson . The name of the person who issues the permits is Neoma Chefalo at 914 631-1470. As I stated before, they are only issuing permits for Rockwood Hall and with two already in this area, there isn't much room for more, given the distance required between caches. I had a little trouble connecting with her, but she was friendly and not hostile to geocaching. She said she is waiting for the state to give her a GPSr before she goes out and removes caches, but it is possible she may move to have them delisted or disabled.