State Park Permits In The Asp(allegany State Park)

[Stoneman and Company]

Well, I got my permit in the mail yesterday. I was immediately on the phone with the ASP (Allegany State Park- Western NY). The thing that jumped right out at me was the mention of "NO BUSHWHACKING" to find a cache! dadgum, my favorite spots in the park (including my geocache there) don't have a trial going to them.

WAIT a minute ... They DO allow hunting all over the park .... What the ****?

How can you let participants of ONE sport walk all over the place and NOT the participants of another sport do the same? OH, ONE GROUP HAS GUNS! I see, if you are stumbling through the woods trying to KILL something, you have more of a right than somebody there just to observe nature and search out a location. Not to mention, MOST hunters drop litter, and most geocachers pick it up ... Then the guy on the phone (Tom) calmed me down! It seems that when the generic "permit form" was conceived, designed and printed by the state, it was for all the state parks across the state. I was assured that in fact, regardless of what the form says (No geocache more than 20 feet off a trail and NO BUSHWHACKING to find a cache) it is up to the individual state parks and/or depending on the individual cache in question, on weather the rule(s) will be enforced. My "Brown Mountain Cache" is in a very remote section of the (ASP) park where there are NO trails. One MUST bushwhack all the way to do my cache. I was assured there will be no problem with them "approving" my cache. It seems the rules are somewhat flexible and it seems that the staff at the ASP is more than willing to bend over back-wards to accommodate geocachers. That was my impression and after all, the permit is free and it will actually help "weed out" the badly thought out, or badly placed Geocache's anyhow. I'm not often a defender of governmental rules and regulations, but this "new permit" doesn't seem to be a big deal .... It's quite painless. I e-mailed them (The ASP) for a permit and two days later got several in an envelope. The only cost of the permit is a stamp to mail the filled-out permit back to them. I am an avid hiker/explorer who spends a lot of time in the woods . I NEVER hike trails .... "NO BUSHWHACKING" is not an option for me! .... However I wouldn't mind them restricting hunters to "twenty feet from an established trail"!

John S.

[naturescout]

See we told you it'd be easy. We actually are nice people and there are a few of us that geocache too. However, define bushwack cause if it means stomping down vegetation, breaking off limbs or cutting up plants, I think we're going to have some concerns. If it means you just want to take the hard route in and around, well, we probably would applaud your stamina.

We issued our first permit yesterday, of course it was to us. Our naturalists have run programs on geocaching for the last two summers and have had a cache out there for the whole time. Yes, even we have to follow our own rules. I walked into the office, filled out the form and took it into the Park Manager, who asked if I was more than 20' off the trail. I said, of course it was. He laughed and signed the permit. (But then I'm one of the ones that has some input into the off limits areas.)

Just so everyone knows, geocachers are not being singled out. We have had permit requirements in place for a lot of other activities, like hunting, metal detecting, large group gatherings, mountain bike racing etc. Sometimes that's the only time we get to meet our user groups. And yes, hunters are also restricted on where they can hunt.

We appreciate your efforts in caching in and packing out. We wish more user groups would adopt that practice. However, not all garbage is left by patrons of the park, we have a fairly messy bear population that contributes significantly to our litter problem. Thanks for picking up after them too.

[Stoneman and Company]

Oh, of course I mean just hiking "off trail". I didn't use "bushwhacking" to actually mean whacking of bushes! I'm a long-time, hard-core, environmentalist. I can walk through the woods without leaving prints, without hacking bushes out of the way, without trampling plants and without breaking of limbs as I'm sure many or most geoachers can do also. I think MOST geocachers are sensitive of environmental concerns and wouldn't trample sensitive or any plant life needlessly. And EVERY SINGLE geocacher I have met carries other peoples trash out with them.

[naturescout]

Thanks for the definition. Now I have something to point to when the Park Managers get those worried frowns when they hear that word. We call it off-trail meanderings here, but then you probably are going faster than us out-of-shape, sit-behind-a desk types. I may try the Brown Mt one this spring, providing they let me out of the office for a while, (like the whole day). I'm wondering if I can make it there and back without having to call in the rescue squad. Hummmmm, I'd better start training now.

[+JMBella]

Thanks for the definition. Now I have something to point to when the Park Managers get those worried frowns when they hear that word. We call it off-trail meanderings here, but then you probably are going faster than us out-of-shape, sit-behind-a desk types. I may try the Brown Mt one this spring, providing they let me out of the office for a while, (like the whole day). I'm wondering if I can make it there and back without having to call in the rescue squad.  Hummmmm, I'd better start training now.

Excellent dialog!! This sheds a tremendous amount of light on what we can expect. I hope. Is there anyway someone naturescout can call the 13 regions and explain to them how this should work? It would be very much appreciated. Someone might even name a cache after you.

Edited February 17, 2005 by JMBella

[+New York Admin]

bush·whack  Audio pronunciation of "bushwhacking" ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (bshhwk, -wk)

v. bush·whacked, bush·whack·ing, bush·whacks

v. intr.

 

  1. To make one's way through thick woods by cutting away bushes and branches.

  2. To travel through or live in the woods.

  3. To fight as a guerrilla in the woods.

 

Above is the definition of 'bushwhack'. Take a look at the first definition and I wouldn't wonder naturescout and other park officials would panic. I would panic! I think as geocachers and hikers when we say bushwhack we more closely relate to number 2. Simply hiking through the woods without the aid of a trail.

[+JMBella]

Take a look at number 3. Now I know why the NPS banned geocaching.

[Stoneman and Company]

Another point I'd like to make about the permit process, is that rules that are good for one region is not necessarily good for another. There is a big difference between the kind of traffic a state park near NYC, and a state park in western NY gets. ASP or Allegany State Park is one of the largest state parks in NY state, AND it does get a lot of visitors a year, BUT those visitors are mostly "happy campers" or "day use" visitors that come for a specific attraction, such as visiting the lakes, beaches or short hiking loops and trails. There are a lot of acres out there that hardly anybody (besides hunters) ventures into. My "Brown Mountain Cache" might not get 20 visitors in the next two years! Putting a geocache in a remote area in the ASP is not going to draw hundreds and hundreds of people tramping through the woods. Not like say a geocache in Harriman state park.

 

The generic permit that the ASP sent me should be changed in the following ways:

 

First, there is no clear indication on the form as to what spaces were to be filled out by the applicant and what is for the office use ... Such as, do I come up with a permit number? The form is WAY to vague as to what lines are to be filled out and what ones are not.

 

Then there is my original objection. Under "Cache Placement" you have:

"The cache should be accessible from existing trails (no more than 20 ft. from trail unless otherwise approved) .... that is all well and good .... I understand that is flexible .....

 

But then there is a rule for finding the same said cache, that may legally in fact be located WAY off trail (under "Participation") that reads: "Participants must follow established trails (no bushwhacking to reach a cache)" .

 

They make an exception to PLACE the cache, but no obvious exception to FIND the cache!

It's a small point, but it's contradictory.

 

Typical bureaucratic stupidity at it's best! LOL! .... Just had to get that dig in!

 

Stony!

[Allegany OPRHP]

First, there is no clear indication on the form as to what spaces were to be filled out by the applicant and what is for the office use ... Such as, do I come up with a permit number? The form is WAY to vague as to what lines are to be filled out and what ones are not.

STONE, We will do the permit number, date issued and expire date. The signature of applicant/permittee and signature of park manager/designee is labeled on the application. If you fill something out on the permit application that shouldn't be filled out, we will correct it for you. What is most important is the permit sticker that goes on the cache that we will issue you once the application is signed. Sorry for the confusion and post printed applications will be edited better to specify what is filled out officially and by cache owner. Thanks for the heads up on this.

TPLB

[avroair]

  3. To fight as a guerrilla in the woods.

 

Does this include APE project caches?

 

As with the introduction of any new permit or regulation there will be wrinkles. But I am glad to see an understanding that these are guidelines rather than set in stone.

[Stoneman and Company]

I found the following quotes in the other topic talking about the NYS permitting system .... I found these 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 (say within the last month, or whatever the state feels is applicable or appropriate) loggings 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 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!

Edited February 25, 2005 by Stoneman and Company

[+headmj]

I just finished my permit process and it was pretty easy. I was totally unaware of the new permit requirement and the folks from ASP reached me by email. Very Nice! They are a good group and I have been using the park for almost 50 years and my interaction with them has always been positive. As a matter of fact if we could get some of the "CITY" environmentalists out of their hair we would have a much more diverse ecosystem there managed by people who know how. Naturescout, let me know when you are going to do Brown Mountain and we can see who runs out of gas first! <BG>

 

All in all I think this will just keep the dangerous or poorly though out caches out of the way.

[naturescout]

Before I try Brown Mt. I think I'd better put new batteries in my GPS, take up running and aeorbics, find someone younger and stronger to haul me up and teach my dog to dial 911 on my cellphone. Sure I'll let you know when I'm ready.

We're easy to deal with here. We're Cache friendly, just can't have all you guys trouncing on my little orchids or other endangered species like timberrattlers. WE also don't have the manpower to go find anyone who ends up not coming back. 65,000 acres is a lot of woods to cover when someone turns up missing.

[+headmj]

LOL Yep, 65000 acres is alot of ground. That's why I tell my wife what 20,000 acres I'll be in! <BG> I have been looking at putting a cache in the Bear Mt marker area. I have been trying to estimate how much draw it might get. It would be fun to put certificates in the box declaring that the bearer had reached the highest point in the park. I can tell you for sure I would get the permit before I actually hiked up there. Twice a year would be plenty. Maybe I will do both in August Right!

 

Mike

[naturescout]

I love the certificate idea. Now that might be as good a bragging right as reaching your first 100 caches.

[+headmj]

NatureScout, how far can a person drive up Bay State road from the Rt #1 side? I have driven by there literally thousands of times and I have never gone up there. I have been plotting access routes to Mear Mountain and there is a relatively flat ridge line that runs from RT. 1 to Bear Marker. It is about a three mile hike from Rt 1 near the overlook site.

 

Regards

 

Mike

[naturescout]

Bay State Road goes all the way thru from ASP 1 to the Red House Exit of I-86. However, there is a gate that is locked back in, but I'm not sure how far. I've only been down in there as far as the gate a couple of times and I'm really no good with distances. It's a ways in. The gate is there to stop patron traffic from venturing onto private land in Bay State. There are still a number of original owners down in there, plus the road is not maintained beyond a certain point so it gets rough. However, there is an old railraod grade that climbs up to the ridge, if you could find that, it would make the climb easier. Historic topo maps are a good resource for find the grades. They can be accessed on the net but I don't have the url at home, which is where I am today. IF I can remember I'll post it next week.

[+headmj]

Thanks, naturescout! I have a waypoint for the gate on the rt. 86 side of the park. It is at 42 deg 4.95 min N and 78deg 48.28 min W on Bay State Rd. I have never gone up that Rd from the ASP 1 side. I will look for the railroad road bed.