Jump to content

Geocaching May Be Outlawed In South Carolina


wkhaz

Recommended Posts

I never would have visited Cheraw SC (a lovely little town) last fall if there weren't caches hidden there.

A Historic Church showed me some Revolutionary War gravesites, and is very tastefully hidden in the cemetery.

And All That Jazz part 2 brought me to the birthplace (now a park) of Dizzy Gillespie! No one else was in it while we were there.

Once again geocaching takes me places and shows me things I wouldn't have found otherwise.

Also, between, snacks, a tank of gas, and lunch at a local cafe, we spent about $50 in town that afternoon.

I'll repeat for what it's worth-I and probably many others who have logged these caches and the others nearby wouldn't have been there if it weren't for geocaching. The way I'm reading this bill, both of these would be outlawed. :grin:

Link to comment

I have spoken with Representative Toole’s office (he is a co-sponsor of H.3777). Mr. Toole’s staff stated that Mr. Toole, as well as the other co-sponsors of the bill, were backing the bill based on the information they were given by Representative Catherine Ceips (House District 124, Beaufort County). According to Ms. Ceips (second-hand information), numerous cemeteries have been vandalized by “geocachers”.

 

According to Toole's Office, Ms. Ceips told them that geocachers were digging up the cemetery and headstones in Beaufort County and the Hilton Head area of South Carolina.

 

I am in the process of setting up a personal meeting with Mr. Toole (my House Representative) to discuss the situation and to educate him on geocaching. I am also writing letters to all of the co-sponsors of H.3777 to inform them of my concerns.

 

It would be great if someone that is a registered voter in SC House District 124 (Beaufort County) would contact Ms. Ceips to discuss this situation.

 

We do not need an additional law that would outlaw geocaching in the areas outlined in H.3777. ESPECIALLY since we ALREADY have a law on the books that makes it illegal to obliterate, vandalize, desecrate a burial ground; deface, vandalize, injure, or remove a gravestone or other memorial monument or marker commemorating a deceased person; and more (SECTION 16-17-600. Destruction or desecration of human remains or repositories thereof; liability of crematory operators; penalties.).

 

Once again, the sponsors of H.3777 are: Ceips, Loftis, Breeland, Scott, Whipper, Bowers, Hosey, Vaughn, Anthony, Battle, Chalk, Clyburn, Dantzler, Hardwick, Harvin, Herbkersman, J. Hines, Howard, Jefferson, Kirsh, Lee, Martin, McCraw, Miller, Moody-Lawrence, J.H. Neal, Perry, M.A. Pitts, Rivers, Scarborough, Simrill, Toole and Umphlett.

 

Please contact them ASAP and educate them on geocaching. Let them know you do not support the bill, AS THEIR CONSTITUANT and as a REGISTERD VOTER in their district.

 

The contact information for these representatives is at http://www.scstatehouse.net/html-pages/housebios.html.

Link to comment
According to Ms. Ceips (second-hand information), numerous cemeteries have been vandalized by “geocachers”.

 

According to Toole's Office, Ms. Ceips told them that geocachers were digging up the cemetery and headstones in Beaufort County and the Hilton Head area of South Carolina.

 

I figured it was something like this. :grin:

Link to comment

 

I am in the process of setting up a personal meeting with Mr. Toole (my House Representative) to discuss the situation and to educate him on geocaching. I am also writing letters to all of the co-sponsors of H.3777 to inform them of my concerns.

 

I wouldn't. There are already two members of the SCGA steering comittee feeling this out. Let them do the recon before we head into any kind of conflict or start something we can't win. I know you mean well.

 

X

Link to comment

It reminds me of the trouble in Arizone a few years ago. A cache was near one of Arizona's 50,000 archaelogical sites (which of course they don't tell you where they are) and someone who actually knew the site was there saw damage from an ATV (My memory is fuzzy) and saw a geocache was near and assumed it was geocachers instead of the more probable population pressure from one of the fastest growing states in the nation and the growing popularity of ATV's. To be fair those are assumptions as well beause treasure hunters could of learned of the site and raided it and so on. You can't tell.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment

According to Toole's Office, Ms. Ceips told them that geocachers were digging up the cemetery and headstones in Beaufort County and the Hilton Head area of South Carolina.

 

I don't suppose that we can get evidence of the actual dug up spots in the cemeterys. I'm guessing that this is being said figuratively. I'm telling you guys that a little education for these folks towards what geocaching is all about will go a long way.

 

But wait til the proper time.

 

X

Link to comment
Considering an earlier post that the sponsor of the bill is from Beaufort, this cache series MAY be a factor.

 

Cemetery Geocaches near Beaufort SC

After looking at the map, it appears that CharlieP may have been on to something. Should somebody contact the owner of these caches, just in case they are the caches in question? If they are, the owner will know more about the situation. It appears CR has found some of these as well.

 

southdeltan

Link to comment

 

I am in the process of setting up a personal meeting with Mr. Toole (my House Representative) to discuss the situation and to educate him on geocaching.  I am also writing letters to all of the co-sponsors of H.3777 to inform them of my concerns.

 

I wouldn't. There are already two members of the SCGA steering comittee feeling this out. Let them do the recon before we head into any kind of conflict or start something we can't win. I know you mean well.

 

X

Excuse me? You now know the issue. It has been 'felt out'. Its time to to take action. What do you see as the downside to WKHAZ speaking to his rep?

Link to comment

As I said there are two representatives of the SCGA (South Carolina Geocachers Association) that are trying to set up meetings right now. I've met and talked with both. I've cached a little with one. They are both educated and competent individuals. I am saying that if we all swamp the house with letters and calls that we could damage our cause more than help it. Most of us can't keep it together in the forums much less talk to a state official about something we truly and passionately believe in. From what I've witnessed in most threads, alot of us (myself included) lose it when we come up against even the tiniest little bit of someone having a different point of view.

 

I was not telling wkhaz not to. That's his right as an American and a resident of the state of South Carolina to contact and use any avenue possible to get answers from a representative of the House. They work for us. We pay their salaries. (Do you get paid as a House member? I would suppose you would.) Anyway, calm down.

 

By the way, I've learned more about the law just reading (the section of law that this would be covered under) the last couple of days than I knew my whole life. Some interesting stuff in there.

 

X

 

By the other way, do we have concrete proof that we now know what the problem is. No we do not. Wait. Be patient.

Edited by Clan X-Man
Link to comment
...By the other way, do we have concrete proof that we now know what the problem is. No we do not. Wait. Be patient.

The problem is the House Bill. Digging up information is a strategy to deal with the bill. There are many avenues available to deal with this. The one we have not done is advance planning for contengencies such as this. Which reminds me I need to follow up on that angle for the next time.

Link to comment
...By the other way, do we have concrete proof that we now know what the problem is. No we do not. Wait. Be patient.

The problem is the House Bill. Digging up information is a strategy to deal with the bill. There are many avenues available to deal with this. The one we have not done is advance planning for contengencies such as this. Which reminds me I need to follow up on that angle for the next time.

By problem I mean what originally started this whole mess. What did the legislator that started this see or hear, possibly second hand, that would make them even think of starting this.

 

It would be a lot better for us to have friends in the House rather than enemies in the future. This bill could become law. That is the first building block to a much bigger problem. If you don't think that our hobby could be outlawed altogether look at some of the laws that make absolutely no sense that are on the books in most of the United States. Do a search on Google for stupid laws and you will see what I mean.

 

Or we could dive in without looking and have the whole thing blow up in our collective faces.

 

I think I'll go start my own hole in the front yard like TeamCotati.

 

Edited for spelling. X

 

X

Edited by Clan X-Man
Link to comment

Hey X-Man.

 

Because of much wasted time and angry emails when I was involved in party politics, I don't do forums, but have no objection to having my reply reposted.

 

The bill, H3777, is currently in the Judiciary Committee.  At some time in the future, the committee will hold a hearing on the bill and public comment will be allowed.  If the committee acts favorably on the bill, it then returns to the floor of the house where it may be debated, amended, passed, rejected or referred back to committee.  Even if it passes the house, the senate will also have to pass the bill before it goes to the Governor for his signature.

 

A majority of bills die in committee.  This is because legislators often introduce a bill simply to prove to a consituent or group of constituents that they care.  Other bills fail to pass the full house despite being favorably referred by committee.  Others fail to pass the senate and some are vetoed by the Governor after passing both bodies.

 

One of this bill's prime sponsors happens to be my local representative.  I dropped her an email on the subject this evening and will call her office tomorrow to see if I can drop by for a face-to-face since I'll be working at Lake Murray tomorrow.

 

For now, there is no need to panic.  With a little luck, I'll be able to get the point across with one meeting, but I suspect that at some time in the future, we'll have to get a delegation of Geocachers to visit a committee meeting in Columbia.  If we could have a few law enforcement uniforms in the room at that time, we should have a slam-dunk.

 

In the meantime, I'd strongly recommend that SC geocachers use extreme discretion in hiding their caches.  This would include avoiding caches anywhere near graves, on public utilities such as lamp posts or power transformers, on bank teller machines or on any commercial property where the cacher does not have explicit permission from the owner or manager. 

 

I would also recommend discretion in naming or describing caches, especially those located in sensitive locations.  We live in an era where many folks appear to spend their lives waiting for someone to offend them.

 

This is not the end of the world for Geocaching in SC, but it is certainly a wake-up call for cachers to be more conscious of appearances.

 

Chuck (Waterbaron)

 

This is one of the individuals I refered to earlier. Guys, patience is a virtue. From what I gleaned from our first face to face meeting I trust this guy. Believe me. He and the other cacher I spoke of will represent us honorably to the best of their ability.

 

X

Link to comment

Instead of getting all up in arms over everything, we could do one of two things.

 

1- Let the people who are in positions to talk to people, talk to people

 

2- Or just suck it up and agree gravesites are now offlimits.

 

Writing letters is good when you feel you need to because no one will listen, but since there are people who have connections, let them explore that, or we could end up making a worse name for us.

 

Also the forum topic is NO WHERE NEAR CLOSE to right

 

The bill is NOT banning geocaching outright, just in certain locations if passed

Link to comment
...The bill is NOT banning geocaching outright, just in certain locations if passed...

Idaho has 50,000 identified cultural/historical sites. South Carolina has more. Many places you normally go too. As a land manager which is easier, tracking all those sites so you as a land manager can help cachers comply with the law, or just baning caching on all your lands so you don't have to mess with it?

 

The House Bill is merely the law. Each agency will in turn create rules on how to best implement it. The rules will err on the conservative side. Meaning making more areas "no zones".

Link to comment

Sounds like the Geocachers in SC have this under control. At this point we should wait and see what happens, once they define what the response from the Geocaching community should be they'll let us know. Chances are it will either be letters defending Geocaching or thanking them for dropping the bill.

 

Based on the most recent update some graves/headstones were vandalized and when the area was checked for damage a muggle found a cache. Then automatically assumed that Geoachers were responsible.

Link to comment

For what it is worth I got a response from the Department of Tourism.

 

Dear Mr. Shilt:

 

Thank you for your recent inquiry.  We are happy to learn of your plans to travel to the state of South Carolina and encourage you to do so.  Your concerns regarding geocaching and potential restrictions on this activity are important to us.  Thank you for making us aware of your personal concerns on this issue.  Please be assured that we will discuss this manner internally, and I will forward your email addressing your concerns to the key sponsor of this legislation immediately.

 

 

Thank you again for traveling to South Carolina.  You are always welcome.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

Phil Hamby

 

 

 

Phil Hamby, Coordinator of Legislative Affairs

South Carolina Department of Parks, Recreation & Tourism

1205 Pendleton Street, Suite 225

Columbia, South Carolina 29201

 

Link to comment
This is one of the individuals I refered to earlier. Guys, patience is a virtue. From what I gleaned from our first face to face meeting I trust this guy. Believe me. He and the other cacher I spoke of will represent us honorably to the best of their ability.

I have little doubt of their ability to be reasonable. However, I am a big fan of multi-front attacks.

 

It is great that you have a few people contacting the Rep. There is little downside to SC voters contacting their representatives to let them know that this is bad legislation. Often times, polticions they will be swayed by this sort of campaign, particularly if he/she does not have strong feelings about the piece of legislation.

Link to comment

We, as an organization, have no political clout or means to act as a unit to respond strongly to this issue . . . BUT, there are organizations with lobbies, capital, clout & connections to derail this issue, quickly.

 

Without the history, why would anyone go to Charleston, for example, and leave all of their money there in the hands of merchants & hotels - it is this history that is being targeted by the legislation - the very source of the revenues to the area.

 

Since SC (& Charleston, in particular) is so dependent upon tourist revenues, is there not a Tourism/Business/Recreation chamber, lobby or organization that represents those segments of business that would be interested in fighting a law that potentially hurts tourism & diminishes revenues?

 

Politicians can attack a small defensless organizations who have no recourse so that they appear rightous, enviromentally-sensitive and caring when it is all really about money & their own re-election . . . you only get their attention when THEIR capital or supporters are impacted. Send in the power lobbies that get them elected and the legislation will fade away.

Link to comment

I appreciate all of the efforts you guys in the low country are putting into this. I live in the same town as Loftis, but I'm not in his district. I have alerted the cachers I know in the Upstate.

 

As for mail templates and whether or not legislators read everything they receive, I do know that they tend to respond better to actual letters than to e-mail. It's much easier to delete.

Link to comment

I sure hope this can be resolved... My grandfather was from Union, SC and I have wanted to visit all my life. I know there is a lot of land in Oregon listed as historic or Archeologically significant so I can only imagine South Carolina.

 

I'm not sure how well organized South Carolina cachers are at this time, but now is the time to act. These are steps I would take

  • Educating local politicians by inviting them to events... make them see what geocaching is about.
  • If there are no CITO events planned it is time to adopt a local cemetery in need

Link to comment

I spoke with WaterBaron a little while ago and he said the Legislature is in recess this week and the commitee doesn't have any meeting scheduled for next week. He will be seeking to talk to Ms. Ceips soon to see what is going on and try to get this stopped.

 

If he can not get Ms. Ceips to redraw the bill, then the next step is to show up at the commitee meeting and be heard. We will be looking to gather a few respectable members of the community including a few LEO in uniform to make an appearance. I'm sure if it gets to this point, this is where it will be killed.

 

He mentioned that in the long run it will likely not become law.

 

My concern is the reason this bill was written in the first place. We need to find out and respond. What that response will be I'm not sure and won't know until we know the cause.

Link to comment

Are any of these state representatives freshmen, or up for re-election? <_<

 

In most legislatures, any member can propose anything, no matter if it makes rational sense and no matter if it has a ghost of a chance of passing, or of surviving a court challenge if it did pass. And some members will use that for political brownie-points, even if it makes them look like utter morons. "South Carolina's tax dollars at work...?" B)

 

Arizona Highways magazine has a special feature on geocaching as this month's online article at their web-site. A recently commissioned local magazine called xplor just featured it. Backpacker just did an article. Meanwhile, South Carolina's finest did this? "Wah, shoot fahr, Bertha, looky here ..." (spit) "... We'll show 'dem jeeo-cashers a thang or too about how we does things around heayh.." Yeah, give those august legislators a nice red star to wear around their necks ... where the colors, it would seem, will blend right in... Sheesh.

Edited by HIPS-meister
Link to comment

Anyone wanting to be notified of the status of this bill should send an e-mail to:

 

martinm@scstatehouse.net

 

Be sure to include your name, e-mail, phone number, and method you would like to be contacted (e-mail or phone). Also reference that this is for bill H3777 .

 

This will notify you of any changes in the bill (committee, etc.) and will keep us up to date from the state's perspective of what's going on.

 

--NetWatcher

Link to comment

Time to Get Organized

 

I worked in the legislature as a page and later as an administrative assistant for the SC Trial Lawyer's Association, a lobbying group, so I know a good bit about the process.

 

The process is by no means over after next week's commitee meeting, but it is an opportunity that should be taken full advantage of. that meeting is being held at 8 am on Wednesday morning at the Legislature in Columbia.

 

Given the time and distance, meetings will be needed in the Upstate, Midlands and Lowcountry before next week's committee meeting to coordinate a response. I’m afraid next month’s geocacher’s association meeting may come too late to address this issue. If this is still a live issue then, anything done now will provide a head start.

 

I will hold an informal meeting here in I’On at O'Brion's on this coming Monday to go over our options. A statewide meeting will take weeks to coordinate and there isn't time. Fortunately we can coordinate by email and cell phone. If the meetings were held at the same time, say 7 pm Monday, we could simply call each other on cell phones to stay on the same page.

 

Since time is short, I would recommend quick, informal meetings with cell phone coordination for 7 pm Monday evening. I leave it up to people elsewhere in the state to coordinate those. Later Monday evening, we can use the clayjar chat on these forums to share ideas and information.

 

:lol: I'll host the Charleston area meeting at O'Brion's Pub on 357 N. Shelmore Blvc., I'On Village, Mt. Plesant, SC 29464 at 7 pm on Monday, April 4 with a contact cell number of (843) 870-5299. I'm going to go on ahead and do that regardless, If nobody shows, I'll just chat with my neighbors. This will be an informal meeting to discuss strategies and lay the ground for formal action as soon as that can be coordinated.

 

After these meetings we should be able to use the Monday evening Clayjar chat on these forums to discuss this issue.

 

People should be collecting letters and emails from as many people opposed to this legislation as possible and run off a full set for each member of the committee to present to them at the meeting. Anything from a park or facility which encourages geocaching on their site would be particularly valuable.

 

My newest Cache, Hog Island Upgrade, on the new nature trail at Patriot’s Point gets 75% of its usage from tourists. Geocaching has a positive, economic impact for the state. Every hour a visitor spends in the area increases the chances of a purchase, meal or overnight stay. A few plastic containers under bushes does that a lot cheaper than civil war submarines, aquariums or other expensive attractions.

 

If anyone has a similar experience, printing out the logs and highlighting the out of state visitors, might impress this committee.

 

Wamr bodies, however, impress them more than anything else. Pack the room with mature, well behaved opposiiton in suits and ties with GPS units hanging around their necks and you'll have their attention.

 

This legislation probably originates from the SC DNR.

Edited by manjack
Link to comment

Try reading the first post, again:

A bill TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 16-17-605 SO AS TO DEFINE THE TERMS "GEOCACHE", "GEOCACHING", AND "LETTERBOXING", TO PROVIDE THAT IT IS UNLAWFUL TO ENGAGE IN GEOCACHING OR LETTERBOXING IN CEMETERIES, ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES, OR ON THE HISTORIC PROPERTIES OF THE STATE, AND TO PROVIDE A PENALTY.

 

The local reference relates to the region where one of the senators who has introduced this bill lives.

Edited by magellan315
Link to comment
:lol: Once again, politicians are out of step with the people they "represent". Geocaching is a great way to bring in people to a location, not to mention the rules of geocaching would benifit parks and localities. Definately contact your political types and don't let them get away with this!
Link to comment
This legislation probably originates from the SC DNR.

No, the state pretty much likes us as we've been pretty responsible in those areas up to this point.

 

I've spoken with Representative Ceips, the person who introduced the bill. At issue is specifically a series of caches that have you visit cache placed without permission in private cemeteries. I've already shot over a note to Hydee requesting more information on how to proceed.

Link to comment
This legislation probably originates from the SC DNR.

No, the state pretty much likes us as we've been pretty responsible in those areas up to this point.

 

I've spoken with Representative Ceips, the person who introduced the bill. At issue is specifically a series of caches that have you visit cache placed without permission in private cemeteries. I've already shot over a note to Hydee requesting more information on how to proceed.

How to proceed?

 

Private property without permission?

 

SBA?

 

sd?

Link to comment

unfortunately a lot of states are considering this. I think its awful. We are eco-conscious, friendly bunch looking for fun and entertainment with like minded people. I sent out letters about a bill regarding smog laws that would have put my classic car in the junk yard. I think we should check this out for our individual states and get on it before another of our freedoms is taken away.

Link to comment
This legislation probably originates from the SC DNR.

No, the state pretty much likes us as we've been pretty responsible in those areas up to this point.

 

I've spoken with Representative Ceips, the person who introduced the bill. At issue is specifically a series of caches that have you visit cache placed without permission in private cemeteries. I've already shot over a note to Hydee requesting more information on how to proceed.

Just lovely, rather than contact someone at GC.com or local Geocachers first and try to easily resolve the problem. Lets pass a law instead. I know that local Geocachers are working to resolve this, but I tend to lose my sense of humor over this sort of idiocy.

Edited by magellan315
Link to comment
How to proceed?

 

Private property without permission?

 

SBA?

Unfortunately, we've not been having much success getting problem caches archived even with photographic proof of activity that's beyond questionable. The SBAs just haven't been working. A note to Hydee seems as though it's what it takes to get a cache archived.

Link to comment
How to proceed?

 

Private property without permission? 

 

SBA?

Unfortunately, we've not been having much success getting problem caches archived even with photographic proof of activity that's beyond questionable. The SBAs just haven't been working. A note to Hydee seems as though it's what it takes to get a cache archived.

That's bizarre.

 

I too find it sad that instead of the landowner seeking prosecution on current laws (tresspassing for sure, possibly vandalism??) they seek to have new laws passed. However, I do not think it is the owners obligation to contact GC.com. They are not geocachers and the objects were placed on their property without permission.

 

This is why caches should be marked clearly, with contact information in or on the cache, and why permission should be obtained. I knew it would be a matter of time before the lack of permission would come back to bite us.

 

Where there any other comments by the Representative about this? Is this something that can be fixed?

 

sd

Link to comment

I sure would be interested to read the background as to why this is being considered. I can just see some dumb a** shoving a 1 litre lock and lock down the barrel of a civil war cannon or the like.

 

The irony of this is that Geocaching brings people to these places and generally leads to discovery, awareness and respect of history and or nature. Isn't the point of having Historical Sites to bring awareness of the past to those in the present and future?

 

I just placed a cache near (not in) a historical site here in British Columbia and I have already had comments like "Thank you for bringing us to the history of the area" from people who probably would never have gone there unless a cache was placed.

 

Xopster

Link to comment

We'll have an event cache meeting at O'Brion's pub in Mt. Pleasant, SC on Monday evening. Check the cache listings for full details. We hope to do some live chat and we'll post information afterwards.

 

Unfortunately, reason and evidence count for very little in SC politics. Counting noses makes all the difference.

 

It is important to understand that the members of the committees considering the bill are the best people to talk to. The sponsors have already made up their mind. Most of the traffic at my caches here in Mt. Pleasant are tourists, happily spending their money while hunting old ammo boxes and racking up $8 per night in accomidation taxes.

 

Because of a long tradition of burying artifacts at gravesites, people often dig up African American grave sites looking for ceramic bowls and other objects. Most of those things were looted out years ago and that tradition died out decades ago.. There is also a beliefe that there might be valuable slave tags in the grave (which would be highly unlikely in a rural cemetary). What these cemetaries need is what all rural historic sites need, someone who cares and who lives nearby. Without that vandalism and arson are inevitable over time. Often when you see a beat up old trailer near a historic site, the goal there is to create a place for someone to live who can keep an eye on property.

 

I would suspect that Goecaches actuallyr reduce the probabilty of vandalism, since nobody working over gravestones with a hammer wants to be seen by a guy with a GPS and his two kids. Anything which brings honest people to remote historic sites probably improves the chances that they'll be respected.

Edited by manjack
Link to comment
...

I too find it sad that instead of the landowner seeking prosecution on current laws (tresspassing for sure, possibly vandalism??) they seek to have new laws passed. However, I do not think it is the owners obligation to contact GC.com. They are not geocachers and the objects were placed on their property without permission.

 

This is why caches should be marked clearly, with contact information in or on the cache, and why permission should be obtained. I knew it would be a matter of time before the lack of permission would come back to bite us.

 

Where there any other comments by the Representative about this? Is this something that can be fixed?

 

sd

It's not tresspassing unless nobody is allowed there. If the entire issue isn't visitors but a dislike for the cache itself, that's best dealt with by the local cache group. They should have the direct knowledge and should have sought out the land manager.

 

That means they remove the cache on behalf of the land manager, and they do the same for any future caches.

Link to comment

Don't forget this angle: I take it SC has two houses - State Senate & House. If this bill passes the House, it'll go to the Senate and has to pass there too, right? Maybe you can also start working to head it off in that direction too. Best of luck in your efforts. :-)

Link to comment
...

I too find it sad that instead of the landowner seeking prosecution on current laws (tresspassing for sure, possibly vandalism??) they seek to have new laws passed. However, I do not think it is the owners obligation to contact GC.com.  They are not geocachers and the objects were placed on their property without permission.

 

This is why caches should be marked clearly, with contact information in or on the cache,  and why permission should be obtained.  I knew it would be a matter of time before the lack of permission would come back to bite us.

 

Where there any other comments by the Representative about this?  Is this something that can be fixed?

 

sd

It's not tresspassing unless nobody is allowed there. If the entire issue isn't visitors but a dislike for the cache itself, that's best dealt with by the local cache group. They should have the direct knowledge and should have sought out the land manager.

 

That means they remove the cache on behalf of the land manager, and they do the same for any future caches.

Land manager? It's a private cemetary. If it's private it's private. If you're going to place a cache, you better be d@mn sure that permission is not required and it is a public space.

 

If I was the average person and found a geocache on my land, why would *I* be responsible for contacting GC.com or a "Local cache group" ? I would very likely know nothing about geocaching. It's not my responsibility to contact the participants - just to contact the authorities.

 

A "local cache group" has no authority over MY private property and wouldn't have permission to go onto it to remove any caches.

 

sd

Link to comment
...Land manager? It's a private cemetary. If it's private it's private. If you're going to place a cache, you better be d@mn sure that permission is not required and it is a public space.

 

If I was the average person and found a geocache on my land, why would *I* be responsible for contacting GC.com or a "Local cache group" ? I would very likely know nothing about geocaching. It's not my responsibility to contact the participants - just to contact the authorities.

 

A "local cache group" has no authority over MY private property and wouldn't have permission to go onto it to remove any caches.

 

sd

Land manager is a univeral term to cover those who own property and those who manage it with authority given to them by the owner.

 

If public access is allowed then there is no issue with tresspassing. If public access is not allowed, then they need to follow the rules that would let them presecute. In both cases the laws needed don't relate to a container and they do already exist.

 

If the area appears to be one of public accomodation then it's fair game for a cache. Unless someone has specific knowledge otherwise which I would hope the local cache group has and can enforce.

 

As for it not being your responsiblity, if you as a land owner do nothing to protect your wishes and make them known. Then under the law you are giving permission. You are responsible because it is your land. The person who placed the cache is responsible because they placed it on your land.

 

I'm with you when it comes to not placing caches where they are not wanted.

Link to comment

I've been informed the cache owner had researched the properties and was told they were open to the public. While it might be officially open, it might be thought of as only open to certain people by the locals, and friends and family of those buried there.

 

You have to understand, this is The Deep South and there are still cultural sensitivities most of the rest of the nation doesn't have to deal with. I'm starting to think this is a case of a situation where the caches where perfectly legal, but people with vested interests in the properties didn't understand what is going on. "What are those white people doing going into a Black cemetery? They can't be up to no good."

 

So, really, as the story is coming out it, appears to be a case of a cultural conflict that could not be forseen by someone not familiar with these sensitivities. The cache owner has graciously archived the caches in question and has already removed many, the rest will be removed soon.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...