Slashdot Mirror


Geocaching Crackdown?

thejuggler writes "Some cities and counties are banning or considering banning geocaching in their parks. "It's good, clean, wholesome fun - just do it someplace else," said Brian Adams, chief of resource protection for the St. Croix National Scenic Riverway, which has banned geocaching. The geocaching.com website claims there are over 600 caches within 100 miles of the twincities."

56 of 464 comments (clear)

  1. likeness to litter by bluelip · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Althouh I enjoy 'geocaching', I can see their point. What's to seperate these caches from ordinary litter.

    --

    Yep, I never spell check.
    More incorrect spellings can be found he
    1. Re:likeness to litter by SnowDeath · · Score: 5, Informative

      Have you even ever read the rules, or gone a cache for that matter? Caches do *not* get buried, just covered in leaves or sticks or stones - usually in ammo boxes or tupperware, something insanely difficult for wildlife to open if it found it. But then again, since the rules state no leaving food, wildlife is never a problem.

      I have only been on 5 caches so far, but we have *never* left a trace that we were there, save for a prize exchage and a entry in the log book.

      Your argument is insulting and just plain ignorant

    2. Re:likeness to litter by r00t_ur_b0x · · Score: 3, Informative

      What separates caches from litter is that most caches are out of the way from common areas and well-maintained. Litter is on the main paths and carelessly dropped by those with no respect for the areas they are visiting. As a side note, geocachers often pick up litter on the way to and from caches. (Check out the 'cache in, trash out' policy on the webpage).

    3. Re:likeness to litter by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Man I wish I had the points to mod you up. Does anyone read Geocaching.com? These parks folks do have a point about paths being worn to the caches. Moving them once a year would probably help prevent this. Also, putting them near a path or almost on a path would be good too. Also, photo caches are nice too (just take a pic of yourself and of the GPS at the cache.....) and up load it to the web. Geocaching reminds me a bit of ham radio. Everyone searching for a contact(the cache). Sometimes they are hard to find (rare DX). Sometimes not (chatting on a repeater...). If there are ANY Geocacher's that leave trash and mess up the area, I would be surprised. Geocaching has a ethos like camping. Campers regularly leave their stuff on the table and stuff at the site and almost noone steals there stuff (in 20+ years of camping, I have never had anything stolen in a campground). Campers also usually leave the area as good as or better then it was when they got there. Now same as with Camping, there are BAD apples. Just deal with it and let us use the park. Noone else does!

      --

      Gorkman

    4. Re:likeness to litter by TamMan2000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What's to seperate these caches from ordinary litter.

      Why not come up with park approved geocache containers that are standardized and therefor obviosly not litter?

      --
      "I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
    5. Re:likeness to litter by jridley · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Obviously spoken by someone who has no f'in idea what he's talking about.

      Geocaches are not buried, just placed and usually covered with a few sticks. Properly placed, they are difficult to see unless you are looking straight at them, and even then they blend in. Most people use ammo boxes, or tupperware painted black or brown.

      The rules state that the landscape is NOT to be disturbed, including when hunting, as much as possible. No food of any kind is to be in the cache, to avoid animals getting into them. Also, the "Cache in, trash out" campaign urges cachers to bring a bag and carry out trash that you see. My kids and I typically carry out one or two grocery bags of trash every trip. I've never seen ANY evidence that cachers have left any garbage; most of the stuff we find is the sort of thing that partying kids would dump.

    6. Re:likeness to litter by jridley · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've never seen a single cache that could be mistaken for litter. An ammo box or well sealed tupperware container painted black, hand lettered with "Dave's XYZ cache #5 - geocaching.com", with the standard notice placed inside explaining to an accidental discoverer what geocaching is, and giving a name and phone number for authorities to call if the cache is in any way in violation of rules so that the placer can reclaim and remove the cache, placed 20 feet off the trail, in the crotch of a tree and covered with sticks, is not what litter typically looks like.

      I've not seen any evidence that any cacher has littered. Most times you can tell the cachers on the trails because they have a bag full of litter that they have PICKED UP and are carrying out of the park. My kids and I pull out more trash every time we visit a cache than any 50 careless people are likely to leave behind.

    7. Re:likeness to litter by st0rmshad0w · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not going to get too deep into this whole thing but I suspect if someone were to find an ammo box concealed under leaves or stone in a public park around here it wouldn't be long before the bomb squad boys were called in.

      Yeah, it sounds like fun, but after terror attacks and sniper whackos, people are kindof twitchy around here.

    8. Re:likeness to litter by ColdGrits · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's OK then.

      Because as we know, all ammo caches are clearly marked "Ammo" on all sides, and nobody would ever think to hide a bomb in an ammo container with the word "geocache" written all over it!

      --
      People should not be afraid of their governments - Governments should be afraid of their people.
    9. Re:likeness to litter by zoward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've found about 45 geocaches so far. It's been my experience that most caches seem to have a "shelf life" of about a year-2 years. After that, they can be lost, be stolen, or all of the geocachers in the area have already found it and it falls into disuse. Caches in our area (the northeastern US) typically follow a trail and then are hidden somehwhere 100-500 feet off the trail. Since it's rare that cachers will leave the trail at the same spot to search for the cache, I've never seen a cache where heavy traffic has created its own trail to the cache, except in the snow, and even then most cachers I know will deliberately create extra footprints to mislead later cachers from the path to the cache.

      Generally, cachers are a benevolent bunch of people, and I would think that anything that gives the parks and byways extra foot traffic is a good thing.

      However, along the lines of this story, the group that maintains the Beaver Brook Reservation in Hollis, NH asked the local geocachers to remove all caches from the reservation. Thisi s in a place that is a haven for dirt and mountain bikers who take a much heavier tool on the trails than geocachers ever could! One of their arguments was that the caches are hidden in the woods off trail, so the cachers go tromping though the woods and disturb the local flora and fauna in search of the cache, whereas the bikers stay on the trails.

      This never seemed to be a problem in the days of letterboxing. I guess geocaching has become a victim of its own success :-(.

      --
      "Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?"
  2. They do have a point, I suppose by Hittite+Creosote · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Naturally, the headline is a bit of an exaggeration of the article - only some parks are talking about banning it outright, and they do have a point - some of the material being left is unsuitable, large numbers of people traipsing to the same point causes erosion, etc. But if the caches are moved regularly, and only suitable material is left, then it wouldn't be a problem - except who would regulate it?

    1. Re:They do have a point, I suppose by Azghoul · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, we need a government agency to tell us what we can leave in a cache.

      Aye carumba!

      The parks certainly have a point, but I suspect eduction of your average geocacher would be much more useful. I mean, there's no agency regulating what people can leave behind when they go on a hiking trip, is there? It's common sense and common courtesy more than anything else.

      I suspect that geocaching.com might do a better job of educating people as to what's appropriate for a cache (ie, balloons = bad for the most part).

    2. Re:They do have a point, I suppose by (trb001) · · Score: 3, Insightful

      there's no agency regulating what people can leave behind when they go on a hiking trip, is there?

      Technically, I think there is. Most parks have fines for littering, and under the letter of the law geocaching is nothing more than intentional littering (leaving non-natural items). It's not a problem now because it's so new and caches are supposed to be hard to find, which means the average tourist won't be bothered by them. It still is, however, another form of littering.

      Don't get me wrong, I'm dying to buy a hand held GPS and try this out, there are two sites within 5 miles of my house that I want to explore, but I can certainly understand the parks' attitudes.

      --trb

  3. Geocaching is Fun! by PerlGuru · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have geocached for a while now. It seems like it has changed though, and is attracting a much wider following. When I moved to the Charleston area two years ago, there were about 20 caches nearby. Now we have 243. With some many more people involved, it can create a lot of traffic. The best places for caches are off the beaten path where they are unlikely to be disturbed by people who may have ill-intentions. This is precisely where the traffic hurts the most. I haven't read the article yet, still can't get it to load, but as someone who loves spending times outdoors, I'm not sure where I stand on this. It's a fun hobby, but with too many people not being cautious about thier impact on the surroundings, it could be not that great for the park or area the cache is in.

    -Michael

  4. geocaching? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Doesn't this have to do with *saving* the parks? If someone slashdots a park (say, trampling nature areas), wouldn't it be nice to have a cache?

  5. This is a great idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is a great idea, most people have become so hard-wired to their televisions, their computers, and their video games, that we as a human race are beginning to forget the natural beauty in the world. We are shown on television that big buildings, 8 lane highways, and sprawling suburbs are things of marvel or beauty, just watch the discovery cluster if you dont believe me. Many times we hear about park representatives trying to get people into their parks so they dont lose funding or become development areas. Now they are becoming upset that people are visiting their parks? make up your mind!

    just my several cents

  6. Obvious solution by kinnell · · Score: 5, Funny

    The cities should just list all their public litter bins as geocaches. That way, the geocachers can have their fun, there is nothing left lying around spoiling beauty spots, and if they're lucky, they won't have to empty their bins so often.

    --
    If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
    1. Re:Obvious solution by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The obvious solution is to stay home and watch tv, as opposed to doing new things and thinking of new ideas. Alternatively, if you must get out, then go to a mall of corporate megastores. When you go into a park to geocache, you are not doing your part to Consume and watch ads.

      --
      The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
  7. it's not my kind of hobby, but... by sweeney37 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Robert Sime, a Richfield dad, takes his 4-year-old daughter out about twice a month. He said parks should adjust to what the public sees as legitimate use. "When volleyball came along, they all put in courts for that," he said.

    This is one of the most insightful comments in the whole article. Instead of trying to fight the geocachers they should be helping them to establish the cache sites. The park would be able to create a more terrain friendly cache site, and in turn they would get more visitors.

    Isn't this the kind of visitor you'd like in your park?

    "Ninety percent of us pick up bottles and cans, whatever we find. It's part of the game," she said.

    1. Re:it's not my kind of hobby, but... by dirk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Doesn't that defeat part of the purpose of caching? The idea is to hide the cache, and you need to use a GPS to find it. If parks set up nice "caching areas", then anyone can come along and find the cache, as it must be in that area. Part of the fun of geo-caching is finding the hidden prize that most people don't know is there.

      --

      "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
    2. Re:it's not my kind of hobby, but... by rworne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Who's to say the cache sites need to be obvious or posted?

      The park ranger can know the locations of the approved cache sites and visitors need not know about them. Just a posted sign saying to contact the ranger before leaving or moving an existing cache. That way the ranger knows the exact location of each cache and everyone's happy.

      Either do that, or paint big black blotches on the park maps stating "spoiler alert".

      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
  8. What about virtual caching? by vasqzr · · Score: 3, Interesting






    Many times you are not searching for an object left by someone else, but you are looking for a static object, such as a tombstone.

    As long as you are looking for a virtual cache, are you okay?




    1. Re:What about virtual caching? by ch-chuck · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That's what my last adventure was - finding the site of a WWII B25 bomber crash in the blue ridge mountains. I have hiked up that mountain many times, and /never/ realized that a debris field with airplane parts, rusty engines, prop hubs, etc were just a few hundred yards off the 'official' trail untill a geocacher pointed it out. They just don't tell you these things at the ranger station!

      That was a rough hike.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  9. What about the trails? by MongooseCN · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One problem with geocaching I see is that eventually trails will be created to caches far out in the woods. People always take the route starting from the nearest trail and the path of least resistance through the woods. This means that if enough people goto this same cache, a path will be worn in the woods. Once a path is there, what's the point of a GPS? You follow the path right to the cache. You can't move the cache obviously so what do you do? Perhaps people can show some sportsman ship and pick random places to start their trek to the cache.

    1. Re:What about the trails? by trikberg · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Once a path is there, what's the point of a GPS? You follow the path right to the cache. [...] Perhaps people can show some sportsman ship and pick random places to start their trek to the cache.

      What's with the GPS devices? How hard is it to input some coordinates and go where the arrow points? Can't people show some sportsmanship and use a good oldfashioned map?

      I'm somewhat serious here; it's all about how hard you want it to be. Some people might enjoy just walking along paths with GPS, some may want to go where no man has gone before with only a map.

      Just in case someone is going to do the old "I remember when we didn't have any maps, and it was uphill both ways, in the snow, against the wind"; it's really not that hard to use a map and you really should know how to use one when your GPS fails. Any normal 12 year old should be able to learn how to navigate using only a map, I know I did at that age.

      --
      This post is free (as in cheese in a mousetrap).
    2. Re:What about the trails? by SomeoneGotMyNick · · Score: 4, Funny

      This means that if enough people goto this same cache, a path will be worn in the woods

      On that train of thought, I would suppose the real problem would eventually be the SUV owners with built in GPS systems wearing tire tracks to the cache spot and inadvertantly running over hikers along the way.

      Then again, at least they would be using the SUV as an off-road vehicle for once.

    3. Re:What about the trails? by harrkev · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It sounds like you might like orienteering. Check out www.orienteering.org.

      I have done some geocaching, and it was not challenging enough. In orienteering, you have only a map and compass (in a serious competition, having a GPS is grounds for disqualification), and have to run around in the woods and find 6-10 flags. Attached to the flags are punches that you use to punch a card (proof that you were there).

      People who are serious about orienteering actually run. But being a typical slashdotter, I can't run that far ;)

      It is likely that there is an orienteering club near you. If you are in the US, check out www.us.orienteering.org and click on the "clubs" link on the left.

      It is also cheap! A compass is under $10 at Wal-Mart. In central Florida, one event is only $6.00 (including a map). Don't forget a bottle of water! And from personal experience, check yourself for ticks when you are done.

      --
      "-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
  10. A reasonable reaction by mblase · · Score: 4, Informative

    This isn't the first time someone's complained about geocaching in public-owned lands. Ideally, geocaching wouldn't produce any problems -- you locate the stash, extract it, exchange one item for your own, and re-stash it -- except that the fun of geocaching comes when you have to hunt a bit. That sometimes means digging up the ground, climbing (and re-climbing) trees, or otherwise moving or stressing things that shouldn't be constantly moved or stressed.

    The Petrified Forest National Park in the U.S. doesn't allow visitors to pick up bits of petrified wood off the ground, asking them to buy it from the gift shop instead, because it would eventually lead to the removal of all the small samples that make the place what it is. Imagine geocachers roaming and digging all around that place.

    Sometimes, preserving natural beauty means inconveniencing the same visitors who've come to see it. I don't consider this unreasonable, since there's still thousands of acres of land, public and unowned, that geocachers can still use. They may not be as scenic to get to, that's all.

    1. Re:A reasonable reaction by Pastey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Though I see your point and agree to it to some extent, places like the Petrified Forest are a special case. I for one think this "hand's off nature" attitude thats made it's way into popular thinking is foolish. In the long run it's actually self defeating, since insulating the public from experiencing it in a personal way leads to a lack of appreciation for it IMHO.

      I'm old enough to remember a time when you were allowed off the trails in most parks. I have many fond memories of exploring, discovering and having the thrill of just maybe getting lost in the woods (hey, I was a kid ;-] ). Those memories, along with teaching from my parents to be responsible and not destructive gave me a great love and respect for nature. Things have changed drastically now, and not for the better.

      Now every park is like going to a theme park. Stand in line here. Walk here. You can touch this but not that. God forbid that you TOUCH that tree or plant, you may hurt it! Don't you DARE feed that squirrel or bird, you're disrupting nature!

      Uh, pardon me, but 90% of the time this is utter bulls**t. Granted you'll have your small share of idiots ruining things for everyone else, but shutting down access for the common man/woman/child is NOT the way to solve it. Even with limited access the fools still find ways to litter, destroy and generally ruin a beautiful location.

      So what is the answer? Well, IMHO the more people are connected to a place the more they will care about it. Give people the education and reason to care and much of the policing will be handled by the public itself.

      Case in point: there is still one metro park in my area that allows people to go off trail to a long stretch of river. This is by *far* the most litter-free area of park I've seen. Since the river is wide and shallow you consistently see people fishing, parents with kids walking the shallows looking for crawdads, and people in general just enjoying actually EXPERIENCING nature - not just staring at it from behind a fence or barrier. You also consistently see people walking the bank and riverbed picking up any litter they see, since they know that THEY might be the next one to step on that piece of broken glass or bottle cap. I've even seen a fisherman take some teenage kids to task for throwing their litter on the ground. He talked to them in a friendly way and they actually listened to him and picked up their trash, joking around with him.

      I'm not saying just open everything up and let people do whatever they please in our parks, I'm just saying that this "hands off" way of thinking is getting too strong. Nature is not some delicate construct that will fall over and shatter at the least little nudge from big bad mankind. It's been my experience that most people I've spoken to that think this way have an inate dislike of mankind to one degree or another, whether they realize it or not.

    2. Re:A reasonable reaction by wass · · Score: 4, Informative
      Don't you DARE feed that squirrel or bird, you're disrupting nature!

      This statement makes me doubt the sincerity of the rest of your arguments about loving nature and respecting the wilderness and wildlife.

      I have been to many national and state parks and feeding animals is universally a bad thing. The main reason is because the more you feed animals the less dependent they become on their abilities to forage and search for food, and hence can starve during the winter months.

      Regarding birds and metro parks, did you ever notice that groups of birds congregate around park benches when you eat? This is a direct consequence to them getting fed by others and hoping to get fed again.

      Another and more important reason, though, is that once you feed wildlife, the animals learn that those curious humanoid bipeds will tend to give them food. They start approaching humans more often to get food. And sometimes becoming agressive.

      This is particularly destructive with predatory animals like bears. In some forests around here in the Northeast, for some unknown reason people feed the bears. Said bears then approach other people, sometimes agressively. What the original feeders don't know is that the park rangers must destroy bears that do this. So, if you feed bears or other agressive animals, you are actually contributing to their destruction.

      This isn't just with bears, it's a common case with deer too. Have you ever seen a deer painted bright orange? This means the deer has agressively approached people before trying to get food. It's painted orange because if it happens again then the rangers have to destroy the deer.

      So that's why it's important not to feed the wildlife, because you really are changing their feeding behavior. And since you were unaware of this it makes me doubt the sincerity of the rest of your comment.

      --

      make world, not war

  11. Short-lived by gerf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As it is i see this as a short lived sport. Right now, it's at the fun stage, where people enjoy it, trust it, and relatively few people are doing it.

    What happens though, when it's wildly popular? We'll have some incident where that lunchbox cache is booby trapped, and some kid gets hurt. Then, the news will jump all over it as some dangerous unregulated, unapproved event on public property. And of course, you'll have to think of the children. Blah.

    I'd like to try it, if i had the $, and the caches in the area, but alas, i don't.

    Perhaps if they try to move it to areas in the country, along rivers, or along regular hiking and biking trails? You could label each cache on the net as a drive, walking, or bike riding cache. These are just some of my own suggestions. I declare them open source and free, do what you will with them. Good luck to them, if this turns out to be a niche, even better. :P

  12. What a tool by Scutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They allow this guy to speak on behalf of the park administration?

    "It's good, clean, wholesome fun -- just do it someplace else."

    Translation:

    "Good, clean, wholesome fun has no place in our state and national parks."

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
  13. Contact: Brian Adams @ 715-483-3284 x 629 by ddawdy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Contact: Brian Adams, Chief, Resource Protection @ 715-483-3284 x 629 Please voice your opinion to Brian for banning geocaching after admitting "It's good, clean, wholesome fun..."

    1. Re:Contact: Brian Adams @ 715-483-3284 x 629 by boogy+nightmare · · Score: 4, Funny

      he was an ex geocacher, back in the summer of 69.

      groan.. OMG

      --
      Kingdom of Loathing (www.kingdomofloathing.com) Addicted is me
  14. Let's see them ban virtual caching by jridley · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There's a type of cache that's becoming very popular, called a "virtual cache." Nothing is stored on the site, it's just a coordinate, and a clue as to what you're supposed to find there. I'd like to see them ban that. What are they going to do, ban GPS units?

    There have been a few cases of serious damage caused by cachers. In one instance, a cache was placed within 10 feet of a teepee ring, which is considered a sensitive archaeological site. If you've seen how the ground gets trampled around a cache, you'd see how this could be a problem. I can certainly understand the park officers being upset that someone posted a "please trample the grass" sign on such a site.

    I do think it's a BIT hypocritical though; the public parks are always aching to increase flow through the park to keep their budgets, but apparently they just want people to come in the gate, get the headcount, eat a picnic out of their trunk and leave. When those people start exploring, they get upset.

    OTOH, I have seen geocachers that have no interest in exploring. They beeline straight to the coordinates, tramping anything in the way, do their logging, and tromp straight out. But many of us spend an afternoon checking out the trails while we're there, which is exactly why the parks are (supposed to be) there.

    Maybe the former types of cachers should take up benchmark hunting instead.

  15. The article by skillet-thief · · Score: 4, Informative

    Someone said the site was /.ed... Not for me, so here's the artcle:

    MINNESOTA: GPS treasure hunt under fire
    BY BOB SHAW
    Pioneer Press

    Ian Stevens checks his GPS unit, as rain drips off the end of his ponytail.

    The GPS arrow points to the east, and Stevens begins another session of geocaching -- a sport like a high-tech scavenger hunt -- in Cottage Grove's Ravine Park.

    Three park officials walk up. Will they kick him out?

    Not today. The developing friction between geocachers and park officials doesn't materialize.

    "Did I hear you say you were geocaching? You are the first one I have seen here," said parks manager Mike Polehna, who seems intrigued. "There's no problem as long as you aren't disturbing the natural areas of the park."

    But officials in other parks, faced with an onslaught of geocachers, are scrambling to develop restrictions. Recently, St. Croix National Scenic Waterway in Wisconsin announced a ban on geocaching, and other parks are considering lesser restrictions.

    Whatever they decide, they have no choice but to deal with it. Geocaching didn't exist a few years ago, but now, according to the official geocaching Web site, there are more than 600 caches within 100 miles of the Twin Cities.

    The sport depends on two new technologies: the Internet and handheld GPS units, which use satellite signals to show the user the precise longitude and latitude of their location.

    The geocachers search for a nearby cache on the Web site, record the longitude and latitude of their prize, and then use GPS locators to get within a few yards of the caches. Usually, the caches are in plain sight or under twigs or leaves -- never buried in dirt.

    Caches contain such things as trinkets, souvenirs or coins. Searchers are free to take or leave what they like. They then sign into the logbooks.

    At home, they record their work on the Web site. Online conversations develop between finders and placers of geocaches.

    But it's not for everyone.

    "My husband thinks it's the most moronic sport ever," said Nola Cutts, co-chairwoman of the state Geocaching Association, who goes geocaching with her children twice a week. "But he's into fly fishing, so I guess we all have our own moronic sports."

    The group was started, she said, "to educate parks departments about what geocaching is and to show them we are not evil people tearing up the parks.

    "Ninety percent of us pick up bottles and cans, whatever we find. It's part of the game," she said.

    Cutts, 43, of Anoka, takes several of her five children when she goes geocaching. "It gets the kids outdoors, away from TV," said Cutts. "We see wildlife. We talk."

    Robert Sime, a Richfield dad, takes his 4-year-old daughter out about twice a month. He said parks should adjust to what the public sees as legitimate use. "When volleyball came along, they all put in courts for that," he said.

    The sport even attracts geo-tourists. Jonathan Gorton, a 43-year-old Milwaukee man who says he has a condition like muscular dystrophy, visits the Twin Cities "because we have pretty much picked Milwaukee clean. We found 428 caches."

    That kind of fanaticism bothers some park officials, who say geocaching leads to geotrashing.

    They don't want anything left behind in parks.

    They worry that hundreds of people tramping through their woods will damage plants and habitat.

    "It's good, clean, wholesome fun -- just do it someplace else," said Brian Adams, chief of resource protection for the St. Croix National Scenic Riverway, which has banned geocaching.

    Earlier this year, he and park officials were startled to learn of several geocache sites in their park. On one site, said Adams, balloons were left. "That's not a good thing. Waterfowl and birds eat brightly colored things," said Adams.

    In Minnesota, other park officials don't express such vocal opposition.

    "It gets people outdoors, which is kind of neat," s

    --

    Congratulations! Now we are the Evil Empire

  16. Whats wrong with..... by Cackmobile · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Going for a good old fashion bushwalk/hike. All you need is a map and some water etc. No expensive equipment. You don't need a goal to marvel in the beauty of nature. Make that your goal to hike to somewhere new and beautiful like a secluded waterfall where you can go for a swim or a big hill with a view. HOw many of the geocaches actually stop to look at the enviroment they are walking through.

    While parks rangers are alwas trying to get people to the parks it ahs to be the right tyoe of people. 50,000 people to a park is good but not if they are the kind that trash the place. Like the 2 guys on jet skis on Sydney harbour who were rounding up the penguins and running over them. THis was after the penguins had returned for the frist time in 50 years or something.

    --
    -- Karma Karma Karma Karma, Karma Chameleon - Boy George
  17. These are the same sorts of idiots that ban bikes by smartin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While allowing horses and stating that "mountain bikes are distructive, cause erosion and take up too much room on the trails."

    Parks are for everyone and the park authorities need to learn to adapt and accomodate.

    --
    The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
  18. fighting ignorance by r00t_ur_b0x · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My dad and I both enjoy geocaching. In an effort to increase its popularity in our area, we have placed caches in local parks and other scenic places. One of our ideas was a multicache of all the Civil War forts in our county (there are 6). Two of them are on National Park land. We requested permission to place caches there, and after not hearing anything back for about a month, we placed the caches in inconspicuous areas in the parks. For a few months, we read logs of people who were really enjoying the caches and most of them remarked on how they never even knew about the sites before geocaching. Then things turned sour.

    We started reading logs of people being harassed by park rangers. Some reported the park rangers about to arrest the geocachers for stepping off the path. We soon received an e-mail from a NPS official telling us that we were breaking the law by leaving the caches in the park. In the e-mail he specifically mentioned that geocachers dig up earth to find caches (all the caches were above ground) and that they tear up property and litter. None of these statements are true. We had to sneak in to get the caches back without getting arrested ourselves (apparently the park rangers were on the lookout for us).

    How do you fight such ignorance? We sent back logs of people saying how much they enjoyed the areas and never knew of their existance before the caches were placed along with letters explaining the 'cache in, trash out' policy of geocaching, but to no avail. Any ideas where to go from here?

  19. Drama, Drama, Drama by Saxton · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article is heavily drama. I am a geocacher that knows two of the people mentioned in the article. When they say "Three park officials walk up. Will they kick him out? Not today," they're referring to Washington County Park Officials that not only allow geocaching, but promote it as well. Drama, Drama, Drama...

    Nola Cutts, mentioned in the article, said this:

    "LOL -- You know what? I talked for the better part of an hour with this reporter about my philosophy of "leave no trace" and my "trash out" activities and the progress MnGCA [Minnesota Geocaching Association] was making with having people pick up garbage on the trails and how I thought geocaching was environmentally friendly in that regard..... You have all heard this from me before

    Toward the end of the interview we were JOKING about how my husband hates to geocache and how I hate to fly fish. So what quote does he use, my speech about recycling or fly fishing? AAAAKKKKK!"

    They chose to make an almost faticious battle between the parks and the unknown techno-nature-hippies instead of talking about how interesting Geocaching is, and not only that, but most Geocachers that I know of in the Twin Cities, and I know that most with the Minnesota Geocaching Association also help clean up city, county and state parks during caching trips. I'm dissapointed the article was even made, and even more so that it's on Slashdot!!!

    The reporter failed to mention that the MN DNR is working on a plan for Geocaching in State Parks as well.

    On a final note, that is my visi.com they found mentioned in the 2nd to last paragraph. ;-)

    Reference URLs:

    Thread about article with the MN Geocaching Association:
    http://mngca.org/forum/viewtopic.php ?t=219

    Thread about relations with MN DNR with the MN Geocaching Association:
    http://mngca.org/forum/viewtopic.php ?t=108

    Cache that was visited in the article:
    http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_det ails.aspx? ID=44584

    Ian Stevens' Geocaching Profile (King Boreas) - the main cacher in the article - also an interesting note that he has *placed* more caches than any other cacher:
    http://www.geocaching.com/profile/default .asp?A=11 922

    -s4xton

    --
    My name is Aaron Landry, and I approve this message.
  20. Cache In - Trash Out by pbemfun · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is a saying with geocachers called "Cache In - Trash Out". Basically, it means that whenever you go geocaching, you're supposed to leave the park better than when you came (ie. picking up trash). There is even a day for this.

    I know some parks in my area that have become usuable because of this. This guy needs to get a clue and figure out that geocaching is not ruining parks.

  21. BRIAN ADAMS ??? by rigau · · Score: 4, Funny

    Didn't you guys see his name? It is obvious why he is against geocaching. As a child he left the city to escape the constant taunts and comparisons to the other Brian Adams. However someone found out his dark secret and left a copy of the Robin Hood movie soundtrack in the geocache inside of his park ranger office. Needless to say he was traumatized by the event.

  22. Bizarre by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "They worry that hundreds of people tramping through their woods will damage plants and habitat."

    Maybe someone should point out to these people that the idea for a park is _for humans to use it_. Now, it's certainly true that you don't want people to use it in such a way as to cause unnecessary damage, but building a park then worrying that people will go there is moronic, to say the least. It often seems to me that "conservationism" has gone so far that the people in charge are forgetting _why_ they're supposed to be conserving these places.

  23. The dichotomy of conservation by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1. - We must preserve these lands for future generations (of humans).

    2. - Humans aren't allowed in these lands. Humans should stay in concrete boxes, close to the center of urban areas. Any other behavior is sprawl.

  24. Grounds = Yet Another Phoney Terrorism Alert by infonography · · Score: 3, Insightful
    One of the favorite old tricks of the Soviet spy networks was to do a variation of GeoCaching called a Dead Drop.

    People would go to secret locations and leave messages and spy related items, never to return. Their contacts would then come at a totally different time and pick up said items.

    Geo Caching would provide far to many 'False Positives' to the Keystone Kops chasing terror suspects.

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  25. Please clarify park versus preserve by jolshefsky · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This is something that bugs me every time. To me there are social parks, nature parks, and preserves. In a social park, you go have a picnic and play frisbee--erosion and general wear is part of the deal. In a nature park, you generally hike and observe--it is not a park to be used, but to be seen, so erosion and wear is a strong consideration. Finally, in a preserve, you're trying to avoid all erosion while still allowing people to witness natural wonders.

    In my opinion, all local parks are social parks. I was furious when they banned mountain biking (all parks in Monroe County, NY--near Rochester, NY) but still allowed horses. If erosion was the issue, then it's not a social park, and you should treat it as a nature park and only allow people on foot (or equivalent.)

    The root cause is that we need to determine the purpose of our parks. Once the definitions are established, the allowable and not allowable behaviors become clear. The short answer for now is that if there's barbeques or a frisbee golf course, you can geocache; if there's a sign-in sheet and dedicated nature paths, you can't.

    --
    --- Jason Olshefsky

    Karma: Poser (mostly affected by adding this line long after everyone else did)

  26. I decided long ago... by uptownguy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I decided long ago it was important to remember that journalism is not historical research. It is not really concerned with accuracy of quotes or with getting the story right. Perhaps only in rare instances will you have a Jayson Blair actually making things up. But perhaps not... I know for a fact that every single time I have ever been quoted in a newspaper article, the quote has contained substantial errors of the, "That's not what I said" and my face turning red sort. I also know that almost any mainstream news report about any project/technology/hobby of mine that I am know a lot about gets it wrong every time .

    I guess I am willing to conclude that if:

    1. I have been misquoted 100% of the time


    2. Every story on something I KNOW something about gets it wrong


    ...then it is fair to assume that MOST stories get it wrong MOST of the time. It isn't that I am cynical. I just don't think the media/journalists are in the business of telling the truth. They want to entertain. They want to sell. OK, well, noted. But if you want facts, you are aren't going to get them from a newspaper or channel 9.

    (PS: You are in charge of visi.com?! Wow... Personal aside to Saxton(34078) ... I've been with visi since 1996 and I've never had anything but exceptional service, prompt and accurate, with warm fuzzy feelings thrown in. Well, except for two weeks ago when they turned off the mail forwarding to two of the shell account servers without notifying anyone and I had like 50 friends/family/colleagues getting unable to send me email for 2 weeks... but other than that hiccup, it has been GREAT!!!)
    --


    I would have to say that explosives are the most abused technology in all of history.
  27. Geocaching incident by AIXman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work on an air force base. One day a few months ago, I heard that traffic was backed up going out of one of the gates that is near a freeway overpass.

    Someone had reported that a person had left a suspicious package near the overpass.

    They closed the gate, called out the bomb squad, cavalry, etc., only to find that the suspicious package was a geocache.

    So be careful where you place your geocache, consider who might be watching and what conclusions they might jump to.

  28. My perspective as a geocacher... by ClayJar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've now been geocaching for over two years. In that time, I've learned more about the environment and *done* more about the environment than I had done in the previous 24 years of my life. Geocaching is directly responsible for that.

    Thanks to what I've learned geocaching, when I go on hikes with friends, I'm the person imploring them to stay on the trails (*especially* if the trail is wet and muddy, since walking around the puddle will only make it wider). I've taught several people that bringing a canvas sack and trash bag along on a hike makes picking up litter a breeze.

    One example: I was out in the Henderson Swamp area of the Atchafalaya basin area of Louisiana last weekend. While out there, I picked up approximately 13 pieces of floating litter (depends on what you count... I counted the two plastic wrappers individually). Why did I spend my valuable personal watercraft time and gas on cleaning up a couple miles of litter along I-10 over the swamp? Because I learned to do it from CITO (Cache In, Trash Out) and geocaching. Geocaching has made me a more nature-conscious person... it'd be a shame to ban it more. (Note: In places like, say, Yellowstone near Old Faithful, I would be the first person to vote for a geocaching ban, but in, say, Baton Rouge parks... that'd be counter-productive.)

    Incidentally, I learned nature from geocaching, and I learned software rights from Linux. I've spent most of my free time for the last half-year developing an application for geocaching... alas, there are not enough Linux-loving application programmers who are also geocachers, and so a native Linux port isn't forthcoming, unfortunately... maybe one day...

  29. Park Ranger and Software developers by geekoid · · Score: 4, Funny

    Software Developer "This would be a great job if it wasn't for the user"

    Park Ranger "This would be a great job if it wasn't for the visitors"

    Software Developer "Look at all those bugs"
    Park Ranger "Look at all those bugs"

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  30. Not all caches are in parks by TClevenger · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Not all caches have to be in sensitive areas or in parks. One of my favorites was a "microcache" in Tracy, CA--basically an Altoids tin with magnets glued to the bottom and a rubber band to hold it closed. It was stuck to the inside top front panel of a newspaper box offering free realty ads. It was challenging to find, it was in an urban setting, and if the box was taken away, you're only out an Altoids tin, golf pencil and logbook.

    Tim

  31. Next,,,"No one goes to national parks" by jeffx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just a few years ago there was a big complaint from the National Park Service that no one ever visited the parks. No people are going and they are complaining that people are going, walking and seeing the parks? Something doesn't set right with me.

    I am a geocacher and I have never seen a cache cause damage to a location.

    Two years from now, if they get the regulations, they will again be complaining that no one visits the parks again.

  32. Absurdities of geocaching... by raytracer · · Score: 3, Informative

    Firstly, I'm an irregularly active cacher (78 finds or so at last count). I find the hobby to be a lot of fun, and good exercise. It gets me motivated to go to parks I might overlook and to hike deeper into them than I normally would. I've also attended numerous local caching events, and met a lot of nice people.

    In all the 78 caches that I've found, I've never seen any sign that the placement of this cache was even visible, much less causing any damage to the surrounding environment with a single exception. I once found the contents of a cache scattered all over the side of a hill. Why? Because somebody had not read the rules, and had left cookies in the cache. Oh well. What did I do? I carefully gathered every scrap of stuff and repackaged it all. Problem solved.

    Caching is an environmentally friendly activity. It gets people out to parks they normally wouldn't, and gets them to pick up trash in those parks. Just one motivated individual can clean up a lot of trash, and caching puts hundreds or thousands of them out every weekend.

    I do understand the motivation in trying to limit damage to sensitive areas, say, where endangered birds or plants can be found, but cachers are more than willing to try to adopt these reasonable restrictions. There is currently a ban on geocaching in national parks. Guess what? You won't find any caches in national parks. I hope that state parks do not follow suit in making a general ban, but instead work with geocachers to try to establish reasonable guidelines for the placement of caches. The idea of moving caches at least once every 12 months to prevent trail formation is a sane and reasonable solution, and I doubt that any cacher would have any issues with that.

    Give it a try. It's a lot of fun.

  33. Environmental hypocrisy by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just thought I'd pass on some personal experience. I started geocaching more than a year ago and let me tell you, this is a great deal of fun. I've done more hiking in the last year than I've ever done in my life. Being a software engineer, I desperately need some solid exercise and gyms are a complete waste of money, IMHO. Having a goal (finding the cache) is much more enjoyable than taking a walk. Having done close to fifty caches, I can say that none of these affects the environment. In fact, Geocaching promotes taking a trash bag with you to pick up the litter left by the rest of the fair-weather hikers. Who raised these littering boneheads is beyond me. Geocaching is not allowed in the National Park system which I find ridiculous. A recent experience at the Grand Canyon affirmed my opinion that evironmentalists are hypocrits and elitists. I attended a nighttime slide show entitled "The sounds of the canyon". The ranger made it very clear that the park service doesn't like the helicopters flying around even though they have a strict flight path. They also make it very clear that it's illegal to ignore anyone in trouble. The next morning, I rose at oh-dark-hundred to go to Yaki Point to take sunrise pictures. Having driven out to the site, I discovered that the National Park service in it's infinite wisdom closed the access road to vehicular traffic. I parked at a picnic area and started to hike in with all my camera gear. Twice a shuttle bus blew past me even though I tried to flag them down. When I finally made it out to the point, I spent about an hour taking pictures. The only sound I could hear was the sound of those damn shuttle busses. IMHO, The National Park Service has become extremist in it's view of visitors. If you're not a serious outdoorsman, we don't want you past the visitor center. This is evidenced by Denali's one access road into the park on which you're only allowed to travel if you take the scheduled bus trip or if you've got a backcountry permit.

  34. VIrtual Caches Banned in CO by Eukalia01 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There was a parks meeting here in Loveland to disuss this subject. Many Geocachers showed up and had a say in it. In the end they banned all Geocaches in the parks including Virtual Caches. A virtual caches is when you give coordinates to a point of interest ie: Nice statue, big tree, spectacular view. But nothing is actually left that was not there before. They decided this was bad. Never mind it infringes on free speech. Banned! Next. It was really amazing and wrong.

  35. Work to inform park rangers by Kaz+Riprock · · Score: 3, Insightful


    I think the geocachers in the state where the article was written need to take a clue from the Maryland Geocaching Society ( http://www.mdgps.net ). This is from their self-description and sounds VERY appropriate:

    The Maryland Geocaching Society is an organization for Geocachers run by Geocachers. The group was originally founded in order to preserve Geocaching in our State Parks. At that time Maryland State Parks, in particular the Patapsco State Park was asking for the removal of all caches from the property which they managed. Recognizing this as a very serious issue regarding the sport in the area, a group of avid geocachers gathered to form the Maryland Geocaching Society. The very first order of business was to reach out to park officials in an effort to come to an understanding and save the State Park Geocaches. Through a lot of hard work, patience and cooperation a set of State Park guidelines was finally agreed upon and adopted by Patapsco State Park. This same set of guidelines would later go on to be adopted state wide! If our founding members had not stepped up when they did, there is no telling how many parks we as geocachers would be shut out of.

    I think pre-registering geocaches on State Park land is important to the health of the trails and non-trail environments. Getting people outside and bringing attention to our much maligned parks is important and geocaching done on park land is a great way to do both (as any...and many here...of the geocachers know).

    By laying out guidelines to protect state lands (many of which mirror guidelines that geocaching.com/GroundSpeak lay out in the first place for caching etiquette), the parks will stay healthy and no worse for the wear and the people will get out to enjoy some of the non-urban delights around them.

    This of course does not preclude urban caches which are a lot of fun too (and feel much more like espionage...even given the current temperment of most Americans towards city-lurking).

    --
    Mordor...a magical, mythical land where women are more rare than dragons--but where every man would rather find a dragon