Jump to content

Caches in Portland City Parks


user13371

Recommended Posts

I emailed the local Parks Department (Portland, Oregon) and asked if there was a set policy on geocasches in parks, and if I wanted to place one who would I ask for permission. Excerpted from the reply:

...folks who have placed geocaches in our parks have not asked for our permission, as there are many, and until now we have had no policy.

 

I can't tell you what to do at this time. Given a choice, I'd prefer that you wait while we sort out our policy and then proceed. I hope to have things finalized in a few months. Barring that, I'd encourage you to tread as lightly on the land as you can, stay close to developed trails, and respect if things change when we get our policies in place in the future.

 

If I knew which park you were hoping to place this in, I could get you in touch with that park's manager, but this policy our group is working on will supersede any previous permissions, once implemented.

So, he didn't flat out say "remove any existing caches" and sort of danced around the bit about placing new ones. But it seems pretty clear to me that any cache in a park around here is not complying with GC.com guidelines. Do any reviewers want to tackle the status of existing ones or talk about how they approve or don't approve new ones?

Link to comment

I, for one, care. And generally too much.

 

They are public lands, although they are run by a land manager.

Generally permission is not gotten on public lands. If we started archiving all caches on public lands without permission we'd all have to focus on finding the ten that were left.

 

He didn't say the caches need to be removed, and he didn't say, or even imply that they would be asked to be removed in the future. He said they were deciding the topic.

 

I'd say now is the time to step in and ask to be a part of those meetings.

Tell them how geocaching has been handled at other parks where geocachers work closely with land managers.

Talk to Hydnsek about it. She's done a fantastic job working with Cougar Mtn and other parks land managers.

 

Cougar Mtn is a much more fragile natural environment than Portland city parks, and Hydnsek has done a fantastic job with the land managers there. The park has somewhere between 50-70 caches in it, and they are all reachable from the trail, so they cause the minimal damage.

If the Portland people know what has been done elsewhere that has worked it would be a great help.

 

I think now is the time, if some Portland people want to contact the land management of the parks there, and let them know that city parks are for everyone, and that their concerns can be addressed.

Link to comment

They are public lands, although they are run by a land manager.

Generally permission is not gotten on public lands. If we started archiving all caches on public lands without permission we'd all have to focus on finding the ten that were left.

Mostly pretty good advice, except the above is hard to square with the actual guidelines.

 

In the case of public property, contact the agency or association that manages the land to obtain permission.

Link to comment

They are public lands, although they are run by a land manager.

Generally permission is not gotten on public lands. If we started archiving all caches on public lands without permission we'd all have to focus on finding the ten that were left.

Mostly pretty good advice, except the above is hard to square with the actual guidelines.

 

In the case of public property, contact the agency or association that manages the land to obtain permission.

 

Ah, that is a fairly recent addition to the guidelines, and I had missed it.

I have not placed a cache since they added that, so I had not seen it.

Thanks for pointing it out.

Link to comment

This sounds like a good time to do a CITO in the parks. Showing that we as Geocachers care about the parks and open spaces could help the good folks in the Portland Parks Dept. see us as "The Good Guys". And by asking them which park, trail system or area they would like us to work on, anything from picking up litter to an "Ivy pull" will demonstate that we are willing to get our hands dirty which could open a dialog that would benefit everyone. Just a thought.

Link to comment

This sounds like a good time to do a CITO in the parks. Showing that we as Geocachers care about the parks and open spaces could help the good folks in the Portland Parks Dept. see us as "The Good Guys". And by asking them which park, trail system or area they would like us to work on, anything from picking up litter to an "Ivy pull" will demonstate that we are willing to get our hands dirty which could open a dialog that would benefit everyone. Just a thought.

Excellent suggestion! CITOs have positively affected our relationship with several parks here in Washington. A specific example is Discovery Park in Seattle, which rescinded its 2-year ban on geocaching after we engaged with them and collaborated on several CITOs of their choice; Seattle City parks also cancelled plans to restrict/ban caching in other city parks. Our work parties on Cougar Mountain have helped strengthen our relationship with King County Parks, which now supports caching on all its lands. Richland City Parks in the Tri-Cities goes so far as to have an annual Geocoin Challenge to get folks to visit all its parks. I could go on, but you get the idea.

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

I emailed the local Parks Department (Portland, Oregon) and asked if there was a set policy on geocasches in parks, and if I wanted to place one who would I ask for permission. Excerpted from the reply:

...folks who have placed geocaches in our parks have not asked for our permission, as there are many, and until now we have had no policy.

 

I can't tell you what to do at this time. Given a choice, I'd prefer that you wait while we sort out our policy and then proceed. I hope to have things finalized in a few months. Barring that, I'd encourage you to tread as lightly on the land as you can, stay close to developed trails, and respect if things change when we get our policies in place in the future.

 

If I knew which park you were hoping to place this in, I could get you in touch with that park's manager, but this policy our group is working on will supersede any previous permissions, once implemented.

So, he didn't flat out say "remove any existing caches" and sort of danced around the bit about placing new ones. But it seems pretty clear to me that any cache in a park around here is not complying with GC.com guidelines. Do any reviewers want to tackle the status of existing ones or talk about how they approve or don't approve new ones?

Did you also inquire about playing Frisbee in the parks? Perhaps they have not gotten around to formalizing a policy but would prefer you don't play Frisbee until they have their policy worked out.

Link to comment

This sounds like a good time to do a CITO in the parks. Showing that we as Geocachers care about the parks and open spaces could help the good folks in the Portland Parks Dept. see us as "The Good Guys". And by asking them which park, trail system or area they would like us to work on, anything from picking up litter to an "Ivy pull" will demonstate that we are willing to get our hands dirty which could open a dialog that would benefit everyone. Just a thought.

Excellent suggestion! CITOs have positively affected our relationship with several parks here in Washington. A specific example is Discovery Park in Seattle, which rescinded its 2-year ban on geocaching after we engaged with them and collaborated on several CITOs of their choice; Seattle City parks also cancelled plans to restrict/ban caching in other city parks. Our work parties on Cougar Mountain have helped strengthen our relationship with King County Parks, which now supports caching on all its lands. Richland City Parks in the Tri-Cities goes so far as to have an annual Geocoin Challenge to get folks to visit all its parks. I could go on, but you get the idea.

The parks around the Beaverton area are maintained by the Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District. Kyle who, works for THPRD, monitors caches and had his own CITO. http://www.geocachin...be-61aa8f105ea1 He even will recommend tiny out of the way parks that need a cache. Maybe the PDX park guy should talk to Kyle.
Link to comment

This sounds like a good time to do a CITO in the parks. Showing that we as Geocachers care about the parks and open spaces could help the good folks in the Portland Parks Dept. see us as "The Good Guys". And by asking them which park, trail system or area they would like us to work on, anything from picking up litter to an "Ivy pull" will demonstate that we are willing to get our hands dirty which could open a dialog that would benefit everyone. Just a thought.

Excellent suggestion! CITOs have positively affected our relationship with several parks here in Washington. A specific example is Discovery Park in Seattle, which rescinded its 2-year ban on geocaching after we engaged with them and collaborated on several CITOs of their choice; Seattle City parks also cancelled plans to restrict/ban caching in other city parks. Our work parties on Cougar Mountain have helped strengthen our relationship with King County Parks, which now supports caching on all its lands. Richland City Parks in the Tri-Cities goes so far as to have an annual Geocoin Challenge to get folks to visit all its parks. I could go on, but you get the idea.

The parks around the Beaverton area are maintained by the Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District. Kyle who, works for THPRD, monitors caches and had his own CITO. http://www.geocachin...be-61aa8f105ea1 He even will recommend tiny out of the way parks that need a cache. Maybe the PDX park guy should talk to Kyle.

Sounds as disjointed a group as the King County Parks were until Hydnsek and others stepped up to help formulate an equitable policy. Now's the right time for the PDX club to step up and have a say.

Link to comment

I emailed the local Parks Department (Portland, Oregon) and asked if there was a set policy on geocasches in parks, and if I wanted to place one who would I ask for permission. Excerpted from the reply:

...folks who have placed geocaches in our parks have not asked for our permission, as there are many, and until now we have had no policy.

 

I can't tell you what to do at this time. Given a choice, I'd prefer that you wait while we sort out our policy and then proceed. I hope to have things finalized in a few months. Barring that, I'd encourage you to tread as lightly on the land as you can, stay close to developed trails, and respect if things change when we get our policies in place in the future.

 

If I knew which park you were hoping to place this in, I could get you in touch with that park's manager, but this policy our group is working on will supersede any previous permissions, once implemented.

So, he didn't flat out say "remove any existing caches" and sort of danced around the bit about placing new ones. But it seems pretty clear to me that any cache in a park around here is not complying with GC.com guidelines. Do any reviewers want to tackle the status of existing ones or talk about how they approve or don't approve new ones?

Did you also inquire about playing Frisbee in the parks? Perhaps they have not gotten around to formalizing a policy but would prefer you don't play Frisbee until they have their policy worked out.

Wrong analogy for the game. If a frisbee gets left behind, it can easily get tossed in the trash as trash.

Link to comment
But it seems pretty clear to me that any cache in a park around here is not complying with GC.com guidelines. Do any reviewers want to tackle the status of existing ones or talk about how they approve or don't approve new ones?

 

Do you ever attend GEOregon monthly meetings? It sounds like a great topic to be discussed there. Perhaps the GEOregon board could approach the COs of these caches and request they adhere to the guidelines or archive their caches.

 

I think (MHO) the reviewers have enough to do as volunteers. Our local caching community could definitely step up here and approach the parks people about establishing guidelines, promote CITO in the parks, and then coordinate the efforts with the COs of the caches already listed. Could be a win/win with minimal ruffled feathers that way.

Link to comment

I think (MHO) the reviewers have enough to do as volunteers. Our local caching community could definitely step up here and approach the parks people about establishing guidelines, promote CITO in the parks, and then coordinate the efforts with the COs of the caches already listed. Could be a win/win with minimal ruffled feathers that way.

+1

 

Groundspeak doesn't get involved on a local level with the parks, it leaves that to local geocaching groups. Which is why WSGA got involved working with park systems in Washington as ThePetersTrio suggested above. We work with parks in a variety of ways, depending on the situation and their needs, from informal arrangements to our more "official" Park Liaison Program.

Link to comment

Okay, the bloke at the Park Department sent me the following email today after I pointed him to this conversation:

 

Hey Lee,

 

I appreciate your sharing the link and the conversation that you've started within the geocaching community about caches in our Parks here in Portland.

 

I'd like to ask that you not put any new geocaches in place at this time, until we are able to complete our policy development. There are currently plenty of opportunities for cachers to explore in our parks right now - and while they don't have permission, we know they are there, and they certainly provide everyone with ample opportunity to explore, until we can catch up.

 

When we get further along, I may check back with you to help us get some review of our draft policy.

 

Thanks,

 

And my reply to him...

 

I'll be happy to comply with that guideline myself. As you mentioned

you have a couple of active geocachers on your planning group, perhaps

you could get them to enter that conversation online?

 

so stay tuned, you might get your open line of communication here...

Edited by Portland Cyclist
Link to comment

I think (MHO) the reviewers have enough to do as volunteers. Our local caching community could definitely step up here and approach the parks people about establishing guidelines, promote CITO in the parks, and then coordinate the efforts with the COs of the caches already listed. Could be a win/win with minimal ruffled feathers that way.

+1

 

Groundspeak doesn't get involved on a local level with the parks, it leaves that to local geocaching groups. Which is why WSGA got involved working with park systems in Washington as ThePetersTrio suggested above. We work with parks in a variety of ways, depending on the situation and their needs, from informal arrangements to our more "official" Park Liaison Program.

+100!

Link to comment

Okay, the bloke at the Park Department sent me the following email today after I pointed him to this conversation:

 

Hey Lee,

 

I appreciate your sharing the link and the conversation that you've started within the geocaching community about caches in our Parks here in Portland.

 

I'd like to ask that you not put any new geocaches in place at this time, until we are able to complete our policy development. There are currently plenty of opportunities for cachers to explore in our parks right now - and while they don't have permission, we know they are there, and they certainly provide everyone with ample opportunity to explore, until we can catch up.

 

When we get further along, I may check back with you to help us get some review of our draft policy.

 

Thanks,

 

And my reply to him...

 

I'll be happy to comply with that guideline myself. As you mentioned

you have a couple of active geocachers on your planning group, perhaps

you could get them to enter that conversation online?

 

so stay tuned, you might get your open line of communication here...

 

If he really wants this to be adhered to, he should make a formal request to Groundspeak. I am sure that there are reviewers here reading this but just asking you is not going to stop others from continuing to place caches in the parks.

Link to comment

Okay, the bloke at the Park Department sent me the following email today after I pointed him to this conversation:

 

Hey Lee,

 

I appreciate your sharing the link and the conversation that you've started within the geocaching community about caches in our Parks here in Portland.

 

I'd like to ask that you not put any new geocaches in place at this time, until we are able to complete our policy development. There are currently plenty of opportunities for cachers to explore in our parks right now - and while they don't have permission, we know they are there, and they certainly provide everyone with ample opportunity to explore, until we can catch up.

 

When we get further along, I may check back with you to help us get some review of our draft policy.

 

Thanks,

 

And my reply to him...

 

I'll be happy to comply with that guideline myself. As you mentioned

you have a couple of active geocachers on your planning group, perhaps

you could get them to enter that conversation online?

 

so stay tuned, you might get your open line of communication here...

The Parks Department liaison is great. I have sometimes worried that the Forest Park Conservancy might get on our case. The Conservancy does ask for volunteers. Maybe a CITO in Forest Park, through the Conservancy would be a good idea. I wonder how many caches are in the park.
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...