New York Law

[Field-N-Water]

Basically this is directed to NY geocachers, but you may have the same law in your state.

 

Yesterday I found out if you want to stash a cache on NY state lands you need to get a permit. I said ok no problem, I play by the rules. No big deal. Then I found out the real deal and it blows me away.

 

NY DEC wanted a $25.00 application fee for each cache to be hidden. I said wow, thats kinda rude. I'd rather pay for a geocaching license that gets renewed yearly like a fishing license. But then I got hit with the bomb shell. They told me I had to provide them with a certificate for liability insurance???? I said WHAT. You gota be kiddin me ! NY wants us geocachers to get liability insurance so we can hide geocache on public state grounds.

 

This puts a big dent in my geo activities. I was all hyped up about going out and doing it. I noticed my area lacked hidden geocache's. Now I know why since my county alone holds thousands of acres of state land. What a shame I say.

[+briansnat]

This issue is being discussed at length in the Northeast forum. As it stands now, NY State Parks are okay. State forests are an issue and some people are working with them to see if some reasonable policy can be developed.

Edited April 20, 2004 by briansnat

[Field-N-Water]

Thank You briansnat. I recieved a phone call from Albany this am. It was from the upper managment of the NYSP service. Basically they welcome geocaching in our state parks like you said. They too where shocked at what the DEC requires. They had no idea about this issue we have with the state land policy.

[+Renegade Knight]

That request has come up before with other organizations. It's generally a way to say "no" while providing a yes they can point at while saying how how cooperative they are.

[+Stunod]

Just call Hillary

[+Criminal]

Just call Hillary

Call her what? Anything I would call her would easily bust my warn meter.

[+leatherman]

Just call Hillary 

Call her what? Anything I would call her would easily bust my warn meter.

[Ferreter5]

I wonder if they came up with the liability insurance angle because they might already require liability insurance for other activities such as leaving weather monitoring equipment on DEC lands, and they mistakenly equated geocaching to that instead of to hiking, bird watching, etc.

 

I'm not saying I'd agree with such logic, but that might be their line of thinking.

[Field-N-Water]

I wonder if they came up with the liability insurance angle because they might already require liability insurance for other activities such as leaving weather monitoring equipment on DEC lands, and they mistakenly equated geocaching to that instead of to hiking, bird watching, etc.

 

What I was told by Region 4 sub station in Stamford, is that if a geocacher goes looking for my hidden cache and gets hurt they have someone to go after. Also they ar classifying geocaching as an event. The permit that is required ( Temporary Revocable) for geocaching is the same permit used by organizations that hold derby's , marathons, etc on state owned lands.

[apogee]

Whoever said public land belonged to the people? It belongs to the lawyers!

[+briansnat]

What I was told by Region 4 sub station in Stamford, is that if a geocacher goes looking for my hidden cache and gets hurt they have someone to go after. Also they ar classifying geocaching as an event. The permit that is required ( Temporary Revocable) for geocaching is the same permit used by organizations that hold derby's , marathons, etc on state owned lands.

 

They are looking at geocaches the wrong way. A geocache is closer to summit registers, which are allowed by the DEC. Summit registers are waterproof containers, with logbooks that are placed on some peaks and people use them to log their visits (sound familiar?). They are usually placed by hiking clubs and I doubt they require TR permits, or liability insurance.

Edited April 20, 2004 by briansnat

[+Renegade Knight]

Geoaching is an activity in the same way that walking your dog, rollerblading, and riding your bike are activties. Those don't require special regulation nor should geocachers. The only difference is that the first geocacher left behind a container and a log book to sign.

 

For everyone else the activit doesn't change much if it's a virtual vs. a container. You go, you look around, you have fun (or at least you should) and you tell about it in your log even if it's in your online log.

 

That its laughable to ask for the same type of insurance for a virtual cache, or a webcam cache or even an event cache is all the more reason why it's not something they should do for a traditional cache.

[Team Nogless]

I must say this is a big crock of $#%@. Screw NYS and their BS policies. They allow 4 wheelers on the land, and they won't allow geocaching? Yea because someone might fall over and get stabbed by their walking stick. One more way they are fleecing America. Now I will have to remove 2 geocaches that have been in place for over a year.

Edited April 30, 2004 by dzgametec

[+mihiker]

Check out what Michigan wants for State Parks.

(I think State Forests are still "open")

 

http://www.mi-geocaching.org/modules.php?n...iewtopic&t=1575

[+briansnat]

I must say this is a big crock of $#%@. Screw NYS and their BS policies. They allow 4 wheelers on the land, and they won't allow geocaching? Yea because someone might fall over and get stabbed by their walking stick. One more way they are fleecing America. Now I will have to remove 2 geocaches that have been in place for over a year.

 

Not so fast. Are they on DEC administered land? Did they, or GC.COM ask you to remove them? If the answer is no to any of the above, I don't see why you should remove them. They were placed in good faith before there was a no geocache policy.

Edited April 30, 2004 by briansnat

[+nfa]

Hi,

 

Rock climbers in the adks and the catskills leave equipment in place on climbs...how is that any different from geocachers leaving caches in place?

 

This is just a knee-jerk response in the negative by the DEC when faced with something new. They will come to their senses, it's just a hassle in the meantime.

 

NFA

[+trippy1976]

I wonder if they came up with the liability insurance angle because they might already require liability insurance for other activities such as leaving weather monitoring equipment on DEC lands, and they mistakenly equated geocaching to that instead of to hiking, bird watching, etc.

 

What I was told by Region 4 sub station in Stamford, is that if a geocacher goes looking for my hidden cache and gets hurt they have someone to go after. Also they ar classifying geocaching as an event. The permit that is required ( Temporary Revocable) for geocaching is the same permit used by organizations that hold derby's , marathons, etc on state owned lands.

We have the same policy going into effect in Michigan, sans insurance requirement. You have to get a "Use Permit" which is generally issued for events, but which they believe can also be applied to geocaching.

 

One thing we have learned is that if your organization can get in touch with them, progress is possible. We have addressed our concerns with our DNR and they made a small compromise that makes the policy a little more palatable. Not perfect, but better. And we will continue to work with them.

 

Original policy was $35 per cache, only good for 3 months.

 

Revised policy is $35 per year for 3 caches, you need to move them to avoid spur trails every 4 months.

 

Our understanding after talking to them about the first version was that the second version would eliminate the fee. If it did... we'd be really happy campers. It's a world better than it was, but we need to continue working with them on this. And will.

 

See what NYGO can do about this is my advice.

[jfreeman_bsj]

I think I would go ahead and cache on, or find somewhere else to do it, rather than give the Liberal People's Republic of New York a single cent. That's just my view on this.

[Team Nogless]

I must say this is a big crock of $#%@. Screw NYS and their BS policies. They allow 4 wheelers on the land, and they won't allow geocaching? Yea because someone might fall over and get stabbed by their walking stick. One more way they are fleecing America. Now I will have to remove 2 geocaches that have been in place for over a year.

 

Not so fast. Are they on DEC administered land? Did they, or GC.COM ask you to remove them? If the answer is no to any of the above, I don't see why you should remove them. They were placed in good faith before there was a no geocache policy.

New York Admin archived Tug Hill # 3 Tin man on the hill. (Traditional Cache) at 4/28/2004

 

Log Date: 4/28/2004

I'm sorry, this cache appears to be located in a State Reforestation Area. The NY State DEC has recently stated that geocaches are forbidden in NY State on DEC managed properties without a Temporary Revocable Permit. Unless you have verifiable permission and a permit from the head park ranger or the DEC regional office, this cache must be removed as soon as possible and I'm archiving the cache.

Please don't hesitate to respond with an explanation if you feel this cache has been misjudged or after you've received permission.

 

Thanks,

New York Admin

Geocaching.com

[+briansnat]

Revised policy is $35 per year for 3 caches, you need to move them to avoid spur trails every 4 months.

 

This shows ignorance on their part. I've placed 70+ caches and not one has caused a spur trail. I'm not saying they don't happen, I don't think it's the norm.

[+Melrose Plant]

Revised policy is $35 per year for 3 caches, you need to move them to avoid spur trails every 4 months.

 

This shows ignorance on their part. I've placed 70+ caches and not one has caused a spur trail. I'm not saying they don't happen, I don't think it's the norm.

I think you are correct for the most part. However, I have a cache placed in a city park, in a somewhat overgrown area by a small creek, and I have noticed that there is beginning to be signs of the best way to get through the thorns after only about a dozen visitors. This is probably not noticeable to the average person, but I visit this cache quite often (and am probably responsible for at least half of the spur trail myself) since it is in a highly muggle prone area.

 

Having said that, I would be willing to bet that it will fill in quite nicely with this summer's growth, as it is not all that popular. Not only that, in my case it really doesn't make any difference because the area is not exactly what you might call pristine. I really need to go down there with a couple of garbage bags sometime and clean up a bit. However, it is quite amazing how quickly a "trail" can be blazed quite unintentionally. I wouldn't think this would be a problem if people are bushwhacking randomly, as is the usual situation.

 

If anybody cares, here is the cache page.

[+trippy1976]

Revised policy is $35 per year for 3 caches, you need to move them to avoid spur trails every 4 months.

 

This shows ignorance on their part. I've placed 70+ caches and not one has caused a spur trail. I'm not saying they don't happen, I don't think it's the norm.

No arguement here. We're working to eliminate the ignorance (and in this case, it's honest ignorance... not using this as a derogatory term) and eliminate any misconceptions of what a "problem" caching is going to be for them. Part of our effort in our new membership system is so we can begin working on proposals for pilot programs to prove out alternate sets of guidelines in areas that we know we have active members who can assist. Currently, this isn't something we can really offer. But it would be a powerful tool.

 

Knowing that spur trails are infrequent and when they happen cachers will happily move the caches comes with time. They are new to the caching game and even now that they are "in it" they won't have the time to direct at it in order to learn that this is true. We hope we can help them get up to speed quicker.

[+trippy1976]

On a seperate note, not all park systems in Michigan are so paranoid about caching. The Huron-Clinton Metroparks system has just released a 13 (!!) cache series in their parks. This is in addition to their legendary Bill & Gary's series that has been done for the last two years.

 

They came to this all on their own too. In fact, I think they might have been the *first* park in Michigan to embrace caching as a good thing. Oakland County is following suit and we have begun discussions with some other county systems. We're heading toward a critical mass of people that are pleased with our involvement and are happy to work with us to learn more about how their parks can benefit from caching as well as what we have seen work well for encouraging participation and conformation with caching policies.

 

Hopefully between working with the DNR and being able to show so many positive relationships and policies elsewhere, we will see these loosen up a bit too. However, our state DNR has been cut from the state budget from what I know and has directives to become completely self-sufficient. The concern about what additional workload this might add as well as concerns about additional maintenance are probably at work here. But like I said, hopefully with time that concern will be mitigated. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

 

I don't think a letter writing campaign will help in these instances. I think the best strategy is to get organized and approach the parks as an organization of X individuals with strong leadership vs. barraging anyone with X letters written by individuals with varying content and messages. Sending mixed messages is something you should avoid at all costs. An organization can supply the manager with a unified vision and message about caching in their park.

[+TEAM 360]

Permits, insurance, more and more regulations...this is one of the reasons why this sport will be all about city micros soon...or go back underground, so we don't have to deal with all that BS...

[+Mopar]

I must say this is a big crock of $#%@. Screw NYS and their BS policies. They allow 4 wheelers on the land, and they won't allow geocaching? Yea because someone might fall over and get stabbed by their walking stick. One more way they are fleecing America. Now I will have to remove 2 geocaches that have been in place for over a year.

 

Not so fast. Are they on DEC administered land? Did they, or GC.COM ask you to remove them? If the answer is no to any of the above, I don't see why you should remove them. They were placed in good faith before there was a no geocache policy.

New York Admin archived Tug Hill # 3 Tin man on the hill. (Traditional Cache) at 4/28/2004

 

Log Date: 4/28/2004

I'm sorry, this cache appears to be located in a State Reforestation Area. The NY State DEC has recently stated that geocaches are forbidden in NY State on DEC managed properties without a Temporary Revocable Permit. Unless you have verifiable permission and a permit from the head park ranger or the DEC regional office, this cache must be removed as soon as possible and I'm archiving the cache.

Please don't hesitate to respond with an explanation if you feel this cache has been misjudged or after you've received permission.

 

Thanks,

New York Admin

Geocaching.com

If that cache has been in place for over a year, why doesn't it show up in a search, or in your placed caches list?

Sound's more like one you just hid.

[+hedberg]

Oh my god... I just happy that I don't live in the US, it seems to be almost impossible to do some geocaching in the US???

[Tahosa and Sons]

Now I have another reason why I left the Empire State and moved to Colorado.

[+briansnat]

Oh my god... I just happy that I don't live in the US, it seems to be almost impossible to do some geocaching in the US???

 

Tha land of the free and home of the lawyers.

[Major Catastrophe]

I would never condone breaking the law, but the term "civil disobedience" does come to mind...

[+protocoldroid]

Oh my god... I just happy that I don't live in the US, it seems to be almost impossible to do some geocaching in the US???

 

Tha land of the free and home of the lawyers.

Truer words never spoken!

 

I'm still p'd off about "smoke free new york" and the driving w/ your cellphone laws, grrrrrrr. It used to be that I could send my girlfriend to CVS at night, walking past three bars... All the people were -inside-, but now... There's about 35 drunk smoking people outside, making it a danger zone for women walking before the horde of meat market prospectors. As for cellphones... I was using hands-free before the ban, so there law makers, it's -my- choice! Not another way for you to glean income from the peaceful users of such a device.

 

At least imho in NYS... before ya know it, you won't be able to pick your nose without a lawyer and a medical professional present.

 

It seems that they just keep taking away more and more freedoms... It's a shame that they'd make it inconvient to geocache on the land that -we- own. It seems that if they can't have 100% control of something, they just ban it.

 

...Makes me want to move :/

[+macatac1961]

It seems that they just keep taking away more and more freedoms... It's a shame that they'd make it inconvient to geocache on the land that -we- own. It seems that if they can't have 100% control of something, they just ban it.

And making up new rules to fit their needs as they go.

[Keystone]

I am closing this topic because the discussion has exceeded the boundaries of the "Getting Started" forum. A specific discussion about the NYDEC geocaching policy is taking place in the Northeast forum. It is best to collect all comments on that issue in one place. For general discussions about land manager regulation or over-regulation, there are plenty of such threads in the general Geocaching Topics forum.