> I placed this almost a year ago, (at the time was blatantly ignorant
on many > of the issues) and really most of the discussion we have had
about this was > since the article in the Republic

Joe, prior to the Republic article I doubt that one land manager out of
ten was aware that Geocaching even existed. And if it had stayed a
"fringe" activity in terms of popularity, most of them might never have
heard of it, or cared very much even if they did know. For example: I
try to follow this stuff closely, but I have yet to hear of a single
site steward or land manager calling for the removal of any of the ten
registered letterboxes in the state.

> I wonder how many caches out there on Nat'l Forest Land, BLM land,
etc.,
> even the Goldwater area...were considered "Grandfathered" by the
owners...in > other words, it's already there, and no one has removed
it, I don't need to > do anything.

Probably, almost all of them. But just because nothing's been done
doesn't mean nothing will be done. Just a couple of days before we left
for the Goldwater range and the El Camino caches, one of them ("Fortuna
in Cache") got disabled -- by Jeremy. And as I interpret his log entry
there, it sounds as though the email he got may well have come from the
Air Force or Marine Corps.

> I'd be willing to bet that there are at least 400 caches in city parks
in
> Arizona...which is public land, I doubt very many of those owners have
> gotten permission to place those as well - I have one in a city park
and did
> not get permission. I'm not saying this is correct.

Before I come off sounding "holier than thou" here, I want to make a
confession. I have never received permission for a single cache I have
placed. I once tried to get permission, and about halfway through my
explanation of Geocaching, the person I was talking to said, "Stop. I
can see where this is leading. You're going to ask me for permission to
hide one, and then I'm going to have to turn you down." That person then
went on to say that I would be better off just hiding it and hope it
never came to the attention of anyone official.

That sort of turned me off to asking, but that was also before the
Republic article was published. After the article my response was to
stop hiding caches for awhile. I didn't hide any again until last
November, and that one was a virtual. I hid a second one in December,
"roadrunners", and no, I didn't get permission for that one either.

I wonder if it's a case of thinking we're "grandfathered", or if it's
more a case of thinking, "Heck, I went through the effort of putting it
out there. Why spoil anyone's fun if they're going to leave it alone? If
they pull it, I'll deal with it then."

> I'd say that held to the standard of obtain permission on all public
or
> private property, most of us would have a lot of letters and work to
do in
> the next few weeks.

I'm not naïve enough to believe that is going to happen either. Not even
with my caches. But we do now have people and procedures in a number of
land management agencies that will enable us to get permission to place
caches. And I think going forward it would be a mistake to not get
permission of those agencies, while we continue to try to work on
establishing those capabilities in other agencies.

Joe, all the points you make in your letter are valid. My concern was
the reaction from some about the pulling of the Superstition caches that
some injustice had been done. My point is that we are the ones who are
breaking the rules. And whether or not we write the letters or do the
work, obtaining permission is the standard. If we don't adhere to it,
certainly going forward, I think it won't be long before we will have
solved the problem of "too many caches", as blanket prohibition of
Geocaching becomes the new standard.

Steve
Team Tierra Buena