MnGCA

Marsha and Silent Bob · Past MnGCA President Joined: 02 Sep 2003 Posts: 6261

After quite a bit of hard work from the MnGCA Board and the Minnesota DNR we are proud to announce that geocaching is officially allowed in Minnesota State Forests (please note that these are not State Parks).

We're working hard to turn around that original stance that geocaching is banned on *all* DNR land and this is the first step.

I will be posting a copy of the guidelines as a PDF after this weekend. I'm in a bit of a rush today trying to get some stuff ready but here's the text version:

s4xton · Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:00 pm Post subject:

This is a very smart policy.

-Aaron

King Boreas · Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:41 pm Post subject:

Do current over-sized containers need to be removed?

I especially like the "no-permit" item.
_________________
Joined: 16 Dec 2002

arrive...raise heck...leave (SCSA)

Arcticabn · Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 8:16 am Post subject:

eagleyes · Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:33 am Post subject:

• A cache may be placed in a state forest without receiving a permit from DNR, providing that no significant damage is caused to commercial or protected species of flora or fauna. All natural resource regulations must be observed including restrictions on off highway vehicles, rutting prohibitions, etc.

Who is checking to see if any protected areas are being disturbed by the placement if no permits are needed? I would think the experts who know where these areas are would be the ones to ok a cache- as opposed to a cacher who might , unknowingly ,place a cache in a protected species area and subsequent cachers spoil or destroy the area.

Would it hurt to tell a forester that you want to place a cache in "X" area and ask if there are any areas to avoid?
_________________
LIFE IS GOOD;CABIN LIFE IS GREAT

Paklid · Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:55 am Post subject:

Do what you want to, but I can tell you where the size restriction comes from.

The state forests did not want the level of management of geocaching that the state parks did, but they did want to wait until the state parks settled upon their policy before proceeding with something with the forests. So they started with the new parks policy and the container size was part of that. (by the way, though the new parks policy is set it isn't official until published on their website - a few more days we're told)

We had discussions with the forest management and they agreed that they didn't need or want permits. From discussions, they aren't interested in nitpicking about the exact limits on the container either. When we were talking with the state parks people, the only reason they have specific container size limit in there, is that they don't like the idea of "having a 5 gallon bucket hanging from a branch of a tree". When pressed with questions like, "what if the width dimension and the length dimension were one inch greater than the container specified in the guidelines" they said they didn't care - just no 5 gallon bucket type things. Both the parks people and the forest people like the idea of ammo cans as sturdy, long term containers - which is why I suspect the dimensions specified look like they do.

So it is more the "spirit of the law" that they all seem interested in, rather than the "letter of the law". My guess is that if there is some really large container out there and some DNR employee doesn't like it, it may become a "letter of the law" issue and the container would need to be replaced. That seems unlikely though. As we move forward, as long as containers don't grossly go over the limits imposed in the guidelines, I'm sure we'll be fine. Of course with the state parks, a cacher will be able to actually show the container to the park manager so "buy in" will be clear. Forest managers are harder to get in touch with, and frankly don't want to be bothered frequently with cache placement questions (though they do give contact info, so if there is a real question about whether a site is OK, please do try to contact them).

So in summary, as it turns out size DOES matter....at least to a certain degree.
_________________
-Paklid

Paklid · Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 12:06 pm Post subject:

Pear Head · Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 12:11 pm Post subject:

eagleyes · Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 12:58 pm Post subject:

I understand- up here in the Kawishiwi Distrist and the La Croix Dist (USFS) they do monitor the gc site for illegal caches- Word must be out because we haven't been called to pull an illegal caches lately- this is good and responsible- and I know the MNGCA had a hand in it too. Makes for a better " recognition" for the activity.
_________________
LIFE IS GOOD;CABIN LIFE IS GREAT

King Boreas · Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 1:10 pm Post subject:

darus67 · Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:17 pm Post subject:

Awesome.

A huge Thank You to everyone involved, for all of the hard work that went into bringing about these changes in state policy.
_________________
Mustang Dreamin'

Surfer Joe · Minnesota Reviewer Joined: 18 Jan 2006 Posts: 199

FYI - Whenever I notice a new cache submitted within a Minnesota State Forest, I intend to ask the owner if the cache meets the requirements of the DNR policy, in particular, paragraph 4.0. It will be in your best interest to log a reviewer note saying so when you first submit such a cache. It will definitely speed up your cache getting listed.

Surfer Joe

King Boreas

IBcrashen · Geocacher Joined: 17 Dec 2002 Posts: 244 Location: Duluth

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/outdoor_activities/state_parks/geocaching_guidelines.pdf

Moe the Sleaze · Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 6:02 am Post subject: