MnGCA Home MnGCA
Minnesota Geocaching Association
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   User listUser list   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Dakota County Parks
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    MnGCA Forum Index -> Park Relations
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
timewellspent
Geocacher


Joined: 19 Mar 2008

Posts: 706

PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2010 7:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

knowschad wrote:
Brad, speedysk1, and whoever else has been trying so hard to work with these folks, do they realize that when a cache that has been registered with them is archived at geocaching.com, that their database will be obsolete? And that, when the next guy comes along and places a cache nearby, and there are problems with that cache, that they may contact the guy that once had an archived cache nearby?


If they have their system down, the 2nd guy wouldn't receive a permit based on it being to close to another cache (the cache that was archived). This happens in EP and I am sure 3 Rivers as well. You then get to do the extra work explaining that that cache is no longer there...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
knowschad
Geocacher


Joined: 20 Jun 2005

Posts: 471

PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2010 8:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If they have their system down, they would set up watches (at least on Archived logs) on all caches that get registered and would have somebody keeping tabs on the logs and keeping their database up to date. If. Big IF.
_________________
Alcohol & calculus don't mix. Don't drink & deriv
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
timewellspent
Geocacher


Joined: 19 Mar 2008

Posts: 706

PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2010 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

knowschad wrote:
If they have their system down, they would set up watches (at least on Archived logs) on all caches that get registered and would have somebody keeping tabs on the logs and keeping their database up to date. If. Big IF.


Obviously EP Doesn't have it down as I have run into the issue. I have also run into the issue of receiving a permit from the city and the city giving another permit to a different cacher for a spot about 40 feet from my approved spot. I figured since I was approved, they wouldn't approve another spot within 528 feet of mine so I didn't place it right away. I guess I was wrong.

Another reason why having the city review and Groundspeak review is a total waste of time and money.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bflentje
Geocacher


Joined: 29 May 2006

Posts: 4054

PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2010 8:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yep. And when I contacted the parks department to clarify the ONE YEAR limit thing a couple weeks back, I suggested carefully to them that they may experience issues just like this. I was more or less told too bad. That's also when I was told to have fun hiking while picking up my caches I wasn't sure I wanted to register twice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
knowschad
Geocacher


Joined: 20 Jun 2005

Posts: 471

PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd hardly expect a county web developer to know how to figure the distance between two sets of coordinates. I mean, that might require a Google search, for cryin' out loud!

I'm sure you Eden Prairie folks and others that have had to register your caches with government agencies for some time now are probably tempted to think of us as a bunch of whiney babies... so thanks for putting up with us!
_________________
Alcohol & calculus don't mix. Don't drink & deriv
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
speedysk1
Past MnGCA Board


Joined: 29 Oct 2007

Posts: 1991

PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2010 10:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FWIW, I don't think they are checking distances or status of caches. Bart nailed it with a previous post...Dak Co could not care any less. If I were a tax paying citizen of the county, I might consider contacting someone from the parks department. Wink


Edited due to PH point out my grammatical error. Embarassed
_________________
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.


Last edited by speedysk1 on Thu Oct 07, 2010 12:57 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
King Boreas
Geocacher


Joined: 16 Dec 2002

Posts: 2442

PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2010 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Dak Co could really care less.


And I could care less that I have an illegal cache in Lebanon Hills, and several on the Big River Regional Trail. Banning that Trail makes absolutely no sense to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Pear Head
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 04 Apr 2004

Posts: 5707

PostPosted: Thu Oct 07, 2010 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

King Boreas wrote:
Quote:
Dak Co could really care less.


And I could care less that I have an illegal cache in Lebanon Hills, and several on the Big River Regional Trail. Banning that Trail makes absolutely no sense to me.


Could not care less? Mr. Green
_________________
Hmm...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
emmanogoldfish
Geocacher


Joined: 26 Oct 2007

Posts: 106

PostPosted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Be thankful that you are not charged a User Fee for registering the caches.

Their policy should have a requirement that Dakota County Park and Recreation be notified if and when a cache is removed or modified.

Most of the features identified to better manage the status of caches are not available on all cache or letterbox listing services. They would have to build unique applications to utilize features of each of these service providers. These features will change with time and would be a ongoing maintenance task on the County.

They do not require caches to be listed with GroundSpeak.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pear Head
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 04 Apr 2004

Posts: 5707

PostPosted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

emmanogoldfish wrote:
Be thankful that you are not charged a User Fee for registering the caches.


Taxpayers should be thankful that they aren't charged a fee to utilize their parks that they pay taxes to maintain? Serious?

Quote:
Their policy should have a requirement that Dakota County Park and Recreation be notified if and when a cache is removed or modified.

Most of the features identified to better manage the status of caches are not available on all cache or letterbox listing services. They would have to build unique applications to utilize features of each of these service providers. These features will change with time and would be a ongoing maintenance task on the County.

They do not require caches to be listed with GroundSpeak.


So require the extra work then for caches that they cannot watch through Groundspeak. I would have to guess that 90%+ caches are registered through Groundspeak.

The idea of a registration policy to begin with is not necessary. From there this policy just goes downhill.
_________________
Hmm...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
emmanogoldfish
Geocacher


Joined: 26 Oct 2007

Posts: 106

PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 12:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pear Head wrote:
emmanogoldfish wrote:
Be thankful that you are not charged a User Fee for registering the caches.


Taxpayers should be thankful that they aren't charged a fee to utilize their parks that they pay taxes to maintain? Serious?


Serious, yes, that's a valid option for the County to help defray the costs. The costs of running the registration has been a topic in this thread. Should Joe and Jean Dakota County Taxpayer who don't geocache or visit the parks bear the cost? State Parks are owned by the State but if you want to visit them by vehicle you pay a user fee, when the MNGCA wants to use the meeting facility they pay a user fee, when someone wants a use a tent pad, ski trail, snowmobile, ATV or other trail they pay a user fee. The waters are owned by the state but to use them a watercraft registration fee is required. Even GroundSpeak Inc charges for Premium Features. Common practice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bflentje
Geocacher


Joined: 29 May 2006

Posts: 4054

PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

emmanogoldfish wrote:
Pear Head wrote:
emmanogoldfish wrote:
Be thankful that you are not charged a User Fee for registering the caches.


Taxpayers should be thankful that they aren't charged a fee to utilize their parks that they pay taxes to maintain? Serious?


Serious, yes, that's a valid option for the County to help defray the costs. The costs of running the registration has been a topic in this thread. Should Joe and Jean Dakota County Taxpayer who don't geocache or visit the parks bear the cost? State Parks are owned by the State but if you want to visit them by vehicle you pay a user fee, when the MNGCA wants to use the meeting facility they pay a user fee, when someone wants a use a tent pad, ski trail, snowmobile, ATV or other trail they pay a user fee. The waters are owned by the state but to use them a watercraft registration fee is required. Even GroundSpeak Inc charges for Premium Features. Common practice.


Actually, Dakota County USED to require a fee for use of that swamp they call a beach in Lebanon Hills. Schultz Lake Beach. The guard shack might even still be by the front gate.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
knowschad
Geocacher


Joined: 20 Jun 2005

Posts: 471

PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If Dakota County has enough money to host Miesville Resevoir for Goodhue County, I don't think they need to be charging fees for caching or swampy beaches.
_________________
Alcohol & calculus don't mix. Don't drink & deriv
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pear Head
Past MnGCA President


Joined: 04 Apr 2004

Posts: 5707

PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In the end the discussion is pointless as Dakota County has made one wise choice in not charging a fee and I don't live in or rarely cache in Dakota County.

edit - I decided to bite my tongue and summarize my post by leaving the last line in instead
_________________
Hmm...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
pfalstad
Geocacher


Joined: 02 Feb 2006

Posts: 1013

PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pear Head wrote:
Paklid wrote:
the county reviewer/approver takes on the responsibility inherent with the process.


Just to play devil's advocate here, but where does SJ's responsibility fall in this? I honestly don't think I know the answer and would be interested in the discussion.

To me he's not liable any more than Groundspeak, which has a disclaimer that is shown when you load cache pages (which doesn't mean much either IMHO). I'd be interested in a discussion as well as a lawyer's take on it, although I'm not aware of any lawyers that are currently active in the organization (that are willing to speak up).

Just idly curious are you? Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    MnGCA Forum Index -> Park Relations All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next
Page 16 of 19

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Geocaching Cache Icons, Copyright 2009, Groundspeak Inc. All rights reserved. Used with Permission.