Why not letterbox on National Parks? I am sure there is a very good,
obvious reason. I am just curious as to what it is.
Mama Stork
> -Do not letterbox in National Parks.
> -Do not letterbox on private property without permission.
> -Letterbox following the Leave No Trace ethic (www.lnt.org).
>
>>
?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
14 messages in this thread |
Started on 2004-03-05
?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: Pam Kleingers (pam@kleingers.net) |
Date: 2004-03-05 10:16:41 UTC-05:00
Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: Crappiefisher (crappiefishergirl@yahoo.com) |
Date: 2004-03-05 15:25:14 UTC
First, it's against the rules. the national park service does not
allow it.
although it would be very cool to look for boxes (and caches) in a
national park, the NPS serves as kind of our "historians" and take
care of lots of places other than large forested systems (like
Yosimite). they are charged with preserving our history and
heritage, and (my opinion here) placing a box or cache in the area
that they are supposed to be preserving would not fit their
purpose...i mean, Licoln didn't place a letterbox in his old
neighborhood (i.e., Lincoln Historical Site in Springfield, IL), so
it shouldn't be there...understand?
cf
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Pam Kleingers"
wrote:
> Why not letterbox on National Parks? I am sure there is a very
good,
> obvious reason. I am just curious as to what it is.
>
> Mama Stork
>
>
> > -Do not letterbox in National Parks.
> > -Do not letterbox on private property without permission.
> > -Letterbox following the Leave No Trace ethic (www.lnt.org).
> >
> >>
allow it.
although it would be very cool to look for boxes (and caches) in a
national park, the NPS serves as kind of our "historians" and take
care of lots of places other than large forested systems (like
Yosimite). they are charged with preserving our history and
heritage, and (my opinion here) placing a box or cache in the area
that they are supposed to be preserving would not fit their
purpose...i mean, Licoln didn't place a letterbox in his old
neighborhood (i.e., Lincoln Historical Site in Springfield, IL), so
it shouldn't be there...understand?
cf
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Pam Kleingers"
wrote:
> Why not letterbox on National Parks? I am sure there is a very
good,
> obvious reason. I am just curious as to what it is.
>
> Mama Stork
>
>
> > -Do not letterbox in National Parks.
> > -Do not letterbox on private property without permission.
> > -Letterbox following the Leave No Trace ethic (www.lnt.org).
> >
> >>
RE: [LbNA] ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: Wes Garrison (letterboxing@wesgarrison.us) |
Date: 2004-03-05 09:30:26 UTC-06:00
The NPS has asked that neither letterboxing nor geocaching happen in NPS parks.
-- Wes
-----Original Message-----
From: Pam Kleingers [mailto:pam@kleingers.net]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 9:17 AM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
Why not letterbox on National Parks? I am sure there is a very good,
obvious reason. I am just curious as to what it is.
Mama Stork
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-- Wes
-----Original Message-----
From: Pam Kleingers [mailto:pam@kleingers.net]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 9:17 AM
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [LbNA] ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
Why not letterbox on National Parks? I am sure there is a very good,
obvious reason. I am just curious as to what it is.
Mama Stork
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [LbNA] ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: (HANNAHKAT@aol.com) |
Date: 2004-03-05 10:50:30 UTC-05:00
They consider it litter (illegal) and feel that it creates additional
off-trail impacts on already overly impacted, often fragile landscape.
A fair-enough observation if you ask me.
-Kim (Rustypuff)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
off-trail impacts on already overly impacted, often fragile landscape.
A fair-enough observation if you ask me.
-Kim (Rustypuff)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: Lady Hydrangea Prisspott nee Hedge (lady_prisspott@yahoo.com) |
Date: 2004-03-05 16:36:00 UTC
I too am troubled by the no Nat'l Parks rule. If you eliminate
National, State or Municipal Parks (which I assume are off limits
for the same rationale) then all you have left is private land and I
don't want all of you crawling over Prisspott Manor and given it's
modest size doesn't offer much in the way of hiding places. There is
one other public land that is not a park; roads and highways but
that doesn't seem like a good place.
If we can't put boxes in Nat'l parks that are by the NPS own Mission
Statement meant for the public's enjoyment then we won't have much
of a hobby left.
"The mission of the U.S. National Park Service (NPS) is to conserve
the scenery, the natural and historic objects, and the wildlife in
United States' national parks, and to provide for the public's
enjoyment of these features in a manner that will leave them
unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations"
I suppose the argument that we're disturbing sensitive habitat is
their rationale for blocking our enjoyment but If we're planting
along hiking trails and other areas that aren't off limits to other
types of recreation then I fail to see how we disturb the habitat
any more than hikers and other users. Camping is almost always
permitted in national parks; I can't imagine much greater
environmental impact than camping (Ok maybe snowmolining and 4-
wheeling). Campers have an advantage though in their numbers and a
long history. Perhaps we need to become more political and lobby our
politicians.
Maryland tried to block planting in State Parks but they backed down
and allowed it as long as we notified them of the location.
Leterboxers unite!!! Rise up against the machine! If you ask me the
Rangers just want to limit access as much as possible so they have
less work to do. I live in an area with LOTS of state and national
parks most of which have only the most cursory, common sense limits
on access yet they want to stop letterboxers; why? My guess is
rampant paranoia and profound laziness (OK that's just venting
anger), but I believe that they merely look at us as something new
that they don't want to take the time to understand or learn about
so it's easier to just say "No" to this "new" use of parks than to
take time to understand what we're doing in "their" parks.
National, State or Municipal Parks (which I assume are off limits
for the same rationale) then all you have left is private land and I
don't want all of you crawling over Prisspott Manor and given it's
modest size doesn't offer much in the way of hiding places. There is
one other public land that is not a park; roads and highways but
that doesn't seem like a good place.
If we can't put boxes in Nat'l parks that are by the NPS own Mission
Statement meant for the public's enjoyment then we won't have much
of a hobby left.
"The mission of the U.S. National Park Service (NPS) is to conserve
the scenery, the natural and historic objects, and the wildlife in
United States' national parks, and to provide for the public's
enjoyment of these features in a manner that will leave them
unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations"
I suppose the argument that we're disturbing sensitive habitat is
their rationale for blocking our enjoyment but If we're planting
along hiking trails and other areas that aren't off limits to other
types of recreation then I fail to see how we disturb the habitat
any more than hikers and other users. Camping is almost always
permitted in national parks; I can't imagine much greater
environmental impact than camping (Ok maybe snowmolining and 4-
wheeling). Campers have an advantage though in their numbers and a
long history. Perhaps we need to become more political and lobby our
politicians.
Maryland tried to block planting in State Parks but they backed down
and allowed it as long as we notified them of the location.
Leterboxers unite!!! Rise up against the machine! If you ask me the
Rangers just want to limit access as much as possible so they have
less work to do. I live in an area with LOTS of state and national
parks most of which have only the most cursory, common sense limits
on access yet they want to stop letterboxers; why? My guess is
rampant paranoia and profound laziness (OK that's just venting
anger), but I believe that they merely look at us as something new
that they don't want to take the time to understand or learn about
so it's easier to just say "No" to this "new" use of parks than to
take time to understand what we're doing in "their" parks.
Re: [LbNA] Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: (HANNAHKAT@aol.com) |
Date: 2004-03-05 13:08:27 UTC-05:00
Okay, I know you are frustrated and are just venting (and it is NOT my
intention to reopen this wound yet again on this list... so please forgive me), but
it is my perception that you believe they are prohibiting letterboxing just to
p*ss you off. Which obviously they are not.
There are many public lands and private institutions that have embraced
letterboxing and questing, much to their credit, but a large part of that
participation is a management strategy on their part. If they are part of the
"program", so to speak, they will be more in the loop and able to have an open dialogue
with 'boxers as to how and where boxes are placed.
As someone who has worked for (and currently work for) private organizations
whose mission it is to preserve and conserve natural, historic and
aethetically important places, I must emphasize what a difficult balancing act it is to
have a piece of land that you want people to visit and enjoy, but that you are
charged with maintaining it at a specific level of quality, health and
biodiversity.
Think about it. What if your job was to manage a piece of land or historic
site? You notice that in one year your visitation has increased 3 fold, which is
great, because it proves that you are getting the word out and people are
enjoying the place. But you also start to realize that there is not enough
parking and people have begun wearing out the grassy areas parking where they can
find space. You also realize that what used to be a quiet, quaint footpath is
now over 10 feet wide and the trees at the trail edge are dying of compacted
roots. What would YOU do?
Most people who work in these jobs do it because they believe in what they
are doing. They are not lazy! (and I take deep offense at the statement). Most
people in this field have an awful lot on their plates, and often work very
long hours for very little pay, because they believe in it AND because it has to
be done.
YOU try simultaneously being a teacher, scientist, grant writer/fundraiser,
engineer, marketing guru, publisher, ambassador for the public and office
manager working 50 - 60 hours a week for $19 - $25K a year.
I agree that letterboxers have to present a united front in the public eye,
but we ALSO have to be the learned, open-minded, diplomatic and reasonable ones
- taking the 'high road' if we want to be taken seriously and be respected.
Otherwise we just end up looking like the 'geeks who hunt tupperware'.
As an environmentalist, I know what I am talking about. We are always trying
to defend ourselves against the image of the radical, knee-jerk "tree
huggers". We do not want to gain that type of reputation as letterboxers. We would
have no credibility.
Our "united front" must be friendly, understanding and intelligent to public
scrutiny. I would caution against reactionary behavior and not let our
emotions get away from us. Our emotions are very important, but we must remember that
passionately defaming someone else really doesn't make anyone want to be on
our side.
Okay, I'm done.
Respectfully,
-Kim (Rustypuff)
In a message dated 3/5/2004 11:38:32 AM Eastern Standard Time,
lady_prisspott@yahoo.com writes:
I too am troubled by the no Nat'l Parks rule. If you eliminate
National, State or Municipal Parks (which I assume are off limits
for the same rationale) then all you have left is private land and I
don't want all of you crawling over Prisspott Manor and given it's
modest size doesn't offer much in the way of hiding places. There is
one other public land that is not a park; roads and highways but
that doesn't seem like a good place.
If we can't put boxes in Nat'l parks that are by the NPS own Mission
Statement meant for the public's enjoyment then we won't have much
of a hobby left.
"The mission of the U.S. National Park Service (NPS) is to conserve
the scenery, the natural and historic objects, and the wildlife in
United States' national parks, and to provide for the public's
enjoyment of these features in a manner that will leave them
unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations"
I suppose the argument that we're disturbing sensitive habitat is
their rationale for blocking our enjoyment but If we're planting
along hiking trails and other areas that aren't off limits to other
types of recreation then I fail to see how we disturb the habitat
any more than hikers and other users. Camping is almost always
permitted in national parks; I can't imagine much greater
environmental impact than camping (Ok maybe snowmolining and 4-
wheeling). Campers have an advantage though in their numbers and a
long history. Perhaps we need to become more political and lobby our
politicians.
Maryland tried to block planting in State Parks but they backed down
and allowed it as long as we notified them of the location.
Leterboxers unite!!! Rise up against the machine! If you ask me the
Rangers just want to limit access as much as possible so they have
less work to do. I live in an area with LOTS of state and national
parks most of which have only the most cursory, common sense limits
on access yet they want to stop letterboxers; why? My guess is
rampant paranoia and profound laziness (OK that's just venting
anger), but I believe that they merely look at us as something new
that they don't want to take the time to understand or learn about
so it's easier to just say "No" to this "new" use of parks than to
take time to understand what we're doing in "their" parks.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
intention to reopen this wound yet again on this list... so please forgive me), but
it is my perception that you believe they are prohibiting letterboxing just to
p*ss you off. Which obviously they are not.
There are many public lands and private institutions that have embraced
letterboxing and questing, much to their credit, but a large part of that
participation is a management strategy on their part. If they are part of the
"program", so to speak, they will be more in the loop and able to have an open dialogue
with 'boxers as to how and where boxes are placed.
As someone who has worked for (and currently work for) private organizations
whose mission it is to preserve and conserve natural, historic and
aethetically important places, I must emphasize what a difficult balancing act it is to
have a piece of land that you want people to visit and enjoy, but that you are
charged with maintaining it at a specific level of quality, health and
biodiversity.
Think about it. What if your job was to manage a piece of land or historic
site? You notice that in one year your visitation has increased 3 fold, which is
great, because it proves that you are getting the word out and people are
enjoying the place. But you also start to realize that there is not enough
parking and people have begun wearing out the grassy areas parking where they can
find space. You also realize that what used to be a quiet, quaint footpath is
now over 10 feet wide and the trees at the trail edge are dying of compacted
roots. What would YOU do?
Most people who work in these jobs do it because they believe in what they
are doing. They are not lazy! (and I take deep offense at the statement). Most
people in this field have an awful lot on their plates, and often work very
long hours for very little pay, because they believe in it AND because it has to
be done.
YOU try simultaneously being a teacher, scientist, grant writer/fundraiser,
engineer, marketing guru, publisher, ambassador for the public and office
manager working 50 - 60 hours a week for $19 - $25K a year.
I agree that letterboxers have to present a united front in the public eye,
but we ALSO have to be the learned, open-minded, diplomatic and reasonable ones
- taking the 'high road' if we want to be taken seriously and be respected.
Otherwise we just end up looking like the 'geeks who hunt tupperware'.
As an environmentalist, I know what I am talking about. We are always trying
to defend ourselves against the image of the radical, knee-jerk "tree
huggers". We do not want to gain that type of reputation as letterboxers. We would
have no credibility.
Our "united front" must be friendly, understanding and intelligent to public
scrutiny. I would caution against reactionary behavior and not let our
emotions get away from us. Our emotions are very important, but we must remember that
passionately defaming someone else really doesn't make anyone want to be on
our side.
Okay, I'm done.
Respectfully,
-Kim (Rustypuff)
In a message dated 3/5/2004 11:38:32 AM Eastern Standard Time,
lady_prisspott@yahoo.com writes:
I too am troubled by the no Nat'l Parks rule. If you eliminate
National, State or Municipal Parks (which I assume are off limits
for the same rationale) then all you have left is private land and I
don't want all of you crawling over Prisspott Manor and given it's
modest size doesn't offer much in the way of hiding places. There is
one other public land that is not a park; roads and highways but
that doesn't seem like a good place.
If we can't put boxes in Nat'l parks that are by the NPS own Mission
Statement meant for the public's enjoyment then we won't have much
of a hobby left.
"The mission of the U.S. National Park Service (NPS) is to conserve
the scenery, the natural and historic objects, and the wildlife in
United States' national parks, and to provide for the public's
enjoyment of these features in a manner that will leave them
unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations"
I suppose the argument that we're disturbing sensitive habitat is
their rationale for blocking our enjoyment but If we're planting
along hiking trails and other areas that aren't off limits to other
types of recreation then I fail to see how we disturb the habitat
any more than hikers and other users. Camping is almost always
permitted in national parks; I can't imagine much greater
environmental impact than camping (Ok maybe snowmolining and 4-
wheeling). Campers have an advantage though in their numbers and a
long history. Perhaps we need to become more political and lobby our
politicians.
Maryland tried to block planting in State Parks but they backed down
and allowed it as long as we notified them of the location.
Leterboxers unite!!! Rise up against the machine! If you ask me the
Rangers just want to limit access as much as possible so they have
less work to do. I live in an area with LOTS of state and national
parks most of which have only the most cursory, common sense limits
on access yet they want to stop letterboxers; why? My guess is
rampant paranoia and profound laziness (OK that's just venting
anger), but I believe that they merely look at us as something new
that they don't want to take the time to understand or learn about
so it's easier to just say "No" to this "new" use of parks than to
take time to understand what we're doing in "their" parks.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [LbNA] Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: (kotlarek@wi.rr.com) |
Date: 2004-03-05 12:25:02 UTC-06:00
I find it interesting that letterboxing originated (and is apparently thriving) in Dartmoor, which I believe is a British National Park. This is in direct contrast to the US, which prohibits boxes in National Parks. Does the English Park System have any official policy about letterboxes?
Wisconsin Hiker
----- Original Message -----
From: Lady Hydrangea Prisspott nee Hedge
Date: Friday, March 5, 2004 10:36 am
Subject: [LbNA] Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
> I too am troubled by the no Nat'l Parks rule. If you eliminate
> National, State or Municipal Parks (which I assume are off limits
> for the same rationale) then all you have left is private land and
> I
> don't want all of you crawling over Prisspott Manor and given it's
> modest size doesn't offer much in the way of hiding places. There
> is
> one other public land that is not a park; roads and highways but
> that doesn't seem like a good place.
>
> If we can't put boxes in Nat'l parks that are by the NPS own
> Mission
> Statement meant for the public's enjoyment then we won't have much
> of a hobby left.
>
> "The mission of the U.S. National Park Service (NPS) is to
> conserve
> the scenery, the natural and historic objects, and the wildlife in
> United States' national parks, and to provide for the public's
> enjoyment of these features in a manner that will leave them
> unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations"
>
> I suppose the argument that we're disturbing sensitive habitat is
> their rationale for blocking our enjoyment but If we're planting
> along hiking trails and other areas that aren't off limits to
> other
> types of recreation then I fail to see how we disturb the habitat
> any more than hikers and other users. Camping is almost always
> permitted in national parks; I can't imagine much greater
> environmental impact than camping (Ok maybe snowmolining and 4-
> wheeling). Campers have an advantage though in their numbers and a
> long history. Perhaps we need to become more political and lobby
> our
> politicians.
>
> Maryland tried to block planting in State Parks but they backed
> down
> and allowed it as long as we notified them of the location.
>
> Leterboxers unite!!! Rise up against the machine! If you ask me
> the
> Rangers just want to limit access as much as possible so they have
> less work to do. I live in an area with LOTS of state and national
> parks most of which have only the most cursory, common sense
> limits
> on access yet they want to stop letterboxers; why? My guess is
> rampant paranoia and profound laziness (OK that's just venting
> anger), but I believe that they merely look at us as something new
> that they don't want to take the time to understand or learn about
> so it's easier to just say "No" to this "new" use of parks than to
> take time to understand what we're doing in "their" parks.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
> -~-->
> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
> Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US &
> Canada.http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/60TolB/TM
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> --~->
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
Wisconsin Hiker
----- Original Message -----
From: Lady Hydrangea Prisspott nee Hedge
Date: Friday, March 5, 2004 10:36 am
Subject: [LbNA] Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
> I too am troubled by the no Nat'l Parks rule. If you eliminate
> National, State or Municipal Parks (which I assume are off limits
> for the same rationale) then all you have left is private land and
> I
> don't want all of you crawling over Prisspott Manor and given it's
> modest size doesn't offer much in the way of hiding places. There
> is
> one other public land that is not a park; roads and highways but
> that doesn't seem like a good place.
>
> If we can't put boxes in Nat'l parks that are by the NPS own
> Mission
> Statement meant for the public's enjoyment then we won't have much
> of a hobby left.
>
> "The mission of the U.S. National Park Service (NPS) is to
> conserve
> the scenery, the natural and historic objects, and the wildlife in
> United States' national parks, and to provide for the public's
> enjoyment of these features in a manner that will leave them
> unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations"
>
> I suppose the argument that we're disturbing sensitive habitat is
> their rationale for blocking our enjoyment but If we're planting
> along hiking trails and other areas that aren't off limits to
> other
> types of recreation then I fail to see how we disturb the habitat
> any more than hikers and other users. Camping is almost always
> permitted in national parks; I can't imagine much greater
> environmental impact than camping (Ok maybe snowmolining and 4-
> wheeling). Campers have an advantage though in their numbers and a
> long history. Perhaps we need to become more political and lobby
> our
> politicians.
>
> Maryland tried to block planting in State Parks but they backed
> down
> and allowed it as long as we notified them of the location.
>
> Leterboxers unite!!! Rise up against the machine! If you ask me
> the
> Rangers just want to limit access as much as possible so they have
> less work to do. I live in an area with LOTS of state and national
> parks most of which have only the most cursory, common sense
> limits
> on access yet they want to stop letterboxers; why? My guess is
> rampant paranoia and profound laziness (OK that's just venting
> anger), but I believe that they merely look at us as something new
> that they don't want to take the time to understand or learn about
> so it's easier to just say "No" to this "new" use of parks than to
> take time to understand what we're doing in "their" parks.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
> -~-->
> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
> Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US &
> Canada.http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/60TolB/TM
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> --~->
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: rscarpen (RiskyNil@pocketmail.com) |
Date: 2004-03-05 18:50:59 UTC
> Why not letterbox on National Parks? I am sure there is a very
> good, obvious reason. I am just curious as to what it is.
Because it's in their little rule book, and an organization of that
size is run by rules up the Yazoo.
But--and this is completely a theory on my part from observations
I've made--some parks I think are more forgiving of letterboxers than
others. The official word is letterboxes are not permitted in
National Parks, but I think the folks that run some of the national
parks actually don't mind a few well-placed letterboxers.
Keep in mind, most of the day-to-day running of the parks is done by
people that work in their park, and there really isn't much
communication between parks. And it really depends on how hell-bent
the individuals working in a park are on how long a letterbox can
last there. Some parks are very anti-letterboxing and allegedly
patrol this talk list for illegal letterboxing activities on their
land.
But there are other national parks where the National Park was
informed about a letterbox, but then took absolutely no actions to do
anything about it. Maybe they felt they had bigger concerns like
crowd control and teaching idiots not to feed to the animals. Maybe
the administrators of those parks actually enjoy letterboxing.
They'll never say that in an official capacity, of course, but I have
a strong suspicion that some national parks really are more forgiving
of letterboxers than others.
A disclaimer, though: I'm not trying to convince anyone to go out and
hide boxes in any national parks. Except for maybe Capitol Reef NP--
because I *really* don't like those park employees and would love to
upset their lazy lifestyles. ;o) Letterboxing in National Parks is
illegal.
On another note, I think the powers-that-be in national parks are
really shooting themselves in the foot with such an uncompromising
attitude. They can outlaw letterboxes, but it's still going to
happen. It'll just be happening behind their backs. People will
hide boxes with no contact or identifying marks. They'll start
passing clues around verbally instead of publicized on websites.
They'll start planting 'fake' boxes to give the park service
imaginary boxes to confiscate.
At least with a tone of reconciliation and compromise, they can keep
letterboxing above-ground where they can keep on eye on it and insure
the boxes being placed in acceptable areas. It urks me to no end
when a NPS employees complains about a letterbox in one of their
parking lots. Yeah, the letterbox is a problem, but building a damn
parking lot--NO PROBLEM. *rolling eyes*
-- Ryan
> good, obvious reason. I am just curious as to what it is.
Because it's in their little rule book, and an organization of that
size is run by rules up the Yazoo.
But--and this is completely a theory on my part from observations
I've made--some parks I think are more forgiving of letterboxers than
others. The official word is letterboxes are not permitted in
National Parks, but I think the folks that run some of the national
parks actually don't mind a few well-placed letterboxers.
Keep in mind, most of the day-to-day running of the parks is done by
people that work in their park, and there really isn't much
communication between parks. And it really depends on how hell-bent
the individuals working in a park are on how long a letterbox can
last there. Some parks are very anti-letterboxing and allegedly
patrol this talk list for illegal letterboxing activities on their
land.
But there are other national parks where the National Park was
informed about a letterbox, but then took absolutely no actions to do
anything about it. Maybe they felt they had bigger concerns like
crowd control and teaching idiots not to feed to the animals. Maybe
the administrators of those parks actually enjoy letterboxing.
They'll never say that in an official capacity, of course, but I have
a strong suspicion that some national parks really are more forgiving
of letterboxers than others.
A disclaimer, though: I'm not trying to convince anyone to go out and
hide boxes in any national parks. Except for maybe Capitol Reef NP--
because I *really* don't like those park employees and would love to
upset their lazy lifestyles. ;o) Letterboxing in National Parks is
illegal.
On another note, I think the powers-that-be in national parks are
really shooting themselves in the foot with such an uncompromising
attitude. They can outlaw letterboxes, but it's still going to
happen. It'll just be happening behind their backs. People will
hide boxes with no contact or identifying marks. They'll start
passing clues around verbally instead of publicized on websites.
They'll start planting 'fake' boxes to give the park service
imaginary boxes to confiscate.
At least with a tone of reconciliation and compromise, they can keep
letterboxing above-ground where they can keep on eye on it and insure
the boxes being placed in acceptable areas. It urks me to no end
when a NPS employees complains about a letterbox in one of their
parking lots. Yeah, the letterbox is a problem, but building a damn
parking lot--NO PROBLEM. *rolling eyes*
-- Ryan
RE: [LbNA] Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: Pam Kleingers (pam@kleingers.net) |
Date: 2004-03-05 15:02:51 UTC-05:00
Thanks everyoen for the explanations nad htought provoking posts.
I will honor the NPS request to not box on their land. I am sorry they
feel this way, and I do hope that at some point in the future they will have
a change of heart. Think of all the wonderful places i could discover!
Ah well...I'll jsut get out there and box!
Mama Stork
aka Pam in Cinci
I will honor the NPS request to not box on their land. I am sorry they
feel this way, and I do hope that at some point in the future they will have
a change of heart. Think of all the wonderful places i could discover!
Ah well...I'll jsut get out there and box!
Mama Stork
aka Pam in Cinci
Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: birder579 (birder579@yahoo.com) |
Date: 2004-03-05 20:08:24 UTC
The situation in State, Municipal, and private parks and preserves
is nowhere as dismal as in National Parks. Many states and
localities welcome letterboxers. The state of Connecticut has put
out their own official state letterboxes. Many land managers would
welcome our activities if they were asked, and had a chance to catch
the enthusiasm that we have. Some will not, so we don't plant on
their land.
It is difficult to put your ego on the line and ask permission from
a stranger. As related in a number of posts, not all of these
approaches go well. Sometimes we must summon all our diplomatic
skill quickly and unexpectedly. Such is the case with a hobby that
has secrecy as part of it's thrill.
The Bird Stamper.
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Lady Hydrangea Prisspott nee
Hedge" wrote:
> I too am troubled by the no Nat'l Parks rule. If you eliminate
> National, State or Municipal Parks (which I assume are off limits
> for the same rationale) then all you have left is private land and
(...)
is nowhere as dismal as in National Parks. Many states and
localities welcome letterboxers. The state of Connecticut has put
out their own official state letterboxes. Many land managers would
welcome our activities if they were asked, and had a chance to catch
the enthusiasm that we have. Some will not, so we don't plant on
their land.
It is difficult to put your ego on the line and ask permission from
a stranger. As related in a number of posts, not all of these
approaches go well. Sometimes we must summon all our diplomatic
skill quickly and unexpectedly. Such is the case with a hobby that
has secrecy as part of it's thrill.
The Bird Stamper.
--- In letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com, "Lady Hydrangea Prisspott nee
Hedge"
> I too am troubled by the no Nat'l Parks rule. If you eliminate
> National, State or Municipal Parks (which I assume are off limits
> for the same rationale) then all you have left is private land and
(...)
Re: [LbNA] Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: dave & diane (vonderinsel@cox.net) |
Date: 2004-03-05 23:41:47 UTC-05:00
Wow. What a poor stance to take. I don't work for any park at all, and I'm irked at this post!
"You make what I'm doing illegal, I don't like that, so I'm going to do it anyway. Your little rule book is wron, and I'm going to find others in your organization that agree with me and we're going to team up to circumvent your rules."
NPS folks deal with tons (Tons - get that picture into your head) of litter every day. We've seen poorly-maintained boxes and boxes abandoned by their planter - that is litter. Numerous efforts to contact the placer have failed, but Diane and I haven't returned on those trips to get up there and yank the dang boxes yet.
Okay, say you're a good, consciencious planter who always maintains the box regularly, and plant one in a natural area that isn't as tame as southern New England. Yosemite critters know what food containers look like and what's inside. They tear them into tiny pieces and scatter the guts looking for goodies. Don't get me started on raccoons in a tug-of-war with a cook over who owns the trash bag, or five bears deciding that this field kitchen is now theirs.
I don't have a lot of trouble with critters with my boxes, but then if they get busted up, it's not a park that gets trashed. The rangers are acting responsibly, trying to be as good a steward of creation as they can given the volume of visitors (some not as respectful as the average letterboxer) they get. Let's cut them a little slack, and try not to think of them as the monolithic menace. I gotta figure they're not in it for the money, power or glory of public service forestry!
Dave
the von der Insels
P.S. - Lazy lifestyles? Have you looked at the personnel appropriations for our park system in this administration?
----- Original Message -----
From: rscarpen
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 1:50 PM
Subject: [LbNA] Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
> Why not letterbox on National Parks? I am sure there is a very
> good, obvious reason. I am just curious as to what it is.
Because it's in their little rule book, and an organization of that
size is run by rules up the Yazoo.
But--and this is completely a theory on my part from observations
I've made--some parks I think are more forgiving of letterboxers than
others. The official word is letterboxes are not permitted in
National Parks, but I think the folks that run some of the national
parks actually don't mind a few well-placed letterboxers.
Keep in mind, most of the day-to-day running of the parks is done by
people that work in their park, and there really isn't much
communication between parks. And it really depends on how hell-bent
the individuals working in a park are on how long a letterbox can
last there. Some parks are very anti-letterboxing and allegedly
patrol this talk list for illegal letterboxing activities on their
land.
But there are other national parks where the National Park was
informed about a letterbox, but then took absolutely no actions to do
anything about it. Maybe they felt they had bigger concerns like
crowd control and teaching idiots not to feed to the animals. Maybe
the administrators of those parks actually enjoy letterboxing.
They'll never say that in an official capacity, of course, but I have
a strong suspicion that some national parks really are more forgiving
of letterboxers than others.
A disclaimer, though: I'm not trying to convince anyone to go out and
hide boxes in any national parks. Except for maybe Capitol Reef NP--
because I *really* don't like those park employees and would love to
upset their lazy lifestyles. ;o) Letterboxing in National Parks is
illegal.
On another note, I think the powers-that-be in national parks are
really shooting themselves in the foot with such an uncompromising
attitude. They can outlaw letterboxes, but it's still going to
happen. It'll just be happening behind their backs. People will
hide boxes with no contact or identifying marks. They'll start
passing clues around verbally instead of publicized on websites.
They'll start planting 'fake' boxes to give the park service
imaginary boxes to confiscate.
At least with a tone of reconciliation and compromise, they can keep
letterboxing above-ground where they can keep on eye on it and insure
the boxes being placed in acceptable areas. It urks me to no end
when a NPS employees complains about a letterbox in one of their
parking lots. Yeah, the letterbox is a problem, but building a damn
parking lot--NO PROBLEM. *rolling eyes*
-- Ryan
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
"You make what I'm doing illegal, I don't like that, so I'm going to do it anyway. Your little rule book is wron, and I'm going to find others in your organization that agree with me and we're going to team up to circumvent your rules."
NPS folks deal with tons (Tons - get that picture into your head) of litter every day. We've seen poorly-maintained boxes and boxes abandoned by their planter - that is litter. Numerous efforts to contact the placer have failed, but Diane and I haven't returned on those trips to get up there and yank the dang boxes yet.
Okay, say you're a good, consciencious planter who always maintains the box regularly, and plant one in a natural area that isn't as tame as southern New England. Yosemite critters know what food containers look like and what's inside. They tear them into tiny pieces and scatter the guts looking for goodies. Don't get me started on raccoons in a tug-of-war with a cook over who owns the trash bag, or five bears deciding that this field kitchen is now theirs.
I don't have a lot of trouble with critters with my boxes, but then if they get busted up, it's not a park that gets trashed. The rangers are acting responsibly, trying to be as good a steward of creation as they can given the volume of visitors (some not as respectful as the average letterboxer) they get. Let's cut them a little slack, and try not to think of them as the monolithic menace. I gotta figure they're not in it for the money, power or glory of public service forestry!
Dave
the von der Insels
P.S. - Lazy lifestyles? Have you looked at the personnel appropriations for our park system in this administration?
----- Original Message -----
From: rscarpen
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 1:50 PM
Subject: [LbNA] Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
> Why not letterbox on National Parks? I am sure there is a very
> good, obvious reason. I am just curious as to what it is.
Because it's in their little rule book, and an organization of that
size is run by rules up the Yazoo.
But--and this is completely a theory on my part from observations
I've made--some parks I think are more forgiving of letterboxers than
others. The official word is letterboxes are not permitted in
National Parks, but I think the folks that run some of the national
parks actually don't mind a few well-placed letterboxers.
Keep in mind, most of the day-to-day running of the parks is done by
people that work in their park, and there really isn't much
communication between parks. And it really depends on how hell-bent
the individuals working in a park are on how long a letterbox can
last there. Some parks are very anti-letterboxing and allegedly
patrol this talk list for illegal letterboxing activities on their
land.
But there are other national parks where the National Park was
informed about a letterbox, but then took absolutely no actions to do
anything about it. Maybe they felt they had bigger concerns like
crowd control and teaching idiots not to feed to the animals. Maybe
the administrators of those parks actually enjoy letterboxing.
They'll never say that in an official capacity, of course, but I have
a strong suspicion that some national parks really are more forgiving
of letterboxers than others.
A disclaimer, though: I'm not trying to convince anyone to go out and
hide boxes in any national parks. Except for maybe Capitol Reef NP--
because I *really* don't like those park employees and would love to
upset their lazy lifestyles. ;o) Letterboxing in National Parks is
illegal.
On another note, I think the powers-that-be in national parks are
really shooting themselves in the foot with such an uncompromising
attitude. They can outlaw letterboxes, but it's still going to
happen. It'll just be happening behind their backs. People will
hide boxes with no contact or identifying marks. They'll start
passing clues around verbally instead of publicized on websites.
They'll start planting 'fake' boxes to give the park service
imaginary boxes to confiscate.
At least with a tone of reconciliation and compromise, they can keep
letterboxing above-ground where they can keep on eye on it and insure
the boxes being placed in acceptable areas. It urks me to no end
when a NPS employees complains about a letterbox in one of their
parking lots. Yeah, the letterbox is a problem, but building a damn
parking lot--NO PROBLEM. *rolling eyes*
-- Ryan
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [LbNA] Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: dave & diane (vonderinsel@cox.net) |
Date: 2004-03-05 23:50:31 UTC-05:00
All is not lost! Clues can send folks in and around anywhere. Take them through the park, gathering data as they go. "If Mount Whoopie is 90 degrees from the McBumpus Overlook, then turn left at the fork. If Mount Whoopie is at 180 degrees, then turn right.". "If the plaque says that this rock is 40 feet high, then drive to the West Exit. If the plaque says it's 60 feet high, then go to the North Exit.". Place the letterbox down the road from the park, with directions based on what you see. Just give folks an idea of the distances involved!
Dave
the von der Insels
----- Original Message -----
From: Pam Kleingers
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 3:02 PM
Subject: RE: [LbNA] Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
Thanks everyoen for the explanations nad htought provoking posts.
I will honor the NPS request to not box on their land. I am sorry they
feel this way, and I do hope that at some point in the future they will have
a change of heart. Think of all the wonderful places i could discover!
Ah well...I'll jsut get out there and box!
Mama Stork
aka Pam in Cinci
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Dave
the von der Insels
----- Original Message -----
From: Pam Kleingers
To: letterbox-usa@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 3:02 PM
Subject: RE: [LbNA] Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
Thanks everyoen for the explanations nad htought provoking posts.
I will honor the NPS request to not box on their land. I am sorry they
feel this way, and I do hope that at some point in the future they will have
a change of heart. Think of all the wonderful places i could discover!
Ah well...I'll jsut get out there and box!
Mama Stork
aka Pam in Cinci
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/letterbox-usa/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: rscarpen (RiskyNil@pocketmail.com) |
Date: 2004-03-06 05:45:57 UTC
> Wow. What a poor stance to take.
Interesting. I don't remember ever saying that I would continue to
hide letterboxes in a National Park. Who gave you that idea? Why
would I bother? I'd rather hide a box in a legal location where it
can live a long and fun-filled life.
But I am VERY pissed off about the park service's attitude as a whole
about letterboxing. They haven't tried to work with letterboxers to
find a happy middle-ground that everyone can live with. That's the
part that urks me most. No consideration is given about where it
might be okay to letterbox. Where it might be a useful to get
visitors to less-visited, less-impacted parks. Or less-impacted
areas of the same park.
The National Park Service doesn't always have a stellar record of
preserving the outdoors. I want to sabatoge those stupid leaf-
blowers they have. They take something that's completely natural,
feels wonderfully good under your feet, and find the single most
ecologicly unfriendly manner possible to get rid of them. It's
disgraceful.
The last time I was out at Channel Islands National Park, they had
cows roaming the island. Yep, the meat in that hamburger you ate
could have come from a national park. Disgraceful.
Snowmobiles have been allowed in national parks for a long, long
time, although I remember some sort of controversy about Clinton
banning them from national parks. I've never snowmobiled, though, so
I don't know many details on that. I think Bush allowed limited
snowmobiling back. (Surprise, surprise.)
There are a lot of great people I've worked with in the NPS, and they
have done a great job in many respects, but the NPS treatment of
letterboxers is shameful.
I'm done with hiding boxes in national parks--it's not worth the
effort--but I'm all for other people doing it. Civil disobedience.
God bless America. It could make someone a criminal today, but a
martyr tomorrow. Their draconian tactics with regards to
letterboxing is only going to drive the sport underground where they
can't control it quite so easily. I'm just stating the obvious.
If the national park service can find room for campers, backpackers,
fishermen, and hikers, I should think they could find room for a few
letterboxers. Hand out lists of pre-approved places for
letterboxes. Or hide boxes themselves that they can keep an eye on,
so letterboxers don't feel the 'need' to plant their own boxes in
less desireable places.
You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, they say, but
the NPS has been stuffing us a lot of vinegar, and I don't like it.
> Let's cut them a little slack, and try not to think of them as the
> monolithic menace.
They ARE a monolithic menace. I *have* worked in the National
Parks. I've built some of those fences that keep visitors out of
sensitive areas. I've built picnic tables for the visitors. I've
revegitated hard-hit areas. I've cleared trails. Built turnpikes.
Dug water drips. I've pulled out several tons of asphault from
abandoned trails. (Get this--the NPS didn't even know where one
trail went anymore--we had to uncover them first to find out! And we
actually found one abandoned trail that the NPS didn't even know ever
existed!) One of my favorite tasks was fixing an electric fence to
keeps cows out of a particularly sensitive area on the Channel
Islands where endangered birds nest. Afterwards. we searched the
area for stray cows to herd them back to "their" side of the electric
fence. Felt like a real cowboy with that experience.
I've probably visited more national parks than the typical person
will in a lifetime. Most of the individual NPS personel I've dealt
with are great people that really care about the environment and the
park they work in, and my beef is not with them. It's with the
practices of the organization as a whole.
I've gotten a closer up view of the NPS than the average visitor
will, and I can respect their accomplishments. But that doesn't make
them perfect, and it doesn't mean we should cut them any slack when
we see them doing something wrong. Their hard-handed and closed-
minded attitude to letterboxing is wrong.
-- Ryan
Interesting. I don't remember ever saying that I would continue to
hide letterboxes in a National Park. Who gave you that idea? Why
would I bother? I'd rather hide a box in a legal location where it
can live a long and fun-filled life.
But I am VERY pissed off about the park service's attitude as a whole
about letterboxing. They haven't tried to work with letterboxers to
find a happy middle-ground that everyone can live with. That's the
part that urks me most. No consideration is given about where it
might be okay to letterbox. Where it might be a useful to get
visitors to less-visited, less-impacted parks. Or less-impacted
areas of the same park.
The National Park Service doesn't always have a stellar record of
preserving the outdoors. I want to sabatoge those stupid leaf-
blowers they have. They take something that's completely natural,
feels wonderfully good under your feet, and find the single most
ecologicly unfriendly manner possible to get rid of them. It's
disgraceful.
The last time I was out at Channel Islands National Park, they had
cows roaming the island. Yep, the meat in that hamburger you ate
could have come from a national park. Disgraceful.
Snowmobiles have been allowed in national parks for a long, long
time, although I remember some sort of controversy about Clinton
banning them from national parks. I've never snowmobiled, though, so
I don't know many details on that. I think Bush allowed limited
snowmobiling back. (Surprise, surprise.)
There are a lot of great people I've worked with in the NPS, and they
have done a great job in many respects, but the NPS treatment of
letterboxers is shameful.
I'm done with hiding boxes in national parks--it's not worth the
effort--but I'm all for other people doing it. Civil disobedience.
God bless America. It could make someone a criminal today, but a
martyr tomorrow. Their draconian tactics with regards to
letterboxing is only going to drive the sport underground where they
can't control it quite so easily. I'm just stating the obvious.
If the national park service can find room for campers, backpackers,
fishermen, and hikers, I should think they could find room for a few
letterboxers. Hand out lists of pre-approved places for
letterboxes. Or hide boxes themselves that they can keep an eye on,
so letterboxers don't feel the 'need' to plant their own boxes in
less desireable places.
You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, they say, but
the NPS has been stuffing us a lot of vinegar, and I don't like it.
> Let's cut them a little slack, and try not to think of them as the
> monolithic menace.
They ARE a monolithic menace. I *have* worked in the National
Parks. I've built some of those fences that keep visitors out of
sensitive areas. I've built picnic tables for the visitors. I've
revegitated hard-hit areas. I've cleared trails. Built turnpikes.
Dug water drips. I've pulled out several tons of asphault from
abandoned trails. (Get this--the NPS didn't even know where one
trail went anymore--we had to uncover them first to find out! And we
actually found one abandoned trail that the NPS didn't even know ever
existed!) One of my favorite tasks was fixing an electric fence to
keeps cows out of a particularly sensitive area on the Channel
Islands where endangered birds nest. Afterwards. we searched the
area for stray cows to herd them back to "their" side of the electric
fence. Felt like a real cowboy with that experience.
I've probably visited more national parks than the typical person
will in a lifetime. Most of the individual NPS personel I've dealt
with are great people that really care about the environment and the
park they work in, and my beef is not with them. It's with the
practices of the organization as a whole.
I've gotten a closer up view of the NPS than the average visitor
will, and I can respect their accomplishments. But that doesn't make
them perfect, and it doesn't mean we should cut them any slack when
we see them doing something wrong. Their hard-handed and closed-
minded attitude to letterboxing is wrong.
-- Ryan
Re: Re: ?? regardign LB and Nat'l Parks
From: (vitlaur@aol.com) |
Date: 2004-03-06 21:56:46 UTC-05:00
I have a dear friend who works for the National Parks. She laughed when I
asked about the "policy" on letterboxes. She said that they are so understaffed
that they don't have time to work up a policy on letterboxing, nor did they
feel it was necessary. She believes it is an entirely laid-backed agency.
Anyway, they have bigger fish to fry.
I think it all depends on the personal feelings of the land manager. LBNA
has had its share of irate land managers asking for removal of letterboxes, for
whatever reasons. It's important to respect their views and wishes. But I
don't believe all National Parks seek to remove all letterboxes. Some national
parks allow it (or don't disallow it) and some don't. The same goes for
state forest, nature conservancy, audubon, etc. Some allow it some don't. Common
sense goes a long way. It is always a good idea to strongly consider the
impact of the letterbox on its surroundings.
Laurette
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
asked about the "policy" on letterboxes. She said that they are so understaffed
that they don't have time to work up a policy on letterboxing, nor did they
feel it was necessary. She believes it is an entirely laid-backed agency.
Anyway, they have bigger fish to fry.
I think it all depends on the personal feelings of the land manager. LBNA
has had its share of irate land managers asking for removal of letterboxes, for
whatever reasons. It's important to respect their views and wishes. But I
don't believe all National Parks seek to remove all letterboxes. Some national
parks allow it (or don't disallow it) and some don't. The same goes for
state forest, nature conservancy, audubon, etc. Some allow it some don't. Common
sense goes a long way. It is always a good idea to strongly consider the
impact of the letterbox on its surroundings.
Laurette
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]