Hi there,
I am brand new to letterboxing.....but have been a stamper, a naturalist and a park ranger for many years...hence my enthusiasm for this "new to me" past time.  Randy used the example of a recent posting of a new letterbox at Effigy Mounds in NE Iowa.  That was my posting...my first letterbox that I've hidden and I can assure you that it is in an appropiate place.  If you have hiked up to the Marching Bears, Randy, you will know that once you reach them, there is no trail...it is a large clearing on the ridge top and one is free to walk among the mounds (but not on them).   The letter box is hidden 13 steps from one of the bear mounds and on the edge of the woods....I guess when I put it in the clues, I made it sound like it is "off trail", but when one is there in person, and as you are reading the clues, you will know that it is in an appropriate place.  I should know, after all, since I am a park ranger there! I guess each letterbox is a unique situation and hopefully everyone will make the right decisions as they pursue this hobby.  

Christine

Randy Hall wrote:

 
>      One suggestion I have concerns clues for finding the box.  It is
> fine if your clues are vague or even deliberately misleading.  You
> can lead poor souls on a merry chase in getting to thier goal.
> But when it comes to actually locating the box we should
> perhaps be VERY descriptive.  This may prevent folks from doing
> too much rooting around trying to find the box in a large area that
> seems to fit the description.  I would very much like to hear
> others thoughts on this matter.  Please feel free to respond.

ok :-) (and please don't flame me if you feel my thoughts are controversial,
flame the thoughts ... :-))

I think this is a good idea.  I think it is in the faq somewhere.  Of
course, people have demonstrated their ignorance of etiquette and
conventions, so being a good idea doesn't have much meaning.  Of
course, it will come down to enforcement now.

That said, I am not responsible for the actions of others in any way.
If someone brings in a backhoe to look for a box, that's their fault,
not mine.  By putting writing on my website that may or may not describe
the location of something interesting, I am not telling you how to get
there, whether to get there, or what to do on the way.

IMHO, the onus is 100% on the searcher to do the right thing, so long
as the placer's actions on the way to the hiding place respects the
environment in the initial placement (and this may involve the placer
asking permission, or considering the social norms of the place).
As for social trails or other damage, the searcher can remove the
box if they feel bothered by it and it is really there (which it may
not be), as can park people.

An interesting thing to consider is this -- imagine letterboxing
without boxes.  If I remove all boxes (and I make no guarantees that
any boxes are there), yet leave the writing on my website, how does
that affect the calculus?  Well, my writing remains protected by the
first amendment, thus public park people can do nothing about it.
But, they can still cite searchers who go off-trail to the putative
locations described in my writing.  Thus, again it seems clear that
the onus is 100% on the searchers to do the right thing.

As a recent example, a hunt was described in eastern Iowa.  I've been
to that place myself; its called Effigy Mounds, IIRC.  IMO, that is
not an appropriate place to go off-trail, therefore I would not have
done so, despite the rumored presence of a box.  Again, the onus being
on the searcher.  I personally feel that complaining about the
placer's writing is meaningless.  You find yourself in a situation,
and you decide what the right thing to do is.  Perhaps the clue was
misread, or it was maliciously altered on the wire or on the website,
and they were writing about a different place altogether, or something
metaphorical.  (Just an example, I don't judge the actions of anyone
as I wasn't a witness.)

> It wont help any of us to get mad at the parks for removing boxes.
> They are doing what they think they need to in order to preserve
> the park from people.

I agree with this.  One of two things will begin to happen.  People will
either work with the parks, as is done in every other off-trail sport
(with the possible exception of geocaching) that occurs in parks, or they
will place boxes anonymously, (as many people are doing already).

Doing the latter will piss the parks off even more, and will give the
pastime an even worse reputation (but the non-anonymous people will pay
the price ... therefore _they_ will have incentive to remove boxes placed
anonymously).  The right answer, it seems, is some organization,
some PR, etc; but that has never materialized in the past when this
thread came up, and I don't expect it to now.

> How can we raise ourselves above the great unwashed to be welcomed
> by parks?

We can't.  There is a great unwashed in every population I've ever seen.
That is why geocaching got a bad name first, because they had more people,
thus more great unwashed.  Now that we have more people, we are getting
a great unwashed also.  I have, for example, seen what the great unwashed
idiots have done at a location no where near one of my boxes.  If their
car leaks oil in the parking lot while they are searching, am I
responsible for that :-)

We have to make our activity look more wholesome and less destructive,
than say, drilling for oil in ANWR or logging in national forests.
Remember, its perception, not reality.  It will need an organization,
but I'm not to optimistic about the emergence of one ...

Cheers
Randy

To unsubscribe: mailto:letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@egroups.com
List info, archives, etc: http://www.letterboxing.org/list.html
 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.