I don't know if it will make any difference, but I have just sent an email
to all of the Maine elected officals in Washington asking for clarification
on the email posted to the LBNA site. Perhaps if lots of us made "noise" in
this way, we might be able to effect a change. I would also be interested
in knowing, if anyone out there knows, who the person is who posted that
email and what "C & O Canal NHP" means.
Memlili

"MARTEL" wrote:
if anyone out there knows, who the person is who posted that
> email
> Memlili

Who is that masked person? Hee, Hee
Susan or Eric DAVIS?

Monica

I am relatively new to letterboxing, but would have to say that
during the course of the past few months and the boxes I have looked
for (some found, some not), I have frequently seen evidence that
would support the concerns of the NPS. This includes everything from
noticable footpaths to boxes or clue landmarks that are located off
the path, to disturbed surroundings, overturned rocks, logs, holes in
the ground around trees, etc.

I realize that most people involved in the hobby are environmentally
responsible and practice a 'leave no trace' philosophy, but
unfortuntately a few irresponsible participants can ruin it for the
entire group. And there is also the possibility that the
disturbances are not even caused by letterboxers, rather by vandals,
intentionally seeking a box to prank (as we have seen in recent
posts).

I think the NPS has a basis for their decision. While they no doubt
realize the majority of letterboxing activity is harmless and can
actually bring people to the park, they have to consider the whole
picture, and the fact that there have been problems and how it could
very quickly get out of control and something they would not be able
to monitor.

Rather than being upset, our response should be to be more diligent
about our letterboxing activities and make sure we are being
responsible at all times, both in our searching and clue writing.
While I agree with a comment that was previously made that the onus
is ultimately on the searcher, well written and desciptive clues
(particularly at the end) can certainly help this. There is plenty
of opportunity to make clues puzzling and vague in the beginning
stages of a hunt that being descriptive about the hiding spot once
the person has actually reached it, is not giving it away and can
make the difference between somebody turning over every stone and
pulling leaves out of every rotting stump in the area. Sure, even
then there is bound to be times where there is a hunt, but as a
searcher, it takes only a minute to put the leaves back, to replace
the stones you have peeked under, etc. Most of what I have seen, is
just haste and carelessness -- somebody looked a few places before
finding a box and then after they found it, just left without
covering their tracks.

There are plenty of other places to hide letterboxes than the
National Parks. By taking advantage of these other opportunities to
demonstrate that we are a responsible group, perhaps some day the NPS
will change their stance. Perhaps not. Oh well, it's a huge country
and the NPS controls only a small portion of it.

Deb (SpringChick)


--- In letterbox-usa@y..., "MARTEL" wrote:
> I don't know if it will make any difference, but I have just sent
an email
> to all of the Maine elected officals in Washington asking for
clarification
> on the email posted to the LBNA site. Perhaps if lots of us
made "noise" in
> this way, we might be able to effect a change. I would also be
interested
> in knowing, if anyone out there knows, who the person is who
posted that
> email and what "C & O Canal NHP" means.
> Memlili

On a different note... Exactly what parks are controlled by the NPS?

I know it includes National Parks, National Historical Parks, and
National Lakeshore areas, are there other?

I believe the National Forest areas, which are under the control of
the USDA, are separate entities, yes?

And what about National Wildlife Refuge areas?

Deb

I actually was referring to the "official" with NPS, not the person who
kindly shared it with us.
Memlili

----- Original Message -----
From: "lizardbuttsfamily"
To:
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 2:28 AM
Subject: [LbNA] Re: Recent National Park Service "rule"


> "MARTEL" wrote:
> if anyone out there knows, who the person is who posted that
> > email
> > Memlili
>
> Who is that masked person? Hee, Hee
> Susan or Eric DAVIS?
>
> Monica
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe: mailto:letterbox-usa-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> List etiquette, info, etc: http://www.letterboxing.org/list.html
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

> And what about National Wildlife Refuge areas?

Its been reported that these are off-limits as well (tho that
doesn't answer the question as to whose jurisdiction they are
in). I will really find it bizarre if they allow drilling in
ANWR, but don't allow letterboxing (as apparently is the
current rule ...) ... but they claim they can do the drilling
with LNT ethics :-)

I _am_ aware of one NWR that allows deer hunting (and doesn't
allow letterboxing). I am not anti-hunting, but I would argue
that most reasonable people would view killing deer and going
off-trail in search of them as higher impact on the environment
than letterboxing (and why don't deer qualify as "wildlife"
anyway?), at least from a biomass metric. Additionally, I've
seen plenty of shotgun shells at the location in question
(and I thought deer were hunted with rifles, that's how much
I know) -- anyway, one wonders why the NWS doesn't view these
shells in the same negative light as letterboxing?

To be perfectly frank about this, I feel the reasons given
by the NPS are, well, nevermind :-). The fact of the matter
is that this issue started when geocaching was promoted, and
the NPS found out about it (and I'm not bashing geocaching,
it seems you need a disclaimer for everything ...). The NPS
has a statute on their books against "leaving abandoned property".
This was the statute that was quoted to "ban" geocaching and
letterboxing, before anyone did any sort of assessment, and
before either activity was popular enough to "leave traces".
(Links to that original memo from the NPS are probably in this
archive, and are certainly in the geocaching yahoo group archive
(assuming that group still exists)). This rule has nothing to
do with any of the reasons they currently quote.

I think that they feel the activities are not as "wholesome",
"noble", "mature", etc., for the noble and high cultural
purposes the parks are supposed to represent. My sense is
that its viewed as "kids playing hide and seek in an opera
house". Too profane for the sanctity of the parks. There is
no doubt in my mind that a box in the middle of Cascade NP, or
Denali NP is going to bother anyone or any biomass or cultural
situations. I assure you that people climbing Denali (or el
Capitan) leave more trace than letterboxers do. But people
are allowed to.

I agree that getting pissed off at the NPS is a non-starter.
I would think emphasizing the "cultural and educational value" of
letterboxing is the way to go ... I'm not claiming my clues are
anything special, but I will claim you will need to be educated
in the same sort of cultural and historical perspectives to find
them that the park people claim to wish provide to their visitors
(I could go on, but I don't want to ...)

Cheers

In reading the NPS official rules, it addresses both letterboxing and
geo-caching as activities which require authorization. It sounds as
though this has gone beyond that to outrightly say "no."

Deb


--- In letterbox-usa@y..., tehutika@a... wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> On the subject of hunting, the NPS requires special permits for the
right to
> hunt their land. Since they have an economic interest, banning the
practice
> would be detrimental to them. This is above and beyond the licences
that
> hunters and fisherman need from the state in which they live.
>
> As for National Monuments, I am currently working with the
Springfield
> Armory, which is run by the Park Service, to get permission to
place two
> boxes on their property. One will be inside the old armory building
itself,
> the other out on the grounds. I think we must try to engage the
people that
> actually work at these sites, and get permission on a case by case
basis. If
> we can do this, and show that we are responsible folks who are an
asset to
> the park system, we'll have a better chance of getting this ban
overturned.
>
> Incidentally, does anyone know where this official policy is
recorded?
>
> As a final question, to those of us in the Massachusetts area, does
anyone
> know if the Trustees of the Reservations have an official policy
regarding
> letterboxes? I know we've already planted on some of their
reservations (I've
> done one myself), but now I'm wondering if we'll have this problem
with them
> as well.
>
> Mike S.
> P12 F74 V4

----- Original Message -----
From: "SpringChick"
To:
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 6:21 AM
Subject: [LbNA] Re: Recent National Park Service "rule"


> In reading the NPS official rules, it addresses both letterboxing and
> geo-caching as activities which require authorization. It sounds as
> though this has gone beyond that to outrightly say "no."
>

I agree - they don't seem to be following their own rules. Any lawyers out
there?

The problem is that this is NOT just a NPS issue. State parks are getting
on board too. And what happens when city parks follow suit? There may be
plenty of "other" places to hide boxes now, but will that be the case in 5
years?

HangGlider

HangGlider

-- Very well written SpringChick. This explains why I haven't been
able to locate Squirrels Mystery Box. I'm sure I was in the right
place but found nothing. I can't be sure but I think Squirrel has her
first confiscation.
What bothers me is their(NPS) concern for boxes and caches but
the garbage is overwhelming. No trash cans or bags provided for easy
clean-up. I personally have picked up full bags of beer cans, soda
cans and food wrappers. I realize these are left by ignorant people.
I do notice that in every State Park that I have visited, there isn't
this problem. Maybe the NPS should get a lesson from State Park
Officials.
Just my 2 cents.
Psychomommy



- In letterbox-usa@y..., "SpringChick" wrote:
> I am relatively new to letterboxing, but would have to say that
> during the course of the past few months and the boxes I have
looked
> for (some found, some not), I have frequently seen evidence that
> would support the concerns of the NPS. This includes everything
from
> noticable footpaths to boxes or clue landmarks that are located off
> the path, to disturbed surroundings, overturned rocks, logs, holes
in
> the ground around trees, etc.
>
> I realize that most people involved in the hobby are
environmentally
> responsible and practice a 'leave no trace' philosophy, but
> unfortuntately a few irresponsible participants can ruin it for the
> entire group. And there is also the possibility that the
> disturbances are not even caused by letterboxers, rather by
vandals,
> intentionally seeking a box to prank (as we have seen in recent
> posts).
>
> I think the NPS has a basis for their decision. While they no
doubt
> realize the majority of letterboxing activity is harmless and can
> actually bring people to the park, they have to consider the whole
> picture, and the fact that there have been problems and how it
could
> very quickly get out of control and something they would not be
able
> to monitor.
>
> Rather than being upset, our response should be to be more diligent
> about our letterboxing activities and make sure we are being
> responsible at all times, both in our searching and clue writing.
> While I agree with a comment that was previously made that the onus
> is ultimately on the searcher, well written and desciptive clues
> (particularly at the end) can certainly help this. There is plenty
> of opportunity to make clues puzzling and vague in the beginning
> stages of a hunt that being descriptive about the hiding spot once
> the person has actually reached it, is not giving it away and can
> make the difference between somebody turning over every stone and
> pulling leaves out of every rotting stump in the area. Sure, even
> then there is bound to be times where there is a hunt, but as a
> searcher, it takes only a minute to put the leaves back, to replace
> the stones you have peeked under, etc. Most of what I have seen,
is
> just haste and carelessness -- somebody looked a few places before
> finding a box and then after they found it, just left without
> covering their tracks.
>
> There are plenty of other places to hide letterboxes than the
> National Parks. By taking advantage of these other opportunities
to
> demonstrate that we are a responsible group, perhaps some day the
NPS
> will change their stance. Perhaps not. Oh well, it's a huge
country
> and the NPS controls only a small portion of it.
>
> Deb (SpringChick)
>
>

Here is the link:

http://www.nps.gov/prwi/PRWISC02.pdf

The statement about only approved letterboxes (and geo-caches) is on
page 11.

Deb


--- In letterbox-usa@y..., tehutika@a... wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> In a message dated 9/26/2002 9:22:51 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> springchick1219@a... writes:
>
>
> > In reading the NPS official rules, it addresses both letterboxing
and
> > geo-caching as activities which require authorization. It sounds
as
> > though this has gone beyond that to outrightly say "no."
>
> I went through the regs, but I couldn't find anything about
letterboxing or
> geo-caches. Where in the regulations is this rule?
>
> Mike S.
> P12 F74 V4

The link Deb gave us is for a document from the NPS's Prince William
Forest Park. This was helpful because it told us what law, i.e.,
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) the NPS is relying on. Actually,
the provision on page 11 is more hopeful than the NO LETTERBOX rule
from the C&O Canal NHP in that at least PWFP allows approved
letterboxes. It looks like each park superintendent can decide what
to allow, according to 36 CFR 2.22(a)(2). What is interesting is
that the C&O Canal and PWFP are both in the same NPS region (at least
they used to be a few years ago) and the superintendents report to
the same Regional Director. It seems to me that C&O Canal's decision
not to allow letterboxes may not reflect the decision of other parks,
not even other parks in the same regional jurisdiction. Isn't there
a letterbox on Theodore Roosevelt Island that hasn't been
confiscated? That's an NPS area - I think the George Washington
Memorial Parkway handles that park and it is under still another
superintendent in the same Region. So I don't think there is a rigid
rule about this; just ask first.

If you want to read exactly what 36 CRF 2.22 says, here it is:

TITLE 36--PARKS, FORESTS, AND PUBLIC PROPERTY

CHAPTER I--NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

PART 2--RESOURCE PROTECTION, PUBLIC USE AND RECREATION--Table of
Contents

Sec. 2.22 Property.

(a) The following are prohibited:
(1) Abandoning property.
(2) Leaving property unattended for longer than 24 hours, except in
locations where longer time periods have been designated or in
accordance with conditions established by the superintendent.
(3) Failing to turn in found property to the superintendent as soon
as practicable.

b) Impoundment of property.
(1) Property determined to be left unattended in excess of an allowed
period of time may be impounded by the superintendent.
(2) Unattended property that interferes with visitor safety, orderly
management of the park area, or presents a threat to park resources
may be impounded by the superintendent at any time.
(3) Found or impounded property shall be inventoried to determine
ownership and safeguard personal property.
(4) The owner of record is responsible and liable for charges to the
person who has removed, stored, or otherwise disposed of property
impounded pursuant to this section; or the superintendent may assess
the owner reasonable fees for the impoundment and storage of property
impounded pursuant to this section.

(c) Disposition of property.
(1) Unattended property impounded pursuant to this section shall be
deemed to be abandoned unless claimed by the owner or an authorized
representative thereof within 60 days. The 60-day period shall begin
when the rightful owner of the property has been notified, if the
owner can be identified, or from the time the property was placed in
the superintendent's custody, if the owner cannot be identified.
(2) Unclaimed, found property shall be stored for a minimum period
of 60 days and, unless claimed by the owner or an authorized
representative thereof, may be claimed by the finder, provided that
the finder is not an employee of the National Park Service. Found
property not claimed by the owner or an authorized representative or
the finder shall be deemed abandoned.
(3) Abandoned property shall be disposed of in accordance with title
41 Code of Federal Regulations.
(4) Property, including real property, located within a park area
and owned by a deceased person, shall be disposed of in accordance
with the laws of the State within whose exterior boundaries the
property is located.

d) The regulations contained in paragraphs (a)(2), (b) and (c) of
this section apply, regardless of land ownership, on all lands and
waters within a park area that are under the legislative jurisdiction
of the United States.

[48 FR 30282, June 30, 1983, as amended at 52 FR 35240, Sept. 18,
1987]


Mary



--- In letterbox-usa@y..., "SpringChick" wrote:
> Here is the link:
>
> http://www.nps.gov/prwi/PRWISC02.pdf
>
> The statement about only approved letterboxes (and geo-caches) is
on
> page 11.
>
> Deb
>
>
> --- In letterbox-usa@y..., tehutika@a... wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > In a message dated 9/26/2002 9:22:51 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> > springchick1219@a... writes:
> >
> >
> > > In reading the NPS official rules, it addresses both
letterboxing
> and
> > > geo-caching as activities which require authorization. It
sounds
> as
> > > though this has gone beyond that to outrightly say "no."
> >
> > I went through the regs, but I couldn't find anything about
> letterboxing or
> > geo-caches. Where in the regulations is this rule?
> >
> > Mike S.
> > P12 F74 V4