By Mike Malvick (Greatland Reviewer/ladybugkids)
The following is adapted from a Geocaching.com Forum post written by Community Volunteer Reviewer Keystone nearly twenty years ago in June 2006, with minor modifications based upon Guideline changes and conditions specific to Alaska. Keystone has reviewed cache pages for Pennsylvania and Ohio since 2003.
When reviewing a new cache page submission, the Community Volunteer Reviewer (Reviewer) starts with the proposition that the hider of the cache is responsible for obtaining “adequate permission.” Note that it says “adequate permission” in the Guidelines — NOT just “permission.” The Reviewer relies upon cache owners to think about this issue and make a determination about what permission is necessary. In submitting a cache page, the geocacher assures the listing service (Groundspeak/Geocaching HQ/Geocaching.com) that adequate permission has been obtained, and the listing service assumes that this is the case. As a listing service, Geocaching.com is not a guarantor of the proposition that every cache is placed with permission. But sometimes there are circumstances why this assumption ought to be questioned. Here are some of them:
- When a landowner/land manager such as a park system (Alaska State Parks is GeocacheAlaska!’s primary permit issuer) or a private land conservancy trust has a published geocaching policy that Groundspeak is aware of, then the Reviewer will ask the cache owner about compliance with that policy. Knowing of the policy’s existence, it is not appropriate to blindly assume compliance with the policy if no mention is made of this on the cache page. So the Reviewer will ask whether a required permit has been obtained or, in the case of a blanket permit such as with Alaska State Parks, if the stipulations of the permit are met. In some cases, such as National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, and National Monuments, which generally do not have an open geocaching policy, we will ask whether the hider obtained explicit permission from the Land Manager or their designee.
- When a cache is hidden on land that is obviously private, like someone’s back yard, it is unwise to blindly assume permission. Usually permission is stated or implied on the cache page (“this cache is hidden in our front yard — please, no night caching”). If it isn’t, the reviewer may ask about it. The guidelines require permission for caches hidden on private property. There’s even a specific sentence about never ignoring a “no trespassing” sign.
- Some locations are so sensitive in nature that it is unwise to assume that permission has been obtained, so specific listing guidelines have been adopted to guard against placements in those areas. Examples include airports, government buildings, school yards, dams, highway bridges, and utility infrastructure. If the reviewer sees a cache in one of these locations, they will challenge the assumption of adequate permission by reference to these specific guidelines.
In most other cases — ranging from suburban parks to shopping centers to little free libraries — it is up to the cache owner to determine what constitutes “adequate permission.” One cache owner might conclude that no formal permission at all is needed for a particular spot, while another will obtain written or oral permission for a different cache location because their instinct tells them that permission is a good idea. If the cache owner arrives at an unwarranted conclusion, the listing service will react to questions about permission. First, if a land owner/land manager requests removal of a cache placed without permission, Groundspeak’s policy is to archive the cache unless and until the hider is able to straighten things out and provide an explanation of clear permission. Second, if another geocacher sees a cache location which causes them to have doubts about permission, they are welcome to raise their concern with the cache owner. If that is not productive, the geocacher may contact Groundspeak via the Contact Us link, contact the local Reviewer, or write a “Reviewer attention requested” log on the cache page. The system is thus largely self-policing in this majority of circumstances.