Brown County Geocache Taxation and Regulation Meeting

WGA Member Joined: 2007-11-26 Posts: 3259

Sorry to start a new thread on this one, but it seemed to deserve a specific header.

If you have any input to provide to the parks department about their plan to impose a $5 geocache placement tax and to regulate the placement of caches within Brown Co. parks, the next meeting is tentatively scheduled for June 7th. You can get updated meeting times and schedules at http://www.co.brown.wi.us/county_board/schedule.htm.

It appears they have been inspired by Dane County on this one and it may be a done deal...

WGA Member Joined: 2006-12-23 Posts: 5956

This is unreal...to gain what...5-600 bucks a year? If that?

Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 4:04 pm

Here we have the parks department trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist. for instance, there is a cache in one of the Brown County parks that has existed since Jan. 2003, GCC1C6. It is a a great cache that has been visited more that 260 times, and has never to my knowledge caused a problem for anyone else using the park. The other two caches in that park likewise have never been anything except a fun hide/find. I believe the same thing can be said for all of the other caches in Brown County Parks. Just what do they hope to accomplish with this added paperwork?

Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 8:30 pm

I am inclined to attend this meeting, however, the attitude expressed by these pompous a$$e$ will simply make my blood boil and I fear this decision is already made.

What a shame. Apparently WI geocachers have not been able to police themselves for the last six years that geocaching has been in WI. Thank God Almighty! Brown County is stepping in to show us the way!

Frickin' Morons.

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 7:39 am

Righteous indignation on our part probably won't amount to a hill of beans in the eyes of Brown County's officials, but I can take the stance that I will not find caches under their jurisdiction any longer, and perhaps local cachers up there should make a point of telling us whether a cache is under their jurisdiction or not on the cache page.

The paltry sum they will collect from cache placement fees is nothing compared to the money we spend in their communities. I have family in the area, and I can attest to the fact that since we have started caching (about two years now), the two of us alone have exceeded in food and gas the $500.00 or so they will collect in fees every year.

Perhaps they'll feel it, perhaps they won't. We are not a large demographic yet. But maybe cities with more understanding management policies will see more of our business, and will be happy for our dollar.

WGA Member Joined: 2007-11-26 Posts: 3259

I wrote our friend Doug Hartman and basically said, "why bother coming to this meeting when the decision is already made?"

His reply:

"Actually, I think the committee is open for reconsideration (they established the fee in August of 2006). Discussion by the three committee members present at the public meeting led me to believe that two were reconsidering having to make sponsors pay a fee. So it may well be worth your while to either write the committee or present your opinion at the next meeting if you have the time."

So, it might be worth showing to politely make the case against taxing and regulating geocaching. And I use "taxing and regulating" very deliberately, because "user fees" are just a more palatable word for "tax."

Here are the original points I made to Hartman:

"Geocaching is not only fun for participants, but it benefits the county parks, and not only in indirect ways such as increased visitation as the article mentioned. Geocachers actively work to protect and improve parks and undertake “cache in, trash out” activities where we routinely remove trash left by OTHER park visitors as part of our cache hunt. It’s also safe to say that simply walking around the park looking for a cache causes virtually no “wear and tear” on the park versus visitors who come to use other park facilities.

The parks department ostensibly wants to ensure that caches won’t pose danger to visitors by where they are placed. However, placing and finding caches requires that geocachers agree to an at-own-risk statement with the organization that tracks where caches are placed. If the county begins to tax and regulate cache placement, does the county then begin to assume liability for where caches are placed, and do its citizens want to bear that burden?

So, before deciding to tax and regulate this non-impact activity, I would implore Brown County to take a close look at all the real facts about geocaching."

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 9:26 am

Another point to emphasize is that because there are already caches placed in Brown county parks, due to the cache density guidelines, it is unlikely that any caches will be placed in the parks in the near future, except in the case that an existing cache is archived. All in all, there is very little to be accomplished here of a positive nature.

WGA Member Joined: 2007-11-26 Posts: 3259

The impression I get is that they would require this for existing caches as well. If you recall the DNR did the same thing, or at least I was following some caches on Rib Mountain that were threatened w/removal if they didn't get the right paperwork. Of course, someone from the parks dept would have to be smart enough to figure out how to hunt and find noncompliant "legacy" caches if they wanted to go that route.

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 4:00 pm

Does anybody know how many caches are in County Parks:

Bay Shore Three or Four. So 15-20 Bucks
Fonferek Glen 1 so 5.00
WayMor Park 1 so 5.00

I am sure there are more. lets actually make a list to bring to the meeting. I plan on being there...

I also spoke to a Brown County Board Member, and he said that more then likely, the fee is going to be shot down..... Which is good, but lets come up with some hardcore evidence for them...

So far we are at a whopping 30 Bucks a year according to my calculations...

And I am sure, they will have to hire a 40-50K per year employee to handle the paperwork....

Justin

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 4:18 pm

K0rpl wrote:

And I am sure, they will have to hire a 40-50K per year employee to handle the paperwork....

Justin

Sounds like the perfect job for me.

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 4:44 pm

Um, No. I already have my Resume and Cover letter in for the Newly Created Position...

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 7:07 pm

Pamperin park has three caches in it, looks like it might be the big money maker for Brown County, The dog park has one cache, the boat launch at Wrightstown has two caches. Barkhausen has one, and the reforestration camp has three. Looks like your workload could get out of hand k0rpl! Please consider me for your assistant.

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 7:16 pm

O.K Frizz, you got it, but remember, we can only pay the assistant 60 to 70K..

Don't ya love Politics....

So:

Bay Shore Three or Four. So 15-20 Bucks
Fonferek Glen 1 so 5.00
WayMor Park 1 so 5.00
Pamperin Park 3 so 15.00
Dog Park 1 so 5.00
Wrighstown Boat launch 2 so 10.00

Wohoo up to 60 bucks. Big Money, big Money!!!

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 7:33 pm

What time is this meeting? I only can see the May Calendar on their website.

Thank you to all who are putting work into gathering information to help shoot this ridiculous idea down!!

Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 6:07 am

Updated Info:

So:

Bay Shore Three or Four. So 15-20 Bucks
Fonferek Glen 1 so 5.00
WayMor Park 1 so 5.00
Pamperin Park 3 so 15.00
Dog Park 1 so 5.00
Wrighstown Boat launch 2 so 10.00
Barkhausen 1 so 5.00
Reforestration Camp 3 so 15.00

Oh, Oh, Oh, Could we be reaching 80.00 Bucks. I think we may..

Next question is how many of these would remain if the 5.00 fee went into effect??

Justin