Saff

AGREE!

I'm surprised to only hear about this on the forums. Could this not have been included in a newsletter, on the webpage, via Facebook... all of the above? The best way to make sure everyone is happy with an increase is to make it public and give a clear break down of costs. If I can see you have no other choice then I happily accept the increase and I feel positive about the company. Conversely, if I find out about the increase through the rumour mill and can't work out exactly where the money is going then: 1) It leaves me with a bad feeling for the company/service 2) I wonder -- do I really need this?

I also have this issue.

Just a quick question about this attribute. When placing a cache, I usually use the rating system to double-check my estimates of cache difficulty/terrain. In the case of terrain, a cache comes out at a one if it's on a flat, paved/road area with no obstacles/climbing etc. When I first published these caches I marked them as wheelchair accessible regardless of their position. On reflection I decided that these were perhaps not accessible after all because their height may prevent retrieval from a sitting position and I've since removed the attribute from one cache for which this is certainly the case. When publishing a new cache with a terrain rating of one I receive the reasonable suggestion from the reviewer that this should perhaps be marked with the wheelchair attribute but again height is an issue. I have rated the cache on handicaching but until others do I'm not sure how this helps me. How do others use/expect to find the wheelchair accessible attribute?

I also have this issue in the UK.