davester

Well there's quite a few decent routes on my website (link in my signature). Quite a few long walks in good walking country there, nothing super remote though.

With the example of the Home View/Castleberg pairing, my brief look at the provisional access maps for the area seem to suggest that I would be entitled to walk from one to the other. That the walls are there and need crossing is irrelevant.

I'd interpret that as meaning you can't climb over dry stone walls at all, as damage can't be avoided. A fence would be a different matter: so would a wall you can step over. What are the walls like on your proposed route? It sounds very odd that there's a track all the way, but it still entails crossing three walls. I really think that the person who has to pay for or repair the walls should agree that these ones can be climbed over before you submit the cache, or else Eckington would quite rightly request that this route suggestion is removed. It's only using common sense and good manners, whatever the legal situation. HH Well. I crossed two dry stone walls without damaging them last saturday so I'm not sure where you are coming from there. The walls in question are all dry stone walls, all in various states of disrepair. I over-simplified in my example as the cacher would need to leave the track near the cache and cross the walls at that point.

I've actually been in touch with someone at Derbyshire County Council since posting this morning to ask about this. He confirmed that once on access land, you may cross a wall or fence in any manner that doesn't damage it. You are not permitted to cross a wall or fence to enter or leave areas of access land. Now would I not be right in presuming that the GC.com guidelines are written for a global outlook and the provision of access land in law should allow that land to be used to the full? I accept that in most instances that the crossing of a wall/fence would be a contravention of access rights, but it isn't on CROW access land. Therefore would the following example not be acceptable for the cache page?

I've been looking for a decent answer to this question on all the governments pages about the new Right to Roam laws. I've exercised my right to roam on new access land in the Peak District a fair bit already and have one question. What do I do when faced with a wall/fence? Can I cross it as long as I cause no damage? The main reason I ask is I have a spot in mind for a new cache. There would be two ways to access the cache. One by walking along an edge path for some 3 miles, or the other by parking below the edge and following a winding path upwards. Unfortunately the winding path would involve the scaling of several walls (all on access land).

Great news. Can we expect to see that cache of ours in London being unarchived now then?

In my experience, when people talk of the devastating truth that they would love to reveal but can't, it's not really that shocking when it does come out.

It might be a geostorm in a teacup to some but the UK geocaching scene is as near the brink as is comfortable. Hopefully the phoenix will rise from the flames, although I doubt we will have approvers of the quality of those sadly leaving us.

Didn't read much after a line or two before posting before due to shock value, but I doubt a single UK cacher will feel let down by yourselves.

A true shame, and I can't help feeling a little responsible for starting it all from a UK point of view. Hopefully some good can come from the situation (although I fail to see how).

I'd certainly be interested in this. Bought plenty of camping equipment last year in various sales and not had the chance to use it in anger yet. Mind you, the main factor in that lack of camping is the missus and her "I'm not bloody going camping" stance.

My only reason for getting premium membership was to be able to have more than 100 caches on my watchlist at any time so I could see who had visited caches I had previously. PQ would be useless to me as I cache with a basic GPS and paper anyway. No other solution would be waterproof. I download all my cache positioning from GeocacheUK for nothing and import them into Memory Map, which shows all 5000 odd little red flags for the UK caches. So the lack of extra features means I'm not going to bother.

Any amusing caching incidents caused by the wind this weekend? I went on a walk around a moor near Buxton (GeoHikes write up here) to pass by GC9B05 Lightly Wooded Walk. Soon after, while walking on the access land I had to cross a wall and the howling gale blew me off the top landing me in a heap in the mud! Not to mention the number of times my mapcase (with heavy lamfold map and Geko 201) whacked me in the face!!!

Well, your Quakers were here cache was VERY close to the River Wharfe.

And there is nothing quite as undesirable as having to stick your hand into the rotting bag to get the cache!!

Well done GC - a sensible outcome For those of you unaware: the UK side of the site exploded at the earlier 'rigid' rule interpretation by GC, followed up by an even greater explosion at the closure of UK discussions relating to cache support towards the disaster, followed by a spate of considerable anti-US postings. Everything will cool down now. I suppose the initial general US ( govt and otherwise ) response to the disaster was muted by the fact that it wasn't their ocean, there are few ex-colonial links with the countries involved, there aren't large immigrant communities from the areas, and its not a big US tourist destination. I am delighted that the GC ( and US govt et al ) responses have changed. Well done GC - a sensible outcome Just to put the perspective over from a UK point of view (our forum is pretty active so many do not stray from it), our situation was somewhat different to the Australian Virtual cache. This cache was a result of me posting about the idea on the UK forum. The idea was met with approval and as a result, the UK approvers decided on this cache placement as a compromise to the guidelines. The cache was allowed to exist for two days. It was then removed by a non-UK approver. Discussion of the cache and the policy decision took place in the UK forum. This discussion was curtailed by a non-UK forum moderator. I will not offer an opinion of the whole incident here, but I will state that the front page statement is welcome although perhaps a more internationalist view could be taken.

It is time to move on, but how long until this will happen again? It appears to me that someone at Groundspeak put a great big foot in it. As a relative newcomer to the pastime of Geocaching, it seems to me that GC.com has become too monopolistic and with that comes the need to make the sport commercial (Jeep TBs!!). I know there are other sites, but they will always stuggle to compete from their disadvantaged position (after all, I keep meaning to add my caches to the Navicache database but never get round to it). My greatest hope would be that some non-commercial non-profit commercial central database could be set up for EVERY geocacher to use. Anyway.....that's my last word for now. Off to test a new GPS!!

I'm looking to create a map with all the walks on for my website, GeoHikes. However, my attempts to do this and get it looking half decent are failing miserably. I'm trying to base the map on one of the outline maps available from the Ordnance Survey at http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/...un/outlinemaps/ Now, I'm can create an image map but unfortunately unless the map is quite big the results are useless. What I'm looking to do, therefore, is to keep the size as downloaded, create the image map and place the whole thing in a frame where the user can drag the map around with their mouse to get the portion they need. Ideally, hovering over the dot representing the walk location would display the details alongside the map. Any ideas?

already been doing that but not random and I still want my money back I'm in the fortunate position of not having paid for premium membership. I was going to do so this very week but it's not going to happen now.

It has been fun hasn't it? I for one accept the slap on the knuckles we've had for being naughty boys and girls. I shall be emailing an American at random to thank them for letting us little UK people borrow their satellites and game.

I have to be the first to say (as co-owner of this cache) how disappointing this has been. Plenty of other sports have made an effort to rally around and promote the plight of those effected by this terrible disaster. Why the gecaching community is not able to make it's own small contribution is beyond me. All I can think is that the hierarchy at Groundspeak perhaps take their pastime a little too seriously and don't want any other agendas, however worthy, encroaching on the perceived "purity" of what they oversee. I shall be making a point of effort to try and put this point across by contacting Groundspeak and I urge others to do the same, even if to protest in the shortest terms. The game would not exist without the players and the more voices speaking, the better chance of being heard. As an aside, we should feel privelidged to have Lactodorum & Eckington as the UK approvers. They cared enough about this idea to argue the case against the overwhelming opposition of their peers and in the face of this decided on putting forward the now rejected compromise. Thanks guys.

Bought a camera case from Asda for 49p in the sale that carries the literally hundreds of AAA batteries my Geko 201 needs to be kept fed on a long days walking.

http://www.gpsw.co.uk/details/prod2164.html This place seems to have what you want as a cable. http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/products/in...oduct_uid=40608 Otherwise Ebuyer have a fairly cheap converter.

Depends on your definition of Decent !! I counter with this link. http://www.globalpositioningsystems.co.uk/...rp=viewprod.php It wouldn't be suitable for me as I need the PC link capability, but a £40 basic GPS could get a hell of a lot more people out caching. A workmate has just ordered one so he can join our merry band.