Firefox.3

What is the criteria that needs to be met to be awarded a Lab Cache? Numerous cachers local to me have been awarded a one, some are in their second. I’m an active Cacher, have placed over 500 caches, held events etc, I’d like to know what I need to do to be awarded a lab cache. Thanks, Firefox.3

I find your response unbelievable. Who else’s responsibility is it? If i was made aware that druggies were leaving needles by one of my caches I would archive it. If I placed the cache, I have a responsibility to maintain it and a moral responsibility to deal with a problem that could cause a serious health risk to cachers who believe they’re just looking for a micro under a hedge. You can not compare the risk of climbing a tree to needles used by drug addicts! I am intrigued to know what occasions you would archive without warning? I would have thought needles and human excrement came pretty high up on the list One of these caches was disabled in July 2017, 7 months ago, others were disabled in October 2017. One cache already had a note from the reviewer giving them until the end of January, the reviewer has now given another 20 days on that cache?? I would have thought 7 months was more than ample time.

Some of you may have seen a thread I posted on the Geocaching UK facebook page on Wednesday 31 January 2018. It concerns a series of caches along the Ashton Canal. This is my post... “I usually love where caching takes me....but not today. I have never disliked a series, location and walk so much. Piles and piles of rubbish everywhere, drugs paraphernalia at and near cache locations, dog muck everywhere and human excrement all over. Unfortunately for us, as it was a linear route we had parked the car at the end of the series and caught the train to the start. If we could have we would have abandoned the walk. I am in two minds whether to say which series we did. I don’t want to slate the CO, although I’m not sure if they are still caching as no maintainence has been done and several caches have been disabled since October last year. However, I really wouldn’t want other cachers to experience what we had to today. I have put ‘Needs Archiving’ on all caches where we saw needles or drugs wrappers, or where it was dangerous to search due to the rubbish. The whole lot could do with Archiving really. Just a few of the pictures from today, I got fed up of taking photos of rubbish. This is not my idea of caching.” I can not stress enough how vile some of these locations were. Several of the caches in the series are already disabled due to piles of rubbish or because they’re missing. They were disabled in October 2017, no maintenance has been done. One was disabled in July 2017! The reviewer has chosen to allow the CO a further 3 weeks to do maintenance. In the meantime these caches are still being searched for by cachers, locations where there are needles/syringes/human excrement/stinking of urine. What does it take for a CO and or reviewer to think - “Are these locations suitable for cachers to search?” “Are these locations safe? Is there a serious risk of injury?” “Would you be happy for children to cache here?” “Have I, as a CO or reviewer, taken reasonable steps to deal with this matter effectively, safely and with cachers best interests at heart?” The answer to all the above is no. The CO’s lack of response is deafening, and the reviewers decision to allow more time is reckless. I would even suggest there is an element of culpability, being aware of the problems but failing to take reasonable action to safeguard cachers. Even if the CO did go and ‘do maintenance’, unless they are going to collect all the needles and drugs paraphanalia, clean up the piles of human faeces and take a lorry to clear up 9 miles worth of flytipping and litter, then the problem will still remain. I have done everything I can to get this matter resolved. I have posted NA on all caches where there were needles/syringes/evidence of drug taking/human excrement. I have contacted the Canal and RIver Trust, Manchester City Council and Tameside Council. I have warned other cachers of the health hazards and state of the area via facebook. I have posted on the reviewers facebook page, hoping for someone to see sense. I have contacted the reviewer for the relevant area voicing my concerns. I have emailed Groundwspeak, but their reply it is clear that they haven’t bothered to read my email to the end. I am at a complete loss as to why these caches are still live or disabled. Even if they are disabled, they can still be accessed to view on numerous caching apps, and people will look for disabled caches, but may not have read previous logs so are oblivious to the dangers at GZ. What more do reviewers need to decide enough is enough?

Thanks Kunarion for your message. I messed about with the cache page and it would appear that it was the background URL it didn't like, although no message came up to say it wasn't acceptable. Took the URL out and it's worked.

Last night I tried to submit a new cache. When I got to the last page, I pressed the 'Save and Preview' button and nothing happened. Tried again, still nothing. Tried again this morning, same problem. Tried submitting a cache on a different computer....nothing At a loss as to what the problem is, but at the moment I have 25 new caches hidden and I can't submit a cache page for them. Any ideas? Firefox.3