jerryo

I found that too. I decided not to care.

It's true that emerging economies in China and India are adding to the problem the west ahas already created. However, a lot here think CITO caching is worthwhile, even though there are piles of litter and fly-tipping all over the place. There's a good article in the NY Times that discusses the "Why bother?" attitude. : http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/magazine...ede-t.html?_r=1 It's more about a sense of personal responsibility - so just because the neighbour throws his rubbish all over the street, doesn't mean it's ok for you to do as well! Vaclav Havel has talked about cultivating in people "a new sense of responsibility for the world, an ability to conduct themselves as if they were to live on this earth forever, and to be held answerable for its condition one day". CITO is totally different. You can make a difference with that - I have attended several CITO events and I'll carry a bag through the woods to clear up as I go. You can see the difference that makes, but the gaseous environmental hype that the government subjects us to is a different matter. It would be better to reduce the emission of pollutants, of course I agree with that, but when compared with the global output of cr.ap, an individual may as well just **** into the wind.

I think it's an amusing point, rather than a good one. What difference does it make in the face of all the industrial pollution throughout the world? What is it they say? China's commissioning 2 coal-fired power stations a week.

You need to get greener, man... Now... where to put that micro? MrsB Socks with sandals? I think not!

Of course, there's also any hazard involving the cache itself, and the fact that some are more dangerous than others. In such a case, following the advice on the page is a sensible idea.

75kg. But I don't care.

Mine does the same. It's internet Explorer's fault. Use Firefox instead as it's generally better than IE.

Neither is anything else!!* *Many, many thanks, McKryton

That's because the world is only 6000 years old and evolution is a lie. Did you know the Vatican is now going to discuss his theories ? http://www.sci-tech-today.com/story.xhtml?...id=030001P232EI Hmm. More theological back-peddling in the light of empirical discoveries. Whoooops. Caching forum ... Erm, What do you think about the evolution of nanos, everyone?

There are three in the Northeast too. They aren't waterproof and should be hidden in a sheltered place - although not inside a bag!

That's because the world is only 6000 years old and evolution is a lie.

Two more here. Coming up to two years for them. I checked the first one yesterday: GCC083 & GCZE7P

I forgot about those types. There was once a full-on medieval battle in the woods where we were caching and another time there were 5 people doing some sort of role playing game that involved skimpy outfits and lots of string. Not sure who's odder, them, or us looking for Tupperware.

I came across a guy who'd walked 60-odd miles and was about to camp near the cache I was after. Not dangerous or anything, just odd. Log

I wouldn't hold out a great deal of hope: I used to own an underwater cache that I couldn't find myself even though I'd anchored it to a paving slab near a submerged tree!

That's very true. And isn't it fun? You only hear about the sad cases when there's an accident but there must be people all over the place taking risks. And refusing to grow up.

I don't think that there is anything like a blanket ban on climbing in County Durham. I know of some seasonal restrictions (e.g. for the Ring Ouzel), and some crags have their own local restrictions (there are certain guidelines to observe when climbing in a SSSI such as Holwick Scar, for instance). But a ban on climbing, even in an SSSI, would cause a huge stink. I don't imagine that's there's the slightest problem with geocaching in an SSSI either, unless there has been trouble. Pick your climb in Co. Durham! There is as far as geocaching is concerned though. That's what I was told by the ranger responsible for the area. I know of quite a few climbing areas in the Northeast but it's not that that's the problem; it's the "encouraging" non-climbers to do "dangerous" activities where there is a problem. The guy said no. What can I do?

Nothing wrong with that! Actually, I did the same thing later on a couple of weeks before I found out about the climbing ban. There is a sea cliff near me and a sea stack rises very near it so I lobbed an ammo can on top of the stack and wrote up the cache. After the SSSI debacle, I thought I’d better check properly and I was, needless to say, refused permission by the landowner (the council). Did I leave my ammo box there? Nope! I think I’m the first and last person to scale that one, which is a shame. My fault again, though. I think I need to move south so I can do some of Cache U Nutter’s challenges.

Did he say why he wouldn't publish it? The fact that it was in an SSSI would not necessarily preclude it using either Groundspeaks or GAGB's guidelines.... neither of which ban caches in SSSI's. Oh, sorry I didn't explain that properly: my bad. I didn't have explicit permission and I assumed the blanket permission for the area was adequate. It wouldn't have been anyway because of the climbing ban. It was absolutely not Deceangi's fault in any way!

I set up a 6 stage multi in an SSSI once and Deceangi didn't publish it. Obviously! It was my fault for not checking. I had to return and do the 3/5 thing myself for the umpteenth time and take all the stuuf out of trees and off cliffs. I since discovered that County Durham has a blanket ban on all things climbing (according to my contact at the council) so that's why I only have one active cache out at the moment. And I'm thinking about archiving that one soon.

Good luck dealing with the ginger witch. Apparently she disappears off stage and takes a few minutes to think of her snappy one-liners.

Us 4 and Jess have just released this one. Where you end up looking like this:

I remove them. Period. I don't always log that I have either, in case the owner comes back and replaces the damned thing.

"Underneath a gorse bush in a depression." In case the scale isn't apparent, there are about 2 acres of gorse bushes here.

Why not have a fresh debate about this? It's a forum, not a library and the OPer has already demonstrated that they have not been able to find extant guidelines about not using plastic bags, they are unlikely, therefore, to peruse these forums for such information, so why not freshen it up?