Know Any Wheely Good Caches?

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

I have been caching for a whole week! Logged 4 caches, bought a gpsr and released a travel bug, so I guess I am still a keen newbie!

 

What I am having trouble with is finding caches in the lists that might be possible for me to attempt...

 

Is there any other way to find caches in the list with reasonably low terrain scores other than selecting an area and going through them one by one?

 

Anyone got any suggestions of caches I could try, say in the Dorset or Central London areas? Please see my profile for the transport options I have!

 

TIA

[+Learned Gerbil]

If you pay to be a premium member you can create very sophisticated searches based on difficulty, type, age and all sorts. Premium Members can also use geocacheuk.com as well to generate custom searches.

[+John & Hazel]

We've got one placed in Bucks TrOLL FREE

Sorry it's not London or Dorset

Have you looked at this site Handicaching.com

I can think of many 1/1 caches but not knowing how mobile you are I can't really recommend any specific caches.

Some are very easy to get to but retrieving the cache from a wheelchair could pose a problem.

Do you cache with just your dog? or do you cache with family, friends etc?

John

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

Do you cache with just your dog? or do you cache with family, friends etc?

John

Well, out of the four caches, I set off for the first two with a friend, and needed her there to do the retrieve.

 

Second two I attempted alone ... managed one on my own, but the last one, the multi, I had to return with trusty friend to do the retrieve today. Mainly bacause my hunch was that it was too far off the path for me to get near...as it happens, I might just about have made it but would most probably have compromised the position by trampling the vegetation with my chair.

 

In reality, I often go further afield with this friend to walk our dogs ... so if there were a cache nearby that's possible, we'd head for it!

 

As w/chair users go, I am quite agile and can just about stand so long as I hold on tight to something!

 

I took a look at the handicaching site ... forum is empty!

 

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll make a note of it, and if I get to pass that way ...

[+John & Hazel]

I took a look at the handicaching site ... forum is empty!

 

The Forum Site got "Hacked" a few weeks ago. It was obviously closed.

I think they are going to reopen it on a new server or something in the near future.

[+Lincolnshire Mountaineer]

It won't be easy!

I recently raised a point about getting cache owners to retrospectively grade their cache for wheelchair accessibility. I also put out a call for more specific classification regarding types of terrain (gravel, bark etc) which although rate the cache as a 1 would be prohibitive to wheelchair users.

The post went on this forum and the main GC.com forum and both got the usual lack of interest as it doesn't affect most cachers! Sorry mate but it appears that no-one gives a monkey's really....

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

The post went on this forum and the main GC.com forum and both got the usual lack of interest as it doesn't affect most cachers! Sorry mate but it appears that no-one gives a monkey's really....

How sad! Especially at a time when there appears to be a wind of change about access for people with disabilities to the countryside.

 

I have taken part in a couple of Open Access Launches ... having been asked to speak by The Kennel Club and Countryside Agency on the topics of access for people who are differently abled and also on responsible dog ownership. Both topics going down well with councils and other landowners ... I'm also a Volunteer Warden for our local nature reserve, a large SSSI which I happen to live on the edge of, and am often asked "How did you manage to get here"? *wicked grin*

 

Perhaps if over time people get to know there are some of us about who love to get out into the countryside, they might make it a personal challenge to rate their caches.

 

I'd be more than willing to help or advise anyone...but I am only an expert in my own ability!

 

For me, the thrill of caching is the navigation, I hold a Private Pilots Licence and RYA Day Skipper cert. but cannot fly nor sail now due to various limitations upon me due to my health

[+AriExplorer]

I'm a newbie Geocacher (just a couple days) but I will be hunting in the London & South West areas - If I come across something I think is w/c friendly I'll be sure to let you know.

 

How does your offroader handle gravel/grass by the way?

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

Hi, yes please, let me know what you find if you think I might be able to handle it.

 

The offroader is called a Tramper and they are great, I haven't found anything yet that it cannot handle ... however, the limiting factor is that it would need a trailer to get it any disatnce from home, so I tend to only use it locally.

 

I use one of these when we travel out by car or public transport. It is pretty good but prefers paths.

[+The Hokesters]

I try to rate all the caches I visit on HandCaching.com and I include a link to the site on my cache pages. The only thing we can do is keep bringing it up to try on the forums and hope other people add to the HC.com database.

 

Incidentally neither we (nor any of our friends or family) are wheelchair users but believe strongly that HC.com be supported.

Edited August 23, 2005 by The Hokesters

[+Chris n Maria]

I try to rate all the caches I visit on HandCaching.com and I include a link to the site on my cache pages. The only thing we can do is keep bringing it up to try on the forums and hope other people add to the HC.com database.

 

Incidentally neither we (nor any of our friends or family) are wheelchair users but believe strongly that HC.com be supported.

^^^^ I was going to say that

[+Skippy and Pingu]

I try to rate all the caches I visit on HandCaching.com and I include a link to the site on my cache pages.  The only thing we can do is keep bringing it up to try on the forums and hope other people add to the HC.com database.

 

Incidentally neither we (nor any of our friends or family) are wheelchair users but believe strongly that HC.com be supported.

^^^^ I was going to say that

I think its sad that cachers are not rating their caches for wheelchair users. We have to admit to not having used handicaching.com until the last 10 mins because we didn't know of its existance but we have always written in the description for our caches where the terrain rating is low whether we think that buggies and wheelchairs can get to the cache. All our active caches are now rated at handicaching.com.

 

We will now also rate all caches we visit there as well. We don't have any friends or family who are in a wheelchair so we might not be too good at it but I guess its better than nothing. I'm guessing stiles are not negotiable?

[+Skippy and Pingu]

I would also like to add that it would be good if setters could stick to the 1 star terrain rating means that its wheelchair accessable. Its not just handicapped cachers that need this. Sometimes completely abled bodied cachers are only able to do 1 star terrain rating and then to get there and find that there is a stile or there is a very rough path is disappointing. We certainly did one cache which was rated 1 star and shouldn't have been. I had my arm in plaster and a sling and I couldn't get to the cache because I couldn't climb over the large tree that was across the otherwise easy path.

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

I'm guessing stiles are not negotiable?

Well almost not negotiable ... depends who I am with, but alone certainly not.

 

I have been known to dismantle chair and trike and (with help) chuck the lot over a stile to avoid a much longer detour, but it's not pretty and it's not nice!

 

Cetrainly with my Tramper they are not negotiable no matter who I am with ...

 

Reminds me of a time last month when in Vienna Airport, GeoDog and I were in transit to Zagreb and he needed to spend a penny ... I ended up lifting 35kg of Golden Retriever over a four foot fence from my chair! If anyone knows the way to the hernia clinic ... send me the co-ords

 

I digress ... I much prefer the Fieldfare Country Gate, or better still, a normal gate with a RADAR lock on it ... happily, they are cropping up more frequently now, and I even came across one on the cache I completed yesterday. It is a good compromise, keeps stock in, motorbikes out and allows scooter and wheelchair users through as they please.

 

Thanks for the replies folks, keep 'em coming!

I had hoped someone would say, try this one, or try that one, but alas not yet!

Nevertheless, it can only be a good thing to have this discussion

[+Paul G0TLG]

If you're visiting Southampton, "A Walk in the Park" is w/c accessible, including the final retrieve.

 

If you can manage reasonably steep inclines, "Sporting Chance" (also in Southampton) should also be OK. If I think of any others in the area, I'll let you know.

 

Have fun!

[+The Cache Hoppers]

I didn't know about www.handicaching.com . I feel a bit ashamed particularly since I have a brother who is disabled and relies on his wheelchair to get about! Just went through our list of caches and rated the only one which I think could be wheelchair accessible. If every cacher did the same, ie, looked at all their caches and rated w/c friendly ones, then surely the database on handicaching would grow considerably. To spread the word more, how about making a note on cache logs when coming across a wheelchair friendly one saying "Registered at www.handicaching.com". Liane, The Cache Hoppers

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

If you're visiting Southampton, "A Walk in the Park" is w/c accessible, including the final retrieve.

 

If you can manage reasonably steep inclines, "Sporting Chance" (also in Southampton) should also be OK. If I think of any others in the area, I'll let you know.

 

Have fun!

Cheers Paul, thanks for that, I'll certainly look into them in more detail.

 

The second one mentions 50 steps, do you happen to know if they are compulsory or might there be another route to the top of the steps?

[+Learned Gerbil]

I have used the icon system from GC.com to indicate wheelchair friendly caches. I remember when the icons were introduced we were told they would be searchable, but not yet.

 

As for handicaching, the language on that site is deeply offensive to many UK disabled people (despite being acceptable in the US) which makes it difficult for me professionally (working across Government to promote the civil rights of disabled people in the UK) to be seen to be utilising or promoting its services.

[+Renegade Knight]

...As for handicaching, the language on that site is deeply offensive to many UK disabled people (despite being acceptable in the US) which makes it difficult for me professionally (working across Government to promote the civil rights of disabled people in the UK) to be seen to be utilising or promoting its services.

Words can be changed. Given that there is no other site like it, it might be worth working with them to tweak the language, especially if it is so deeply offensive that it prevents people from using it to begin with. The point of the site is so people can better find caches they wish to seek. There probably is middle ground on language that could be found.

 

Being from the US I probably have no clue where the differences that matter lie.

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

I have used the icon system from GC.com to indicate wheelchair friendly caches. I remember when the icons were introduced we were told they would be searchable, but not yet.

 

As for handicaching, the language on that site is deeply offensive to many UK disabled people (despite being acceptable in the US) which makes it difficult for me professionally (working across Government to promote the civil rights of disabled people in the UK) to be seen to be utilising or promoting its services.

*Nods in agreement* Yep it would be great if it were possible to search by the logo.

 

I was appalled by the language in use there ... and as I am fairly new to all this, I did wonder if it reflected attidudes as well as linguistic limitations. Glad you feel the same, I was trying to decide if it was just me being precious or not!

[+t.a.folk]

Think gckx01 "Not shy or modest -decoy "in the Bournemouth Upper Gardens might be retreivable from the hard path .

Would hope the Bournemouth tourist department or similar would be in a position to clarify if wheelchairs can easily access the path along the upper gardens .

The red brick water tower in the upper gardens is an interesting feature .

[+t.a.folk]

Few more suggestions are "Dorset towns #3 "and " Bournemouth Towns #2 ."

one at ground level and one at standing height at top of a slope .

 

In lymington is "Muggle trouble " standing required and stelth but vey accessable .

 

East of Christchurch "Pine path "gckqzr.

[+t.a.folk]

"Dr beechings legacy " near Ringwood is a level route along a cycle track from the car park ,but the retreive is via some hard metal obstacles .

 

It is a little difficult to helpfully describe possible retreiving obstacles to caches without giving away the exact locations.

[+t.a.folk]

Abbey View (Stapehil Dorset)cache

From memory think the location of the cache along an unadopted lane that leads to residences would be accessable but cant recall if the retreive would be possible .

[+Paul G0TLG]

The second one mentions 50 steps, do you happen to know if they are compulsory or might there be another route to the top of the steps?

Oh bum, sorry about that - as far as I can remember, the steps are of the "long and shallow" type, if the Tramper can climb kerbs it should have no trouble with the steps. However, I'm not 100% certain - next time I'm passing I'll drop in and check, and let you know.

[+The Hokesters]

As for handicaching, the language on that site is deeply offensive to many UK disabled people (despite being acceptable in the US) which makes it difficult for me professionally (working across Government to promote the civil rights of disabled people in the UK) to be seen to be utilising or promoting its services.

Someone needs to grab the reins here then. I have to admit to not really reading through the website but just tested the search facility and it worked well and therefore I have patronised it. However what's the point if UK cachers however well abled they may or may not be don't use it?

 

In view of the 'appaling language' remark I assume we are talking about something more than just political correctness here? If it is just a PC issue then I would 'personally' take it with pinch of salt. I hope we don't start a PC/non-PC argument here because that is not the point.

 

One final thought - 'Cache Hoppers' say that they have rated just 'their' cache that is W/C friendly - forgive me if I have this wrong? Really you need to rate ALL of your caches and you need to rate ALL the caches that you visit regardless of their W/C accessibility. Don't forget that there are many forms of disability.

[Helen in Mustardland]

 

If you can manage reasonably steep inclines, "Sporting Chance" (also in Southampton) should also be OK. If I think

Um, there are a few steps on the way to the final cache for Sporting Chance! (Did it last week) All the clues part of it is accessible, but you'd need to enlist someone to do the very last bit of retrieval.

[+Learned Gerbil]

It depends what you mean by PC. I am sure you will accept that people have the right to define themselves and it is basic curtesy to use language that people prefer when talking about them. For example, you woundn't be surprised if an Indian was offended by being referred to as a "Paki", no matter in what context the word was (and often is) used to describe them.

 

In America the word "Handicap" when used to describe disability is perfectly acceptable, but amongst many British disabled people the word is deeply offensive and considered patronising.

 

When I firstcame across the website I did start composing an email on the subject, but gave up, I struggled to understand why the site should change its language (and even its domain as that has the offending word embedded in it) just because I wrote. I am certainly not the best placed to explain the issue having never been associated with the British disability rights movement, and not being in the position of being personally offended by the word.

 

It occures to me that given the domain problem, the best solution might possibly be a UK mirror of the site to avoid these issues, but that would require a lot of work, probably some money, and the cooperation of the current owner.

[+Alibags]

It's an interesting topic this. I started off rating caches on hc.com, but then gave up because it seemed that :

 

Most of the caches I was doing were not really suitable for people with mobility problems, so I got disheartened

 

I was not entirely sure I was qualified to rate caches as there are so many shades and degrees of physical disability and I had problems trying to decide who would be able to do what.

 

I think perhaps I should have another look at this and rate at least my own caches on handicaching.com. I am also inclining towards putting a comment on all my cache descriptions saying that I am happy to go into specifics with anybody who is looking at possibly doing them, but is worried that they may have problems, if they contact me. I would not neccessarily put that info right on the cache page because although somebody who uses a wheelchair may need to know that a cache is, for example, up a tree, I would not want to spoil the hunt in general.

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

I am also inclining towards putting a comment on all my cache descriptions saying that I am happy to go into specifics with anybody who is looking at possibly doing them, but is worried that they may have problems, if they contact me. I would not neccessarily put that info right on the cache page because although somebody who uses a wheelchair may need to know that a cache is, for example, up a tree, I would not want to spoil the hunt in general.

That's a very valid point Alibags, I was thinking along similar lines myself last evening, that perhaps there would be some logo or something to indicate that the cache owner has thought about access for let's say, the differently abled, and is prepared to give further details privately. (They might even have prepared a document in advance that they could send out routinely to those who enquire).

 

It would of course make things less spontaneous for some people, but less spontaneous is better than not at all! To be honest, I never set off into the countryside without good preparation, it simply would not make sense to do so healthwise and in many ways would be irresponsible to put myself in a position where the only option was the emergency services if things went wrong.

 

From clicking around gc.com it seems to me that there are many, many caches within a mile or two of the suggested parking places that perhaps might be possible for people who use wheelchairs or electric scooters, but it would be very frustrating to try one and find, for the sake of a 5 bar gate, say, that I was stopped in my tracks.

 

I just really wanna get out and take part, but not at the cost of spoiling the thrill of the find for others

[+t.a.folk]

Seems to me a good reason to keep virtuals as loggable finds .

I think multi virtuals could be an interesting .

Bit like multis traditional multis but instead of the final location for the obligitary container being up or down the nearest and sometimes muddy path the final could be an interesting feature .

Cunning wording could make it difficult for cachers with local knowledge to guess at what the final feature is .

I would like such caches .

Edited August 24, 2005 by t.a.folk

[+Team Spike]

Hi, I'm the person operating the handicaching.com web site and someone this morning alerted me to this thread.

 

Even though I am a British expat, I didn't realise that "handicap" was offensive, but that can be changed everywhere except the domain name and site name. I took the idea for the name from a local service dog organization called Handidog.

 

So all I need to know is what word or phrase to use instead that would make everyone happy. You can post here or you can email me through this site or the handicaching site. I would have thought "disabled" but now I'm not so sure, so I need some input.

 

I think it is perhaps the more progressive nature of the UK that I see more British geocachers rating caches than non-British geocachers. That's not a scientific poll, just that when I randomly click on ratings I recognize names of British cachers. I hope everyone will continue to keep up the good work!

 

Regarding some of the other points. Handicaching.com is not just about wheelchair users. For example, my wife is disabled and most good days can walk about half a mile on level ground with a few small climbs. If every cache was rated on handicaching.com then people like her would be able to use it as well. It's not meant to replace the rating on gc.com, but to supplement it and provided a better picture of what can be expected. Therefore I urge everyone to rate any cache, including ones they have found rather than just ones they have hidden.

 

If anyone has any concerns about the site they are always free to contact me to discuss them. We are not trying to offend anyone, just provide a needed service that increases access to geocaching for people who are disabled.

 

Andy

[+Learned Gerbil]

Thanks for joining the thread, and thanks for considering changes. I seriously doubt anyone for a moment thought any offence was deliberate. As I recognised above, language use in this area is very different on each side of the Atlantic.

 

"Disabled" is the word of choice to replace Handicapped in the UK. The use of the simple adjective is now much preferred to "with disabilities" usage still current in the US.

 

You can probably get away with not changing the domain if the language on the site avoids the use of the "h" word.

 

I spend a lot of my working life writing speeches etc for the Minister for Disabled People, so whilst not claiming to be an authority on the correct language, I am happy to help in any way I can.

Edited August 24, 2005 by Learned Gerbil

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

*Nods again in agreement* with Learned Gerbil.

 

Thanks Spike for understanding where we are at here in the UK.

 

"Handicapped" has so many negative connotations, that I personally don't see it as a word that encourages inclusion. As you will see from my post above, as a newbie around here, I was left wondering if it was a linguistic problem or if it reflected attitudes in general, I am delighted to hear it is merely linguistic

 

I often describe myself as a "wheelchair user" (among other things) and have no problem with that, but appreciate there are varying degrees of ability within and aside from wheelchair use.

 

Anecdotally, these days, I see a move away from "the disabled" to "people with disabilities" which incidentally is preferable to most, but I am happy with either as opposed to "handicapped".

 

I would however bow to the Gerbils greater experience

Edited August 24, 2005 by Dorsetgal & GeoDog

[+Team Spike]

OK, so if "with disabilities" is falling out of favour, what would be used in a sentence like this (hypothetical sentence - I know I have phrased some like this on the site):

 

"This site helps people who are disabled"

 

"This site helps people with disabilities"

 

Andy

[+DomHeknows]

From Dictionary.com, the definition of handicap means " A physical or mental disability." which I think sums it up really which is why I think a lot of people don't find the word offensive. However in this politically correct day and age, a lot of people get offended by almost any word......

 

Having said all that, would a good start be to publish a list somewhere - on a wiki perhaps - of all terrain level 1 caches which could then be rated by the cachers around the uk (and globally) as to whether they are disability challenged...but then do you go for the wheelchair user, the crutch user, the person who gets severely out of breath going up an incline........things aren't as simple as making a cache "accessible".

[+Team Spike]

Which is why on the handicaching site a cache is not rated as accessible. Instead it is just rated.

 

Let the person who is disabled compare their abilities on any given day with the rating of a cache and decide for themselves if they can do it or not, rather that a person or a site stating that "this cache is accessible for everyone". Some caches may be tough for a particular set of disabilities, but boring for someone else with a different set of disabilities.

 

This is one of the core philosophies of handicaching.com.

 

Andy

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

From Dictionary.com, the definition of handicap means " A physical or mental disability." which I think sums it up really which is why I think a lot of people don't find the word offensive. However in this politically correct day and age, a lot of people get offended by almost any word......

 

You're not British then?

 

Sorry, but to choose an American dictionary to define a word that many British people find offensive... or understand to have different connotations, is really just an exercise in explaining why you don't understand.

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

Let the person who is disabled compare their abilities on any given day with the rating of a cache and decide for themselves if they can do it or not, rather that a person or a site stating that "this cache is accessible for everyone". Some caches may be tough for a particular set of disabilities, but boring for someone else with a different set of disabilities.

 

This is one of the core philosophies of handicaching.com.

 

Absolutely! I couldn't agree more!

 

All I was after was accurate info about what might be ahead of me terrain wise if I were to attempt a cache.

[+Learned Gerbil]

OK, so if "with disabilities" is falling out of favour, what would be used in a sentence like this (hypothetical sentence - I know I have phrased some like this on the site):

 

"This site helps people who are disabled"

 

"This site helps people with disabilities"

 

Andy

This is where you run into a philosophical and political debate. Are disabled people disabled because of an inherent limitation that is personal to them, or are they disabled through the interaction between their impairment and the way the society around them is structured?

 

Take short sightedness for example, it is a serious impairment that should seriously disadvantage people with myopia. However, with spectacles or contact lenses (and more importantly, society's acceptance that it is normal to correct vision) the disadvantages faced by spectacle wearers are minimal. There is nothing inherently non-disabling about myopia - a person with perfectly controlled epilepsy or type two diabetes will probably not get employed as a police officer because they may not be able to operate at full efficiency in an emergency, but a police officer with spectacles is commonplace despite him or her running the risk of losing good vision in a struggle or while chasing someone.

 

This illustrates that often it is society and its attitudes that is more significant than the person's impairment when it comes to disadvantage through disability.

 

Now, when you apply that language, there is a strong view in the UK that "a person with disabilities" (which was a term invented to accentuate the person over the disability) implies that the disability is part of the person. However, the term "disabled person" implies that the person has been disabled by factors outside the person.

 

However, different disabled people have different views, for example, some disabled people feel very strongly that their impairment is an important part of what they are and strongly believe in the "person with" terminology. Other disabled people deliberately adopt outdated terminology such as calling themselves "Crip" much as Black Americans sometimes refer to themselves as "Nigga", especially informally.

 

Sorry it is so complicated. Certainly in the UK, the simple "disabled person" approach is the one recommended by most organisations of or representing disabled people. However, as an international site based in US, you may be better off using the "people with disabilities" approach as it is usual US terminology, for example, whilst UK disability rights legislation uses the disabled person terminology, the US has the "Americans with Disabilities Act".

[+DomHeknows]

From Dictionary.com, the definition of handicap means " A physical or mental disability." which I think sums it up really which is why I think a lot of people don't find the word offensive. However in this politically correct day and age, a lot of people get offended by almost any word......

 

You're not British then?

 

Sorry, but to choose an American dictionary to define a word that many British people find offensive... or understand to have different connotations, is really just an exercise in explaining why you don't understand.

Actually 100% british - dictionary.co.uk doesn't really work very well.

That dictionary was chosen because it is the default included dictionary in the toolbar of the browser and I'm just trying to point out why some people wouldn't find it offensive.

Besides, as you said the crux of the matter is the terrain rating.

[+[MF]taz]

The meanings of words change all the time, not so long ago people with down’s syndrome would have been labelled as Retarded, thankfully in this day an age this is considered as being offensive.

 

Handicapped is implying inferiority.

 

If you have a disability you are not an inferior person.

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

Actually 100% british - dictionary.co.uk doesn't really work very well.

That dictionary was chosen because it is the default included dictionary in the toolbar of the browser and I'm just trying to point out why some people wouldn't find it offensive.

It is more a question of common usage and understanding...way up there ^^^ somewhere, I explained that because of the language usage, and me not being familiar with the gc community, I was unaware if it was a linguistic thing or an attitude thing, I think we have established it is a linguistic thing, so let's move to discussing a suitable solution that won't put newbies off using what seems to be a very good site...and get those caches rated!

 

Personally, I have no problems with "people with disabilities" or "disabled people" but that's only me, I do understand the point LG makes above when he explains that "disabled people" is unacceptable to some.

[+Learned Gerbil]

Personally, I have no problems with "people with disabilities" or "disabled people" but that's only me, I do understand the point LG makes above when he explains that "disabled people" is unacceptable to some.

I hope I didn't say that.

[+Lincolnshire Mountaineer]

God what is happening to this forum? Can't post a reply now!

Good for you DG, this appears to have stirred up a hornet's nest...at last we have moved in the right direction.

Well done everybody, hope we can keep the ball rolling on assessing cahes and thanks to Andy for posting.

[+Dorsetgal & GeoDog]

Personally, I have no problems with "people with disabilities" or "disabled people" but that's only me, I do understand the point LG makes above when he explains that "disabled people" is unacceptable to some.

I hope I didn't say that.

Hah! Just testing!

 

Sorry LG, meant to say,

 

I understand what LG means when he explains that "disabled people" implies that the person has been disabled by factors outside the person.

 

Mea Culpa.

[+Team Spike]

OK, I think I have removed all occurences of handicap and either removed it or replaced it with disabled, accessible, etc. according to the context. If anyone spots any more or has a concern with any of the new wording, please let me know.

 

Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

 

Andy

[+2202]

And to get back to the subject..........

Central Oxford caches by and large are wheelchair friendly and a good day out should be had.

[+The Hokesters]

Thanks Andy for taking our comments on board. I hope the Australians don't start bashing you because they find 'disabilities' offensive

 

Seriously this shows what a great community this is and that we can sort it all out without upsetting each other.

 

Si

Edited August 25, 2005 by The Hokesters

[+Learned Gerbil]

The changes look good to me. As said - back to the subject -