Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Deceangi

Important Announcement re London Caches

Recommended Posts

"On the 23rd of January 2007, the GAGB Committee were contacted by an Officer from the Specialist Search Unit of the Metropolitan Police Force, regarding geocaching in the SW1, Whitehall, St James & Green Parks.

 

Geocaching was brought to their attention after 2 geocachers were stopped and searched due to what was described as acting in a suspicious manner. On explaining geocaching to the officers, they were allowed to go on their way.

 

Matt Wagster [badger] acting on behalf of the GAGB Committee, made contact with the Officer who had initiated the contact, and discussed geocaching with him. He also passed on contact details for one of the Geocaching.com UK Reviewer Team. The discussion was very constructive about geocaching and the issues raised.

 

The following day the officer made contact with Dave Palmer [Deceangi UK Volunteer Reviewer]. A very constructive conversation followed, during which the Officer explained the concerns that his unit had with geocaching in these areas.

 

The following were agreed between Deceangi and the Officer, to allow the caches currently located in these areas to remain, and for future caches to be placed in the areas, without the Metropolitan Police Force objecting to them.

 

1: Due to the high security status of these areas:

 

SW1

 

Whitehall

 

St James and Green Parks

 

Cachers are requested to try to avoid acting in a suspicious or furtive manner, when searching for a geocache or when placing one.

 

2:The following prominent warning to be placed on all cache pages in plain text, within the

areas affected by this agreement.

 

"This cache is located within an area frequently patrolled by Police. Please avoid acting suspiciously whilst searching for it, and if challenged, explain about geocaching"

 

3: All containers to be clearly marked as Geocaches.

 

4: All owners of caches in the affected areas to provide a written description of the container and a general description of how it is hidden [e.g. magnetic, under bush, attached to underside of seat]. These written descriptions to be updated immediately if the container is changed or moved.

 

5: Cache owners to provide a photograph of the container [to be updated immediately if the container is changed].

 

6: Deceangi to act as liaison between the Metropolitan Police Unit and the UK Reviewer Team and UK geocaching community.

 

7: Deceangi to provide and maintain an up-to-date cache location map of the affected areas.

 

Provided that the agreed information is provided and kept up-to-date, the Specialist Search Unit from the Metropolitan Police Force have no objections to Geocaching continuing in these areas.

 

Over the next few weeks Deceangi will contact all affected cache owners, to request the required information from them.

 

The GAGB committee due to the serious nature of the issues raised by the Metropolitan Police Unit have agreed to place the details of the agreement into the GAGB GLAD

 

http://www.gagb.org.uk/glad/

 

*Bill Daly - Bill D (wwh)* [Chairman GAGB]

 

*Dave Edwards- The Wombles*

 

*Tony Pinnington - mongoose39uk*

 

*Matt Pringle - nobby.nobbs*

 

*Fiona Robertson - The Nutters*

 

*Matt Wagster - Mattwaggie (Badger)*

 

Eckington Volunteer UK Reviewer Geocaching.com

 

Lactodorum Volunteer UK reviewer Geocaching.com

 

Dave Palmer-Deceangi Volunteer UK reviewer Geocaching.com -

Geocaching Liaison to the Metropolitan Police Force [specialist

Search Unit]"

 

Due to the serious nature of the issues raised, the UK Reviewer Team have after discussing the issue between themselves. Have decided to immediately Temporarily Archive all caches in the affected areas. Each cache will be Un-Archived once it complies with all parts of the agreement. Deceangi

Share this post


Link to post

Well done on what must have been tricky negotiations.

 

Not entirely sure it's possible to cache in London without raising a little suspicion or engaging in a little furtiveness though. I'll happily explain if challenged, but until it's illegal to be "strange" I'll be clambering under park benches the length and breadth of London Town!

Share this post


Link to post

Great news...having been a victim of stop and search whilst caching in Hyde Park... looking for a none existant nano. This should be a great help. Cheers MaxKim.

Share this post


Link to post

Well done for keeping the caches in place everyone - i should imagine that was not easy! And as a bonus, I can now get out and find some of the pesky london caches a little easier!

 

Can I ask, and it doesn't affect me, whether the currently archived caches will be unarchived once these requirements are met, but ONLy these requirements, not any new ones that Groundspeak may have initiated after the caches were first placed... (I can't think of any immediately except possibly proximity requirements!)

 

Well done all!

 

Dave

Share this post


Link to post

WELL DONE to the Reviewers and GABG committee in their hard work behind the scenes in saving the London caches for us and preventing it becoming a cache free desert.

Share this post


Link to post

Nice to see that the police didn't take the path of least resistance and demand that all caches be removed. Looks like a victory for commonsense all round.

Share this post


Link to post

The officer was very interested in a joint agreement, and sounded genuinely interested in caching after he had researched it, prior to contacting the GAGB.

 

Thanks to Dave for taking the lead on this agreement, great work.

Share this post


Link to post

Well done for keeping the caches in place everyone - i should imagine that was not easy! And as a bonus, I can now get out and find some of the pesky london caches a little easier!

 

Can I ask, and it doesn't affect me, whether the currently archived caches will be unarchived once these requirements are met, but ONLy these requirements, not any new ones that Groundspeak may have initiated after the caches were first placed... (I can't think of any immediately except possibly proximity requirements!)

 

Well done all!

 

Dave

 

Only caches currently Active and located in the listed areas will be Temporarily Archived until they meet the agreement. This in no way changes the Guidelines they were listed under, so will not face any review to see if they meet the current guidelines, as they are Grandfathered in, just the requirements of this agreement with the Metropolitan Police Unit.

 

Also some of the thanks for this agreement should be aimed at Matt [badger] who made my task a lot easier by making the initial contact with the Officer ;)

 

At no point did the Officer request or suggest that the caches bee removed, in fact he was very keen to work out an agreement with me for them to remain.

Share this post


Link to post

Well done to all for a great common-sense agreement.

 

I don't think Seherlock7 is covered by this agreement but I have updated the text anyway.

Share this post


Link to post

As one of the cache owners affected by this agreement, I have something of a problem with just one of the conditions.

 

At least a couple of my caches are in plain sight. Clearly marking them as geocaches will make them totally obvious to muggles.

 

Since three of the four caches in Green Park were "unavailable" when I adopted them, and the fourth went missing immediately afterwards, it can be seen just how vulnerable these caches are in this environment. Marking them so they become even more obvious just isn't going to work.

 

So, whilst I applaud the way that this agreement has been achieved, it might have been even better if the people involved had also mentioned it to the very restricted number of cachers involved.

 

Bob

Edited by Belplasca

Share this post


Link to post

I've tried to edit my two affected caches to fit the new rules, but as they've been archived, of course, I can't :laughing:

 

One of them is a 1cm-ish cubed nano which won't take being 'clearly marked as a cache' very easily, unless its finders have excellent eyesight! :D

Share this post


Link to post

So, since cache owners are unable to edit their cache pages, what is the point of the comment in the archiving message:

 

We will check all cache pages after a 3 week period, and reserve the right to arrange for a agent acting on behalf of the UK Reviewer Team to remove those not meeting the above conditions so as to remain in compliance with the agreement with the Specialist Search Unit-Metropolitan Police Force.

 

Bob

 

Edited to add that I have now heard that a mechanism is being put in place to allow the editing of cache listings involved...

Edited by Belplasca

Share this post


Link to post

A small discrete 'G' or something should be sufficient on a micro. Once the police have all the lcoations then all should be well anyway. Bang goes my idea of placing a small nano near the Israeli embassy! LOLOLOL

 

Well done folks - nice to know common sense rules

Share this post


Link to post

Congratulations on the negotiations. It is a very good result considering what security is like in that area. I hope the wrinkles are ironed out, and I may now go looking for a couple of caches I have avoided for security reasons!

Share this post


Link to post

A small discrete 'G' or something should be sufficient on a micro. Once the police have all the lcoations then all should be well anyway. Bang goes my idea of placing a small nano near the Israeli embassy! LOLOLOL

 

I have one that is in plain sight. Putting ANY label on it will make it stand out...

 

It just might work if cachers return the cache with the label out of sight. But, if the police know EXACTLY where the cache is and what it looks like, do they really need it to be labelled?

 

There are plenty of unlabelled other structures in the area!

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post

A small discrete 'G' or something should be sufficient on a micro. Once the police have all the lcoations then all should be well anyway. Bang goes my idea of placing a small nano near the Israeli embassy! LOLOLOL

 

I have one that is in plain sight. Putting ANY label on it will make it stand out...

 

It just might work if cachers return the cache with the label out of sight. But, if the police know EXACTLY where the cache is and what it looks like, do they really need it to be labelled?

 

There are plenty of unlabelled other structures in the area!

 

Bob

 

Just a suggestion Bob. Why don't you go and re negotiate the deal.

 

What exactly is the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
3: All containers to be clearly marked as Geocaches.

 

Could it be on the underside? I think with a little thought most caches could be labelled and for those that really cannot, then perhaps a few will be lost. Does it say 'on the outside'?

 

However, the alternative to this arrangement is NO caches in those areas at all, so think on that!!!

Share this post


Link to post
3: All containers to be clearly marked as Geocaches.

 

Could it be on the underside? I think with a little thought most caches could be labelled and for those that really cannot, then perhaps a few will be lost. Does it say 'on the outside'?

 

However, the alternative to this arrangement is NO caches in those areas at all, so think on that!!!

 

Yes - it could be labelled on the underside. Which would work, provided all future finders returned it in that way. But if they don't???

 

But, the agreement does NOT say 'on the outside' as far as I can see. Maybe this is something that can be clarified? In point of fact, I made a special journey to the cache site after I had placed it to make sure it was clearly labeled inside, since I recognise how sensitive this area is...

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post

We are currently discussing a suitable and very simple logo for Nano containers, which might even be acceptable on Micro containers. This with a bit of thought could be used on containers that are visible, nothing in the agreement states that it has to be white in colour.

 

Yes the Officers searching the area will have a written description and photograph of the container, but you have to remember. That they have to conduct a extremely thorough search of these areas, and so wish as much measures put in place to aid in quickly ID'ing the container, without have to take several minutes debating whether it is the container in the photo.

 

Failure to properly ID one in a search could result in the Area be evacuated, the Bomb Squad being called out. The resulting chaos would cause Grid Lock to a large part of London [the officers description].

 

From the UK geocaching community's point of view, this could not only lead to large parts of London being put off bounds to caches. But also cause legislation to be enacted for the control of Geocaching in the UK.

 

Another risk the Officer highlighted, and another reason the caches have been Temporarily Archived. Is because of the risk that Armed Police Officers could be called out to geocachers searching for a container, placing their safety at risk. Again something both the Metropolitan Police Force and the UK Reviewer Team, wish to avoid at all cost. Even if this means that to remain in compliance with the agreement, we arrange for the removal of any container which is not brought into compliance.

 

I personally would rather have a cache owner irate at me for arranging the removal of his/her container due to Non compliance, than have a geocacher loose their lives or be in serious trouble with the Police.

Share this post


Link to post

We are currently discussing a suitable and very simple logo for Nano containers, which might even be acceptable on Micro containers. This with a bit of thought could be used on containers that are visible, nothing in the agreement states that it has to be white in colour.

Thanks for the feedback on this - I'll wait and see what transpires before I take my toys out of the playground :D

 

I personally would rather have a cache owner irate at me for arranging the removal of his/her container due to Non compliance, than have a geocacher loose their lives or be in serious trouble with the Police.

Absolutely! Having been "interviewed" by an armed policeman at a cache site in America, I know just how un-nerving it can be... Oh, and I'm not at all irate! :D :D :laughing:

 

I'll stand by and await instructions.

 

Bob

Edited by Belplasca

Share this post


Link to post

We are currently discussing a suitable and very simple logo for Nano containers, which might even be acceptable on Micro containers. This with a bit of thought could be used on containers that are visible, nothing in the agreement states that it has to be white in colour......

 

Rather than a logo (which would be difficult to reproduce on a nano) couldn't we use a code number/word or something similar?

 

If we could fit the GC Waypoint code onto the container the police would be able to do a quick internet search and find the actual details for the cache. Perhaps something as simple as "GC" stamped, printed or written on the container might be enough to satisfy the police without attracting the unwanted attention of muggles.

 

Most "street furniture" has some kind of code on it such as street lamps, road signs, cable boxes etc. Perhaps the codes would go relatively un-noticed by muggles rather than a nice shiny logo attracting their attention?

Share this post


Link to post

It is such a shame that Virtual Caches are no longer allowed.

 

This would eliminate the need for a physical cache in sensitive areas.

 

Logging either with photographic evidence, or an email reply to a simple question.

 

I know it doesn't solve this problem but just a thought anyway!

Share this post


Link to post

It is such a shame that Virtual Caches are no longer allowed.

 

This would eliminate the need for a physical cache in sensitive areas.

 

Logging either with photographic evidence, or an email reply to a simple question.

 

I know it doesn't solve this problem but just a thought anyway!

Let me generate a storm. That's now the point of waymarks.

Share this post


Link to post

As 7 of mine..(I was expecting more) have now been archived.I'll see what happens over the next few weeks before I decide if I wish to follow the exacting guidelines that may or may not follow.This of course will affect more than just 7 of my caches.I hope and even expect that the cachers involved will be able to have some input before the final "rules" are implemented.As I have yet to be contacted by TPTB on a personal level..ie a polite email of sorts !!!

 

Q's

1.Did the police contact TPTB or was it vice versa?.."A mountain out of a molehill" may now have started.

2.Did the police really have a MAJOR problem with something the size of a 35 MM film container?

3.Will every policeman in the affected areas become aware of geocaching?

 

.......and on a slightly lighter note......

4.Will that pair of cachers be chastised for allowing themselves to be muggled so easily.Surely stealth is the #1 factor while caching in urban areas!!

Share this post


Link to post
currykev wrote:

Did the police contact TPTB or was it vice versa?

Initially, the police contacted GAGB. An officer from the Met left a message on the GAGB contact phone number, and Matt Wagster (Badger) responded to it.

 

---

Bill

Chairman, GAGB

Share this post


Link to post

We are currently discussing a suitable and very simple logo for Nano containers, which might even be acceptable on Micro containers. This with a bit of thought could be used on containers that are visible, nothing in the agreement states that it has to be white in colour......

 

Rather than a logo (which would be difficult to reproduce on a nano) couldn't we use a code number/word or something similar?

 

If we could fit the GC Waypoint code onto the container the police would be able to do a quick internet search and find the actual details for the cache. Perhaps something as simple as "GC" stamped, printed or written on the container might be enough to satisfy the police without attracting the unwanted attention of muggles.

 

Most "street furniture" has some kind of code on it such as street lamps, road signs, cable boxes etc. Perhaps the codes would go relatively un-noticed by muggles rather than a nice shiny logo attracting their attention?

 

The logo that is being considered is simple and is very easy to produce at all sizes, whether by permanent marker, paint brush or even scratched on. In fact I have a magnetic nano [10mm across] that has been marked up in compliance and from 2m away you can not even see it's been marked :D

 

In answer to Currykev's questions

 

1 yes the Officer from the Specialist Search Unit-Metropolitans Polices Force made the initial contact with GAGB, via their Telephone contact No. After doing a search on the net for geocaching.

 

2. The size of the container has nothing to do with the risk assessment they have to make during a search in what is a High Security Risk Area. They have no idea if the container has explosives, Toxic substances, or even drugs in them. By having as much information as possible before hand enables them to produce a more detailed risk assessment.

 

3. As currently we are dealing with a specialist Unit concerned with the affecting areas, I can't confirm the answer to this yet. But will request that the information is disseminated to all patrol officers in the area.

 

4. The particular cachers have not been identified, nor will we make any attempts to ID them. As trying to act in a Stealthy way, kicked of the whole issue, acting in a more open manner might be the best option and result in less caches being muggled. It will certainly go towards keeping cachers safe.

 

As 7 of mine..(I was expecting more) have now been archived.I'll see what happens over the next few weeks before I decide if I wish to follow the exacting guidelines that may or may not follow.This of course will affect more than just 7 of my caches.I hope and even expect that the cachers involved will be able to have some input before the final "rules" are implemented.As I have yet to be contacted by TPTB on a personal level..ie a polite email of sorts !!!

 

The agreement guidelines have already been posted in the first post of this topic, there is nothing exacting about marking the container, providing a written description of the container and how it is hidden. And a photograph of the actual container.

 

I will be contacting all affected cachers via email ASAP but have had several appointments to deal with on a family level. So I'm not ignoring anyone affected.

Share this post


Link to post
currykev wrote:

Did the police contact TPTB or was it vice versa?

Initially, the police contacted GAGB. An officer from the Met left a message on the GAGB contact phone number, and Matt Wagster (Badger) responded to it.

 

---

Bill

Chairman, GAGB

 

Thanks for answering that vital question Bill.

I have taken the precaution of disabling other possible caches that may be within the said areas.I will of course

monitor the situation in earnest.

Kevin

Share this post


Link to post

Looks like the whole incident was handled in a muture and intelligent manner, well done to all concerned.

 

Having found many of the caches concerned I am amazed that the boys in blue were not aware of geocaching and we had got away with acting suspiciously for so long.

 

I thought the nano at Hyde Park HCQFVP had caused enough problems with the police. After all, that was the reason it was archived.

 

I also find it hard to believe that every new officer that joins that area will have geocaching explained as part of their induction. If that if that is the case then great, but I feel this might go the way of a number of initiatives. Approached with enthusiasm for the first few months and then quietly dies away.

 

Cachers will keep their part of the deal, but new officers will know nothing about it.

 

Also I hope this doesn't hit the papers. Giving the criminal elements a hint that they can do whatever it is the police are trying to stop them doing and just tip them the wink, 'it's OK I'm a geocacher', would not be good.

Share this post


Link to post

This matter brings to mind my experience last summer. I had just completed 'Dilapidated Des Res (Beds)' (GC9ADB) and was just returning to my car from the direction of Luton Airport (taxiing aircraft easily visible from this location), when I was stopped by a member of Beds Police. I was asked what I was doing (on a mapped footpath). Basically I had to explain geocaching, show him the cache page, and point out on the map where exactly the cache was (if he checked out the cache, he didn't log it online). Two weeks later, all the airports had been closed. Made me think how suspicious we can look in other peoples eyes (even when we're not actually searching) if the circumstances aren't as we believe them to be. It possible didn't help that I was wearing a rucksack!

Share this post


Link to post

Firstly, congratulations for achieving a reasonable compromise in difficult circumstances.

 

I have a visit to London planned later in the year, and I would normally be unable to avoid the temptation of trying to tick off as many caches as possible whilst wandering around. But having read this thread, I think I'll take the cautious approach and stick to logging the dozen or so (hopefully more by then!) ready-made waymarks in central London, and adding a couple more myself. I can't imagine searching for a micro in a park without looking "furtive", and I don't fancy having to explain geocaching to an armed detachment of guards or even an enraged citizen. This is supposed to be a fun and entertaining pastime!

 

I've just done a quick search, then downloaded the existing ones onto Memory Map. They look feasible to get round in less than a day: they are mostly grouped around St. James's Park and Tower Bridge.

 

Although some of the virtual cache types look fairly easy to log ("Little Ben" for instance), there may be some where you might attract suspicion (particularly the more obscure "locationless" ones). Was Waymarking mentioned to the police as well? I suspect that it will be even harder to explain, although you're a lot less likely to actually have to explain it!

Share this post


Link to post

Was Waymarking mentioned to the police as well? I suspect that it will be even harder to explain, although you're a lot less likely to actually have to explain it!

 

Waymarking is usually much easier, most commonly just photographing common landmarks, which are likely to already be frequented by tourists!

Share this post


Link to post

Waymarking is usually much easier, most commonly just photographing common landmarks, which are likely to already be frequented by tourists!

You're right in general terms - but I'm hoping to find a "simulacra" hidden away behind a building, or one of the more obscure waymarks (ghost signs, for instance). I suppose photographers have a similar problem, but they won't have to explain why they're consulting a GPSr at the same time (unless they're Geographing!).

Share this post


Link to post

Waymarking is usually much easier, most commonly just photographing common landmarks, which are likely to already be frequented by tourists!

I suppose photographers have a similar problem, but they won't have to explain why they're consulting a GPSr at the same time (unless they're Geographing!).

Not so much wrong with that, especially if you cant get a signal! I'll have a look into those cats, not fully looked at london ones yet. (although I'm close)

Share this post


Link to post

the point is that not all police will be aware necesarily of these guidelines or the existance of caches, rather that tptb within the force will be so that when the finger tips searches are done prior to any event or if one of the caches is accidently found then the control room will be aware.

 

should hopefully resolve any situation very quickly and without any need for major problems occuring.

 

and on a lighter note maybe get a few more cachers within the force.

Share this post


Link to post

Waymarking is usually much easier, most commonly just photographing common landmarks, which are likely to already be frequented by tourists!

I suppose photographers have a similar problem, but they won't have to explain why they're consulting a GPSr at the same time (unless they're Geographing!).

Not so much wrong with that, especially if you cant get a signal! I'll have a look into those cats, not fully looked at london ones yet. (although I'm close)

A slip of the mouse button this one

Edited by AB&MB

Share this post


Link to post

The logo that is being considered is simple and is very easy to produce at all sizes, whether by permanent marker, paint brush or even scratched on. In fact I have a magnetic nano [10mm across] that has been marked up in compliance and from 2m away you can not even see it's been marked :)

 

Come on then! Show us your logo :lol::):)

Share this post


Link to post

The logo that is being considered is simple and is very easy to produce at all sizes, whether by permanent marker, paint brush or even scratched on. In fact I have a magnetic nano [10mm across] that has been marked up in compliance and from 2m away you can not even see it's been marked :)

 

Come on then! Show us your logo :):D:D

 

Sorry not mine but a public domain one :) [no copyright] that many cachers might be familiar with

 

Leatherman and No not the knife :)

 

simple and to the point or should that be X :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

Re emails to owners. These will be despatched this morning [now that they have been proof read and corrected for my poor grammar :lol: ]

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post

The logo that is being considered is simple and is very easy to produce at all sizes, whether by permanent marker, paint brush or even scratched on. In fact I have a magnetic nano [10mm across] that has been marked up in compliance and from 2m away you can not even see it's been marked :)

 

Come on then! Show us your logo :):D:D

 

Sorry not mine but a public domain one :) [no copyright] that many cachers might be familiar with

 

Leatherman and No not the knife :)

 

simple and to the point or should that be X :lol:

 

They look like a good idea, nice and simple to reproduce, as you say. :D

 

Might be an idea for the cache owners to show the logo on their cache page to give cachers an idea as to what they're looking for. Not everyone will be familar with the logo (or this forum topic) :D

 

I've got a micro cache that needs replacing (not in London) and will probably use that logo :D Although I am thinking of using a nano instead or perhaps something more devious :D

Share this post


Link to post

Well done on the negotiations guy. I'm not sure if it solves the root problem of furtive activity in parks, but that's been covered in a different recently closed thread. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

We did these caches as a family on Sunday and am now relieved it was not us who brought it to the Police's attention. They are extremely difficult to do without looking suspicious and I sent the kids to get some as they look less 'dodgy'. Green Park 4 is right by a very busy path We couldnt find this one.

The one near to Hyde Park Corner near the war memorial looks very suspicious both where it is placed and the container used. It is great that the Police have allowed caching to continue as these are a nice set and we enjoyed doing them.

Share this post


Link to post

mmm i am in london in a few weeks and was hoping to get in a few caches. i hope they are all back up and running by then.

 

thanks for the great work being done on our behalf

Share this post


Link to post

We did these caches as a family on Sunday and am now relieved it was not us who brought it to the Police's attention. They are extremely difficult to do without looking suspicious and I sent the kids to get some as they look less 'dodgy'.

 

As the owner of these caches, I have the advantage of knowing exactly what I'm looking for, but I tend to just openly go straight to them and go off with them...

 

Green Park 4 is right by a very busy path We couldnt find this one.

It was replaced for me recently. So I didn't know what I was looking for, but I did know the rough area. I spotted it after a couple of moments. It's in plain sight (through a little foliage) so can be found without any suspicious scrabbling around...

 

The one near to Hyde Park Corner near the war memorial looks very suspicious both where it is placed and the container used.

 

Actually, I disagree! If you don't know that it's a cache, I wouldn't mind betting that most people - police included - would take it for a normal part of the installation. Once you realise what you need to grab, it's quite easy to get hold of it. But I did hear recently of an experienced cacher who took time to check amongst the nearby leaves - but posted a DNF! They must have actually touched the cache and not realised it! So, it only looks suspicious in hindsight...

 

It is great that the Police have allowed caching to continue as these are a nice set and we enjoyed doing them.

Yes. And all credit to the negotiators - on both sides - for reaching a consensus.

 

Having caches in areas like this that stay in place isn't easy. They need to be findable, yet hidden. As I've said, my approach with the ones in this park, which were all missing when I took them over, has been to find a way to hide two of them in plain sight. A third is very close to its original position, but now has a taped on holder, rather than relying on magnets on cast iron and the third has been relocated away from the seat that it had been magnetically attached to, into a new spot, where it can easily be seen if you are looking for it, but where it is a little way away from the normal run of muggles. And, much to my surprise, it even survived the very high winds recently!

 

So now I'll have to work out just how to mark the containers in a way which will not make them more obvious, but which won't compromise them. Might need some discussion with the reviewers!

 

Anyway, to sum up, three of these caches can be grabbed in a totally non-suspicious manner. Just study the locations from a short distance. Green Park 1 is more difficult, and may not survive the new situation very long. However, it should be possible to grab it if you happen to be clumsy with your loose change... :lol:

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post

Ah-ha...we did wonder if GP4 was where you suggested. The old dropped change or tying your shoelaces is a good trick. My kids have got very good a finding caches plus they are closer to the ground. Nobody seems to worry about a couple of kids raking about in some undergrowth. At least with the inverted key safe varieties you can stick a label on and nobody will notice unless they crouch down. Good luck with these, it would be a shame to loose them.

Share this post


Link to post

Good luck with these, it would be a shame to loose them.

Thanks. I suspect that some will be lost - though hopefully not in Green Park.

 

But, since there are so few cache owners in the area, it's quite hard to understand why they weren't involved in the discussions, and just presented with an ultimatum...

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post

Good luck with these, it would be a shame to loose them.

Thanks. I suspect that some will be lost - though hopefully not in Green Park.

 

But, since there are so few cache owners in the area, it's quite hard to understand why they weren't involved in the discussions, and just presented with an ultimatum...

 

Bob

 

Sorry Bob but as in most negotiations regarding cache placement, it's just usually one member of the community who makes the agreement and then presents the details to the community.

 

In this case there was a time constraint, imposed by the Officer who made the initial contact, as we are approaching what is a busy period for his Unit [his words]. As some of the issues raised by him were of a very serious nature, I felt that I had no alternative but to finalise a agreement with the Officer during the conversation. The basic details were agreed with the Officer, who then left it up to me to see it through to implementation. As this agreement not only affects a small No of cache owners, but those searching for them and future cache placements in the area, any discussion would have had to be open to everyone. To have opened the issue up for discussion, before making a agreement with the Met Police, would have resulted in the permanent Archiving and uplifting of all affected caches, before any agreement could have been reached

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

×
×
  • Create New...