Jump to content

Cache Permission


jochta
Followers 6

Recommended Posts

I still geocache on and off and I still browse the forums occasionally. I've not been very active recently as I've become a bit disillusioned with the sport I used to love. I've not commented on anything either, one person's chalk is another person's cheese after all.

 

In danger of being labelled Mr Grumpy again, a cache approval this evening has eventually perked me into saying something publicly.

 

I'm referring to the recently approved cache GC1G68M (Benchmark Flush Bracket S6433). I know this location intimately as my sister's remains are buried a few feet away, within sight of the Flush Bracket.

 

I would be interested to know whether the placer had sought appropriate permission to place the cache in a graveyard (although the cache is hidden behind a drainpipe on the church wall) as detailed in a recent thread on the forums.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=198133

 

"Proof of permission is required for PHYSICAL CONTAINERS"

 

I actually wouldn't mind so much if the cache had any point to it, like some details about the church and why you might like to visit it. Or a comment about respecting the surroundings as it's a place of worship, remembrance and mourning. I wonder if my sister's two small children will mind a stranger or group of strangers rummaging around behind a drainpipe 6' away while they are visiting their mother's resting place?

 

Just placing a nanocache next to a Flush Bracket when there is a perfectly adequate existing system for finding and logging them (http://www.bench-marks.org.uk) is just like the vast majority of new cache alerts I receive nowadays, i.e. geocaching just for the sake of it.

 

Whatever happened to the boxes of goodies for the children to rummage through (yes, you can still find them occasionally)? Descriptions of unusual places you would never think of visiting? Learning something new from the cache description? Things to look out for on the way?

 

I'm sure the cache placer will read this and say "Why didn't he just drop me an email? What a grumpy basket." and he's probably right and I'm probably a bit cross and maybe I should sleep on it. But I think this is a big problem facing geocaching generally and worth airing. I see too many new caches placed without thought or care, placed without researching the location (this one doesn't even tell the finder what a Flush Bracket is for) and placed without sharing knowledge to what used to be a young and inquisitive audience who want to learn about the places they visit.

 

It's just a numbers game now. What a sad way for such an exciting and interesting hobby to go.

 

John

 

PS A much better use of Flush Brackets in geocaching IMO would be to use the number as part of an offset cache. Some trigpoints are used (they have exactly the same brackets) in the same way. I've toyed with doing this myself before but not got around to it.

Edited by jochta
Link to comment

Wow! I agree with so much in your post. Especially the degradation of the hobby because of micro spew. Its like a virus and grows exponentially. More and more new people join the hobby and all they see is micro spew and assume that's what all caches must be like, so they place what they know.... Micro-spew....

 

But I have to disagree with you when it comes to the permission issue. Permission, in my opinion, is not required for every physical container. Some locations carry adequate permission just by their nature. For instance, explicit permission is not required in a public park (unless required explicitly by the park). If I can go to a public location without asking permission, I should be able to place a cache there.

 

Maybe Google maps has the location incorrect, but this cache doesn't appear to be in a graveyard.. There may be what looks like a graveyard a couple hundred feet away though. Otherwise, this looks like a very public location.

Link to comment

Must agree with the last post, according to both Google Earth and my copies of MemoryMap and Anquet Maps the location appears to be in a totally public location and not next to/in a graveyard. So either the cache placer has his co-ords well out or the OP is worrying uneededly.

 

Micros and Nanos are fun to find but with so many families with young children getting involve now it is nice to see larger boxes appearing.

 

I have just left 4 caches in Cornwall to be maintained by a local cacher and 3 of these were large enough to accept swaps and the other was a micro just for fun but at least I will give somebody's family a bit of joy in visiting the area I chose (un cached up till then) and in finding something in the box. Micros and Nanos have a place in our 'game' but they must not be allowed to swamp and take it over.

Edited by DrDick&Vick
Link to comment

Must agree with the last post, according to both Google Earth and my copies of MemoryMap and Anquet Maps the location appears to be in a totally public location and not next to/in a graveyard. So either the cache placer has his co-ords well out or the OP is worrying uneededly.

 

Micros and Nanos are fun to find but with so many families with young children getting involve now it is nice to see larger boxes appearing.

 

I have just left 4 caches in Cornwall to be maintained by a local cacher and 3 of these were large enough to accept swaps and the other was a micro just for fun but at least I will give somebody's family a bit of joy in visiting the area I chose (un cached up till then) and in finding something in the box. Micros and Nanos have a place in our 'game' but they must not be allowed to swamp and take it over.

Just let the dead rest in peace, just ask the church what they think.

Gordy

Link to comment

A few above have commented that it is in a public location; I see that this flush bracket is in the middle of a field on several mapping products, so I think it might be a case of bad co-ords.

 

 

It has also been mentioned that it looks like it's in a very public place, but are not public spaces owned, even common land tends to have it's owners and also has strict rules what it can be used for.

 

No matter where a cache is placed, the owner must take all reasonable steps to seek permission, and if he can't find an owner that does not give the right to place.

 

 

In reality placing a cache without permission could be dealt with under environmental laws, this could mean a cache placer getting up to £2000 fine or even a prison sentence for multiple offenses :blink:

Link to comment
Whatever happened to the boxes of goodies for the children to rummage through (yes, you can still find them occasionally)? Descriptions of unusual places you would never think of visiting? Learning something new from the cache description? Things to look out for on the way?

This is a very good point, and is the crux of the matter, however most of the people who place "pointless micros" (to quote a previous thread) are the ones least likely to read the posts here. I have recently seen a proliferation of these set by cachers with only one or two finds, so they obviously have no idea was geocaching is really about. Shame. :blink:

Link to comment

Thanks for the replies.

 

I can assure you that it is in a graveyard...

 

http://www.bench-marks.org.uk/bm11549

 

I have visited it, I know exactly where it is, I know exactly where the cache is. In fact you can see the drainpipe in the photo I took when I logged the Flush Bracket...

 

http://groups.msn.com/OSBM/wallbracketsthe...mp;PhotoID=3876

 

Double standards? I can photo it but you can't cache there? I didn't say you couldn't visit it, it's a 'public' place after all. If it was a worthwhile cache, had appropriate permissions or used the FB as part of an offset to a big box of goodies I wouldn't have even brought the subject up. Benchmarking is more about discovering, logging, cataloguing and maybe saving the surviving Flush Brackets.

 

Sticking a nano behind a drainpipe on a church next to recent graves just for the sake of adding another geocache so the number whores can add one to their found total does however wind me up a bit.

 

John

Edited by jochta
Link to comment
Whatever happened to the boxes of goodies for the children to rummage through (yes, you can still find them occasionally)? Descriptions of unusual places you would never think of visiting? Learning something new from the cache description? Things to look out for on the way?

This is a very good point, and is the crux of the matter, however most of the people who place "pointless micros" (to quote a previous thread) are the ones least likely to read the posts here. I have recently seen a proliferation of these set by cachers with only one or two finds, so they obviously have no idea was geocaching is really about. Shame. :blink:

 

Do you think there's a solution? Nano and microcaches without adequate description of the location, without adequate purpose are banned? Blanket ban on nanos and micros? Difficult I guess. I've used micro containers where it has proven difficult to hide a bigger box, although maybe if I'd tried harder I could have. But they are placed where the location is worth visiting with description on the cache page.

 

I wondered if the proliferation of nanos and micros was partly laziness, no need to maintain contents as often, easy to hide, no need to buy contents etc. I've visited micro cache locations and seen several perfect places within feet to hide a bigger box and wondered why the hider didn't bother.

 

And, as another poster commented, I can see that anyone starting the hobby recently will only see new micros and nanos and assume that's what the hobby is, and places more as that is what they know.

 

Only us oldies from the early days remember what caching should be all about.

 

John

Edited by jochta
Link to comment

i wasn't going to pipe up on this thread, but maybe I will...

 

Surely the point isn't that micros are bad, evil, 'spew' or whatever - it's more about using an appropriate cache container for the location. I agree, micros in 'the countryside' could probably be replaced by something larger. However, a micro is surely much more appropriate in towns and cities, where not only is it almost impossible to hide anything larger, but hiding a full size ammo can within shouting distance of the Houses of Parliament is downright dangerous!

 

By saying that micros and nanos should be banned (and this isn't aimed at the last post - I appreciate jochta ISN'T saying that!) is effectively saying that caches in towns and cities should be banned. I for one have got just as much enjoyment from a well thought out micro in the city as I have from a well thought out ammo can in the country.

 

So, can we not all agree that the problem is inappropriate size containers, NOT micros per se - and then get back to the OP! On which subject, I would just say that there are and will always be poor caches (no idea whether this one is), and as a percentage of the total number of UK caches, I doubt it is increasing much - there are simply a lot more caches now than 4+ years ago.

Link to comment
Some locations carry adequate permission just by their nature. For instance, explicit permission is not required in a public park (unless required explicitly by the park). If I can go to a public location without asking permission, I should be able to place a cache there.

The old "frisbee rule" eh? :blink: this one could run and run.

 

I tend to agree in general with the OP, and regarding this specific instance suggest that, in light of the recent announcement regarding graveyards, he put a SBA log on the cache (or email a reviewer).

 

I've said it before but, if you have obtained permission it's great if you state as much on the cache page. Unlike GS policy, I personally don't assume that the cacher has done so; I assume the opposite, curmugeonly so & so that I am. If a cache seems to be in a questionable place then I just walk on by. I alway find it reassuring if someone states "thanks to xyz for permission ..." on the cache page.

Link to comment

I can't see the cache or the log mentioned. It says the cache hasn't been published :blink:

 

Maybe it has been removed already until permission for placing has been sought?

 

As for your general point, why do "old timers" keep harking back to the good old days of geocaching when everything was much better. Us newcomers are entitled to play the game as it is now too.

 

Of course, and that's why I've stayed out of it until now and quietly semi-retired from geocaching. It's a game (one I pay an annual fee to play mind) and can be played in any way you like within the rules set.

 

Doesn't mean that the current way it is played is better than it used to be though (and maybe you wouldn't like how we used to play it) and like all games, rules are adapted and changed to keep the game current and interesting for everyone.

 

John

Link to comment

The cache listing has been retracted.

 

Due to what appears to be a coordinate error the Reviewed location is in fact not the actual location of the container. As this error is outside normal GPSr error, the location even allowing for the GPSr error was indicated to be clear of Church Property so no query about proof of permission would have been made as required for such locations.

 

The OP clearly indicated in his post

 

I know this location intimately as my sister's remains are buried a few feet away, within sight of the Flush Bracket.

 

Which as he has also in a later post provided proof of the location, has left no doubt to the actual location of the container.

 

The cache owner has been requested to provide proof of permission for the placement of the cache or relocate the container off church property before resubmitting it.

 

Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer Geocaching.com

Link to comment

 

Micros and Nanos are fun to find but with so many families with young children getting involve now it is nice to see larger boxes appearing.

 

 

Being fairly new to the game did did you mean this?

Please don't be offended (it too easy on here) I ask out of genuine interest.

 

If so then this is sad as it means that new people think that Nano's and Micro's are the standard and that larger caches are only just being introduced and are the exception.

 

When we started we found only large containers out in the countryside. a park up followed by a walk to a nice area. That's all there was.

When we placed caches we put out the same type of cache that we found as we thought this was the expected thing to do.

When we found our first park and cache without the walk we felt a bit cheated. What no walk. it was large cache though.

It took a long time before we found out first micro. There were so few.

 

So if you feel that its the other way round now, then Micros and Nanos have indeed taken over.

I wonder what the ratio of Mirocs places to regular cache palaces are now?

 

I don't want this to be an argument over pro and cons of cache type there is not going to be agreement on that ever. The original poster asked.

 

Whatever happened to the boxes of goodies for the children to rummage through (yes, you can still find them occasionally)? Descriptions of unusual places you would never think of visiting? Learning something new from the cache description? Things to look out for on the way?

 

Old timers can harp back as it shows the progression of the game. In five more years where will we be?

Link to comment

By saying that micros and nanos should be banned (and this isn't aimed at the last post - I appreciate jochta ISN'T saying that!) is effectively saying that caches in towns and cities should be banned. I for one have got just as much enjoyment from a well thought out micro in the city as I have from a well thought out ammo can in the country.

 

Agree 100%, I've enjoyed some superb microcaches. And I've found pointless big boxes in the countryside too.

 

There's never going to be an easy answer and in an ideal world, every cache would be brilliant, be exciting and interesting, the finder will have researched the location and be excited to share it with others etc.

 

Sadly, I think this ideal is becoming further and further away.

 

John

Link to comment

To be honest, I get really annoyed with people harking back to the Golden Age all the time. I've only been caching for just over a year, and I love it and think it's great fun. OK, there's bad caches out there, but the vast majority I've found have been well worth doing and I've found it a rewarding experience.

 

I don't think anyone views micros as the norm. Personally, I rarely bother with micros, and prefer bigger containers. I've hidden eight caches so far and only one is a micro.

 

Having a snobbish and elitist view about how the sport used to be better is bit of a slur on newcomers. There's plenty of great hides in my area, and lots keep appearing, many placed by newer cachers. Without new caches coming online, the game would die out.

 

Lee

Link to comment

I can't see the cache or the log mentioned. It says the cache hasn't been published :ph34r:

 

As for your general point, why do "old timers" keep harking back to the good old days of geocaching when everything was much better. Us newcomers are entitled to play the game as it is now too.

 

Old timer I've only just gone forty :( Ahh yes the good old days going on round trips of hundreds of miles to get three caches :D .

 

I do agree with a lot of what has already been said about caches being placed just for the sake of placing , I think its down to enthusiasm of the convert and I think I have been guilty of this myself in the past.

 

People seem to go for micros and I don't see anything wrong in a well thought out placement of one but you could say that for any cache I suppose.

 

As for permission it should always be sought :blink: I always do :) that's probably why I only have a handful put out.

Edited by reelcutter
Link to comment

It may only be a few years old, but the game has changed a lot. I used to tell people who asked me about geocaching (back in 2004) that the game invoolved hiding a box in an interesting location. I remember saying how useful it was when I travelled to somewhere new as it directed me to interesting spots that often only the locals would otherwise know about. For good or ill, that is no longer what geocaching is about; it is about finding a cache whatever the location. The prevailing spirit within the game (as I see it from new caches placed and numbers of finds on different types of caches) is that finding a cache in whatever the location is better than not caching at all. This is epitomised by series such as Motorway Mayhem and Off Yer Trolley.

 

It's still possible to cache in the "old" way, but you have to take time to choose which caches to do. I have enough experience to sift through the mass of caches to judge which I will enjoy. I guess if I was starting out now, there would be a strong probability that I would lose interest in geocaching fairly quickly.

Link to comment

I consider myself fairly experienced now (although not as much as the old timers who went caching with wind-up GPSs!) and I would say that geocaching has expanded to incorporate more features and ideas. The UK has always been at the forefront of pushng the boundary, and people have all sorts of ideas about what makes a good cache. I can honestly say that if every cache I did was an 'old style' cache, with an ammo can and a glorious walk to a 'secret' spot with wonderful views, I would soon be bored and almost certainly wouldn't have carried on.

 

Surely the joys of caching IS the diversity of caches. Caches in city centres, caches on hill tops, and caches underground. We're lucky enough to have the North Downs on our doorstep, which has wonderful views, but there is only space for a limited number of caches there. So caches have to be placed in locations without the stunning views or wonderful walk. Other things can be done to make them enjoyable caches - near us, there are lots of puzzles, and the joy of caching is at least as much in solving the puzzle as finding the cache itself. For those less puzzle minded, there are plenty of extreme caches, and also our RTB series. Finally, the church micro series provides easy finds (usually) at some delightful churches (usually!)

 

In amongst that lot, there must be caches for every cacher! All of them are good caches, depending on what you like. Just because they don't finish with a big box and a nice view doesn't make them poor caches.

 

Sure, there are some poor caches, but I would be very surprised if there wasn't some poor caches in the old days. However, poor caches often end up archived, for whatever reason, so the only old ones left are the good ones. No doubt the poor caches that are currently listed will dwindle and be lost, to be replaced by better caches, and obviously the occasional poor one.

 

back to work!

 

dave

Link to comment

Off topic from the OP I guess, though I will risk it anyway.

 

My first cache find on the 30th of December 2003 was a 35mm film can under a style 4 ft from the car.

 

Robrovski's Cache

 

Micros are far from new, a fair amount of the ones in this area were micros.

 

Some are good, some are bad others are just OK.

 

It's not the size of the cache that counts, it is the thought that goes into the placement. I am sure we all get it wrong every now and again.

 

Then, sometimes even what was a brilliant place for a cache can turn bad after a few months. I went back to one of mine that was in a OK area (not fantastic just OK) and discovered large amounts of fly tipping. :blink:

Link to comment

Off topic from the OP I guess, though I will risk it anyway.

 

My first cache find on the 30th of December 2003 was a 35mm film can under a style 4 ft from the car.

 

Our very first cache was a micro too!

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...g=&numlogs=

 

20th September 2003 hidden under a small wooden disk.

 

Maybe this discussion is focusing on size too much, it's the recently increasing lack of thought and effort that goes into some hides that annoys me more. The majority of these do seem to be micros and nanos though...

 

As has been said above, a micro placed with thought is better than a big box dumped anywhere.

 

John

Link to comment

I consider myself fairly experienced now (although not as much as the old timers who went caching with wind-up GPSs!) and I would say that geocaching has expanded to incorporate more features and ideas. The UK has always been at the forefront of pushng the boundary, and people have all sorts of ideas about what makes a good cache. I can honestly say that if every cache I did was an 'old style' cache, with an ammo can and a glorious walk to a 'secret' spot with wonderful views, I would soon be bored and almost certainly wouldn't have carried on.

 

Absolutely. It's a diverse sport, and just because a type of cache appears that you don't like, doesn't mean the game has gone to the dogs. If you don't like micros, exclude them from your PQs and ignore them. I

 

Personally, I love the variety of caches out there, but I tend to avoid most puzzles and prefer a bigger box to a micro. Not everyone thinks it's all about numbers - but if for some people that's what they want, why should it bother anyone else?

 

Surely the joys of caching IS the diversity of caches....(snip)...In amongst that lot, there must be caches for every cacher! All of them are good caches, depending on what you like. Just because they don't finish with a big box and a nice view doesn't make them poor caches.

 

Absolutely. A cache I did recently had a pretty negative log beforehand, questioning why the hider had chosen the location. I wanted to do the cache anyway, as others in the series had been good, but when I got there I discovered a well-hidden cache in a very pleasant spot indeed, in a nice park next to a river. Clearly someone hated it, but I really enjoyed it. I think it's a bit arrogant and conceited to think that a cache you personally don't like is an example of how caching as a whole is going downhill.

 

Lee

Link to comment

I don't understand how folk who were not caching 'in the old days' can possibly comment or defend the opinion that caching is better or worse. The one's who were caching then and now are the only people in the position to compare the game. All others can only argue that they enjoy the game as it is now.

 

I think the arrogance is from those that were not there then and reckon they know it's as good or better now.

 

It is a fact that the game has changed and if someone who was there years ago feels it's got worse then it is their opinion, based on thier experience of the game. It's not arrogant of them to voice that feeling.

Link to comment

I don't understand how folk who were not caching 'in the old days' can possibly comment or defend the opinion that caching is better or worse. The one's who were caching then and now are the only people in the position to compare the game. All others can only argue that they enjoy the game as it is now.

 

I think the arrogance is from those that were not there then and reckon they know it's as good or better now.

 

It is a fact that the game has changed and if someone who was there years ago feels it's got worse then it is their opinion, based on thier experience of the game. It's not arrogant of them to voice that feeling.

 

if this post is aimed at what I thought was my own well-reasoned post, then i totally resent any implication that it is arrogant. As a number of people will hopefully say in my defence, arrogant is about the last thing i can be described as. :blink:

 

My opinion (and thats all it is - you seem to be implying that old-timers (you know what I mean) are entitled to an opinion, however I'm not) was based entirely ON the expressed opinions of those old timers. Namely, that early caches were all big boxes, full of wonderful goodies, and in lovely locations. I merely suggested that the law of averages should mean that there were poor caches in the old days, but they've been archived.

 

Finally, I never said it was better, merely that statistically it probably isn't getting worse - UNLESS you think caches should ONLY be big boxes with nice views and/or good walks. If anyone does have that opinion, then they are perfectly entitled to it! I may think they're wrong - but I am equally entitled to my opinion aren't I?

 

Anyway, straying woefully OT and onto frequently treaded paths. I believe we were talkign about permission? And it appears the cache in the OP didn't have it and is now unpublished - end of matter!

Link to comment

I think that the difference from "olden times" is that more caches are there just for the sake of a cache being there. When I began caching there was a variety of caches- short walks, long walks, puzzles, micros and multis but the majority had a point beyond just being a cache.

 

There seemed to me to be a fundemental change in caching with the advent of Motorway Mayhem. Whether it's a positive or negative thing depends on what caches you enjoy doing and how easy it is to distinguish the types you enjoy before you attempt them. One of the good things about the various cash and dash series is that it's immediately obvious which type of cacher they are aimed at, so it's easy to filter them out or in.

Link to comment

I don't understand how folk who were not caching 'in the old days' can possibly comment or defend the opinion that caching is better or worse. The one's who were caching then and now are the only people in the position to compare the game. All others can only argue that they enjoy the game as it is now.

 

I think the arrogance is from those that were not there then and reckon they know it's as good or better now.

 

It is a fact that the game has changed and if someone who was there years ago feels it's got worse then it is their opinion, based on thier experience of the game. It's not arrogant of them to voice that feeling.

 

if this post is aimed at what I thought was my own well-reasoned post, then i totally resent any implication that it is arrogant. As a number of people will hopefully say in my defence, arrogant is about the last thing i can be described as. :blink:

 

My opinion (and thats all it is - you seem to be implying that old-timers (you know what I mean) are entitled to an opinion, however I'm not) was based entirely ON the expressed opinions of those old timers. Namely, that early caches were all big boxes, full of wonderful goodies, and in lovely locations. I merely suggested that the law of averages should mean that there were poor caches in the old days, but they've been archived.

 

Finally, I never said it was better, merely that statistically it probably isn't getting worse - UNLESS you think caches should ONLY be big boxes with nice views and/or good walks. If anyone does have that opinion, then they are perfectly entitled to it! I may think they're wrong - but I am equally entitled to my opinion aren't I?

 

Anyway, straying woefully OT and onto frequently treaded paths. I believe we were talkign about permission? And it appears the cache in the OP didn't have it and is now unpublished - end of matter!

 

No it wasn't aimed at you in particular but the 'topic' in general. I'm sorry if you don't like the inference but newcomers can only claim to know how they THINK the game was and guess at how it was played. The 'Old Timers', not my term, were there at the time and KNOW what the game was like. I was simply trying to say that it seems arrogant of people to say that the game is just as good as it was when they have no possible way of knowing.

Link to comment

Maybe this discussion is focusing on size too much, it's the recently increasing lack of thought and effort that goes into some hides that annoys me more. The majority of these do seem to be micros and nanos though...

I get the impression that there is a set of cachers out there that are "relatively" new to the game and full of enthusiasm. They want to contribute by placing loads of caches in places that they find interesting (but sometimes only to them!). They go prepared on a day out with 5/6 caches ready to place. Unfortunately so many caches get placed in one trip that the location isn't that well thought out, permission can be a bit "iffy", coordinates not the best, etc. To top it all off it's easier (and cheaper) to carry 5/6 micros/nanos in your pocket than ammo boxes and that's why (IMO) micro "spew" happens so much and why so many micros and nanos get bad press.

 

Many of these caches frustrate me as a reviewer but I get great enjoyment out of a first time placer putting loads of effort into their cache planning (regardless of size) and can share their fun when I see the great logs coming through :unsure:

Link to comment

Whats a flush bracket?

 

Placed by Ordnance Survey, and used to measure height/distance when making maps.

Are usually found on a Trig Pillar.

The OS guys had permission to more or less where they liked to get the measurements!

The Flush Brackets are often on churches as they are less likely to be demolished/extended, so less likelyhood of loosing their set mark.

 

(They can be logged, on various other sites :unsure: )

.

:)

Link to comment

It seems I've caused quite a stir on a few counts!!! :laughing:

 

I've sent a mail to the cacher concerned about the proximity to his sister grave and I will seek permission from the church involved. I was a bit out on my cords and have rectified this. I’m a fairly new cacher who is learning the rules fast. :laughing:

 

I like to point out that the flush bracket is accessible with a path a no trampling over graves is involved. I would think caches are respectful and don't generally go around trampling on graves especially when there is a perfectly good path. Also the flush bracket is on other sites and you will get people affectively seeking the bracket anyway.

 

Secondly, yes unfortunately I think it is a numbers game. But I like to think I put a little bit more imagination into my caches and don't go around sticking caches on park benches and every tree I find.

Anyway, I find the best caches are church yards. I’ve done plenty of them and find them lovely places to go. I certainly wouldn’t have gone there if it wasn’t for the cache and isn’t that what caching is all about? Going places out ‘n’ about, places you wouldn’t visit if it wasn’t for the cache!!! :D

 

The reason I placed this cache was to promote benchmarks. If you look at the geocahing site it says log your benchmark. But you can't log these ones in the UK. So if you've ever wondered if there are bench marks in the UK you now know they are everywhere!!! :blink::o

 

I would have preferred the cacher involved to have mailed me personally rather than have a rant without myself being able to justify myself!!!? :rolleyes:

Link to comment

It seems I've caused quite a stir on a few counts!!! :rolleyes:

HUGE SNIP!

 

glad you're not too disheartened, especially being a newbie! We don't actually want to scare people away from our hobby!

 

To be honest, the coords being out was probably the main problem (been there, done that, anyone that says thay haven't is either lying or never placed any caches!!! :laughing: ) as the reviewers would have picked up where it was and discussed any permission issues before it even went live! Ho hum, as you say, its a learning curve!

Link to comment

Thanks PP I was scared to death when I read this whole thread!!!

 

I'm Feeling a little bit down and my initial enthusiasm has been dampened.

 

I will certainly take more care when placing caches in sensitive areas to gain permission and highlight the respect and sensitively for the surroundings to cachers.

 

Following the thread and being relatively new, I think caching is great.

 

The first caches I found were ‘cache n dashes’ drive right up and bag a quick cache.

I Like the idea of bug hotels which are the only ammo boxes I've found.

Also, when I find caches with what can only be described as plastic junk, mainly from happy meals, a bit boring!! My son loves caching, of course he loves plastic junk and the pet dog has great enthusiasm for my new hobby.

 

By the sound of this thread it looks as caching has changed. I love the idea of urban nano caches. Being devious placing caches under people’s noses and basically finding as many caches as possible is the kind of cacher I am at the moment. (It’s like having an eBay account!! It’s all about what rating score you are and what colour star you are)

 

Perhaps I will create a new topic about UK benchmarks I think this is worth pursuing.

Link to comment

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...
Followers 6
×
×
  • Create New...