Dull drive-bys...

[+rutson]

Important caveat 1: this post *is* a rant, it is not, however, intended as criticism of any one reviewer, but of the system.

 

Important caveat 2: All the points in the this post have been covered in the last few days, I want to bring them together

 

I'm going to lay my cards on the table here, the reason for this post is the refusal to publish a cache I placed at the weekend near to the site of a wreck on access land on Bleaklow Moor in the Dark Peak area of the Peak District. The publication was refused on the grounds that the site is an SSSI. I checked, it is, but so is the whole of the Dark Peak. I am very worried that this astonishingly beautiful area of the county, housing some of my favourite caches will become a cache desert.

 

I intend to attempt to gain formal permission for this cache, I suspect it will be fruitless. Why? First I have to find out who owns it (failed so far...). Then I have to obtain their permission, then THEY have to obtain Natural England's permission. All this for a small tupperware box, it just seems crazy.

 

I do appreciate that there has to be controls lest the hobby is brought into disrepute but I can just feel it degenerating if "interesting" caches are so hard to get published and "dull" ones are so easy.

 

{edit coz I can't type :$}

Edited September 2, 2009 by rutson

[+Von-Horst]

Good luck.

 

Sounds like an uphill battle. On the other hand, what is the realistic alternative?

 

The Study Centre may be able to point you in the correct direction on who to contact for permission. From their website;

 

"All land is owned by someone

 

Even Open Access land requires the landowner to give permission for a group to access it. Check first that you are allowed to take your group to your chosen site. For more information email: information.losehill@peakdistrict.gov.uk, or telephone the National Park Study Centre on: 01433 620373."

 

Hope this helps in some way,

 

Mike

[The Hearse]

I am entirely sympathetic with your view but your logic breaks down. We have no way of controlling quality in the UK and any agreement is unlikely to lead to caches of greater quality, just further employment for the mechanical micro cache dispensers albeit it in nicer areas to hunt. Geocaching enjoys a reasonable reputation at the moment but until we can control cache types we must accept that we will not be allowed access to areas that may permit a limited number of caches demanding some degree of physical activity in keeping with the use of that area but who wish to avoid saturation by drive-bys.

[Deceangi]

You could always ask the Designating Authority for contact details of the Landowner or alternatively for them to pass over your contact details to the Landowner

 

Natural England East Midlands Region

 

Peak to Trent Area Team: BAKEWELL Endcliffe,

Deepdale Business Park,

Ashford Road, Bakewell,

Derbyshire, DE45 1GT

Tel: 0300 060 2228,

Fax: 0300 060 2204,

email: enquiries.eastmids@naturalengland.org.uk

 

Peak to Trent Area Team: NOTTINGHAM

Block 7, Government Buildings,

Chalfont Drive,

Nottingham,

NG8 3SN

Tel: 0115 929 1191,

Fax: 0115 929 4886,

email: enquiries.eastmids@naturalengland.org.uk

 

For anyone whose looking to contact a Natural England Regional Office. Visit http://www.natureonthemap.org.uk/search.aspx and type in the name of the Location, from the list chose which location with that name [warning they don't always use local names so check the name out on both OS 50,000 (Street Map) and OS 25,00 OS (Get a Map) and see if there are variations. Zoom out and use a local town or city if needed] once on the map page click on the map and that will provide you with the contact details for the Local office.

 

Deci

[+rutson]

One step ahead of you Dave ;-)

 

Actually enquiries.eastmids@naturalengland.org.uk doesn't work but eastmidlands@naturalengland.org.uk seems ok.

[Deceangi]

One step ahead of you Dave ;-)

 

Actually enquiries.eastmids@naturalengland.org.uk doesn't work but eastmidlands@naturalengland.org.uk seems ok.

 

Ah I just copied and pasted directly off their contact page [having to sort the formatting out for the forum post] hopefully they will be able to help. As it would be nice to Publish a cache up there.

 

Deci

[+uktim]

Important caveat 1: this post *is* a rant, it is not, however, intended as criticism of any one reviewer, but of the system.

 

Important caveat 2: All the points in the this post have been covered in the last few days, I want to bring them together

 

I'm going to lay my cards on the table here, the reason for this post is the refusal to publish a cache I placed at the weekend near to the site of a wreck on access land on Bleaklow Moor in the Dark Peak area of the Peak District. The publication was refused on the grounds that the site is an SSSI. I checked, it is, but so is the whole of the Dark Peak. I am very worried that this astonishingly beautiful area of the county, housing some of my favourite caches will become a cache desert.

 

I intend to attempt to gain formal permission for this cache, I suspect it will be fruitless. Why? First I have to find out who owns it (failed so far...). Then I have to obtain their permission, then THEY have to obtain Natural England's permission. All this for a small tupperware box, it just seems crazy.

 

I do appreciate that there has to be controls lest the hobby is brought into disrepute but I can just feel it degenerating if "interesting" caches are so hard to get published and "dull" ones are so easy.

 

{edit coz I can't type :$}

 

Can I ask why it's necessary to proive that you've got permission if land is an SSSI but not otherwise?

[nobby.nobbs]

I've placed a cache on a Natural England site before by having the ranger present at the time.

 

Might be worth discussing with them this part of their website:

natural health walking for health

 

they are encouraging people to use the countryside as a way to get healthy by walking...... isn't that what we do?

[+GAZ]

Just commenting on the title of the thread, rather than Rutsons actual content.

 

We were caching with another couple on bank holiday Monday. Out of the 30 odd caches, there were only 3 that had any kind of walk. I had planned the route deliberately this way, as some of the drive-bys' were either unusual, or sneaky. We had a great time, and only had two DNFs.

 

Now......if I had been on my own, I wouldn't have done as many, or even been in that area, I probably would have nabbed a few local ones.

 

So.......I suppose drive-bys can be dull, but if you are having a laugh with good company........they may not be that dull after all............!

[Deceangi]

Important caveat 1: this post *is* a rant, it is not, however, intended as criticism of any one reviewer, but of the system.

 

Important caveat 2: All the points in the this post have been covered in the last few days, I want to bring them together

 

I'm going to lay my cards on the table here, the reason for this post is the refusal to publish a cache I placed at the weekend near to the site of a wreck on access land on Bleaklow Moor in the Dark Peak area of the Peak District. The publication was refused on the grounds that the site is an SSSI. I checked, it is, but so is the whole of the Dark Peak. I am very worried that this astonishingly beautiful area of the county, housing some of my favourite caches will become a cache desert.

 

I intend to attempt to gain formal permission for this cache, I suspect it will be fruitless. Why? First I have to find out who owns it (failed so far...). Then I have to obtain their permission, then THEY have to obtain Natural England's permission. All this for a small tupperware box, it just seems crazy.

 

I do appreciate that there has to be controls lest the hobby is brought into disrepute but I can just feel it degenerating if "interesting" caches are so hard to get published and "dull" ones are so easy.

 

{edit coz I can't type :$}

 

Can I ask why it's necessary to proive that you've got permission if land is an SSSI but not otherwise?

 

SSSI-Site of Special Scientific Interest is a location Designated such by Natural England, Countryside Council Wales or Scottish Natural Heritage Information Service. The appropriate department for the 2 Governments and Assembly. The location has specific legal protection, and the Landowner has certain Legal Requirements. And can face huge fines for breaking those restrictions and even be made to rectify the Land to a designated state.

 

When you submit a cache you agree that you have Adequate Permission for the cache placement, however Reviewers can ask for Proof of that Permission if they believe it is needed

 

By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location.

 

A reviewer may request that you provide contact information for the person who gave you permission to hide your cache.

 

You'll find that we have a "Proof of Permission to Publish" for caches located on

 

Local/National Nature Reserves

Scheduled Monuments

Locations covered by a Landowner Agreement

Railway Company Property [This came about after a complaint to Groundspeak from the Authorities in London]

Church Property and Graveyards [this came about after several caches in such locations had to be archived in a short period after complaints that they had been placed without permission]

 

The "Proof of Permission to Publish" for SSSI's has been in place for longer than I've been a Reviewer [May 2006] so it is not new by any means.

 

I'd also like to point out, that the UK Reviewers regularly publish caches in SSSI's, as the CO has obtained permission off the Landowner [in each case it's down to the Landowner to decide if approval off the Designating Authority is needed. The UK Reviewers just require permission off the Landowner]

 

Deci

[+uktim]

Important caveat 1: this post *is* a rant, it is not, however, intended as criticism of any one reviewer, but of the system.

 

Important caveat 2: All the points in the this post have been covered in the last few days, I want to bring them together

 

I'm going to lay my cards on the table here, the reason for this post is the refusal to publish a cache I placed at the weekend near to the site of a wreck on access land on Bleaklow Moor in the Dark Peak area of the Peak District. The publication was refused on the grounds that the site is an SSSI. I checked, it is, but so is the whole of the Dark Peak. I am very worried that this astonishingly beautiful area of the county, housing some of my favourite caches will become a cache desert.

 

I intend to attempt to gain formal permission for this cache, I suspect it will be fruitless. Why? First I have to find out who owns it (failed so far...). Then I have to obtain their permission, then THEY have to obtain Natural England's permission. All this for a small tupperware box, it just seems crazy.

 

I do appreciate that there has to be controls lest the hobby is brought into disrepute but I can just feel it degenerating if "interesting" caches are so hard to get published and "dull" ones are so easy.

 

{edit coz I can't type :$}

 

Can I ask why it's necessary to proive that you've got permission if land is an SSSI but not otherwise?

 

SSSI-Site of Special Scientific Interest is a location Designated such by Natural England, Countryside Council Wales or Scottish Natural Heritage Information Service. The appropriate department for the 2 Governments and Assembly. The location has specific legal protection, and the Landowner has certain Legal Requirements. And can face huge fines for breaking those restrictions and even be made to rectify the Land to a designated state.

 

When you submit a cache you agree that you have Adequate Permission for the cache placement, however Reviewers can ask for Proof of that Permission if they believe it is needed

 

By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location.

 

A reviewer may request that you provide contact information for the person who gave you permission to hide your cache.

 

You'll find that we have a "Proof of Permission to Publish" for caches located on

 

Local/National Nature Reserves

Scheduled Monuments

Locations covered by a Landowner Agreement

Railway Company Property [This came about after a complaint to Groundspeak from the Authorities in London]

Church Property and Graveyards [this came about after several caches in such locations had to be archived in a short period after complaints that they had been placed without permission]

 

The "Proof of Permission to Publish" for SSSI's has been in place for longer than I've been a Reviewer [May 2006] so it is not new by any means.

 

I'd also like to point out, that the UK Reviewers regularly publish caches in SSSI's, as the CO has obtained permission off the Landowner [in each case it's down to the Landowner to decide if approval off the Designating Authority is needed. The UK Reviewers just require permission off the Landowner]

 

Deci

 

What about ELS, HLS, CSS, ESA, WGS and quite a few other designations that you could check on MAGIC?

 

Damage caused on land under any of these schemes could lead to financial penalties for the landowner. The need for permission on an SSSI but not on any if these others seems a bit random.

 

If churchyards are different because of a few complaints how many complaints from non-insitutional landowners would it take to spark a requirement for proof of permission on every cache?

 

As a farmer I wouldn't want to see every cache needing written permission but it drives me up the wall to see that some property is arbitrarily granted more importance than everyone elses.

Edited September 2, 2009 by uktim

[+Renegade Knight]

...SSSI-Site of Special Scientific Interest is a location Designated such by Natural England, Countryside Council Wales or Scottish Natural Heritage Information Service. The appropriate department for the 2 Governments and Assembly. The location has specific legal protection, and the Landowner has certain Legal Requirements. And can face huge fines for breaking those restrictions and even be made to rectify the Land to a designated state. ...

 

Thanks for the description. I was thinking this might be the UK equivilent of a site listed in the National Registor of Historic Places in the USA. It's not. Our government has special restriction on these locations, but the private owner doesn't. Here it's a common misconception that it works like your SSSI.

 

Now I'm wondering if we have a scientific equivilent to the Historic Register.

[Deceangi]

Important caveat 1: this post *is* a rant, it is not, however, intended as criticism of any one reviewer, but of the system.

 

Important caveat 2: All the points in the this post have been covered in the last few days, I want to bring them together

 

I'm going to lay my cards on the table here, the reason for this post is the refusal to publish a cache I placed at the weekend near to the site of a wreck on access land on Bleaklow Moor in the Dark Peak area of the Peak District. The publication was refused on the grounds that the site is an SSSI. I checked, it is, but so is the whole of the Dark Peak. I am very worried that this astonishingly beautiful area of the county, housing some of my favourite caches will become a cache desert.

 

I intend to attempt to gain formal permission for this cache, I suspect it will be fruitless. Why? First I have to find out who owns it (failed so far...). Then I have to obtain their permission, then THEY have to obtain Natural England's permission. All this for a small tupperware box, it just seems crazy.

 

I do appreciate that there has to be controls lest the hobby is brought into disrepute but I can just feel it degenerating if "interesting" caches are so hard to get published and "dull" ones are so easy.

 

{edit coz I can't type :$}

 

Can I ask why it's necessary to proive that you've got permission if land is an SSSI but not otherwise?

 

SSSI-Site of Special Scientific Interest is a location Designated such by Natural England, Countryside Council Wales or Scottish Natural Heritage Information Service. The appropriate department for the 2 Governments and Assembly. The location has specific legal protection, and the Landowner has certain Legal Requirements. And can face huge fines for breaking those restrictions and even be made to rectify the Land to a designated state.

 

When you submit a cache you agree that you have Adequate Permission for the cache placement, however Reviewers can ask for Proof of that Permission if they believe it is needed

 

By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location.

 

A reviewer may request that you provide contact information for the person who gave you permission to hide your cache.

 

You'll find that we have a "Proof of Permission to Publish" for caches located on

 

Local/National Nature Reserves

Scheduled Monuments

Locations covered by a Landowner Agreement

Railway Company Property [This came about after a complaint to Groundspeak from the Authorities in London]

Church Property and Graveyards [this came about after several caches in such locations had to be archived in a short period after complaints that they had been placed without permission]

 

The "Proof of Permission to Publish" for SSSI's has been in place for longer than I've been a Reviewer [May 2006] so it is not new by any means.

 

I'd also like to point out, that the UK Reviewers regularly publish caches in SSSI's, as the CO has obtained permission off the Landowner [in each case it's down to the Landowner to decide if approval off the Designating Authority is needed. The UK Reviewers just require permission off the Landowner]

 

Deci

 

What about ELS, HLS, CSS, ESA, WGS and quite a few other designations that you could check on MAGIC?

 

Damage caused on land under any of these schemes could lead to financial penalties for the landowner. The need for permission on an SSSI but not on any if these others seems a bit random.

 

If churchyards are different because of a few complaints how many complaints from non-insitutional landowners would it take to spark a requirement for proof of permission on every cache?

 

As a farmer I wouldn't want to see every cache needing written permission but it drives me up the wall to see that some property is arbitrarily granted more importance than everyone elses.

 

Sorry we are not supermen or women, if we had to require "Proof of Permission to Publish for every designation. We'd be so swamped that we would never publish a single cache. At the end of the day we are trying to keep restrictions to a minimum, yet we still get moaned at by some people for doing even that [please note this comment is not aimed at anyone particular, but is a general comment from past experience. The OP of this topic was in touch directly with me before it was posted] as they consider that we are wrong to apply any restrictions at all!

 

Also one point of interest, and this comes from practical experience of using it day after day. MAGIC is not 100% reliable as to availability. People moan about this site having outages, well MAGIC has a lot more and that is owned and run by a Government Department. At least when it does go down, we currently have other sites to fall back on to check for designations. But this slows the review process down considerably. NT and FC land is partially shown on OS maps [the full extent is not when compared to what is shown on MAGIC] as are Nature Reserves for the most part [again not all are], WT has it's own maps. Natural England and CCW have good mapping showing SSSI's and Nature Reserves [having to locate a specific location of 4 separate sites is slow and cumbersome. Especially with the huge work load we're facing]

 

As for Churches/Grave Yards the following is a direct quote from someone responsible for 2 such locations. Who made Official complaints about caches on both locations, placed without permission. I counted his complaints as a single one!

 

My anxiety about this is that, in looking for them, people will necessarily be rummaging around, even walking over graves. This is obviously a bit insensitive for those who have loved ones buried in the churchyard

 

...SSSI-Site of Special Scientific Interest is a location Designated such by Natural England, Countryside Council Wales or Scottish Natural Heritage Information Service. The appropriate department for the 2 Governments and Assembly. The location has specific legal protection, and the Landowner has certain Legal Requirements. And can face huge fines for breaking those restrictions and even be made to rectify the Land to a designated state. ...

 

Thanks for the description. I was thinking this might be the UK equivilent of a site listed in the National Registor of Historic Places in the USA. It's not. Our government has special restriction on these locations, but the private owner doesn't. Here it's a common misconception that it works like your SSSI.

 

Now I'm wondering if we have a scientific equivilent to the Historic Register.

 

our equivalent to the National Registor of Historic Places in the US, is Scheduled Monuments, this covers all sorts of structures and locations of a Historic Nature, the Designation being made by Government Departments for England. Scotland and Assembly for Wales. NI is separate and has it's own Designating Departments.

 

Deci

[+uk89camaro]

I can appreciate your frustration, but you can still waymark your way through the places you want people to see.

 

I know it means a multi or a puzzle or such like, which might diminish interest a tad (might depend on the length of the walk and complexity of the waypoints), but I suspect I'm not telling you something you don't already know.

 

It's something I've done in the past as I couldn't be bothered with the effort of seeking the relevant permissions for the sake of a trad at the site.

[+uk89camaro]

sloooooooow.

Edited September 2, 2009 by uk89camaro

[+smstext]

have you contact any other cache owners near to where you want to place yours to see who they contacted in case they have some contacts within who could speed things up etc???

[+PopUpPirate]

Has anyone applied to the Highways Agency for a blanket ban on drivebys?

[+drdick&vick]

???????