Caches in walls.

[+zarbi&zarbibird]

We've just got back from a holiday in Lake Garda in Italy . A very nice place but not too many caches around, especially in the southern part. What suprised us was the fact that 5 out of the 8 caches we found (all micros btw ), were in walls. So does this mean that there are different rules for different countries? We've always believed that caches in walls were a definite no-no

[+Just Roger]

It's not walls as such it is Dry Stone walls that are the no-no. This is because over time walls could end up being demolished completely by people looking for caches. It is a UK rule because Dry Stone walling is much more common here than it is in other countries. There are plenty of caches in walls in the UK - nanos in cracks in the pointing or micros behind loose bricks for example. The potential for damage in these cases is far less than in dry stone walls, the building and repairing of which is a highly skilled craft.

[+zarbi&zarbibird]

It's not walls as such it is Dry Stone walls that are the no-no. This is because over time walls could end up being demolished completely by people looking for caches. It is a UK rule because Dry Stone walling is much more common here than it is in other countries. There are plenty of caches in walls in the UK - nanos in cracks in the pointing or micros behind loose bricks for example. The potential for damage in these cases is far less than in dry stone walls, the building and repairing of which is a highly skilled craft.

Thank you for putting us right on that. We haven't found any in walls in this country, apart from one which was in a drystone wall and was archived soon after! The holiday made us feel pleased to live in England, with it's multitude of caches of all different sizes and types to suit everyone

[+NattyBooshka]

It's not walls as such it is Dry Stone walls that are the no-no. This is because over time walls could end up being demolished completely by people looking for caches. It is a UK rule because Dry Stone walling is much more common here than it is in other countries. There are plenty of caches in walls in the UK - nanos in cracks in the pointing or micros behind loose bricks for example. The potential for damage in these cases is far less than in dry stone walls, the building and repairing of which is a highly skilled craft.

Thank you for putting us right on that. We haven't found any in walls in this country, apart from one which was in a drystone wall and was archived soon after! The holiday made us feel pleased to live in England, with it's multitude of caches of all different sizes and types to suit everyone

Italy doesn't follow GAGB "guidlelines" so yeah, they have different rules!

 

They also have a lack or quality caches... which sucks as I'll be moving there within 10 years... need as much quality as I can get in the next 10 years.

[+Graculus]

It isn't just dry stone walls. If you put a cache in any masonry structure that is in a poor state of repair it is likely to be questioned and may not be published. Walls with loose pointing or mortar or stones can just as easily be damaged as a dry stone wall as people search.

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

[+thehoomer]

I think I have probably mentioned before, Thehoomer never log (as found) caches in any type of wall. The most recent one being GC2A80K. This is purely personal choice of course. When we first started caching, we went on a caching trip to Oldham and a new series had recently been launched. There was one particular cache (in a wall) which we really struggled to find and we made 3 or 4 visits before we found it. Over the course of those visits, the wall was almost completely dismantled by cachers who were also struggling to find it. I'm sure we played a part in the damage, although we did try to replace every stone where we found it.

Being witness to this sad destruction during the course of our hobby, really made us think and since then, we have never posted a find on a cache in a wall. We do of course, post a note to explain why we have not logged it as a find and on more than one occasion, this has met with vexation and anger.

[+NattyBooshka]

I think I have probably mentioned before, Thehoomer never log (as found) caches in any type of wall. The most recent one being GC2A80K. This is purely personal choice of course. When we first started caching, we went on a caching trip to Oldham and a new series had recently been launched. There was one particular cache (in a wall) which we really struggled to find and we made 3 or 4 visits before we found it. Over the course of those visits, the wall was almost completely dismantled by cachers who were also struggling to find it. I'm sure we played a part in the damage, although we did try to replace every stone where we found it.

Being witness to this sad destruction during the course of our hobby, really made us think and since then, we have never posted a find on a cache in a wall. We do of course, post a note to explain why we have not logged it as a find and on more than one occasion, this has met with vexation and anger.

Don't give up the fight!

 

Whilst out the other day though I saw what could be described as dry stone walls. They were fallen, surrounded by more modern fencing solutions, and quite obviously not maintained. Are they a no go would you say? The cache I was seeking was cleverly hidden elsewhere close by, but I was thinking is it in the "wall?" on the approach to GZ

[+thehoomer]

I think I have probably mentioned before, Thehoomer never log (as found) caches in any type of wall. The most recent one being GC2A80K. This is purely personal choice of course. When we first started caching, we went on a caching trip to Oldham and a new series had recently been launched. There was one particular cache (in a wall) which we really struggled to find and we made 3 or 4 visits before we found it. Over the course of those visits, the wall was almost completely dismantled by cachers who were also struggling to find it. I'm sure we played a part in the damage, although we did try to replace every stone where we found it.

Being witness to this sad destruction during the course of our hobby, really made us think and since then, we have never posted a find on a cache in a wall. We do of course, post a note to explain why we have not logged it as a find and on more than one occasion, this has met with vexation and anger.

Don't give up the fight!

 

Whilst out the other day though I saw what could be described as dry stone walls. They were fallen, surrounded by more modern fencing solutions, and quite obviously not maintained. Are they a no go would you say? The cache I was seeking was cleverly hidden elsewhere close by, but I was thinking is it in the "wall?" on the approach to GZ

Thanks, we wont, its an in-built reflex now.

IMHO, for cache placement, yes. Otherwise, where would we draw the line? Could we for instance say, that if a DSW was over 70% damaged anyway, would it be ok to put a cache there? If we did, in no time at all, that 70% would turn into 75% and so on. I know what you mean about caches near DSW's, its always difficult. I think the only way of reducing the risk of damage to the nearby wall would be to put several notes on the page, stating that the cache was not on/near or in the wall and also include that information in the hint. Regular visits to the hide by the CO, to assess any deterioration would also be a good idea.

[+NattyBooshka]

I think I have probably mentioned before, Thehoomer never log (as found) caches in any type of wall. The most recent one being GC2A80K. This is purely personal choice of course. When we first started caching, we went on a caching trip to Oldham and a new series had recently been launched. There was one particular cache (in a wall) which we really struggled to find and we made 3 or 4 visits before we found it. Over the course of those visits, the wall was almost completely dismantled by cachers who were also struggling to find it. I'm sure we played a part in the damage, although we did try to replace every stone where we found it.

Being witness to this sad destruction during the course of our hobby, really made us think and since then, we have never posted a find on a cache in a wall. We do of course, post a note to explain why we have not logged it as a find and on more than one occasion, this has met with vexation and anger.

Don't give up the fight!

 

Whilst out the other day though I saw what could be described as dry stone walls. They were fallen, surrounded by more modern fencing solutions, and quite obviously not maintained. Are they a no go would you say? The cache I was seeking was cleverly hidden elsewhere close by, but I was thinking is it in the "wall?" on the approach to GZ

Thanks, we wont, its an in-built reflex now.

IMHO, for cache placement, yes. Otherwise, where would we draw the line? Could we for instance say, that if a DSW was over 70% damaged anyway, would it be ok to put a cache there? If we did, in no time at all, that 70% would turn into 75% and so on. I know what you mean about caches near DSW's, its always difficult. I think the only way of reducing the risk of damage to the nearby wall would be to put several notes on the page, stating that the cache was not on/near or in the wall and also include that information in the hint. Regular visits to the hide by the CO, to assess any deterioration would also be a good idea.

Yeah... that's what I figured too... the wall in question is way more than 75% damaged, and quite obviously no longer used to keep the sheep in, or the guys in wellies out... but it would be more subjective for others not too far away. It's all good stone though, if I'd known about it 3 years ago when doing the back garden I'd have gone seeking the farmer's permission to remove a few of them!

[+The Patrician]

There's a cache here which appears to have had a similar argument.

 

The CO has stated in a note "This cache has been placed with the permission of the landowner, a friend, who lives nearby. The wall in question had collapsed some time ago and serves no purpose. We agreed that this would be a good hide."

 

I wouldn't, and indeed haven't had a problem with this. There's a photo of the wall in question with my log, although the photo doesn't show the actual cache position which is a bit more dilapidated!

Edited June 9, 2011 by The Patrician

[+Graculus]

I guess if the owner of the wall is happy for the cache to be there then that is fine! You have to make an assumption the wall owner is aware of how people can search for caches and the potential for damage to the wall that can result.

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

[+Geocass&Andy750x]

It isn't just dry stone walls. If you put a cache in any masonry structure that is in a poor state of repair it is likely to be questioned and may not be published. Walls with loose pointing or mortar or stones can just as easily be damaged as a dry stone wall as people search.

 

Gosh, I wasn't aware of this. We found quite a few caches in Dry Stone walls in The Peak District when there in April. I absolutely hated them and we did say "this shouldn't be allowed". Although we placed the stones back carefully after hunting, it didn't feel good dismantling them to try and find the caches. The most evil one was the rock cache in the dry stone wall. That took about 15 minutes!

[+rutson]

It isn't just dry stone walls. If you put a cache in any masonry structure that is in a poor state of repair it is likely to be questioned and may not be published. Walls with loose pointing or mortar or stones can just as easily be damaged as a dry stone wall as people search.

 

No, but it's perfectly acceptable to place a cache at the edge of a dry-stone wall using stones from the wall to conceal it.

[+Kryten]

No it's not, inaccuracy in GPS readings will still put the wall in jepordy.

[+The HERB5]

In France I've found caches actually in the masonry of Roman Aqueducts (which I mentioned at the time, and was corrected), 18th century stone huts, dry stone-walls.

[Deceangi]

I think I have probably mentioned before, Thehoomer never log (as found) caches in any type of wall. The most recent one being GC2A80K. This is purely personal choice of course. When we first started caching, we went on a caching trip to Oldham and a new series had recently been launched. There was one particular cache (in a wall) which we really struggled to find and we made 3 or 4 visits before we found it. Over the course of those visits, the wall was almost completely dismantled by cachers who were also struggling to find it. I'm sure we played a part in the damage, although we did try to replace every stone where we found it.

Being witness to this sad destruction during the course of our hobby, really made us think and since then, we have never posted a find on a cache in a wall. We do of course, post a note to explain why we have not logged it as a find and on more than one occasion, this has met with vexation and anger.

Don't give up the fight!

 

Whilst out the other day though I saw what could be described as dry stone walls. They were fallen, surrounded by more modern fencing solutions, and quite obviously not maintained. Are they a no go would you say? The cache I was seeking was cleverly hidden elsewhere close by, but I was thinking is it in the "wall?" on the approach to GZ

 

I've lost track of the number of times over the last 40,000+ caches I've seen as a Reviewer, that I have used

 

I noticed your description/hint states

 

~

 

to enable me to be able to publish this cache, please confirm in a Reviewer Note that it is not located in or on a Dry Stone Wall or is not of a Dry Stone construction or the remains of such,as due to the damage that can be caused to such locations by searchers. I am unable to publish this cache if it is located in or on a Dry Stone Wall or of a Dry Stone construction, once you have done that I will happily publish this cache.

 

For Local Guidelines as used by the UK Reviewers please see http://www.gagb.org..../guidelines.php in particular section 14

 

If this cache is placed near to but not in or on a Dry Stone Wall. Please add to the cache description

 

" there is no need to move any stones in the Dry Stone wall to find the cache"

 

sadly far to many times, it has caught a container in such a location

 

5 years ago I discussed estimated costs to repair a Dry Stone Wall, with a Master Dry Stone Waller (who worked a seven year apprenticeship to become one). and was quoted anything from £150 to £250 per square meter, to repair a damaged section. the wall has to be de-constructed in a V shape, taking the wall down on either side of the damaged section. So a single cache can cause thousands of pounds worth of damage. Sadly I've personally seen 2 Dry Stone Walls, damaged by cachers. And had to deal with one, the wall in question owned by Historic Scotland the Designating Authority in Scotland. One which also happened to be a Scheduled Monument. All it takes is one cache to have major implications for our hobby.

 

So even though a Dry Stone Wall is in disrepair, caches should never be hidden in them. Because the next time a searcher might start de-constructing a functional Dry Stone Wall. Leading to a major Ban by a Landowner or even worse Laws regulating Geocaching being brought in.

 

If you ever come across a container in a Dry Stone Wall, please contact the Cache Owner and advice them of the situation regarding the location. And also inform a Reviewer (you can do this in private by email if needed). At the end of the day your protecting your hobby and not being the "cache police"!

 

Deci

[+NattyBooshka]

I think I have probably mentioned before, Thehoomer never log (as found) caches in any type of wall. The most recent one being GC2A80K. This is purely personal choice of course. When we first started caching, we went on a caching trip to Oldham and a new series had recently been launched. There was one particular cache (in a wall) which we really struggled to find and we made 3 or 4 visits before we found it. Over the course of those visits, the wall was almost completely dismantled by cachers who were also struggling to find it. I'm sure we played a part in the damage, although we did try to replace every stone where we found it.

Being witness to this sad destruction during the course of our hobby, really made us think and since then, we have never posted a find on a cache in a wall. We do of course, post a note to explain why we have not logged it as a find and on more than one occasion, this has met with vexation and anger.

Don't give up the fight!

 

Whilst out the other day though I saw what could be described as dry stone walls. They were fallen, surrounded by more modern fencing solutions, and quite obviously not maintained. Are they a no go would you say? The cache I was seeking was cleverly hidden elsewhere close by, but I was thinking is it in the "wall?" on the approach to GZ

 

I've lost track of the number of times over the last 40,000+ caches I've seen as a Reviewer, that I have used

 

I noticed your description/hint states

 

~

 

to enable me to be able to publish this cache, please confirm in a Reviewer Note that it is not located in or on a Dry Stone Wall or is not of a Dry Stone construction or the remains of such,as due to the damage that can be caused to such locations by searchers. I am unable to publish this cache if it is located in or on a Dry Stone Wall or of a Dry Stone construction, once you have done that I will happily publish this cache.

 

For Local Guidelines as used by the UK Reviewers please see http://www.gagb.org..../guidelines.php in particular section 14

 

If this cache is placed near to but not in or on a Dry Stone Wall. Please add to the cache description

 

" there is no need to move any stones in the Dry Stone wall to find the cache"

 

sadly far to many times, it has caught a container in such a location

 

5 years ago I discussed estimated costs to repair a Dry Stone Wall, with a Master Dry Stone Waller (who worked a seven year apprenticeship to become one). and was quoted anything from £150 to £250 per square meter, to repair a damaged section. the wall has to be de-constructed in a V shape, taking the wall down on either side of the damaged section. So a single cache can cause thousands of pounds worth of damage. Sadly I've personally seen 2 Dry Stone Walls, damaged by cachers. And had to deal with one, the wall in question owned by Historic Scotland the Designating Authority in Scotland. One which also happened to be a Scheduled Monument. All it takes is one cache to have major implications for our hobby.

 

So even though a Dry Stone Wall is in disrepair, caches should never be hidden in them. Because the next time a searcher might start de-constructing a functional Dry Stone Wall. Leading to a major Ban by a Landowner or even worse Laws regulating Geocaching being brought in.

 

If you ever come across a container in a Dry Stone Wall, please contact the Cache Owner and advice them of the situation regarding the location. And also inform a Reviewer (you can do this in private by email if needed). At the end of the day your protecting your hobby and not being the "cache police"!

 

Deci

 

It's hard work too... once paid for a "holiday" with the NT where I got to help rebuild some wall... not as easy as it looks when driving past walls several miles long round these parts. Sadly, it's a dying art and I guess won't be an issue in 50 years time. Lots of farmers have wire fences right next to broken walls now, guess a mile of modern fence is cheaper than rebuilding a few yards of dry stone.

 

Anyways... the NT never offered me a job doing it... I was pretty hopeless TBH.

 

I did find one in a wall a long time ago, placed before the GAGB existed... hopefully it's now archived/relocated.

[+Pharisee]

I found a cache (an imitation stone micro) hidden in a stone wall a few weeks ago. I reported it to the reviewer who published the cache but as far as I know, the cache is still in place and active. The encrypted hint even says "In the wall between the iron gate and the wooden one."

[+NattyBooshka]

I found a cache (an imitation stone micro) hidden in a stone wall a few weeks ago. I reported it to the reviewer who published the cache but as far as I know, the cache is still in place and active. The encrypted hint even says "In the wall between the iron gate and the wooden one."

While I can see ignorance may lead someone to put a film canister in a wall, I think anyone placing a fake stone in a wall must realise that finding it will destroy the wall?!

 

Found a couple of the former before the GAGB guidelines came to be... In which case both myself and the CO were equally ignorant. Thought I'd add that before someone thought I was insulting them.

 

Fake rock geocaches belong under a pile of similar rocks

[+The Patrician]

Can I start a whole new hare running?

 

What bothers me at least as much as drystone wall caches is Tupperware and assorted plastic contents where cattle and sheep can get at them. I can see the time coming where a cache is going to kill some stock and then the excrement's really going to hit the air conditioning. I've found a couple of caches lately that I wouldn't have placed. I confess I haven't said anything to the CO other than a polite "TFTC", I don't think I'm cut out for being a geocop, or is it cachecop?

[+NattyBooshka]

Can I start a whole new hare running?

 

What bothers me at least as much as drystone wall caches is Tupperware and assorted plastic contents where cattle and sheep can get at them. I can see the time coming where a cache is going to kill some stock and then the excrement's really going to hit the air conditioning. I've found a couple of caches lately that I wouldn't have placed. I confess I haven't said anything to the CO other than a polite "TFTC", I don't think I'm cut out for being a geocop, or is it cachecop?

LMAO

 

Ammo cans aren't as chewable. Not sure a bovine, or an ovine, would actually have a great chance of dying by eating a bit of plastic... but it's an interesting point... and will happen one day. I always TFTC with a few words, because they took time to try and offer me something, and because the log isn't the place to open a discussion, but the forum is. There is always the chance that these things will happen, and we have to minimise the risks. There is a chance that me throwing a brick over a wall will kill someone, and I could possibly be prosecuted... but not for murder. The severity of the punishment would depend on how likely it would be that I could reasonably expect someone to be on the other side. So with a sheep, well they ain't worth much money as nobody seems to eat mutton... a lamb is worth about £160 quid apparently... but I'd wager the worst that could happen would be a discussion between the farmer (who approved the placement) and the CO and would go nowhere. A prize winning Aberdeen Angus bull discussion may not be as friendly though! There are risks in everything, but we take a reasonable risk in this game.

 

Legally speaking though... the aggrieved party is much more likely to sue Groundspeak as they have more money than most of us

[Deceangi]

Can I start a whole new hare running?

 

What bothers me at least as much as drystone wall caches is Tupperware and assorted plastic contents where cattle and sheep can get at them. I can see the time coming where a cache is going to kill some stock and then the excrement's really going to hit the air conditioning. I've found a couple of caches lately that I wouldn't have placed. I confess I haven't said anything to the CO other than a polite "TFTC", I don't think I'm cut out for being a geocop, or is it cachecop?

LMAO

 

Ammo cans aren't as chewable. Not sure a bovine, or an ovine, would actually have a great chance of dying by eating a bit of plastic... but it's an interesting point... and will happen one day. I always TFTC with a few words, because they took time to try and offer me something, and because the log isn't the place to open a discussion, but the forum is. There is always the chance that these things will happen, and we have to minimise the risks. There is a chance that me throwing a brick over a wall will kill someone, and I could possibly be prosecuted... but not for murder. The severity of the punishment would depend on how likely it would be that I could reasonably expect someone to be on the other side. So with a sheep, well they ain't worth much money as nobody seems to eat mutton... a lamb is worth about £160 quid apparently... but I'd wager the worst that could happen would be a discussion between the farmer (who approved the placement) and the CO and would go nowhere. A prize winning Aberdeen Angus bull discussion may not be as friendly though! There are risks in everything, but we take a reasonable risk in this game.

 

Legally speaking though... the aggrieved party is much more likely to sue Groundspeak as they have more money than most of us

 

Actually the Cache Owner is at all times legally responsible for their cache, Groundspeak who own Geocaching.com which is just a listing site has no legal responsibility for the cache. This is made quite clear in the sites TOU ans also the Legal Disclaimer on every cache page. So the cache owner would be the one in discussions with the farmer, and that would be even worse if no permission had been obtained.

 

Deci

[+NattyBooshka]

Can I start a whole new hare running?

 

What bothers me at least as much as drystone wall caches is Tupperware and assorted plastic contents where cattle and sheep can get at them. I can see the time coming where a cache is going to kill some stock and then the excrement's really going to hit the air conditioning. I've found a couple of caches lately that I wouldn't have placed. I confess I haven't said anything to the CO other than a polite "TFTC", I don't think I'm cut out for being a geocop, or is it cachecop?

LMAO

 

Ammo cans aren't as chewable. Not sure a bovine, or an ovine, would actually have a great chance of dying by eating a bit of plastic... but it's an interesting point... and will happen one day. I always TFTC with a few words, because they took time to try and offer me something, and because the log isn't the place to open a discussion, but the forum is. There is always the chance that these things will happen, and we have to minimise the risks. There is a chance that me throwing a brick over a wall will kill someone, and I could possibly be prosecuted... but not for murder. The severity of the punishment would depend on how likely it would be that I could reasonably expect someone to be on the other side. So with a sheep, well they ain't worth much money as nobody seems to eat mutton... a lamb is worth about £160 quid apparently... but I'd wager the worst that could happen would be a discussion between the farmer (who approved the placement) and the CO and would go nowhere. A prize winning Aberdeen Angus bull discussion may not be as friendly though! There are risks in everything, but we take a reasonable risk in this game.

 

Legally speaking though... the aggrieved party is much more likely to sue Groundspeak as they have more money than most of us

 

Actually the Cache Owner is at all times legally responsible for their cache, Groundspeak who own Geocaching.com which is just a listing site has no legal responsibility for the cache. This is made quite clear in the sites TOU ans also the Legal Disclaimer on every cache page. So the cache owner would be the one in discussions with the farmer, and that would be even worse if no permission had been obtained.

 

Deci

I agree with that 100%, but at the end of the day, if it came to it, the action would come against the party with the $$$... alway's does... McDonald's milkshake suit springs to mind... it got dismissed (yes, even in the US) but it's the most likely scenario. After all, Napster themselves never shared illegal copies of music... look what happened there!

 

Of course without permission, the CO is up a certain creek... but with permission, within GAGB guidelines and GS rules... who would you sue?

Edited June 10, 2011 by NattyBooshka

[Deceangi]

Can I start a whole new hare running?

 

What bothers me at least as much as drystone wall caches is Tupperware and assorted plastic contents where cattle and sheep can get at them. I can see the time coming where a cache is going to kill some stock and then the excrement's really going to hit the air conditioning. I've found a couple of caches lately that I wouldn't have placed. I confess I haven't said anything to the CO other than a polite "TFTC", I don't think I'm cut out for being a geocop, or is it cachecop?

LMAO

 

Ammo cans aren't as chewable. Not sure a bovine, or an ovine, would actually have a great chance of dying by eating a bit of plastic... but it's an interesting point... and will happen one day. I always TFTC with a few words, because they took time to try and offer me something, and because the log isn't the place to open a discussion, but the forum is. There is always the chance that these things will happen, and we have to minimise the risks. There is a chance that me throwing a brick over a wall will kill someone, and I could possibly be prosecuted... but not for murder. The severity of the punishment would depend on how likely it would be that I could reasonably expect someone to be on the other side. So with a sheep, well they ain't worth much money as nobody seems to eat mutton... a lamb is worth about £160 quid apparently... but I'd wager the worst that could happen would be a discussion between the farmer (who approved the placement) and the CO and would go nowhere. A prize winning Aberdeen Angus bull discussion may not be as friendly though! There are risks in everything, but we take a reasonable risk in this game.

 

Legally speaking though... the aggrieved party is much more likely to sue Groundspeak as they have more money than most of us

 

Actually the Cache Owner is at all times legally responsible for their cache, Groundspeak who own Geocaching.com which is just a listing site has no legal responsibility for the cache. This is made quite clear in the sites TOU ans also the Legal Disclaimer on every cache page. So the cache owner would be the one in discussions with the farmer, and that would be even worse if no permission had been obtained.

 

Deci

I agree with that 100%, but at the end of the day, if it came to it, the action would come against the party with the $... alway's does... McDonald's milkshake suit springs to mind... it got dismissed (yes, even in the US) but it's the most likely scenario. After all, Napster themselves never shared illegal copies of music... look what happened there!

 

Of course without permission, the CO is up a certain creek... but with permission, within GAGB guidelines and GS rules... who would you sue?

 

The first and only Geocacher that I'm aware of, to run to a Accident Claims Company, after sustaining a injury whilst searching for a cache, actually had that company go after the Cache Owner and Landowner on his behalf. The cache in question actually having Permission. The cache owner went through a period of total fire and brimstone, before the claim against him was dropped.

 

Notice that at no time was any attempt made to go after Groundspeak.

 

Oh and this all took place in the UK.

 

Even with Landowner Permission, and within GC's Guidelines as well as the GAGB Guidelines, the Cache Owner is at all times Legally Responsible for their caches

 

</h2>

<h2>Geocaching.com Disclaimer

Cache seekers assume all risks involved in seeking a cache.

 

Geocaching.com is owned and operated by Groundspeak Inc. Information in the Geocaching.com database is updated regularly. Neither Groundspeak Inc., nor any agent, officer, employee or volunteer administrator of Groundspeak Inc. warrants the accuracy, reliability, or timeliness of any information and shall not be liable for any losses caused by such reliance on the accuracy, reliability, or timeliness of such information. While every effort is made to ensure the accuracy of this information, portions may be incorrect or not current. Any person or entity that relies on information obtained from Geocaching.com does so at his or her own risk.

 

Geocaching, hiking, backpacking and other outdoor activities involve risk to both persons and property. There are many variables including, but not limited to, weather, fitness level, terrain features and outdoor experience, that must be considered prior to seeking or placing a Cache. Be prepared for your journey and be sure to check the current weather and conditions before heading outdoors. Always exercise common sense and caution.

 

In no way shall Groundspeak Inc. nor any agent, officer, employee or volunteer administrator of Groundspeak Inc., be liable for any direct, indirect, punitive, or consequential damages arising out of, or in any way connected with the use of this website or use of the information contained within.

 

This website is for personal and non-commercial use. You may not modify, copy, excerpt, distribute, transmit, publish, license, create derivative works from, or sell any information, or services obtained from this website.

 

Other products and companies referred to herein are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies or mark holders.

 

Individual geocaches are owned by the person(s) who physically placed the geocache and/or submitted the geocache listing to geocaching.com.

 

Groundspeak Inc. reserves the right to change the terms, conditions, and notices under which this website is offered.

 

 

I've made Bold several parts of the Disclaimer on every cache page. This info also forms part of the Sites TOU, which every Member Agrees to when signing up for a account on this site.

 

Deci

[+sTeamTraen]

I agree with that 100%, but at the end of the day, if it came to it, the action would come against the party with the $$$... alway's does... McDonald's milkshake suit springs to mind... it got dismissed (yes, even in the US) but it's the most likely scenario. After all, Napster themselves never shared illegal copies of music... look what happened there!

 

Of course without permission, the CO is up a certain creek... but with permission, within GAGB guidelines and GS rules... who would you sue?

I wouldn't sue anyone, and I certainly wouldn't win if I did. Actually, there are far fewer lawsuits of the "OMG we might get sued, panic panic" variety than people think - the proof of this is that such cases make it into the papers, which means they are rare, otherwise they wouldn't be newsworthy.

 

If Geocaching is still here after 11 years and almost a million caches published in the most litigious country on earth, I think it's a pretty safe bet that suing them for damage caused by a cache which they didn't place is unlikely to get very far. (Having one of the founders of the company be a licensed attorney certainly hasn't hurt them.)

[+NattyBooshka]

I agree with that 100%, but at the end of the day, if it came to it, the action would come against the party with the $$$... alway's does... McDonald's milkshake suit springs to mind... it got dismissed (yes, even in the US) but it's the most likely scenario. After all, Napster themselves never shared illegal copies of music... look what happened there!

 

Of course without permission, the CO is up a certain creek... but with permission, within GAGB guidelines and GS rules... who would you sue?

I wouldn't sue anyone, and I certainly wouldn't win if I did. Actually, there are far fewer lawsuits of the "OMG we might get sued, panic panic" variety than people think - the proof of this is that such cases make it into the papers, which means they are rare, otherwise they wouldn't be newsworthy.

 

If Geocaching is still here after 11 years and almost a million caches published in the most litigious country on earth, I think it's a pretty safe bet that suing them for damage caused by a cache which they didn't place is unlikely to get very far. (Having one of the founders of the company be a licensed attorney certainly hasn't hurt them.)

For sure.. and long may it continue to be so. And if anything arose, I'm sure they could beat it. Yeah, the number of these cases that get to court are very low... pretty much like the no win no fee injury stuff, usually settled out of court.