Personal attack in cache log...

[+OMUK]

Just seen this published as the first log, reads :-

 

A bit of a strong and unnecessary use of the log function in a cache. By all means, have a conversation in private but via log...?

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=b0f9d88a-92d5-4343-bdcb-4d7832f5309c

 

Write note August 3 by TelemachusGB (964 found)

 

This is not what this part of the country needs - another power trail, mainly populated by micros and nanos. Geocaching is far more than just a quest for numbers. However, there can be little other reason for the alarming growth of power trails in this area.

 

From the Groundspeak Fundamental Placement Guidelines: "Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. The two main goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist, and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area, especially by the same hider."

 

I have corresponded privately with the CO regarding his attitude to placing caches. Nonetheless, he continues with his activities. I therefore feel I must make a public protest. No doubt many will diagree with me - but I also know I am not alone in my views.

 

View Log

Edited August 3, 2011 by OnlyMeUK

[Santa_Claws]

Completely agree with the opinion, given without abuse. I don't know poshrule, but he/she is clearly intent on putting out at least 500 caches, whatever their content.

 

The poster of that log should be congratulated, it's called self policing.

Edited August 3, 2011 by Santa_Claws

[+TelemachusGB]

I have had the conversation in private. So have others. There is a growing concern about the huge rise of apparantly low-quality power trails in this area and I am now voicing that concern publicly.

[+OMUK]

Sorry, sounds like NIMBYism to me.

[Neath Worthies]

Sorry, sounds like NIMBYism to me.

Not NIMBYism, just someone expressing an honest opinion in a non abusive way. Surely he/she is entitled to a different opinion?

[+G-X]

I don't normally post in the GC forums but...

 

Isn't it up to the cache owner as where and how many caches they place?

As long as they uphold the Groundspeak guidelines / rules on placing a cache.

Some people like to hide caches in places you may not want to go to. If that is the case, then don't do the cache.

Thats what ignore lists are for.

 

I have a series of caches near where I live that I choose not to do. Thats my choice.

The above comment is not aimed at Vegpunks excellent new caches (I just havent got round to doing them yet)

Edited August 3, 2011 by G-X

[Santa_Claws]

I don't normally post in the GC forums but...

 

Isn't it up to the cache owner as where and how many caches they place?

As long as they uphold the Groundspeak guidelines / rules on placing a cache.

Some people like to hide caches in places you may not want to go to. If that is the case, then don't do the cache.

Thats what ignore lists are for.

 

I have a series of caches near where I live that I choose not to do. Thats my choice.

The above comment is not aimed at Vegpunks excellent new caches (I just havent got round to doing them yet)

 

Oh come on!

 

I don't subscribe to the "put it on your ignore list".

 

Self police.

Expunge this type of power trail.

Go back to basics!

[+Geocass&Andy750x]

Having exchanged many emails with poshrule and completed many of his circuits I thought I'd add my two pennies worth to this.

 

Firstly, poshrule is a lovely chap. His hide locations and containers are very varied and none of his trails are simply a case of a big circuit of film cannisters. He thinks about his hiding places, he researches walks, and he's passionate about the places that he takes you. It's not a case of just putting every cache under a rock. There is variation! He also reads all of the logs people post, and if you take time to write decent ones then he will email you and thank you. Finally, despite placing so many caches recently, he doesn't shy away from maintaining them. If there are DNF's on his caches then he will go out and replace them, even if it's in the middle of a series and a long walk to just that one. He doesn't expect others to go and replace them for him. He is breaking no guidelines and is a fine example of a cache hider who actually cares about his caches! I also heard from a fellow cacher that there was a problem with a section of one of his walks where the footpath passed through someone's garden and they had noticed the extra walker traffic passing through. The cacher spoke to the man and told him the reason why then took the man's phone number and passed it on to poshrule. He archived those caches immediately, and phoned the man the next morning to apologise, explain, and then moved all of the caches to places that the man was happy with which didn't lead cachers through his garden.

 

I've blogged about many caching expeditions on his series' and we've had some great adventures and taken some fabulous photos. He also takes time to read my blog entries and browse through the photos and always emails to say thank you for mentioning his series. Poshrule is breaking no guidelines with what he is doing. If you want to bag the caches on these series then you have to put the work into it, you have to do the long walks for it and it's very rewarding and great exercise!

 

The bottom line is: If you don't like em, don't do em!!! Just put anything by poshrule on the ignore list and the job is done.

Edited August 3, 2011 by Cassandy

[+G-X]

Theres more to life though.

 

I consider myself to be more of recreational cacher as opposed to the obsessive.

I don't feel the compulsion to cache on a daily basis and I chose which caches to find and which to ignore.

Self policing is a valid point but only to a point. I don't condone caches in drystone walls and the like but...

While I might make comment on caches that I have found that are pointless (in my opinion), I don't feel the need to comment on that cache for the caching public to read.

[+OMUK]

Having exchanged many emails with poshrule and completed many of his circuits I thought I'd add my two pennies worth to this.

 

Firstly, poshrule is a lovely chap. His hide locations and containers are very varied and none of his trails are simply a case of a big circuit of film cannisters. He thinks about his hiding places, he researches walks, and he's passionate about the places that he takes you. It's not a case of just putting every cache under a rock. There is variation! He also reads all of the logs people post, and if you take time to write decent ones then he will email you and thank you. Finally, despite placing so many caches recently, he doesn't shy away from maintaining them. If there are DNF's on his caches then he will go out and replace them, even if it's in the middle of a series and a long walk to just that one. He doesn't expect others to go and replace them for him. He is breaking no guidelines and is a fine example of a cache hider who actually cares about his caches! I also heard from a fellow cacher that there was a problem with a section of one of his walks where it passed through someone's garden and they had noticed the extra walker traffic passing through. The cacher spoke to the man and told him the reason why then took the man's phone number and passed it on to poshrule. He archived those caches immediately, and phoned the man the next morning to apologise, explain, and then moved all of the caches to places that the man was happy with which didn't lead cachers through his garden.

 

I've blogged about many caching expeditions on his series' and we've had some great adventures and taken some fabulous photos. He also takes time to read my blog entries and browse through the photos and always emails to say thank you for mentioning his series. Poshrule is breaking no guidelines with what he is doing. If you want to bag the caches on these series then you have to put the work into it, you have to do the long walks for it and it's very rewarding and great exercise!

 

The bottom line is: If you don't like em, don't do em!!! Just put anything by poshrule on the ignore list and the job is done.

 

More eloquently put than I could manage, and I completely agree. I've done quite a few of late and found them to be interesting, well thought out with excellent coordinates. Not a load of 35mms thrown in a hedge.

 

I just don't get the "I don't like it, therefore no-one should" attitude by the log poster.

[+TelemachusGB]

Simply ignoring the abundance of power trails does not quite work. They may prevent other, better quality, caches being placed in the area due to proximity. They may introduce newer cachers to a "all about the numbers" mentality. They may simply become unmaintained geolitter.

 

On that last point, I want to be very clear that this is not an accusation I level at poshrule. As Cassandy comment above, he has a track record of maintaining his caches.

 

Nor is this meant to be an ad hominem attack. The very act of publishing nearly 500 caches, the majority of which are trails, is one kind of public statement. I felt it reasonable to make an opposing type of public statement.

[+drsolly]

I don't see a problem.

 

If you like caches with great views, then set caches with great views. If you like big ammo cans, then set big ammo cans. If you like roundwalks enlivened by a cache every few hundred yards, then set roundwalks enlivened by a cache every few hundred yards.

 

I like Poshrule's caches. If you don't like Poshrule's caches, then don't do them.

[Santa_Claws]

well you would mate, with jack all to do other than collect the numbers.

[+Geocass&Andy750x]

Nor is this meant to be an ad hominem attack. The very act of publishing nearly 500 caches, the majority of which are trails, is one kind of public statement. I felt it reasonable to make an opposing type of public statement.

 

Which is absolutely fine, but IMO notes on the cache pages aren't the place to do it. The forum definitely is though!

[+pklong]

The bottom line is: If you don't like em, don't do em!!! Just put anything by poshrule on the ignore list and the job is done.

 

I don't fancy bringing up 495 cache pages and clicking ignore on them all.

 

I simply have no understanding how someone can maintain that number of caches.

 

Philip

[+The_Street_Searchers]

well you would mate, with jack all to do other than collect the numbers.

 

And so it decends into a personal attack - what next, you going to punch him in the face? Get back under the bridge buddy.

 

As to the original question - The main reason I cache is to get out into the countryside for a walk. These 'power trails' provide me with a nice circular walk in beautiful countryside with the added incentive of finding a few boxes. I subscribe to the belief that caching is for everyone, it is different things to different people. What you consider as 'quality' some might not. I have seen favourite points awarded on caches I percieve as rubbish and no favourite points on caches I consider to be brilliant.

 

Let it go..with so many caches I am sure you can find some that meet what you want out of caching

 

Chris

Edited August 3, 2011 by The_Street_Searchers

[+OMUK]

The bottom line is: If you don't like em, don't do em!!! Just put anything by poshrule on the ignore list and the job is done.

 

I don't fancy bringing up 495 cache pages and clicking ignore on them all.

 

I simply have no understanding how someone can maintain that number of caches.

 

Philip

 

Doesn't mean it isn't possible. The ones I've done are have been well maintained and a nice, if easyish, mixture of hides. I've had more personal emails of thanks from poshrule than any other CO

[+G-X]

 

I simply have no understanding how someone can maintain that number of caches.

 

Philip

 

But the point is that he does appear to be able to maintain them.

[+Fianccetto]

I come from the area and went back there last week for a holiday to meet up with various relatives (mostly elderly ill ones who have forgotten who I am...it has often been a stressful and anxious time when visiting, but this time it wasn't, and one reason was these trails set by poshrule). It was great to do a couple of poshrule's caching rings, they were well thought out, good hides, varied and we enjoyed them. It did slow us down in the sense that some of them took us a long time to find, and took us further, but in other ways they marked out a more interesting route, saved us from going the wrong way and getting lost (I find the flat landscape a bit on the boring side and repetitive - it all looks a bit samey to me). I was particularly impressed by the way the farmers cut paths around (and sometimes through) all their crops for walkers, and the well marked walks. It helped give me back some appreciation of the county I grew up in.

 

I got 'thank you' emails from poshrule saying he enjoyed reading my logs and I hope he did, because I hope he carries on making trails like this. They're not power trails - power trails are identically hidden nano caches often placed in a straight line every 100 m or so.

 

If you want a cache something to complain about, take a look at some of the RAF WWII memorials caches in the surrounding counties which have been neglected and are in need of some refurbishment. Find something about your area that needs improving and get it done.

 

(edit to correct my mistake about which memorials need some care.)

Edited August 4, 2011 by Fianccetto

[+TelemachusGB]

For the record, my note and some others following it have now been deleted by Red Duster, who reasonably comments that cache notes are not a forum.

[+thehalibutkid]

They may prevent other, better quality, caches being placed in the area due to proximity.

 

But are lots of people clamoring to put out caches in those areas? If there is nothing of interest on the trail then there is nothing of interest for a single cache either. Personally I really like trails. They give me an abundance of interesting well thought out often circular walks. The caches are just a pleasant distraction.

[+poshrule]

I feel the need for a short reply to the above topic. My intention is to provide cachers with a pleasant and interesting walk with the added bonus of finding caches ( i had never heard of the term power trails untill advised by email) and by the kind comments i recieve i believe cachers are enjoying them . I try to vary the cache sizes but yes there are many micro's amongst them. I try to maintain them promptly as soon as i am aware of any issues. I have had two cachers express concerns re the number of walks i have set, and have offered to join them on a series should they wish. As mentioned in some of the replies, these trails do not suit all, but i really enjoy walking other cachers series and enjoy setting my own for others to enjoy

 

Poshrule

[+Icenians]

The problem with one cacher placing so many of these types of caches is it stops variety. This means that the rest of us have less and less caches to find because greedy powertrail setters have hogged all the ground.

 

I'm sorry Poshrule, but many of us just don't waste our time complaining anymore as you lot simply don't listen.

 

There is nothing wrong with variety in caching and I'm all for that, but 500 caches that are largely the same type of thing in one small area is simply greedy and selfish.

 

It's all well and good folk saying 'ignore the caches you don't like" but as the numbers of these caches climbs ever upwards we are left with less and less caches to do and are slowly driven out of the game.

[I!]

Are there many examples of poshrule's caches preventing placement of something more interesting? After the would-be CO asking, "would you mind shifting that one?", that is.

[roger-rabbit]

The problem with one cacher placing so many of these types of caches is it stops variety. This means that the rest of us have less and less caches to find because greedy powertrail setters have hogged all the ground.

 

I'm sorry Poshrule, but many of us just don't waste our time complaining anymore as you lot simply don't listen.

 

There is nothing wrong with variety in caching and I'm all for that, but 500 caches that are largely the same type of thing in one small area is simply greedy and selfish.

 

It's all well and good folk saying 'ignore the caches you don't like" but as the numbers of these caches climbs ever upwards we are left with less and less caches to do and are slowly driven out of the game.

 

The answer seems obvious, if poshrule made all his caches 'premium' then you wouldn't be able to see them.

[+Icenians]

and by the kind comments i recieve i believe cachers are enjoying them .

 

But you generally only hear from those that like them. What you are not hearing is those that simply ignore them or complain about them but not to you. So, you get a one sided view of your caches.

 

There is a problem in caching, I'm not sure why it is but it is. If you offer any kind of critisism about a cache you generally get shot down for it. I know of someone who was even threatened with a ban from GC simply for stating in a log that the cache wasn't that great! So, while people can say they enjoyed a cache they cannot indicate that they didn't. That means that people with rubbish caches THINK they have great ones when in reality they have mediocre at best.

[+Icenians]

 

The answer seems obvious, if poshrule made all his caches 'premium' then you wouldn't be able to see them.

 

Eh? How does that allow variety of caches in the area? Whether a cache is PMO or not does not change the facts that the area is saturated with 500 caches that are all similar. I couldn't give a monkeys about what I see on the map or not. It's about the powertrail fans remembering to leave a bit of room for those that don't want to ruin a walk by diving into the hedge every 5 minutes to find yet another filmpot.

[+OMUK]

and by the kind comments i recieve i believe cachers are enjoying them .

 

But you generally only hear from those that like them. What you are not hearing is those that simply ignore them or complain about them but not to you. So, you get a one sided view of your caches.

 

There is a problem in caching, I'm not sure why it is but it is. If you offer any kind of critisism about a cache you generally get shot down for it. I know of someone who was even threatened with a ban from GC simply for stating in a log that the cache wasn't that great! So, while people can say they enjoyed a cache they cannot indicate that they didn't. That means that people with rubbish caches THINK they have great ones when in reality they have mediocre at best.

 

Not true, I'll leave a negative log if I think it merits its, so far, poshrule's don't really merit it.

 

I think there's a lot of "things ain't wot they used to be" from some cachers, thinking the hobby (it's not a sport, IMvHO) should be exactly the same as it was 10 years ago. More and more casual cachers are bound to be attracted and I probably number myself amongst them. Horses for courses and all that.

 

This is the place (or one of them) to discuss the merits of any type of cache, not a log.

[+Lord & Lady Boogie]

OK 2 cents coming in.

 

I like walking + I like caching = I love power trails I have four geokids that are hard to keep happy while walking so a power trail is a good balence for us. On the other hand I like intersting caches, tough caches extreme caches and multi caches, but I don't really like puzzzle caches.

 

There are aome very hard puzzle caches in the Midlands area and so far I have avoided them... I have also avoided slating the CO of these because it is their choice to place my choice to find. I can see both sides of the argument but can not agree with some of the NIMBY / Elitest statements, this is a game to have fun not life and death.

 

My eight year old twins can quite easily manage an eight mile power trail but some of my friends can not, that dosn't mean it is impossible! Just as Poshrule can, for the moment at least, manage to look after the caches. I have a small round of sixteen and find it very hard to keep on top of those but I don't for one second judge another by my yardstick.

 

It seems to me there are lots of different people wanting different things out of Geocaching and I think thats great. If you have a problem and want the CO to remove a cache then ask, just as you would ask any friend or neighbour if you had a problem with them. And please remember not to judge a man until you have walked a mile in their moccasins.

[jholly]

I have had the conversation in private. So have others. There is a growing concern about the huge rise of apparantly low-quality power trails in this area and I am now voicing that concern publicly.

So then, I take it you would not have a problem with high quality power trails?

[+Legochugglers]

I think that Only MeUK's original post was a point well made and it would appear that this has been accepted and the log deleted which seems to have dealt with the original topic.

 

However the ongoing saga of what people enjoy and get out of Geocaching will no doubt rage on for many years. Thank goodness we are all so different. My views tend to mirror Lord Boogies although I actually enjoy a good puzzle cache to add a bit of variety.

 

I am looking forward to seeing the first logs posted on the new 'Buckworth' series to see what the feedback/comments are from a fully informed basis rather than speculation from afar. Its a bit far for me but I would love somebody local to give some impartial feedback to the forum after actually doing the caches.

 

But of course... that would only be their opinion!!

[+Happy Humphrey]

I enjoy country walks, and cache trails are just the thing for people like me. Sometimes I make up my own cache trail by linking several unrelated caches, but it's really nice when someone has gone to the trouble of setting a lot of caches in a logical sequence which takes you on an interesting walk. Yes, it's also nice when you discover that you can log 25 caches in a day (or whatever) but that's a secondary consideration.

 

I guess that those that complain about them prefer just to drive up and grab a cache without having to go to the trouble of working out which ones in the trail are accessible. Fair enough, but I'm afraid that these days you really have to do a bit of research before setting out.

 

I haven't looked for any of poshrule's caches, but I'm sure I would if I was visiting the area. They sound top quality.

 

Yet many days I like to go after half a dozen caches at most, and generally try and include some mystery caches in the itinerary. But that doesn't mean I don't appreciate a well-designed series, which IMO is the bread and butter of geocaching as it encourages you to go out and explore an area. See the Alphabet Soup series near Matlock as an example of a good series (and note the number of Favourite points awarded).

[+OMUK]

Just got back from doing the caches, Myself & TAG have done the whole round (not together), Samurai Sword & Bigbatch have found a few FTFs as usual. Need to freshen up, so may post more later.

[+G-X]

See the Alphabet Soup series near Matlock as an example of a good series (and note the number of Favourite points awarded).

 

Doing the rest of the series this weekend.

[I!]

It's about the powertrail fans remembering to leave a bit of room ...

... or making room when asked. Do they not, in your experience?

[+MartyBartfast]

... or making room when asked. Do they not, in your experience?

 

Are you saying that if there's a trail and I want to put a cache somewhere that's close to one of the caches then the power trail owner should move/remove one of their caches to make room for mine? I don't see why they should.

[+Geocass&Andy750x]

I had never heard of the term power trails until advised by email

 

*snip*

 

 

I do love a good debate!

 

I'm not sure how posh's caches got labelled as "Power trails" as they really aren't! From Cacheopedia "A trail with many closely spaced caches, each placed as close to its neighbors as the cache saturation guidelines allow.". Posh's trails certainly aren't anything like that. Sure, some are just over 528ft apart, but some are quarter mile apart, some are half mile apart, etc. Some run across crop fields where there is nowhere to hide a cache.

 

Power trails are more of a US thing: 'Hang em High', Route 66, The ET Highway, etc. and usually run along a highway. Posh's cache series are simply nice circular walks. They get us out and about, they keep the footpaths open, and they give us some exercise!

 

For anyone looking to visit the area, I'd highly recommend Sawtry Saunter - We saw loads of Red kites, wildlife, and pretty wild flowers all around the trail, and Polebrook Plunder was our second favourite - Which takes you along a lovely river.

[+Geocass&Andy750x]

... or making room when asked. Do they not, in your experience?

 

Are you saying that if there's a trail and I want to put a cache somewhere that's close to one of the caches then the power trail owner should move/remove one of their caches to make room for mine? I don't see why they should.

 

I'd bet that if someone found a spot that you absolutely had to place a cache (And there are times when a certain spot is an absolute must!) and it was say 200ft from a poshrule cache then they could easily come to an arrangement with him to juggle the caches around a bit to make space. I'm sure posh wouldn't mind discussing it!

 

The spots that the trails are on are places where there was very little there in way of caches in the first place. In fact, there was once very little around the Peterborough area in terms of series/trails. Cambridgeshire is the new Sussex?

[Alan White]

I don't understand the term "power trail". I've not seen it defined anywhere - despite there being a thread every so often on how bad they are. What I do know is that the term is always used in a derogatory way, also for reasons which I don't understand.

 

England is fortunate to have an extensive network of public rights of way* and I enjoyed circular walks around them long before caching. Such circular walks are obvious areas for caches and even when a cache series is not placed along the walk then a collection of individual caches can often form a circular walk.

 

While I've not done any of poshrule's, I have enjoyed every circular walk I've done and I thank all the cache owners who take time to place and maintain them.

 

There are ~100k caches in GB: surely everyone can find caches which they enjoy?

 

* If it were me, I would not have moved the caches as described here. If the path is a public right of way then everyone has a legal right to use it. One of the benefits of caching is that it keeps rights of way open and acceding to requests by landowners to limit their use only leads to the ROWs becoming unusable or closed.

[+Happy Humphrey]

* If it were me, I would not have moved the caches as described here. If the path is a public right of way then everyone has a legal right to use it. One of the benefits of caching is that it keeps rights of way open and acceding to requests by landowners to limit their use only leads to the ROWs becoming unusable or closed.

I agree with that 100%. I guess that this right of way must have been very infrequently used if cachers made a noticeable difference to the traffic level. I'd have expected about 3 or 4 extra people per day using the path (at most). Makes you wonder how the landowner finds time to spend all day watching the footpath!

 

I've seen several footpaths that have had a new lease of life thanks to geocachers, in that they have become better defined since a cache appeared. This game also helps with the path network if cachers report problems with paths, including signage and stiles. That is actually of benefit to the landowner; you can easily go off route due to the path becoming too faint and the line ambiguous, whereas the manager would usually prefer everyone to use exactly the same route and travel quickly through his plot.

[dodgydaved]

If the path is a public right of way then everyone has a legal right to use it.

 

 

Now that IS an interesting thought that would need a precise definition of "use".

 

I am told, by a legal source, that a "Right of Way" is just that - a right of passage across land. Ad Absurdum it could be argued that even to stop and pic-nic on the land without permission of the landowner is in breach of that "Right of way" - so even on a "Right of Way" landowner's permission is required - in theory - to place a cache.

 

As the "Right of Way" in this case happened to pass through a persons garden, if the cache was in that section (& I think it was not) the landowner is correct to ask for its removal - however the increase of foot traffic as the result of the cache being elsewhere - should not have resulted in the removal of a cache that had not been placed in the garden section.

 

I don't think I have expressed myself as clearly ad I should have - but I know what I meant to say :)

[Neath Worthies]

I'd bet that if someone found a spot that you absolutely had to place a cache (And there are times when a certain spot is an absolute must!) and it was say 200ft from a poshrule cache then they could easily come to an arrangement with him to juggle the caches around a bit to make space.

But surely the whole point of a cache is to bring someone to an interesting location. If there's already a cache there why try and put another one? The cache finder has already experienced that "special" location.

[+Geocass&Andy750x]

I'd bet that if someone found a spot that you absolutely had to place a cache (And there are times when a certain spot is an absolute must!) and it was say 200ft from a poshrule cache then they could easily come to an arrangement with him to juggle the caches around a bit to make space.

But surely the whole point of a cache is to bring someone to an interesting location. If there's already a cache there why try and put another one? The cache finder has already experienced that "special" location.

 

Possibly, usually, but there are some exceptions where there may be an obsticle in the way which may mean that a cacher would not see the "special" thing whilst finding a cache on a series despite it being within 500ft, or perhaps it's a puzzle that needs to placed in a very particular place. There are always exceptions, just saying that I'm sure if that's what some are worried about then you can always negotiate.

[+agentmancuso]

....

 

Nor is this meant to be an ad hominem attack. The very act of publishing nearly 500 caches, the majority of which are trails, is one kind of public statement. I felt it reasonable to make an opposing type of public statement.

 

A more appropriate 'opposing type of public statement' would be to simply not find those caches. Or to set a good example by putting out better caches yourself. Or even just to moan about it on the forums. But complaining on the cache page isn't really on, unless there is some sort of unlisted danger etc.

[+Geocass&Andy750x]

As the "Right of Way" in this case happened to pass through a persons garden, if the cache was in that section (& I think it was not) the landowner is correct to ask for its removal - however the increase of foot traffic as the result of the cache being elsewhere - should not have resulted in the removal of a cache that had not been placed in the garden section.

 

I'll add that I'm not 100% on the details of it as I haven't yet done that circuit so I'm just going by what others have told me. I do know that there was a problem and the CO got in touch with the landowner immediately to arrange a move. I was trying to give an example of the CO not just chucking caches everywhere and anywhere and actually caring about the location. If I placed a series that passed through a garden and found out that the owner was a little unhappy about the extra traffic then I'd happily readjust it, perhaps just as a gesture of good will.

[+Fianccetto]

If the path is a public right of way then everyone has a legal right to use it.

 

 

Now that IS an interesting thought that would need a precise definition of "use".

 

I am told, by a legal source, that a "Right of Way" is just that - a right of passage across land. Ad Absurdum it could be argued that even to stop and pic-nic on the land without permission of the landowner is in breach of that "Right of way" - so even on a "Right of Way" landowner's permission is required - in theory - to place a cache.

 

As the "Right of Way" in this case happened to pass through a persons garden, if the cache was in that section (& I think it was not) the landowner is correct to ask for its removal - however the increase of foot traffic as the result of the cache being elsewhere - should not have resulted in the removal of a cache that had not been placed in the garden section.

 

I don't think I have expressed myself as clearly ad I should have - but I know what I meant to say :)

 

Depends if it is an ordinance right of way (on the definitive ordinance map - though some rights of way haven't quite made it onto the map yet) or a permissive right or way. I'm guessing this could be the former rather than the latter, or poshrule wouldn't know there was a footpath there, as the owner of the garden wouldn't be giving permission for a footpath.

 

For me, this highlights exactly why cache circuits like these are so great, as I have often found it very hard to follow the maps on footpaths without coming across somewhere that the landowners have put up so many obstacles you end up stranded, or having to push through the edge of someone else's crop in another field to get back to a road. When it was just me, or me and one other adult I was prepared to do it and try to contact the council responsible for maintaining footpaths if there was a problem, but when walking with kids I haven't had the time nor the inclination to get into those situations. I'm just starting to get back into this type of walking again now, and it is a struggle at times to work out where the path is supposed to be when finding a cache. (poshrule's Nassington Nobble and Polebrook Plunder made a pleasant change, I even added photos, I was so impressed by the landowner's consideration!)

Edited August 4, 2011 by Fianccetto

[+drdick&vick]

I see that good old Santa_Claws has been dragged out of the sock drawer to post comments that the real identity does not want to be seen posting.

 

As long as all the caches are well maintained and sensibly placed there should be no problem with trails.

 

As for the comments about DrSolly, I am sure that if we were able to go out caching every day we would.

[Alan White]

I don't think I have expressed myself as clearly ad I should have - but I know what I meant to say :)

And so do I. And I agree with you entirely. I wasn't suggesting that a cache could be placed on a ROW simply because it's a ROW. As you say, the "legal right" I refer to allows passage on the ROW: it's a highway. What I'm objecting to is the suggestion that a landowner can influence the frequency of use of a ROW. In this case the increased use was because of caching: suppose the circular walk had instead been published in a book or by the local RA group? Would the publisher or the RA have removed the walk because the landowner didn't like the increased traffic? I think not, so why should a cacher exercising his/her legal right of passage be any different?

[+Fianccetto]

I don't think I have expressed myself as clearly ad I should have - but I know what I meant to say :)

And so do I. And I agree with you entirely. I wasn't suggesting that a cache could be placed on a ROW simply because it's a ROW. As you say, the "legal right" I refer to allows passage on the ROW: it's a highway. What I'm objecting to is the suggestion that a landowner can influence the frequency of use of a ROW. In this case the increased use was because of caching: suppose the circular walk had instead been published in a book or by the local RA group? Would the publisher or the RA have removed the walk because the landowner didn't like the increased traffic? I think not, so why should a cacher exercising his/her legal right of passage be any different?

 

One reason might be to not bring geocaching or geocachers into disrepute, or into wrangles with the landowner themselves. Most people who buy RA books and go walking like that are pretty clued up on the ROW issues, they usually look like ramblers, and have the right kit and clothing, and would likely be carrying the book, and an OS map showing evidence of the public footpath they're on, if questioned.

 

I'd like some advice about placing caches on a route to highlight a good walk on a ROW where the landowner is blocking the ROW... But I think, as has been said further up the thread, this discussion is getting off topic here. I'm going to start a new thread, and would like to invite further comment about ROW and setting geocaching trails there, hope that is OK.

Edited August 4, 2011 by Fianccetto

[Alan White]

One reason might be to not bring geocaching or geocachers into disrepute, or into wrangles with the landowner themselves.

Perhaps, though I don't regard the landowner's preference as significant. Let's remember that given the choice most landowners would remove or obstruct ROWs. Only the law prevents them from doing so. But...

 

I'd like some advice about placing caches on a route to highlight a good walk on a ROW where the landowner is blocking the ROW.

...if you know that the landowner is blocking the ROW then you should report that and have it resolved before placing caches there. Placing caches on the route could cause problems for cachers and/or antagonise an obviously already hostile landowner. Let the highway authority deal with it.