Do the reviewers use common sense

[+Haggis Hunter]

but when you own 52 caches that take a while

There are so many things that I can say to this, but I feel as though I am allowing myself to be dragged into what appears to be a pointless discussion, so I shall try to refrain from commenting any further.

[Pup Patrol]

but the cache does not invlove any of that. Next one to every one. how do i delete all my caches quickly as i feel the guidelines of this site i can not agree with any more.

You can't! Go to each individual cache page and select the 'archive' option. Once you have archived all of your caches please go to each and every location and remove what will become geolitter. This isn't a rule or guideline, it's the proper thing to do, and as the caches will be no longer listed and used then it equates to no more than actual littering. Especially when you have proven that there is a good chance none of them have permission.

 

I have to say that it is a pity that you have taken the hump with what I have viewed as constructive criticism (grammar jibe aside). If you decide to continue to search for caches, I hope you enjoy your finds.

 

Disabling caches is not the same as archiving them. The containers need to be removed and the listing "archived".

 

6.13. Permanent Removal: Archiving a Cache

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=56

 

OWNERS:

 

Visit the page of the listing you wish to archive. Click on the "archive listing" link in the Navigation box in the top right of the page. Enter some text for the log and click "Submit Log Entry."

 

A warning will alert you, "This can only be reversed by a reviewer or a site administrator. Use the "temporarily disable this cache" option if you only need to take your cache offline for a short time. If you still wish to archive this cache, click on the "yes" button to continue." Click the YES button to archive the listing.

 

Again, this is permanent.

 

If you simply want to temporarily disable the cache to give yourself time for repairs, click on the "disable listing" link in the Navigation box in the top right of the cache page. You can enable the listing there, when the cache is ready for finders.

 

6.12. Temporarily Disable and Enable

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=235

 

As the cache owner, you can easily tell people whether or not your cache is ready for visitors.

 

Published Caches

 

Cache owners can temporarily disable a listing, which will take a cache page offline. Do this if the cache needs repairs, or if the area is closed for a period of time (construction, hunting, winter closures, etc.) This is meant to be temporary, which means a few weeks or perhaps a couple of months. When the cache is available again, you must enable it. Enable and disable are actions done via log entries:

 

Starting at the "Navigation" box in the upper right of your cache page, use the "log your visit" link.

 

On the new page choose the appropriate log type, and write some explanatory text in the text field.

 

"Enable" or "Disable" will show as options for cache owners.

 

If a "Needs Maintenance" log was posted, you will need to log an "Owner Maintenance" log to clear the "Needs Maintenance" icon from the cache page.

 

A listing which is disabled for an extended period may be archived by a reviewer, unless there is some explanation on the listing. If you decide not to replace a missing cache, please archive the listing.

[+dartymoor]

This is all very sad and unneccessary.

 

"An excellent location - never been onto this particular area before despite living within a couple of miles. tftc."

 

"Great cache location, a favourite."

 

From visitors to your caches. You didn't need to remove them, that looks like spite and everyone loses. I think you'll regret it, and I hope some of the people who have been negative in here regret what they've said.

[patdhill]

This thread seems to be going well away from the original topic. In my opinion the reviewers do use a lot of common sense, reading the above posts I don't think geekyninja has in this case.

[+drsolly]

when the caching world has grown up a bit

 

That isn't going to happen. We're as grown up as we're ever going to be. This is what people are like. There's been many attempts to change human nature; none of them have worked.

[Neath Worthies]

first of all i will point out for the person who decided to attack my spelling and use of English i am servery dyslexic and in some sense your comment was extremely offensive.

Hmm! After reading this I thought I may have forgotton what I had said. I was careful to put my thoughts in a clear and innofensive way, or so I thought. Anyway I have just gone back to re-read my post. This is what I said:

 

I hope your university work is more intelligible and makes proper use of capitalisation, punctuation and grammar than your forum postings. They are very difficult to read.

 

What is offensive about that? Your posts, for whatever reason (dyslexia being a valid reason) ARE difficult to read. I DO hope your Univeristy work is better written, maybe help will be available.

 

Anyway on the question of the archiving of your caches, have you considered listing them on another listing site other than geocaching.com?

[+Amberel]

Anyway on the question of the archiving of your caches, have you considered listing them on another listing site other than geocaching.com?

Just to clarify a point here, in case you were suggesting other sites are more relaxed than Groundspeak about placing caches in areas such as SSSIs.

 

On TerraCaching it would depend on your sponsors (your reviewers) - my sponsors are tougher than Groundspeak in this respect .

 

On opencaching.org.uk the system is different to Groundspeak's, but not necessarily easier - you are expected to do a lot of checking for yourself that a reviewer might do for you here. Natural England explain WHY protected areas are so designated, and say what sorts of activities are permitted there - you are expected to assess this responsibly.

 

NaviCache don't have any controls, but they really are out of the picture now.

 

And I don't know much about the Garmin opencaching procedures - I think it might be a bit like publishing the banns when you plan to marry - a new cache sits in a quarantine area for a few days for people to comment or object - but I'm not sure about that.

 

As far as quality is concerned, both opencaching.org.uk and TerraCaching were created with a "quality caching" ethos, though it is difficult to ensure that they remain so. But the sparse listings show that both have successfully avoided becoming home to numbers caching so far .

 

NaviCaching don't really make any statement about quality.

 

And I think Garmin will publish anything they can get their hands on to increase their numbers .

 

Rgds, Andy

[+geekyninja]

Due to feedback received from local cachers, All my caches will be out until the near new year (Just waiting for student fiance to pay out as then i am ordering 100 new pee pots). This is due to new log books being rolled out and the way i manage the caches off the geocaching website. Mostly as having the last found date is not helpful when i view a long list of caches i just want to know what ones have had a did not find straight out.

 

Also thoses who can not understand what i have written or have issues with the way my posts are when it comes to the use of english i say one thing.

So long and thank you for all the fish.

[+Malpas Wanderer]

Due to feedback received from local cachers, All my caches will be out until the near new year (Just waiting for student fiance to pay out as then i am ordering 100 new pee pots). This is due to new log books being rolled out and the way i manage the caches off the geocaching website. Mostly as having the last found date is not helpful when i view a long list of caches i just want to know what ones have had a did not find straight out.

 

Also thoses who can not understand what i have written or have issues with the way my posts are when it comes to the use of english i say one thing.

So long and thank you for all the fish.

 

Well it went over my head once again.

 

If I understand it that you are to place 100 containers of one design as a series of that number, then you will have your work cut out to make it interesting.

 

Recently did a series of around that number you will be looking at about 12-15 miles minimum.

 

A big challenge which I wish you well with and hope it is suitably well presented such that it might draw me to it.

[Neath Worthies]

Just to clarify a point here, in case you were suggesting other sites are more relaxed than Groundspeak about placing caches in areas such as SSSIs........................

I thought the problem was more with Groundspeak reviewers being unduly strict in their interpretation of the rules. However you could be right and the problem is danger to a fragile ecosystem in which case they SHOULD be strict.

 

Whatever, many thanks for the clarification and the excellent summary of the options available to everyone.

[+trampyjoe]

Ok I know this is off topic but I feel the need to mention it.

 

Geekyninja (and other young cachers) just because you do not have your own car it does not restrict you from caching. I'm fortunate to have a car but due to the economy and price of petrol I often take the pushbike out caching and this doesn't restrict me at all. I live on the very edge of Northampton and transport links are basicly poo so to get anywhere takes a bit of effort. I'm originally from SE London and the number of times I hear people from within the M25 complaining they can't get anywhere is crazy ... Busses, trains and (in the case of the OP) tube trains abound and can get you the other side of the city in just an hour.

So kids, in short, stop being lazy.

 

Right, that's that done with, SSSI's .. as others have said, in the case of the carpark the underlying geology may be protected or there may be a rare or threatened species of plant in the car park. As for the location of the caches in question, you guys are very lucky to have the ancient woodland of epping forest on the doorstep and even more fortunate to be able to place caches in it. The simple fact that there is ancient woodland may be the reason for there being a SSSI (as pollution from cars massively affects trees). The reviewer isn't aware of why it is SSSI and shouldn't be expected to know each SSSI in their area so they fall back on their guidlines and deny the cache if it is in a SSSI, sounds fair to me.

Edited December 31, 2011 by trampyjoe

[team tisri]

Geekyninja (and other young cachers) just because you do not have your own car it does not restrict you from caching. I'm fortunate to have a car but due to the economy and price of petrol I often take the pushbike out caching and this doesn't restrict me at all.

 

I prefer to cache by bike. It means I don't have to worry about parking, can get from cache to cache quickly, and for good measure the exercise does wonders for my waistline.

[+drsolly]

I prefer to cache by bike. It means I don't have to worry about parking, can get from cache to cache quickly, and for good measure the exercise does wonders for my waistline.

 

I like caching by bike, but my waistline has seen no wonders.

[+ForsdykeFinders]

I do have some sympathy for this guy. I live in Loughton and have done some of his caches. The area did have a lot of caches at one point with Siloans soaking the place in containers. However, the approach to caches placed in Epping Forest has changed with everywhere seeming to be SSSI. I did try to reason with the Corporation of London a while ago but I was directed to the head keeper who didnt want anything to do with caching. Infact I wondered if he wanted anyone in the woods at all. Their view was that caches would be placed off the beaten track and more likely to cause 'damage'. The forest is an excellent place to put caches but due to these restrictions it has driven people to place caches into some less than interesting urban sites.

All my caches in the forest pre-date any of these new rules and have been visited hundreds of times.

I tend to find something of interest before placing caches and just randomly sticking them to various street furniture isnt great but if you want to contribute to the community and play your part in placing caches then I guess he had little choice in his home town. I would add that this guy also made the fatal move of placing way too many then not maintaining them so winding up many people.

A local cacher Daemonic is trying to approach the Corporation of London again so we may have some more sensible guidelines on where we can cache in the forest but I dont hold out too much hope. If you are clever with the Magic maps you can find odd areas on the finges but it is very limiting.

[+geekyninja]

The problem with the maintenance is that when you get about 30 logs its hard to filter off ones that are missing from the found ones. Other problem i have is people log did not find due to people near by. Or they put that it might need maintenance but dont say what needs replacing. Where i put a fellow cachers log as needing maintenance , i put down what is wrong with it. most the time i have spare pots in my mums car or in my bag. Also i have a if the cache has more than 7 DNF due to it might be missing i check it. Ive been out to a cache that had about 10 did not finds yet it was there.

 

If they are missing i try and ask users to mail me so i can get a replacement out as soon. 95% of them have now been replaced or the conditions have improved to allow a cache to return.

[+Malpas Wanderer]

I do have some sympathy for this guy. I live in Loughton and have done some of his caches. The area did have a lot of caches at one point with Siloans soaking the place in containers. However, the approach to caches placed in Epping Forest has changed with everywhere seeming to be SSSI. I did try to reason with the Corporation of London a while ago but I was directed to the head keeper who didnt want anything to do with caching. Infact I wondered if he wanted anyone in the woods at all. Their view was that caches would be placed off the beaten track and more likely to cause 'damage'. The forest is an excellent place to put caches but due to these restrictions it has driven people to place caches into some less than interesting urban sites.

All my caches in the forest pre-date any of these new rules and have been visited hundreds of times.

I tend to find something of interest before placing caches and just randomly sticking them to various street furniture isnt great but if you want to contribute to the community and play your part in placing caches then I guess he had little choice in his home town. I would add that this guy also made the fatal move of placing way too many then not maintaining them so winding up many people.

A local cacher Daemonic is trying to approach the Corporation of London again so we may have some more sensible guidelines on where we can cache in the forest but I dont hold out too much hope. If you are clever with the Magic maps you can find odd areas on the finges but it is very limiting.

 

I admit I've found it hard to decipher most of the OP's posts and I change my feelings like the wind.

 

My latest interpretation is that he intends to place double the amount he previously had placed, a big initial undertaking and a mammoth maintenance task.

 

I'm unsure if he just wanted to skim off DNF alerts for speedy action at the expense of not reading the found logs, surely that is one of the joys of placing caches.

 

It is a pity that such a large tract has been designated SSSI but if is is a nice area surely there will be immobile and unchanging objects which could be used as information collection points leading to a cache placed well outside the SSSI. I've such a cache located at Blenheim Palace it's about a three mile walk in the grounds and the cache is placed about another 3 miles outside the grounds. It's a different breed of cacher that undertakes that one and it's found less frequently but the logs are a joy to read when you do get one and I don't recall having a bad one yet.

 

What ever line this young man chooses to take I wish him well with it.

[+geekyninja]

to be honest i dont bother reading most my logs as they mostly copy and pasted stuff

[patdhill]

to be honest i dont bother reading most my logs as they mostly copy and pasted stuff

I've got to ask what do you get out of placing your caches.

 

Reading peoples on-line logs is the main thing for me in placing caches, hearing peoples experience and enjoyment of a cache is the best feedback that you are doing a good job. If I received a lot of "TFTC" or cut and paste logs I'd think I was doing something wrong. I try to write relevant logs on other peoples caches whether good or bad as that's what I want in return.

[+Stuey]

with regards to the favor point system its a pointless system as people just log and go. only cache owners who are cache policers are worried about the points.

What a ridiculous thing to say!

 

there was going to be a another 100 caches placed in the new year as part of a cache route but now that plan is being scrapped

Thank goodness for that. In my experience, the majority of cachers that I interact wth are in favour of quality over quantity.

[+Stuey]

to be honest i dont bother reading most my logs as they mostly copy and pasted stuff

 

If you put out 100 caches in a series, what do you expect? If you placed 10 individual caches you'd be more likely to get individual logs.

[+castagnari]

Can we try and get back on topic please

(tho i feel the original question was answered long ago)

[+geekyninja]

I think to be honest there are bugs in the whole geocaching website as if i look at the list of when they was last found unless i go in to each cache i cant quickly in any way see any that might need attention. The whole point of this was to raise the awareness of the SSI issue and how it effects people. The problem as a whole is only one or two people on here so far have ever been near one my caches and i point out i am nearly 22. I am one of i want to find alot of caches, all the caches i visit i put my geocaching calling card in that contains a QR code for my profile, i brought my last phone to ensure i could use a geocaching app better.

[team tisri]

The problem with the maintenance is that when you get about 30 logs its hard to filter off ones that are missing from the found ones. Other problem i have is people log did not find due to people near by. Or they put that it might need maintenance but dont say what needs replacing. Where i put a fellow cachers log as needing maintenance , i put down what is wrong with it. most the time i have spare pots in my mums car or in my bag. Also i have a if the cache has more than 7 DNF due to it might be missing i check it. Ive been out to a cache that had about 10 did not finds yet it was there.

 

If they are missing i try and ask users to mail me so i can get a replacement out as soon. 95% of them have now been replaced or the conditions have improved to allow a cache to return.

 

Unfortunately that seems like something that just goes with the territory. Personally I don't write a Needs Maintenance log unless I'm going to say what the problem is (suspected missing, damp, rusted shut, whatever) but that doesn't mean everyone else does the same.

 

Can you set up email rules so that found logs go into one folder and DNF or NM logs go into another? That way you could see the DNF logs more easily, see the NM at a stroke, and maybe even filter them into folders based on which caches they related to. That way you could see at a glance if one cache had a dozen consecutive DNFs, and see at a glance if any caches had an NM/NA logged against it.

 

Truth be told if I had caches out there that I wanted to make easier to monitor that's the kind of thing I'd do.

[+geekyninja]

my mail box for geocaching is well set up for this for this but often the issue is that i have to then make a list of man down caches, and then go out and recover / repair / wave at it as its still there. Really they should make the site so if on the page that shows what i own, they made it so next to the found date it puts that little icon to show it needs looking at, it be easyer

[+The Growler]

spam

Edited January 2, 2012 by Bendos

[+The Growler]

more spam - apologies

Edited January 2, 2012 by Bendos

[+Red Duster]

my mail box for geocaching is well set up for this for this but often the issue is that i have to then make a list of man down caches, and then go out and recover / repair / wave at it as its still there. Really they should make the site so if on the page that shows what i own, they made it so next to the found date it puts that little icon to show it needs looking at, it be easyer

Sounds like a reasonable suggestion, try suggesting it here and it might happen.

 

Andy

Red Duster

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

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

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

[+maxkim]

I think to be honest there are bugs in the whole geocaching website as if i look at the list of when they was last found unless i go in to each cache i cant quickly in any way see any that might need attention. The whole point of this was to raise the awareness of the SSI issue and how it effects people. The problem as a whole is only one or two people on here so far have ever been near one my caches and i point out i am nearly 22. I am one of i want to find alot of caches, all the caches i visit i put my geocaching calling card in that contains a QR code for my profile, i brought my last phone to ensure i could use a geocaching app better.

We have a weekly PQ for any of our caches which have the NM attribute... Not perfect but it does help with over 150 caches.

[+Bear and Ragged]

my mail box for geocaching is well set up for this for this but often the issue is that i have to then make a list of man down caches, and then go out and recover / repair / wave at it as its still there. Really they should make the site so if on the page that shows what i own, they made it so next to the found date it puts that little icon to show it needs looking at, it be easyer

 

They do.

If you look at your list of 'Caches Owned' it will show a litle 'Needs Maintenance' icon...

 

But, only if a cacher writes a 'Needs Maintenance' log. Maybe more cachers need to start doing that?

 

Maybe, when a cacher writes a Needs Maintenance log, Cache Owners shouldn't take offense, as a lot seem to do, these days.

[+martlakes]

I don't follow why it's such a problem for you. As log emails come in I have a quick scan, if it's cut & paste, delete. If it's interesting, read then delete. If it's a DNF, read, consider and save. Or if a log mentions emptying water out of the box, again save.

 

So now I've got a a few emails saved which may indicate a problem with a cache or two. Decide if they need action or not. If they do, I make a list or just go and sort it out. At busy times I can have a few outstanding issues to deal with, which sometimes have to wait until I'm heading that way, or not working, so a list is handy.

 

Doesn't seem too hard to me, as I'm interested in what happens with my caches. I don't like folk not finding them unless it's an intentionally hard one. I've got over 200 active caches to keep an eye on and I enjoy reading interesting logs, and even just noting that it's been found.

 

Or, do what Max does and run a PQ, but the trouble with that is that problems are often mentioned long before someone actually puts a NM log on a cache.

 

Alternatively, you can get a list of your caches which have dates and NM icons. Go to your 'Quick View' page; click on your Stat Bar to show your profile; click on Geocaches tab; click on All Geocache Hides. Get a list of your hides with NM and coins etc showing, arranged by date of placing or last found, or D/T values. Looks like this:

[+ForsdykeFinders]

Can I just seek a bit of clarification re the rules...I am interested in what one person mentioned about their caches at Blenheim. Are we allowed to do 'offset' caches? ie I could send someone into Epping Forest to collect a clue then direct them to another site? Also are we allowed for instance to hang a tag on a tree with the final cache (located outside of SSSI) final co-ord. I have seen one of these before up in Suffolk.

I guess the other option would be to run a multi around the woods with the final co-ord outside.

 

Also, does anyone have massive problems with magic maps. I can never get the things to load easily and I find it difficult to see what is an SSSI. I assume we use Rural Designations - Statutory? Is it 'Environmentally Sensitive Areas'? Being a reviewer must require the patience of a saint using these maps.

[+Bear and Ragged]

Are we allowed to do 'offset' caches? ie I could send someone into Epping Forest to collect a clue then direct them to another site?

I'd have no problem, so long as it said on the cache page.

I'd hate to do a couple of miles getting information, to then find the cache itself is another 3 miles away from the final clue/information!

[+Red Duster]

Can I just seek a bit of clarification re the rules...I am interested in what one person mentioned about their caches at Blenheim. Are we allowed to do 'offset' caches? ie I could send someone into Epping Forest to collect a clue then direct them to another site? Also are we allowed for instance to hang a tag on a tree with the final cache (located outside of SSSI) final co-ord. I have seen one of these before up in Suffolk.

I guess the other option would be to run a multi around the woods with the final co-ord outside.

You can put 'question to answer' stages in the woods, but not physical stages, which are anything physically placed there by the owner. This would include tags.

 

Also, does anyone have massive problems with magic maps. I can never get the things to load easily and I find it difficult to see what is an SSSI. I assume we use Rural Designations - Statutory? Is it 'Environmentally Sensitive Areas'? Being a reviewer must require the patience of a saint using these maps.

If you use the MapIt tool all you need to do is enter the location. Once the map appears, do not pan or you will loose the location. If you then click on the 4th icon from the left you can enter a distance and then click on the map. This then returns a report of all the areas within the specified distance.

 

There is more information on MAGIC maps at www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk under 'map resources'. It is fair to say, you get an eye for the colours on the map.

 

Andy

Red Duster

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

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

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

[+MartyBartfast]

 

I'd hate to do a couple of miles getting information, to then find the cache itself is another 3 miles away from the final clue/information!

 

Same here, so PLEASE give an idea of how long the walk is (and whether there's a long walk to get back to the start) on the cache page.

[+Graculus]

Re MAGIC. If you use the link my colleague referred to getting then map to show is really easy. Understanding the colors is bit tricky sometimes. Have a look at the MAGIC page on my site and scroll down to 'Controlling the layers'. The commonest problem seems to be seeing the default 'grey' background as blue - which might indicate a nature reserve. If you get several layers on top of each other that is also difficult. For example, an SSSI and Nature Reserve give an odd muted reddish color. So you can easily use the layers control to 'remove' a layer to see what it is or what may be underneath.

http://www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk/resources/magic.html

 

If you use the MAGIC map itself from the DEFRA site then it is very difficult to set it up. So use that MagicMapIt! link. Much easier.

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

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

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

Edited January 2, 2012 by Graculus

[+ForsdykeFinders]

Many thanks for all the tips. I can now see my confusion related to the layers. The maps already have the woods as a grey colour so it looked like the only areas that were SSSIs were the open areas when in actual fact the whole area is SSSI.

Will have a little think about doing some offsets to at least get people into the woods then find somewhere near for the final which will be a major challenge.

I assume Virtuals are still not allowed?

[+Delta68]

 

You can put 'question to answer' stages in the woods, but not physical stages, which are anything physically placed there by the owner. This would include tags.

 

This is impossible for reviewers to police though.

 

I've seen Multis with physical stages listed as QTA stages to avoid proximity problems and it could no doubt be used to place a starting location in an otherwise prohibited area.

 

 

Mark

[+Delta68]

An even better alternative would be to write a simple Wherigo where there is nothing at all at the starting point B)

 

 

Mark

[+Graculus]

This is impossible for reviewers to police though.

Not impossible at all... We have super powers

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

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

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

[+t4e]

 

Alternatively, you can get a list of your caches which have dates and NM icons. Go to your 'Quick View' page; click on your Stat Bar to show your profile; click on Geocaches tab; click on All Geocache Hides. Get a list of your hides with NM and coins etc showing, arranged by date of placing or last found, or D/T values. Looks like this:

 

 

that is a good solution for those that have a few caches out there that generate a couple of pages

 

if you got a lot of them and you have 10 pages is not a very pleasant task to complete

 

now, if GC would make the "info" field sortable it would become a very easy task

[+Happy Humphrey]

Many thanks for all the tips. I can now see my confusion related to the layers. The maps already have the woods as a grey colour so it looked like the only areas that were SSSIs were the open areas when in actual fact the whole area is SSSI.

Will have a little think about doing some offsets to at least get people into the woods then find somewhere near for the final which will be a major challenge.

I assume Virtuals are still not allowed?

It's a bit of an anomaly that "virtual" stages are allowed in an SSSI without special permission when physical ones aren't (the impact of visitors could be comparable), but if you design it so that people are likely to use public footpaths then it should be fine. I guess that Natural England should still know that the cache search entails a visit to the SSSI, however, even though the reviewer might not be bothered.

If there are points of interest in the SSSI you could Waymark them rather than bother with the cache; even more anomalous is that Waymarks don't need permission even in an SSSI, despite potentially having a similar impact as a physical cache.

Don't get SSSIs confused with Nature Reserves though; it's unlikely that an SSSI will be a sensitive area (from a walking / geocaching point of view) whereas a nature reserve might well be.

[+Daemonic]

Just thought I'd add my tuppence worth, (not that it really needs it, as most things have been said already), but from a local point of view, I live in Epping, so know the area well.

 

I believe the reviewers do a grand and thankless job, and have certainly helped me with a question or two and guidance for when I have placed my few caches. Granted I would love to place a cache or two in the forest, in fact I have one in build that would suit being in the forest, but being an SSSI they have to stick to their rules

 

I personally have completed 30+ of geekyninja's caches, and if I'm totally honest, some of the locations aren't the best I have been too, but at the same time I can see what he has tried to do, i.e. adding caches to an area somewhat lacking. You will never be able to please everyone with regards to where they are placed!

 

Going slightly off topic, but I'm currently trying to talk with the head keeper for Epping Forest with regards to permission for caches within the forest. I believe part of the SSSI status for the forest comes from rare forms of mushroom which have been found growing within the forest, the forest giving the ideal and delicate balance for these mushrooms to grow. Understandably they want to protect this, and thus far from what I can make out, they have only seen geocaching as a destructive activity as they imagine people trampling and bush-whacking their way off the paths

 

In my line of work, I do some work for an organisation that has close ties with Natural England, so I will also try and get a contact that I can speak with there, to get an input from them also.

 

I am hoping to propose to the rangers/keepers that we setup a test geocache which can be monitored with a view to change their minds about geocaching and hopefully move forward with permission. Wish me luck!

 

Anyway, I digress, thanks for reading.

[Deceangi]

Don't get SSSIs confused with Nature Reserves though; it's unlikely that an SSSI will be a sensitive area (from a walking / geocaching point of view) whereas a nature reserve might well be.

 

You seem to be of the belief that a location is designated a SSSI, due to the geology of it. That's misleading. 2 genuine examples

 

Cache A, located in a Public Park in a large UK City. Cacher X places a container up a tree, no harm there you'd claim. Yet due to the park being Designated as a SSSI, Cacher X was required to provide Proof of Permission. The reason the Park is a Designated SSSI, is due to the fact a Roost of Bats, a Protected Species. Roost in the tree's in the park. The Cache Owner and any searchers if published risked a Maximum Prison Sentence of 5 years and/or a Maximum Fine of £20,000, for Disturbing the Bats.

 

Cache B, located on Snowdon. Another Designated SSSI, CCW the Designating Authority for Wales, are the owners on behalf of the Welsh Assembly, are for the most part. Happy to give Permission for caches on the Mountain. But have refused one cache placement, due to the cache being located at the site of a extremely rare and Protected Plant. The reason given for refusal being, that 99.9% of all visitors, take specific routes, or visit specific climbs. So the chances of a visitor straying to the plants location is finite, however a cache locate there. Would attract visitors to that location. Placing the plants at risk,

 

It's because Reviewers do not have access to specialised information, nor are they qualified to make judgement calls about specific reasons for a locations Designation. We leave the decision up to the persons with more information. A location may be designated a SSSI for reasons related to Geology, Flora or Fauna. One Point to note, whilst Reviewers will point out SSSI's, which is a UK Government Designation. The location could also be a SAC, which is a European Designation, and a higher level of Designation, than a SSSI. All SAC's are also Designated as SSSI's, but not all SSSI's are SAC's.

 

And please Note, unless they actually own the location, Natural England, SNHi nor CCW may not give Permission for a cache placement. They may give their approval, if asked to do so. Actual Permission has to come from the Landowner or Person Authorised by them.And the decision to require that the Designating Authority, gives their approval, is down to that person and not the Reviewers.

 

I live on the North Wales Coast, and a section of the Coastline is a Designated SSSI, part of the reason for the Designation is that it is the Home to the rare Naterjack Toad.Another reason is due to a colony of Birds who breed on the Dunes/Flats, the Designation of SSSI, carries on to the Flats, due to the Birds breeding there. The Flats are also a Nature Reserve, and that part of the SSSI is owned by the RSPB.

 

Even Nature Reserves can also be SSSI's.

 

Deci

Edited January 2, 2012 by Deceangi

[+Graculus]

HH raises a good point re 'virtual' stages. Whilst allowed in an SSSI or nature reserve if we thought it was not located on a proper path or the owner was taking people to a location that might be sensitive then we'd probably query it and suggest the owner got permission. Nature reserves I visit usually have a path and hides on an 'approved' route. People visiting would not be encouraged to leave such paths and go 'off piste' so to speak. Of course if the owner didn't tell us or our local knowledge didn't help then caches could get published which perhaps shouldn't have been but we do try!

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

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

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

[+Happy Humphrey]

You seem to be of the belief that a location is designated a SSSI, due to the geology of it. That's misleading.

No, as I explained before, there are two types of SSSI and only one of them is "geological". Nor would I claim that a Nature Reserve cannot be in an SSSI.

It's best to read the whole thread before making such remarks. I'll add that in Wales, 30% of SSSIs are Geological.

 

I'm not claiming that a geocache will always be fine anywhere in any SSSI. It's just unlikely to be a problem, as SSSIs tend to be protected from such things as building works or landfill sites and so on; not from the general public. If you take a look at Epping Forest, for instance, there are paths and roads going all over the area; right through the SSSI.

 

I'm just trying to balance the misunderstanding that an SSSI is somewhere that we always have to tread very carefully and treat as if it's a very delicate environment at the individual visitor level. That's not what the SSSI system was meant for at all. They are very different from nature reserves or SACs.

 

If the SSSI is designated because of needing protection for such its flora and fauna, and geocaching activities will endanger this protection, then it follows that allowing access to the public at all will also endanger it. Access tends to be enouraged, in fact. I'm not saying that therefore we can just ignore the permission requirement; we still have to write to the Duke of Westminster and prove that we have received a positive reply (or the City of London in the case in question). But just look at Epping Forest as an example; there are a variety of activities encouraged there, let alone horse riding, driving trucks and cars, and using car parks. I understand the point that if there is a single rare plant and you place a cache at the side of it then it's likely to cause harm, but it's highly unlikely to be an ten-foot square SSSI in that case and would at least be an SAC (as in the case of Snowdon).

 

In my post above where I defended the reviewers and their inability to be experts on every SSSI, I also made the same point as you have, that they cannot make a judgement so have to insist on permission for everywhere in an SSSI (even the car park). So I guess you skipped that post as well.

 

Your examples (I've seen them enough times now, thanks!) are both rather dubious too and prove little.

 

(edit) changed "of SACs" to "or"

Edited January 3, 2012 by Happy Humphrey

[+Delta68]

This is impossible for reviewers to police though.

Not impossible at all... We have super powers

 

We are supposed to help reviewers improve the game by reporting anomalies and I may or may not have done so in the past but I don't bother these days because nothing gets done about it anyway...

[+maxkim]

I don't follow why it's such a problem for you. As log emails come in I have a quick scan, if it's cut & paste, delete. If it's interesting, read then delete. If it's a DNF, read, consider and save. Or if a log mentions emptying water out of the box, again save.

 

So now I've got a a few emails saved which may indicate a problem with a cache or two. Decide if they need action or not. If they do, I make a list or just go and sort it out. At busy times I can have a few outstanding issues to deal with, which sometimes have to wait until I'm heading that way, or not working, so a list is handy.

 

Doesn't seem too hard to me, as I'm interested in what happens with my caches. I don't like folk not finding them unless it's an intentionally hard one. I've got over 200 active caches to keep an eye on and I enjoy reading interesting logs, and even just noting that it's been found.

 

Or, do what Max does and run a PQ, but the trouble with that is that problems are often mentioned long before someone actually puts a NM log on a cache.

 

Alternatively, you can get a list of your caches which have dates and NM icons. Go to your 'Quick View' page; click on your Stat Bar to show your profile; click on Geocaches tab; click on All Geocache Hides. Get a list of your hides with NM and coins etc showing, arranged by date of placing or last found, or D/T values. Looks like this:

Oh this is much better.... I do keep a list of DNF's as well, but on checking our 9 pages it was great to catch up on several caches where I had done the maintenance but not logged the fact!!! and none of them had shown up on the PQ. Cheers Max :P

[+Malpas Wanderer]

I don't follow why it's such a problem for you. As log emails come in I have a quick scan, if it's cut & paste, delete. If it's interesting, read then delete. If it's a DNF, read, consider and save. Or if a log mentions emptying water out of the box, again save.

 

So now I've got a a few emails saved which may indicate a problem with a cache or two. Decide if they need action or not. If they do, I make a list or just go and sort it out. At busy times I can have a few outstanding issues to deal with, which sometimes have to wait until I'm heading that way, or not working, so a list is handy.

 

Doesn't seem too hard to me, as I'm interested in what happens with my caches. I don't like folk not finding them unless it's an intentionally hard one. I've got over 200 active caches to keep an eye on and I enjoy reading interesting logs, and even just noting that it's been found.

 

Or, do what Max does and run a PQ, but the trouble with that is that problems are often mentioned long before someone actually puts a NM log on a cache.

 

Alternatively, you can get a list of your caches which have dates and NM icons. Go to your 'Quick View' page; click on your Stat Bar to show your profile; click on Geocaches tab; click on All Geocache Hides. Get a list of your hides with NM and coins etc showing, arranged by date of placing or last found, or D/T values. Looks like this:

Oh this is much better.... I do keep a list of DNF's as well, but on checking our 9 pages it was great to catch up on several caches where I had done the maintenance but not logged the fact!!! and none of them had shown up on the PQ. Cheers Max :P

 

A lot easier to extract your requirements from a GSAK database.

 

Filtering for caches where owner contains Martlakes where the month of November 2011 containss 1 or More NM logs.

Returns 2 caches, split screen can be set to display full logs or log summary.

 

Email me if you desire a screen shot.

[+mellers]

This is impossible for reviewers to police though.

Not impossible at all... We have super powers

 

We are supposed to help reviewers improve the game by reporting anomalies and I may or may not have done so in the past but I don't bother these days because nothing gets done about it anyway...

I have not found this to be the case

[+drdick&vick]

This is impossible for reviewers to police though.

Not impossible at all... We have super powers

 

We are supposed to help reviewers improve the game by reporting anomalies and I may or may not have done so in the past but I don't bother these days because nothing gets done about it anyway...

I have not found this to be the case

I have to agree with Mellers here, on the odd occaision where I have noticed something wrong with a published listing and have written to the relevant reviewer, I have always recieved a thanks and my observation was acted upon.