Historic landowner has very poor regard for geocaches

[+geofaf]

I've placed a geocache on Historic Scotland property (well away from the historic items). Upon request for permission (I'd tried to advertise it that it would attract more visitors to the site) eventualy received a response that stated "Unfortunately, we are aware of instances where damage has been caused to scheduled monuments by visitors to geocahes nearby – eg. arrows being scratched/carved into standing stones. Although such damage is ‘unthinking’ rather than malicious, we would prefer not to court further instances" I can't see that this is true, well geochaches might be near by but I would be very shocked if it was the geocachers that caused the damage (especially 'carving arrows'. Does anyone have any idea how I can reply and sell the geocaching concept to them?

 

Many Thanks

 

Chris (geofaf)

[I!]

Quit now before you give Historic Scotland further reason to dislike geocaching.

 

If you want to get people to visit the location, how about making a multicache. Stage 1 = go to that Historic Scotland location and answer some questions based on what's already there (i.e. don't place anything yourself). Stage 2 = location off H.S. property with coords given by (convoluted maths applied to) those answers.

[+flipflopnick]

Respondent is set in their ways. Give up trying to place a cache on HS land. All you can do is educate them as to their intrangience. Once you start a dialogue you could be at it for years. HS are confusing muggles with responsible cachers. Often happens.

Part of your argument sorry education could be to point out that cachers rarely carry a spare writing implement let alone a chisel and rock hammer. You have to decide whether to crusade on behalf of caching community or not.

 

HS are not mentioned on GAGB agreements. Could ask GAGB negotiators what they have done.

[+SXParx]

Whilst you think that geocachers wouldn't do something as irresponsible as carve arrows into stones.....

 

In a recent found log on one of my caches a cacher admits to trying to carve his nephews initials into one of the trees, nearly cutting his finger off in the process.

 

The tree in question was in fact between 500 and 700 years old......... So not only an appalling example to set the child he was caching with, but criminal damage to our ancient woodland!

 

Perhaps it would have been better if the cacher in question had actually cut his finger off to prevent him doing more damage to the environment

Edited March 31, 2012 by SXParx

[BOBBLES WORLD TOUR]

You state that you have placed a cache.

Better go and pick it up then. Ask before placing may be the way forward.

Or do as I do. Don't get involved in placing at all.

[+Munkeh]

I think a lot of values of geocaching prior to the surge of the last few years are being lost slightly

 

 

When placing or seeking geocaches, I will:

 

• 
   
  
• Not endanger myself or others.
  
• Observe all laws & rules of the area.
  
• Respect property rights and seek permission where appropriate.
  
• Avoid causing disruptions or public alarm.
  
• Minimize my and others' impact on the environment.
  
• Be considerate of others.
  
• Protect the integrity of the game pieces.
  

[+ShaunEM]

Looks like a pretty well thought out "No" to me.

 

Shaun

[+Haggis Hunter]

I've had direct dealings with HS and failed. But I do have caches on their property, most of which is SSSI. You will usually find the local manager a lot easier to approach. I would go down that route if I were you.

[+Legochugglers]

You state that you have placed a cache.

Better go and pick it up then. Ask before placing may be the way forward.

Or do as I do. Don't get involved in placing at all.

Great advice. So someone is really trying to place a nice hide in an interesting place and your view is dont get involved in placing ar all. What an interesting game you will have when nobody places a cache.

[+Happy Humphrey]

Quit now before you give Historic Scotland further reason to dislike geocaching.

It sounds like a bluff. I doubt that there is any evidence that carving arrows in rocks is anything to do with caching, but someone has had a quick look at geocaching and decided that it's some sort of treasure trail thing that is bound to cause damage and inconvenience. So it's convenient to blame cachers for the damage, and at the same time ban geocaches. It sounds a bit like the Bournemouth Council ban because of all the "digging" going on for caches and "insurance issues" with the caching "organiser".

 

I'd offer to get in touch with the culprits and as a fellow geocacher, put pressure on them to pay for the damage to be repaired; and also offer to investigate and have the offending caches archived. What's the betting that HS are unwilling to divulge the gc.com user names (because they have just assumed that the arrows are caching-related but don't really know how they got there), and that the caches involved (if HS are able to list them) are not the subject of the arrow carvings. That would call their bluff, whilst impressing on HS that we're a responsible lot and are as annoyed about the damage as they are.

[I!]

That would call their bluff, ...

... and they'd see that's what you were doing. It might come across as picking a fight. Better to have the GAGB do that than one recently-spurned would-be CO.

 

I like the other HH's suggestion the best so far. Well, that and mine of course.

[+Happy Humphrey]

That would call their bluff, ...

... and they'd see that's what you were doing. It might come across as picking a fight.

How's it picking a fight to offer to get the damage repaired? Sounds like a more than reasonable offer, as long as HS can provide the evidence.

[I!]

We're both speculating on how H.S. would see it. Ride on into battle and test it yourself if you like.

[BOBBLES WORLD TOUR]

You state that you have placed a cache.

Better go and pick it up then. Ask before placing may be the way forward.

Or do as I do. Don't get involved in placing at all.

Great advice. So someone is really trying to place a nice hide in an interesting place and your view is dont get involved in placing ar all. What an interesting game you will have when nobody places a cache.

 

As I can see by the evidence of this thread an MANY others, I find my OWN reasons are proven.

"Don't get involved in placing at all"

Sorry but that's how I feel.

 

I've been stalked by arrogant geocachers on these very forums. BeJeesus. This ain't no friendly place.

Edited April 1, 2012 by JoLuc

[+Legochugglers]

You state that you have placed a cache.

Better go and pick it up then. Ask before placing may be the way forward.

Or do as I do. Don't get involved in placing at all.

Great advice. So someone is really trying to place a nice hide in an interesting place and your view is dont get involved in placing ar all. What an interesting game you will have when nobody places a cache.

 

As I can see by the evidence of this thread an MANY others, I find my OWN reasons are proven.

"Don't get involved in placing at all"

Sorry but that's how I feel.

 

I've been stalked by arrogant geocachers on these very forums. BeJeesus. This ain't no friendly place.

 

I appreciate your decision not to place caches of your own and respect your prerogative on this matter. However I also stand by my decision that if everybody took the same stance and stopped placements then the game would be all the worse for that attitude. The OP seems to be trying to place a cache near an interesting site and this seems worthy of encouragement (I can only give the benefit of the doubt on that). There are many criticisms on poor quality 'micros in a layby' so I wish the OP good luck in his efforts to win the landowners approval and follow some of the positive suggestions made by other posters.

As for not being friendly, being arrogant and an implied stalker....rather a harsh accusation, however I think we should just move on and keep on topic.