+Eckington Posted May 7, 2005 Share Posted May 7, 2005 No, I am afraid not . Refusal of permission to place a cache would not automatically result in a virtual being allowable. We would still have to follow the, now very tight , guidelines for virts which are set out by gc.com. However, as has been suggested elsewhere, perhaps there is a wind of change blowing through Groundspeak as far as a possible way to list virts is concerned............ Quote Link to comment
+The Intrepid Scotts Posted May 7, 2005 Share Posted May 7, 2005 For some reason I am still having difficulty with the logic of all this. In a recent post, SP mentions places that need "special approval". If I have read previous posts correctly, potential cache sites requiring "special approval" include SSSIs, golf courses and churches. What type of approval do other potential cache sites require? Please can a Reviewer answer, 1)Is it now the RULES that ALL new caches MUST have permission from the landowner, or are there exceptions? 2)Do existing caches benefit from "grandfather rights"? I am thinking of the caches in the SW, where most are on SSSIs and certainly none of the ones that I have placed have permission. Quote Link to comment
Lactodorum Posted May 7, 2005 Author Share Posted May 7, 2005 1)Is it now the RULES that ALL new caches MUST have permission from the landowner, or are there exceptions? To quote from the guidelines you agree to when placing a cache: By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location. However, if we see a cache description that mentions ignoring "No Trespassing" signs (or any other obvious issues...) ALL caches need the landowners permission and when you submit the cache you tick a box saying you have it. We are merely checking, by asking for some form of identification of the permission, those caches which appear to be on land where experience shows that permission might not be granted...... also 2)Do existing caches benefit from "grandfather rights"? I am thinking of the caches in the SW, where most are on SSSIs and certainly none of the ones that I have placed have permission. No, if a cache is on a SSSI without permission there could be a problem with the landowner as they have certain legal obligations to safeguard the site. To summarise, the guidelines haven't changed, just our way of handling caches that come in for review. It's an administrative change on our part to try and make our lives easier. Quote Link to comment
+The Intrepid Scotts Posted May 7, 2005 Share Posted May 7, 2005 Thankyou Lactodorum for the clarity. Oh dear. What then are we to do about all the caches that have no permission, whether on an SSSI or not? Graeme Quote Link to comment
+The Spokes Posted May 7, 2005 Share Posted May 7, 2005 No, I am afraid not . Refusal of permission to place a cache would not automatically result in a virtual being allowable. We would still have to follow the, now very tight , guidelines for virts which are set out by gc.com. However, as has been suggested elsewhere, perhaps there is a wind of change blowing through Groundspeak as far as a possible way to list virts is concerned............ Seems clear cut to me on this one. Note: Physical caches are the basis of the activity. Virtual caches were created due to the inaccessibility of caching in areas that discourage it. Please keep that in mind when submitting your cache report. Quote Link to comment
+wildlifewriter Posted May 7, 2005 Share Posted May 7, 2005 Thankyou Lactodorum for the clarity. Oh dear. What then are we to do about all the caches that have no permission, whether on an SSSI or not? Despite and notwithstanding all the comments that have appeared in this thread, one thing remains true: The person who placed the cache is responsible for that cache. That's it. You don't have to do anything. -Wlw. Quote Link to comment
+Kitty Hawk Posted May 7, 2005 Share Posted May 7, 2005 The trick is to find out what landowners have already given permission, then find their land, then find your spot. If you have found the spot first it can be tricky, unless it is a unique place that cries out for a cache. Incidentally - new caches seem to have dropped off this week - coincidence? Quote Link to comment
+-Phoenix- Posted May 7, 2005 Share Posted May 7, 2005 Id be interested in seeing a Poll on the effects of this, something along the lines of How willl the tighter restrictons affect you when placing a cache None, I dont place caches None, I always check for permission None, Ill just place a cache an lie about permission Some, Ill go ask permission, if its refused, cest la vie Some, Ill only place on land where permission is established Quite a bit, Ive no idea where to find the owners to ask permission Completely, Ive decided to place no more caches Quote Link to comment
nobby.nobbs Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 no essay from me. sounds like a fair proposal. good work guys. from now on i'll post landowner details in description icase of queries arising later. Quote Link to comment
+t.a.folk Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 If we get found by an official when we are seeking,with or replacing a cache that has been placed without the permission of the landowner /agent are we the people who could be "in trouble" or the cache owner or both ? Quote Link to comment
60North Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 If we get found by an official when we are seeking,with or replacing a cache that has been placed without the permission of the landowner /agent are we the people who could be "in trouble" or the cache owner or both ? As the Germans would say: - Achtung - Minen Quote Link to comment
nobby.nobbs Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 well the original cacher left the cache so they've potentially commited littering but then if you replace it you've also committed same act....... you don't get into trouble for doing things in this country......you get into trouble if you are CAUGHT doing things!! Quote Link to comment
+Teasel Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 the original cacher left the cache so they've potentially commited littering but then if you replace it you've also committed same act...... Ah, the old litter question again! If any person throws down, drops or otherwise deposits in, into or from any place in the open air to which the public are entitled or permitted to have access without payment, and leaves, any thing whatsoever in such circumstances as to cause, or contribute to, or tend to lead to, the defacement by litter of any place in the open air, he shall be guilty of an offence, unless that depositing and leaving was authorised by law or was done with the consent of the owner, occupier or other person or authority having control of the place in or into which that thing was deposited. So, if the cache is well hidden, does it "tend to lead to defacement"? It would be an interesting test case, but I'd not want to be on the receiving end! Quote Link to comment
nobby.nobbs Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 like i said you only get prosecuted for being CAUGHT!!! and like the definition says without permission on landowner.......so get permission side step all the problems. Quote Link to comment
+multitracker Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Just the sort of luck i have. Just when i thought i had found a great new hobby. Ordered Log book, stickers and even a Travel bug, to get ready to place my first cache-, excited at the thought of going off to find a nice site, a place with views worth looking at, somewhere other people would appreciate the beauty, when Bang!. My heart sinks as i read all these posts of getting permission from land owner before you can submit your cache. While i accept this is needed on some occasions, the thought of having to trace owner of land puts me off the idea of leaving a cache at all now. This has got to be the shortest hobby i have ever had, 4 days. I hope this sport does not die. Quote Link to comment
+McDeHack Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Just the sort of luck i have. Just when i thought i had found a great new hobby. Ordered Log book, stickers and even a Travel bug, to get ready to place my first cache-, excited at the thought of going off to find a nice site, a place with views worth looking at, somewhere other people would appreciate the beauty, when Bang!. My heart sinks as i read all these posts of getting permission from land owner before you can submit your cache. While i accept this is needed on some occasions, the thought of having to trace owner of land puts me off the idea of leaving a cache at all now. This has got to be the shortest hobby i have ever had, 4 days. I hope this sport does not die. I know how you feel matey. Look at the years that I have been doing this thing. I have a new load of boxed caches that were going to go on my River Lea series. I do not know the first thing of how to contact the owners of the land/ towpaths. Seeing as gc.com have ordered these new rules, maybe I will submitt that I want them to get the permission for me. Surly as a world wide organisation they would have more of a backing than I would as an individual. So Geocaching.com would you get permission from British Waterways. for me to place some caches along the River Lea. Quote Link to comment
+wildlifewriter Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Seeing as gc.com have ordered these new rules, maybe I will submitt that I want them to get the permission for me. Where are these "new rules", then? -Wlw Quote Link to comment
+The Intrepid Scotts Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Can someone please expand upon the new rules mentioned by MCDeHack in the previous post. Graeme Quote Link to comment
+McDeHack Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Seeing as gc.com have ordered these new rules, maybe I will submitt that I want them to get the permission for me. Where are these "new rules", then? -Wlw Stop picking hairs WLW. you know what I mean. I am already peed off. Quote Link to comment
+Tupperware Hunters Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 is there any one who can ask land owners for permition oficialy or a official letter we can print out ie i want to aproack calderdale councile but as you can see i woul have difficulty putting a presentable letter together if the facility is a valable i woul certanly use one many thanks in advance fruity Quote Link to comment
+Kitty Hawk Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 is there any one who can ask land owners for permition oficialy or a official letter we can print out ie i want to aproack calderdale councile but as you can see i woul have difficulty putting a presentable letter together if the facility is a valable i woul certanly use one many thanks in advance fruity Have a look at GAGB.org.uk, or, I think Mancunian Pyrocacher has one. GAGB have a forum, I bet if you asked there you'd strike lucky. Adrian Quote Link to comment
+Dead Poet's Society Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Big brother, Red tape, call it what you like but it’s the same old story. When enough people start doing something they enjoy, some tosspot will try to police it, tax it, or ban it. We’re at the beginning of the end folks. When it becomes more trouble than it is fun people just won’t bother. Quote Link to comment
+Bekandian Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 We are merely checking, by asking for some form of identification of the permission, those caches which appear to be on land where experience shows that permission might not be granted...... To summarise, the guidelines haven't changed, just our way of handling caches that come in for review. It's an administrative change on our part to try and make our lives easier. Settle down everyone, if you read the posts by Lacto and Ecky you will see that the rules haven't changed, at all. Same rules, just procedures to make the reviewing process less of a headache. Quote Link to comment
nobby.nobbs Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 the skies falling, the skies falling!!!!!!! calm down dear, it's only a commercial. Quote Link to comment
+Kitty Hawk Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 Big brother, Red tape, call it what you like but it’s the same old story. When enough people start doing something they enjoy, some tosspot will try to police it, tax it, or ban it. We’re at the beginning of the end folks. When it becomes more trouble than it is fun people just won’t bother. You'll be setting fewer caches from now on I guess? Quote Link to comment
Lactodorum Posted May 11, 2005 Author Share Posted May 11, 2005 Settle down everyone, if you read the posts by Lacto and Ecky you will see that the rules haven't changed, at all. Same rules, just procedures to make the reviewing process less of a headache. Yes, yes, yes! I couldn't have put it better myself. And for anyone who is still uncertain about the guidelines Eckington and I try to follow when reviewing caches I will repeat myself - look here and here. Quote Link to comment
+McDeHack Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 (edited) Of the caches that I have placed so far they have been on what I would call 'common ground' such as areas where the public have free access. Woods, canal towpaths, Magnetic 35mm boxes under bins and or railings. Yes I know someone, somewhere, owns the land. But whom? So will someone answer the question. If I continue to place caches in these places would I realy need to get permission before I do so, and would they get approved? A cough, cough, nudge and a wink would do. Edited May 11, 2005 by McDeHack Quote Link to comment
Lactodorum Posted May 11, 2005 Author Share Posted May 11, 2005 So will somone answer the question. If I continue to place caches in these places would I realy need to get permission before I do so? A cough, cough, nudge and a wink would do. 35mm film cans on "Common Ground" are unlikely to involve the reviewers in a detailed examination of permission details. We have enough work to do with Forestry Commission, SSSI's, SAM's, Nature Reserves etc. We have to rely on cachers' good sense (which has proved more than adequate for the vast majority of caches). Now where's my linctus Quote Link to comment
+2202 Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 Therefore the Waterproof cigarette packet holder I placed for the Chiltern Hundreds is OK as well? As Mies van der Rohr said, ''Less is more' Quote Link to comment
+McDeHack Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 We have to rely on cachers' good sense (which has proved more than adequate for the vast majority of caches). Now where's my linctus Message received and understood, wilco, roger, 10-4, over and out. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.