Thanks Thanks:  0
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 75 of 75

Thread: New Forest & The Forestry Commission

  1. #51
    NattyBooshka Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by Teasel@Oct 4 2003, 12:00 AM
    Negotiations were in progress, so if the FC had asked that all NF caches be immediately deactivated pending further discussion, then no doubt this request would have been passed on to the relevant cache owners. I'm sure the FC can negotiate for themselves, without the "assistance" of the letterboxing community! Let's face it, the FC must now be aware of the locations of all the caches in the NF and if they explicitly demanded their removal, I can't see anyone refusing (whether or not it's a long multicache&#33.
    OK... where was the inferance that the letterboxing community would remove caches? We'd really like to know where that came from. We have been in contact with some very respected members of that community during this debate, and they are/were actually supportive of us, and wanted us to succeed. Well done guys, you've probably alienated them now.

    All we have done here is asked some questions of our chairman, That chairman, instead of answering them (online or offline) decided to resign... we believe this is history repeating itself. We are sorry if our questions were OTT, but we were fed up of receiving a deadly scilence when we asked a question. We'd have settled for an e-mail, or even a out and out lie.

    From the statement that talks are continuing with the FC on both a national and local level? Without being able to comment on the national discussions, and keeping that wish 100%? Wouldn't that mean two completely seperate discussions on the same topic? That's a dangerous game to play. We accept that we may have been given the wrong end of the stick here.

    Whilst we accept that many caches are places with the landowner blissfully unaware of their existence, we do question the, it seems GAGB, stance that we do not have to follow the rules of the land. Well, we would dispute that and state that any caches should be inline with any extra regulations that the land it is on has... in this case severe restrictions for two months of the year. Without picking up that rule of the land you are endangering deer AND cacher alike. The FC don't want people roaming off track in the forest for several reasons in October, not least the much increased chances of getting shot. Play safe guys... is a kevlar jacket part of your caching kit? And who is going to stand up for the deer population in all this? They don't have a DAGB, so they are probably now happily going around not discussing caching. That is until next year when a cacher hurts their young.

    The forest and wildlife are infinitely more important that the game or geocaching. If we carry on doing what we are, then the general public will be against us and we will be dead as a game not only in the New Forest. That could be the major achievement of the GAGB... how proud we'll be then

    Finally, we are very pleased now, it has to be said, to not have a chairman who resorts to "**** off" when people state their opposing views. This was never personal, but we do not feel that we can condone that sort of behaviour from any of our members, let alone elected officials. Sorry to throw "****" and "crap" but that is not what we are doing, and we think that you will find they are the only times we've sworn on a forum.

    All we ever wanted is answers to the questions we asked, and for some common sense re the deer in the forest. That's still all we want.

  2. #52
    NattyBooshka Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by Omally@Oct 4 2003, 12:52 AM
    I particularly admire the fact that T n J are still graceful enough under fire to allow this site to continue breathing whilst it is yet populated by ingrates.
    We agree. However, it is the repeated use of the word "ingrates" around here that is interesting. True the geocaching community is full of them... ungrateful people. We consider that having NO respect for rules put in place by guardians of land, opened up to us the public is VERY ungrateful. So to all you ingrates out there please become grateful to these people, although they may never understand or play geocaching, they do hold its future in their hands.

  3. #53
    Kouros Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by NattyBooshka@Oct 4 2003, 08:17 AM
    Finally, we are very pleased now, it has to be said, to not have a chairman who resorts to "**** off" when people state their opposing views.
    While I can't condone the insinuation of the language used, I think it's only fair to bear in mind the stress that Tim (who I presume wrote it) must be under right now, since he is dealing with a lot of unjust flak, especially when his wife is ill.

    It would probably also be worth bearing in mind that it was not in response to an opposing point of view, but rather a direct criticism of his moral character, suggesting that T&J were trying to "control" Geocaching, when all their efforts so far have been to ensure quite the opposite - that no individual runs the game in this country, and it remains a community activity, while actually promoting the activity to Land Owning/Maintaining bodies.

    If you doubt that, note that this site is still up and running, although it is based on their server. Also note that while Pharisee was a reluctant runner, T&J were not eager either - they were prepared (and even actively encouraging us) to pass the GAGB Chair mantle to someone else. Yet they were nominated for chair, and then we all elected them back in.

    Almost immediately after, it seems, they get accused of trying to control the sport. I can fully agree why they might get emotional about that. :angry:

    It is somewhat ironic that the statement came from someone who T&J nominated for chair, but turned it down because they didn't want to deal with the flak that comes with the position. So while T&J's response might not be the most suitable - perhaps we could try to understand it a little more.

    And one final thing - Eckington said it on the GC.com forum, and I'll repeat it here: Chill!

    EDIT: Bold text, movement of statement paragraph two to paragraph five for sake of coherency

  4. #54
    Ashandes Guest

    Default

    .

    Post removed as I realised I was aking prety much exactly the same thing I was asking in another post. No need to repeat myself

  5. #55
    Teasel Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by NattyBooshka+Oct 4 2003, 08:17 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (NattyBooshka @ Oct 4 2003, 08:17 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Teasel@Oct 4 2003, 12:00 AM
    Negotiations were in progress, so if the FC had asked that all NF caches be immediately deactivated pending further discussion, then no doubt this request would have been passed on to the relevant cache owners. I&#39;m sure the FC can negotiate for themselves, without the "assistance" of the letterboxing community&#33; Let&#39;s face it, the FC must now be aware of the locations of all the caches in the NF and if they explicitly demanded their removal, I can&#39;t see anyone refusing (whether or not it&#39;s a long multicache&#33.
    OK... where was the inferance that the letterboxing community would remove caches? We&#39;d really like to know where that came from. We have been in contact with some very respected members of that community during this debate, and they are/were actually supportive of us, and wanted us to succeed. Well done guys, you&#39;ve probably alienated them now.[/b][/quote]
    In a hobby beset with rumourmongering, I understand why you may have misinterpreted my comment as infering that the "assistance" provided was by removing caches. But I assure you that nothing was further from my mind and apologise if my wording was clumsy&#33; Personally I see the letterboxing community as both friends and potential allies.

    Actually, I was trying to infer that your most recent posts have seemed, to me at least, almost as if you are trying to negotiate with T&J on behalf of the FC. I think that is something that the FC can handle themselves&#33;

    The idea of GAGB is that it will negotiate with landowners and attempt to get their support for geocaching to occur on their land. Especially in sensitive areas, these negotiations may result in extra conditions (rules, guidelines, requests, discouragements, whatever&#33 which are designed to protect both the environment and cachers themselves. When these are agreed between GAGB and the FC, they will be disseminated to the geocaching community. Please do not criticise T&J for not attempting to shut down geocaching until their negotiations are complete&#33;

    Comments about kevlar and deer killing are, IMHO, unhelpful. Bottom line is that if you shouldn&#39;t be walking there, you shouldn&#39;t be caching there. That applies over the whole planet, 365 days a year. I&#39;ve not yet seen anyone suggest otherwise.

  6. #56
    NattyBooshka Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by Teasel@Oct 4 2003, 10:43 AM
    Comments about kevlar and deer killing are, IMHO, unhelpful. Bottom line is that if you shouldn&#39;t be walking there, you shouldn&#39;t be caching there. That applies over the whole planet, 365 days a year. I&#39;ve not yet seen anyone suggest otherwise.
    Thanks for clearing up the letterboxing situation... not sure they are in support anymore though... I know that they once were

    So... you agree then that we should not be caching in the New Forest in October? The kevlar comment was an exageration, but we SHOULDN&#39;T be walking where many of these caches are right now.

    We have had no contact with the FC, and have no desire so to do.

    It seems to us that the GAGB are only going to listen to landowners and not members, it is in danger of becoming even more undemocratic than it already is. We can see where the "control" comments have come from, though I wouldn&#39;t aim them at T&J. We, it seems, have no right to an opinion, it&#39;s described as "****" by perspective committee members. This assocciation is supposed to represent all members. If you don&#39;t want people like the FC seeing our opinions, then these forums should be members only. To hide our opinions by shutting us up is wrong, undemocratic, and a definate sign of the power hungry.

  7. #57
    Paul G0TLG Guest

    Default

    I&#39;ve been walking in the forest since I was old enough to walk, first with my parents, then with the school, then independently or with friends. Very recently (in the last few months) that walking has included carrying a GPSr and looking for things.

    At no time have I EVER seen a sign posted by the FC or anyone else, asking people not to walk in certain areas of the forest in October**. If I did, I&#39;d respect it, and I believe the majority of cachers would too. In fact, when I was at school, we were encouraged to walk during October as that was the time when deer were easiest to spot.

    **Exception - some areas of the forest are closed at this time of year, during working hours on weekdays, for forestry operations.

    There seem to be people suggesting here, that there are restrictions which aren&#39;t applied to normal walkers, which should be applied to people who look for things, whether they&#39;re carrying GPSrs or not.

    Of course, we may now never know what was in the guidelines that T&J were discussing, nor who they were discussing them with. I only hope that any FC or other land managers reading this thread realise that in fact, it was only a very small proportion of the population who were so volubale against T & J.

    Tim - I know you&#39;ve said you won&#39;t, and I don&#39;t blame you, but please change your mind and come back.

    June - Get well REALLY soon.

    Paul

  8. #58

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    North Wales
    Posts
    675

    Default

    A very polite request, which is not trying to silence anybody, " Would all who wish to continue debating this issue, please take it to a private forum or to email&#33;" I&#39;ve just sent a letter to a landowner for permission to place a cache, with this letter I have enclosed a document about geocaching. Included in this are details of this association and its aims, that includes the web address. As the area is a SSSI, and is managed by a county council who have yet to make any statement for or against geocaching, I have tried to stress all the good parts of geocaching( CITO, educational benefits, family orientated), as certain parts of the area are closed of to access, for several reasons, I included a this statement "If it comes to my attention that any geocacher has entered any protected area I will immediately remove and permanently archive the cache". As I am prepared to except restrictions on the placing of the cache, it would not look good if the landowner or any of the organisations involved in the land management of the area, and which include local, Welsh, and UK, organisations were to monitor the above debate, which is very in your face. Once again I will repeat I&#39;m not trying to silence any ones opinion, just requesting that it now taken on to a private level, before damage is done, as has happened due to debates on GC.COM. Please remember it&#39;s harder to achieve yours aims, if at first "Damage Control and Repair Has to Take Place." Lets all be in a position of helping Geocaching leap forward in the UK&#33; Dave-Mancunian Pyrocacher.
    My post is my personal opinion and as such you do not have my permission to quote me outside of these forums!

    Dave
    Brenin Tegeingl
    Formerly known as Mancunian Pyrocacher on GC

  9. #59
    NattyBooshka Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by Paul G0TLG@Oct 4 2003, 12:36 PM
    Of course, we may now never know what was in the guidelines that T&J were discussing, nor who they were discussing them with. I only hope that any FC or other land managers reading this thread realise that in fact, it was only a very small proportion of the population who were so volubale against T & J.
    We hope that FC people are watching this and they can tell you all about June and October. We currently know of at least 3 caches that are in a conservation constraint area this cannot be good for the are or the game. We&#39;re sure Bosshka&#39;s dad can fill you in on this too, he has lots of relevant experience.

    There are a few people who are vocal against T&J and a few that are not... We have recieved a LOT of e-mail on this, none ot it against what we said (we all know that we could have put it better) and we&#39;re sure that there are mails in Tim&#39;s inbox that are against what I said. It&#39;s very difficult to see who is with whom when one party has more than one standpoint. We have stood firm on this and not moved, but when another party states several conflicting opinions, or worse states and opinion and does the opposite, we guess it becomes difficult to see where that person stands. The silent majority are, therefore difficult to guage opinion from... looking around it&#39;s faily balanced. We will not break the confidentiallity of the people who have e-mailed us, and we assume that T&J will not either, so it&#39;s difficult to tell really. Putting a neutral hat on and reading this, all we&#39;d see is an inibility to agree, and (possibly taking it off again) an inibilty to listen to opinion.

    By the way Paul, did you not realise that we&#39;re not worthy of an opinion because we&#39;ve only been in the game a few moinths? Or is that different for Hampshire residents? Not our opinion (though there is a north south divide that&#39;s plain to see) but we were recently told the GAGB should change it&#39;s name to the GAGH and be done with it... sadly, for much of this and other discussions we&#39;ve seen this become apparent.

  10. #60
    NattyBooshka Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by Mancunian@Oct 4 2003, 01:10 PM
    A very polite request, which is not trying to silence anybody, " Would all who wish to continue debating this issue, please take it to a private forum or to email&#33;" I&#39;ve just sent a letter to a landowner for permission to place a cache, with this letter I have enclosed a document about geocaching. Included in this are details of this association and its aims, that includes the web address. As the area is a SSSI, and is managed by a county council who have yet to make any statement for or against geocaching, I have tried to stress all the good parts of geocaching( CITO, educational benefits, family orientated), as certain parts of the area are closed of to access, for several reasons, I included a this statement "If it comes to my attention that any geocacher has entered any protected area I will immediately remove and permanently archive the cache". As I am prepared to except restrictions on the placing of the cache, it would not look good if the landowner or any of the organisations involved in the land management of the area, and which include local, Welsh, and UK, organisations were to monitor the above debate, which is very in your face. Once again I will repeat I&#39;m not trying to silence any ones opinion, just requesting that it now taken on to a private level, before damage is done, as has happened due to debates on GC.COM. Please remember it&#39;s harder to achieve yours aims, if at first "Damage Control and Repair Has to Take Place." Lets all be in a position of helping Geocaching leap forward in the UK&#33; Dave-Mancunian Pyrocacher.
    Fine by us... hopefully some committee member elect can start a private thread and invite any interested parties.

  11. #61
    Wood Smoke Guest

    Default

    How can anyone who are interested parties?

    I have not posted to this thread, but I am one of the &#39;Silent Interested Parties&#39;.

    WoodSmoke

  12. #62
    NattyBooshka Guest

    Default

    I guess we state our interest in this here and then invite all to a private thread?

  13. #63
    Omally Guest

    Default

    I&#39;m slightly confused on one point (and I&#39;m certainly not having a dig at anyone at all whatsoever, I&#39;m genuinely confused): Is there some sort of cottage industry in Veal going on? I mean, we&#39;re not to disturb the Deer in one part of the year, then a few months later we&#39;re not to go near the same areas because the same Deer are busy being disturbed in a very permanant manner by Rangers with guns. Of course the latter is for our safety, but as Deer are apparantly becoming a pest with over-breeding and thereby destruction of rare flora etc (hence the culling) are the NF Rangers *really* so fussed about anyone (not just Geocachers, we&#39;re by no means the only members of the public to visit the New Forest) disturbing deer?

    Like I say, I&#39;m not trying to have a dig at anyone, I just have this nagging doubt that I have misunderstood the points about Deer and would greatly appreciate any knowledgeable and helpful posts that might explain things a bit.

  14. #64
    NattyBooshka Guest

    Default

    At Mancunians request we are not continuing this discussion here. If you would like more information on Deer in the New Forest, especially with respect to culling and protection in early summer, feel free to e-mail us, or better still ring the FC, we&#39;re sure they&#39;d be willing to help.

    That said, we fail to see what the veal trade has to do with deer maybe you meant vennison? :P

  15. #65

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Originally posted by NattyBooshka@Oct 4 2003, 08:41 PM
    That said, we fail to see what the veal trade has to do with deer maybe you meant vennison? :P
    Or even venison.
    Rich

  16. #66
    NattyBooshka Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by el10t+Oct 4 2003, 09:40 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (el10t @ Oct 4 2003, 09:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--NattyBooshka@Oct 4 2003, 08:41 PM
    That said, we fail to see what the veal trade has to do with deer maybe you meant vennison? :P
    Or even venison. [/b][/quote]
    That too... being one of those nancy boy vegetarians, Natty&#39;s not too good with meats&#33;

  17. #67

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Chippenham, Wiltshire
    Posts
    2,145

    Default

    GAGB will not be implementing "private" threads for members&#39; discussions because we believe that these discussions should be open for all members and we would not wish to stifle the presentation of any polite and relevant opinions. Where these opinions are disrespectful to others then that person&#39;s future posts will be passed to a moderator for approval prior to publication.

    Would all members please remember that our forums are open to those with who we wish to negotatiate; if you believe that a subject may be prejudicial to such negotiations then would you please communicate with the committee by email. If you can&#39;t get a reply from one of us then try another or feel free to send to all. Mail addresses via the GAGB contacts page or GC.com.

    Finally, some of these debates will inevitably end in disagreement and we&#39;ll try to grow a thicker skin in preparation for that. However, please remember that we are only human. We currently have a committee of two and it would be nice to see that number steadily increasing over the coming weeks rather being a fluctuating number which never quite reaches six.


    Caching since 2001
    Founder member of GAGB (2003)
    Committee (2003-2013)
    Chair of GAGB (2010-2012)
    Negotiator of 18 Landowner Agreements
    GAGB Friend

  18. #68
    NattyBooshka Guest

    Default

    fine... we can take this onto private forum on GC.com... not a problem... this is not purely a GAGB issue anyway.

  19. #69

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    5,520

    Default

    Post removed. Having read Dave&#39;s post above (after posting here) I decided not to pursue this topic.
    ​​Do not go gentle into that good night.
    Rage, rage against the dying of the light. (Dylan Thomas)​


  20. #70
    Omally Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by The Wombles@Oct 4 2003, 09:56 PM
    Would all members please remember that our forums are open to those with who we wish to negotatiate; if you believe that a subject may be prejudicial to such negotiations...

    Having re-read my post enquiring about deer-culling/care, I do see that a NF ranger (or indeed any employee at any level within the Forestry Commission) might view the phrasing of my query in a negative light. I would not for one moment wish to imply that there are any shady dealings of deer carcases within the New Forest as I&#39;m sure this is not the case. Indeed I should have thought with more care about my opening comment, and if any employees of FC are reading this, I apologise for any offence caused.

  21. #71
    Omally Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by NattyBooshka@Oct 4 2003, 10:41 PM
    fine... we can take this onto private forum on GC.com... not a problem... this is not purely a GAGB issue anyway.
    So are we allowed discussions behind closed doors or not?

  22. #72
    NattyBooshka Guest

    Default

    Looks like we&#39;re not on GAGB so any interested parties should take this to GC.com where we can. I don&#39;t think that any rangers would be offended by the carcass question either&#33;

    If somebody could find out who wants in to a discussion... we have to go out for the morning.

  23. #73
    Chris n Maria Guest

    Default

    As a (fairly) neutral party in this, I will be setting up a private topic, tonight & inviting all those who have posted on this thread. If anyone else wants in let me know.


    Chris

  24. #74
    Chris n Maria Guest

    Default

    Okey Dokey,

    (glad I said this evening - setting up that topic was a lot harder than it needed to be&#33

    The topic is up and running, I think I have invited everyone who has posted on this thread - any omissions are not deliberate, let me know if I have missed you out & I will see what I can do.

    Cheers
    Chris

  25. #75

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    5,520

    Default

    Just in case anyone doesn&#39;t know how to find the private topic, go to the Groundspeak forums, click on &#39;My Space&#39; near the top of the page, and then choose &#39;Private Topics&#39;. You&#39;ll see it listed there.
    ​​Do not go gentle into that good night.
    Rage, rage against the dying of the light. (Dylan Thomas)​


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •