Caches on FC Dorset land

[Bill D (wwh)]

The Forestry Commission are becoming concerned at a recent rapid increase in the number of caches placed on the land they own or manage in Dorset.

For the moment, they're happy for the committee to try to find a way of managing the situation, rather than just set a limit themselves. If you're a GAGB Member you can follow our discussion in the Committee Discussions forum in the new Members Only section.

In the meantime, could I ask anyone who's thinking of placing a new cache on that land to put it on hold for the moment, to avoid precipitating any escalation of the situation? Thanks!

[Happy Humphrey]

It would be helpful for those non-members who take a general interest in such matters, to give a brief explanation of why this is seen as a cause for concern from the FC's viewpoint.

To an outsider, it would appear that the Dorset FC has to do exactly the same amount of work with 100 caches in a given area as they have with 1 cache, i.e. not a lot. So it might be enlightening to hear about their concerns and whether these are based on accurate and informed opinion.

[Bill D (wwh)]

It would be helpful for those non-members who take a general interest in such matters, to give a brief explanation of why this is seen as a cause for concern from the FC's viewpoint.

To an outsider, it would appear that the Dorset FC has to do exactly the same amount of work with 100 caches in a given area as they have with 1 cache, i.e. not a lot. So it might be enlightening to hear about their concerns and whether these are based on accurate and informed opinion.

I take your points, both about an explanation and about their concerns.

To be honest, I've not said much more in the Committee Discussions thread than I've said here, as I'm not really clear myself what their reasons are. I think one of their main concerns may be admin, i.e. keeping track of them all. I think they may have slight concerns about cacher trails being left, but I don't think they see that as a big issue as they check all caches placed there to ensure the location is suitable. I think the main thing is probably just a general feeling that "this is getting too big and unmanageable - perhaps we should put a cap on it".

Another possible issue is their accidental destruction of caches - that's happened in Dorset and in the New Forest, for example by way of gorse burning (including to one of my own). When that happens its not good for either us or them, and of course the greater the number of caches the more likelihood there is of that happening.

My opinion, though, is that it's their land and that we have to do things their way regardless of their reasons. Whilst I have a very good working relationship with my contact there, as does Matt (nobbynobbs) with his New Forest FC contact, they're not the people who make these decisions.

[Happy Humphrey]

Thanks for supplying a bit more detail, Bill. I suspect that, rather than get into cache regulating, it would be better to really understand what their worries are. Possibly, they have misinterpreted the game to some extent.

If it's that they feel the need to manage and administer the caches in some way, it might be beneficial all round to simply agree that they have no responsibility for them at all and are not required to take them into account in any way. The ones I've set in working plantations have been on this basis; should the area be subject to forestry operations and the workers come across a cache of mine then it's possible that they'll know what it is. That's all there is to it. I never got the officials to agree to anything specific when I asked permission, and they didn't want to know the exact locations. Probably because they understood the nature of the
game and realised that they didn't need to know.

Should they bulldoze the area or burn it without removing the caches first, then it's too bad for me but I won't be trying to sue them.It's up to me to keep an eye on things and remove a cache if operations are getting too close.

[Bear and Ragged]

I think HH has it.
They -FC- have no responsibility for the cache.
It's Nice that they care.

They don't just decided "Lets cut all the trees down today", so there is time to contact GAGB and say "We will be working in "this" area from "date" and it will be closed to the public.
Which would give GAGB a chance to contact the cache owners, who then have a chance to remove the cache/s.

FC could always join GC.com to see where the caches are!

[Bill D (wwh)]

I wasn't on the committee then, but I think when negotiations were taking place for the original FC New Forest agreement, one or two of the then committee members took one or two FC staff caching to demonstrate what it was all about, and I could be wrong but I rather think one of those staff may have been my present FC Dorset contact. If I'm right on that then at least some of the FC staff know exactly what caching is all about.

More than that, rangers do check some if not all of the caches, so they should have a pretty good idea too. Unfortunately though, decisions like these come from the top, and who really knows what the people at the top know or understand.

Regarding locations, the FC Dorset and New Forest both require us to supply OS grid refs, so they know exactly where the caches are. When caches get accidentally destroyed (and it doesn't happen often) I think it's just a case of one hand not knowing what the other's doing. In theory they should notify us of gorse burning and so on, but sometimes things slip through.

From the agreement: "Forest maintenance operations (such as gorse burning) will be notified when possible. It may be necessary for caches to be removed if possible or temporarily suspended. However, neither the NF FC or GAGB will be responsible for any cache destroyed." Though that states NF FC it's in the part of the agreement that covers Dorset too.

[Team Sieni]

... Matt (nobbynobbs) ...

Completely OT, but I find it a very sad disillusion to learn that Nobbynobbs name isn't really Nobby Nobbs.

[Brenin Tegeingl]

Completely OT, but I find it a very sad disillusion to learn that Nobbynobbs name isn't really Nobby Nobbs.

You mean you've never read the Disk World series of books

Deci

[Team Sieni]

You mean you've never read the Disk World series of books

Deci

No, sorry. I'm not a big reader of fiction.

Actually did read one, a long time ago (I liked it too), and I heard a bit of another one serialised on Radio 7 a while back.

I'm still sorry that it's not his real name.