Thanks Thanks:  4
Results 1 to 27 of 27

Thread: Ban: Sussex Wildlife Trust

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    63

    Default Ban: Sussex Wildlife Trust

    Hi all

    I have been investigating the placement of caches on Sussex Wildlife Trust Land. Unfortunatly they have taken the decision to ban the placement of caches on the land they manage. Email Chain below - please can the database be updated?

    A link to a map showing all the sites they manage can be found here

    Regards, Chris

    Email Chain - (starts at the bottom)

    From: SteveTillman

    Chris
    I am afraid that is the policy for all of the Sussex Wildlife Trust sites.
    Steve

    From: Street, Chris

    Hi Steve

    Thanks for your prompt reply.

    I am very sorry to hear of your negative experience of geocaching and that caches have been placed without permission. Unfortunately, as with all activities, there are those who circumnavigate the rules and ultimately spoil it for others.

    Having grown up in the area I was hoping to bring others to a woodland that I have greatly enjoyed, however I fully respect and understand your decision. Can you confirm if this is the policy for all Sussex Wildlife Trust managed land throughout the county?

    Once again thank you for your reply.

    Chris

    From: SteveTillman

    Dear Chris

    We were approached recently about allowing Geocaching on our nature reserves including Withdean Woods.

    After some discussion both within the Trust and with Neil Doyle at Brighton and Hove it was decided that it was not an appropriate activity to have within a nature reserve.

    I'm sorry about this decision. Previously on some of our other sites groups have placed geacache containers without permission, which became dumping grounds for all sorts of litter.

    This has unfortunately tainted our view of the hobby, which I feel is a worthwhile one in principle.

    Regards

    Steve Tillman

    Reserves Officer




  2. #2
    nobbynobbs Guest

    Default

    sorry to hear this and thanks for trying and maybe those who say that no harm is done by " assuming adequate permission is there" might learn a lesson from this. but then it's not life or death so probably not.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Haslemere, Surrey
    Posts
    11

    Default

    Pity they don't do something about all the dog owners who take their pets for a cr@p every day on their reserves...... I know which I think is less appropriate on a nature reserve.

  4. #4

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Street_Searchers View Post

    please can the database be updated?

    Done. Thanks for trying.


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

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Church Warsop, Notts
    Posts
    518

    Default

    Obviously, this is outside my area so I don't mind avoiding Sussex Wildlife Trust reserves (although I am planning a lengthy visit to Sussex soon, mostly a walking trip but some geocaches will be on the agenda). As they appear to be discouraging visitors I'm happy enough to comply and keep off their land.

    But yet again I'm left scratching my head about the reason behind the ban.

    If a geocache is left without permission, apparently this then becomes a dumping ground "for all sorts of litter". But this curious phenomenon is only observed in Sussex Wildlife Trust reserves: remarkable. I haven't noticed it happeneing elsewhere. The inference is that if permission had been sought, then the litter problem wouldn't have occurred.

    The logic of that seems clear to Nobby, but it escapes me.

    It appears that every geocache ban has a reason, but they're all different.
    That doesn't help convince me that it's not a case of "the ban comes first and the reasons are thought of later"!

  6. #6
    nobbynobbs Guest

    Default

    yes the claim that the litter increase is spurious.

    Just maybe they get a bad impression of the hobby and how much they can trust the peeople who cache by the way that although the hobby clearly states that adequate permission is needed, they have experienced that caches are placed with no permission at all being sought. if that fundamental point is ignored how can they rely on our word to be pro countryside and anti litter and so on?

    that does make logical sense to me.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Church Warsop, Notts
    Posts
    518

    Default

    Yes, but when it comes down to it geocaches are generally harmless, and placed where access isn't a problem. Or at least, there's no information in this case that any of the caches was causing an actual problem except for the spurious excuse noted.

    I don't think it's as simple as just getting permission for all caches.

    If permission wasn't sought for a particular cache and then the land manager comes across it, he should really ask himself whether it's worth making a fuss about something that's doing no harm. I agree that he will think that it would have been nicer to have been asked, but using common sense he would perhaps understand that the cache placer might worry that making the cache "official" causes all sorts of problems for the land manager and may force him into a corner.

    When left unofficial, the manager can simply turn a blind eye - a lot less problematical than having to take responsibility for the blighter along with all the attendant costs and admin. If I was managing an area and found a cache placed at a reasonable location, I'd probably e-mail geocaching.com to ask how quickly they could have it removed should a problem occur. Once reassured, I'd keep quiet about it and pretend I'd never seen it.

    But then if someone writes to me and requests specific written permission for a new cache I'd probably decide that things were now too formal to just ignore caches, and simply ban the lot. Perhaps with a spurious excuse to head off any dispute. If that instantly makes the problem disappear then I'd be satisfied.

    The other option is that a geocaching representative offers to take responsibility for all caches in my area and be on the end of a phone for me so I can report any problems. In return they will not take this as permission, thus leaving the caches unofficial and allowing me to continue ignoring them.

    Having said all that, I do prefer to get permission for my caches wherever practical. But in my view, we need to look more carefully at the way land managers deal with caches (those with permission and others), and see what the real problems are, rather than accepting bans at face value or insisting that written permission must be filed in all cases.

    Yes, in some cases written permission is necessary and works in everyone's favour. All I'm saying is that I don't think it helped in this case, and we have to be careful not to cause a problem where none existed before.

  8. #8
    nobbynobbs Guest

    Default

    and i have experience of negotiating an agreement with hampshire wildlife trust when they had become aware of numerous caches that had been placed without permission.
    As land managers they do not take the option of turning a blind eye to people who place items on their land and then encourage others to go looking.
    strangely the forestry commission in the new forest took a similar approach. the discovered all the caches that had been placed and took the decision that they did not like the idea of people not asking before placing. they just gave one of their employees a gps and told them to collect the lot. a long and complicated negotiation the ensued to get a limited agreement that is still tentative entirely due to the fact that their original contact was by finding caches on their land.

    it would be a lovely world where people realised how innocuous geocaching is and how much of a benefit it can have by encouraging more "normal" people to explore the countryside and keep the less desirables away. how we can co exist without any problems and often with numerous benefits. unfortunately, when the first experience is negative, they often react in a negative manner and it then becomes much harder to bring them back round to our side.

    but it's a personal choice. i personnally think it's often lazyness that stops people asking that or they feel embarressed about asking a stranger if they can leave a plastic box on their land. but then my opinion is often criticised.
    if you ask a land manager and they say no. what makes you think that they will say yes by the act of just placing it there?

    but this is a moote point. people either think that they should go out and get permission or they don't. maybe we should start listing the names of the people who placed caches without permission that then result in bans.


    it's been a long and tiring day

Posting Permissions

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