GAGB Guideline not met, cache denied?

[Sven]

I'm confused - although it doesn't take much

I've had a cache denied because:

Log Date: 9/8/2011
Hi

I'm just reviewing your cache which is fine however your cache is placed in an urban area (overlooked by the farmhouse) and due to a major security alert with a cache in a similar location a new guideline has been brought in by the Geocaching Association of Great Britain (GAGB) to cover caches in such locations so as to minimise the chance of more security alerts, particularly where there is a likelihood of finders being considered suspicious for example where a cache is overlooked by houses / offices / shops / people.
When a cache is placed in an overlooked location, the cache owner should help finders avoid being considered suspicious by offering a clear and unambiguous hint on how to retrieve the cache quickly. Your cache should be clearly labelled as a geocache with the cache GC number if it is large enough for this to be written externally. This will offer the Police a better way to identify a suspect package as a geocache. You may view the GAGB guidelines here https://www.gagb.org.uk/what-is-geoc...he-guidelines/

I am temporarily disabling your cache so you can confirm it meets this guideline. When you're ready for me to review the cache again either enable it from the cache page (Navigation box on the top right) and add any information or questions in the comments box or if you are editing the cache tick the box 'Yes this listing is active' and add any information in the 'Note to reviewer' box at the bottom. This will bring it back to the top of the queue for review.

Regards

Now it's in the middle of the wilderness. There's one farmhouse nearby but besides that there's nothing. It's certainly not an urban area - the nearest village is about 2km's away.

Wikipedia says the definition of urban is:

An urban area is characterized by higher population density and vast human features in comparison to areas surrounding it. Urban areas may be cities, towns or conurbations, but the term is not commonly extended to rural settlements such as villages and hamlets.

Also some people on another forum tell me the GAGB guildelines are.....guildelines, not rules governing the placement of caches.

Do they *have* to be adhered to? I cannot find anything in the GC.com terms that tell me I must follow them, as it happens I'd read them, but didn't realise they formed part of the rules??

There is point 3 below

Inappropriate or Non-publishable Placements

1.Groundspeak respects the wishes of land owners and land managers.
2.A geocache may be disabled or archived.
3.Additional regulations and laws that apply only to your country and region may further restrict geocache placement.
4.Instructions for geocaches that are on hold, temporarily disabled or archived.

I guess that means GAGB? What other local organisations must I follow the guildelines of? I assume there are local geocaching clubs to me, forums etc, do they make stipulations also, where do I find a list of ALL my local rules?

[DrDick&Vick]

The guidlines are just that and not rules. I would suggest that you contact the relevant reviewer and explain just that to him/her. It might also be an idea to explain to him/her the location settings and the fact that there are very few buildings there.

The guidelines are not rules. If a reviewer chooses to treat them as rules that is down to their conscience.

[Brenin Tegeingl]

As stated the cache location is overlooked by the Farmhouse in fact it's right in front of it. And whilst there is not Google Street View for that location, looking at the location on Google Satellite, it looks very close to if not directly opposite a Gateway to the property.

Groundspeak's UK Reviewers have used the GAGB Guidelines as Local Guidelines since before I became a Reviewer. And as I've been a Reviewer for just over 5 years (and I'm currently the longest serving UK Reviewer) and the people who recruited me, had used the GAGB Guidelines from when they became Reviewers (around 2003) . The GAGB Guidelines have been used as Local Guidelines for around 8 years.

Also I noticed that you have not mentioned Landowner Permission in your post. Yet you have confirmed in that post that you have read GC's Cache Placement Guidelines.

You assure us that you have the landowner's and/or land manager's permission before you hide any geocache, whether placed on private or public property.

Also will you please explain why you felt a need to immediately discuss a unpublished cache in a Public forum, without even giving the Reviewer a chance to even work with you over this cache placement? Because you did not even give the reviewer any chance to discuss this with you, before posting a copy of the Reviewer note here.

One of the roles of GC's Reviewers is to work with Cache Owners to get their cache submissions published. To do that, they have to be given the chance to work with the cache owner.

Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer Geocaching.com

[Sven]

errr I came here for some help? And I'm now more confused, I've got some people saying they're only guidelines yet you're saying the reviewers use them as rule.

I just want some clarification of this that's all.

I have to say even as a committee member of the GAGB ia m confused. We list guidelines and yet it seems they are being treated as rules?

[martybartfast]

errr I came here for some help? And I'm now more confused, I've got some people saying they're only guidelines yet you're saying the reviewers use them as rule.

I just want some clarification of this that's all.

These are guidelines, rather than hard and fast rules, which gives the reviewers some room for movement when applying them, if they wish and they think it's appropriate. While your proposed cache isn't in an 'urban' environment it seems to be clearly overlooked by a property, and in fact a cacher hanging round outside a house in the middle of nowhere could potentially attract a lot more suspicion than a cacher hanging around in the middle of a city centre.

Also will you please explain why you felt a need to immediately discuss a unpublished cache in a Public forum, without even giving the Reviewer a chance to even work with you over this cache placement?

Personally I don't think the OP has done anything wrong. [S]He's been told the cache contravenes the GAGB guidelines and has then come to the GAGB for advice, I don't see a problem with them clarifying the situation before approaching the reviewer to query the rejection.

[dodgydaved]

Groundspeak's UK Reviewers have used the GAGB Guidelines as Local Guidelines since before I became a Reviewer. And as I've been a Reviewer for just over 5 years (and I'm currently the longest serving UK Reviewer) and the people who recruited me, had used the GAGB Guidelines from when they became Reviewers (around 2003) . The GAGB Guidelines have been used as Local Guidelines for around 8 years.


Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer Geocaching.com

Nor strictly true Dave, if you remember one of my big arguments with Michael LaPaglia (which contributed largely to my resignation) was his insistance that there were no such things as UK specific guidelines and GSP guidlelines and only GSP guidelines had to be followed. This was during a protracted and sometimes quite heated discussion about DSW caches.

One of the things that has been a pleasant and refreshing surprise (but only in some ways) in recent months has been the seeming acceptance of GSP that the UK reviewers can now create their own rules (as they are not and never have been really simply guidelines have they ?)

Not intending any criticism here but wanting to set the record straight.

Cheers,:cheers:

DaveD

[The Wombles]

I just wanted to clarify that GAGB has guidelines and it's up to the Reviewers of listing sites on how these should be applied to individual caches.

[Lord Boogie]

Nor strictly true Dave, if you remember one of my big arguments with Michael LaPaglia (which contributed largely to my resignation) was his insistance that there were no such things as UK specific guidelines and GSP guidlelines and only GSP guidelines had to be followed. This was during a protracted and sometimes quite heated discussion about DSW caches.

One of the things that has been a pleasant and refreshing surprise (but only in some ways) in recent months has been the seeming acceptance of GSP that the UK reviewers can now create their own rules (as they are not and never have been really simply guidelines have they ?)

Not intending any criticism here but wanting to set the record straight.

Cheers,:cheers:

DaveD

This would be an accurate statement given the official response from GroundSpeak in a thread I started on their forum.
https://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/in...post&p=4846595

Sums it up nicely there that the GAGB are now a recognised rule set, sorry guidelines. To be used fast and loose using "judgement"