I thought I’d share my take on this issue, both as a hider who has rated (some) of their caches, and someone with limited experience of helping my aged mother about in a wheelchair.
For me, the main reason the Handicaching rating system hasn’t taken off is confusion over definitions and relevance. Yes, there are other reasons such as it’s ‘tucked away’ and perhaps some folk find the terms unhelpful, and it’s not been much promoted by listing sites.
I think it is primarily about, ‘what are we talking about when we think about disabilities?’ It tends to get limited to “wheelchairs” IMHO. There’s an attribute for wheelchair accessibility, so is that the focus?
There are obviously a whole range of abilities but getting to a cache on a set of wheels is quite specific, and either you use a wheelchair or you don’t. In theory, it should be fairly easy to say, yes, you can get to it in a wheelchair or no you can’t. I’m sure many wheelchair users find that, in practice it isn’t that clear cut as raters forget the 3 steps up or the narrow gap or whatever!
Those who use other means, or who have other abilities can be the only judge of what is suitable for them. Just like anyone in fact - we all have to look at a map, read the cache page, look at the terrain stars etc and decide if we want to go for the cache.
So, I do support using some form of rating, currently Handicaching appears to be the only option, but not all my caches are rated for accessibility. Some because I wasn’t aware of Handicaching.com when they were placed. Others because of my own confusion about terms and things. In more recent times I do endeavour to rate any cache that has the potential to be accessible for a limited cacher. If it appears to be a roadside cache, or it is in fact a good surface and I can imagine getting to it in a wheelchair, or for some similar reason, I will rate it and include the Handicaching code on the page.
If the cache is 2* or above, for me that means it’s off pavement, on a usual sort of muddy footpath, through a wood, or up a small hill etc. I see 2* caches as being in places where there is no way of getting there with a wheelchair, not even one with off-road tyres. If I place a cache on a walk in the countryside like this, then I’m afraid I don’t see a lot of relevance in rating it on Handicaching. The terrain stars give a good indication, as does my cache description, as does a quick look at the map. For me there is quite a clear divide between being wheelchair accessible and “everything else”. Some of my caches have 1.5* terrain but I’ve included the wheelchair icon cos it’s a maybe, or you could get most of the way and enjoy the location, but may not be able to get the box. I often include more info on the cache page if this is the case. I’ve also offered to supply more detail if anyone wants it.
Anything over 2* seems to me to be the same process for all seekers - get the info off the page and the map and decide if it looks within your ability. I can’t know, only you can. I’m happy to describe the route and stuff, and I would be very happy to supply further info if asked via email. But generally, it will involve mud, sticks, slopes, gates, stiles etc since most countryside does. Look at the map to find out the distance involved etc.
What to do?
In the short term I would be happy to see Handicaching added to the margin of the cache page, like the attributes, or at the top with the terrain and difficulty. It would then make it easy to rate by finders, draw attention to it so people know it’s there, and so it gets completed by hiders along with attributes.
I would like Handicaching to improve it’s system a bit cos some of it isn’t entirely clear. I would be quite happy if an alternative system was used, which could lead to a change of terminology and better integrate it into the Terrain system.
It would be good to promote the whole agenda and discuss and educate so there is greater understanding of access issues, what’s important, how to describe it etc. It would be great to have more detail in a clear and unambiguous way on the cache page, especially for the low terrain caches.
The reality is that the majority of rural caches are not accessible unless you can go for a walk in the countryside. Given that most of my caches are out in the ‘wilds’ access will always be tricky if you’re not very mobile. Urban caches can be a different matter. I know from planning trips with my mum that finding truly accessible trips out is very tricky.
It would be good to have a discussion about what aspects might be worthwhile rating when going 'beyond the tarmac'. Currently, I generally don’t feel there is much point in doing a separate rating when the info is on the cache page. The info that isn’t on the page is the stuff about using a wheelchair: is it paved, is it steep slopes, are there steps or narrow bits. That to me is what is currently missing and why I do include Handicaching on my pages, where it feels useful.
It would be good to ‘campaign’ for Groundspeak and other sites to include Handicaching or an alternative. Also to spread the word and encourage cache hiders to include ratings where appropriate. GAGB could certainly lead the way with these aspects.
I hope I have shed some light on how I understand and use the current system. Yes, it would be good to include it and make it ‘mainstream’ but some work on clarity, definitions and purpose needs to happen I feel.
(Sorry it's a bit long!)