Question 3: GLAD Manager/s

[Maple Leaf]

GLAD is a very important and historical part of GAGB, but is something that I don't see 'shouted about' very often.

There hasn't been any updates from a GLAD Manager in the Landowner Permissions forum since Alan (twoofnine) left the committee.

There also appears to be an unanswered post from a member about Yorkshire WT. (It may have been answered privately - but should have been acknowledge publically).


However, having read the Annual Reports and Manifestos (and Minutes from the last year) it appears to have been extensions/negotiations with Landowners but nobody has told the members what they are (I've not checked past Facebook posts).

Dominic: "As GLAD manager I have negotiated extensions to several agreements throughout my tenure"

Rich: Mentions doing something with Derbyshire Wildlife Trust (but I'm not sure what). I can't find Derbyshire WT in the database (with either a Yes or No permission) so assume it is still in progress.


I'm aware that there will be a lot happening behind the scenes of GAGB (and I expect posted in committee forum) ... but you need to tell the members/caching public what the GAGB are doing / wanting to do. There are probably lots of cachers that have contacts/permissions that they will be happy to share.

If a change / extension has been done to an agreement - tell people.


So, not really a question - more an observation (as if I had just read the forum, I wouldn't have thought the GLAD Manager/s had done anything for several years)

[Saza36]

I fully endorse the sentiment of this question. All negotiations, challenges etc should be open and all members should be made aware.

[geocaching womble]

This year and last year I extended several forestry commission agreements that were up for renewal then updated the dates and revised the agreements accordingly
I haven’t been able to negotiate any new agreements because my last 3 attempts fell through as the required people never got back to me with an answer despite continued efforts to contact them. The end dates have been extended for several agreements have been extended and this has been published either in seeker or on the GAGB Facebook page when it has become available.
If you read the agreements I added a new agreement to the database earlier this year

I’m sorry I haven’t necessarily posted this on the public forum but I have acknowledged it publicly via social media
Edited I will also include on the forum in future

[Maple Leaf]

The end dates have been extended for several agreements have been extended and this has been published either in seeker or on the GAGB Facebook page when it has become available.

Thanks - I hadn't searched Facebook or re-read all the past editions of Seeker. Hence, but having a forum thread is useful to refer to.

If you read the agreements I added a new agreement to the database earlier this year

How would I know which one it is? (without opening & viewing each one)

[geocaching womble]

hi Jen,

the new agreement was posted on social media earlier this year as was an extended national trust one
i’d be only to happy to point you in the right direction if you message me
Also I believe there was an extension to the Kent National Trust agreement
And a new nature reserve trust agreement sorted out this year

[border caz]

So it was actually an extended one, not a new one? Could you put the link on here please rather than messaging as I think others may be interested too.

[geocaching womble]

There were actually 3 this year 2 extended and one completely new one
] https://www.gagb.org.uk/agreement_view.php?id=197
this one began this year I did not negotiate it However I did include it in the database
http://https://www.gagb.org.uk/agreement_view.php?id=189
This one was renewed until 2020 by me

http://https://www.gagb.org.uk/agreement_view.php?id=134
This one was extended to cover all National trust properties with in north Kent

However I cannot claim that I negotiated them all just that I have ensured that the database is kept up to date

[geocaching womble]

Additionally I cannot claim to know anything about that membership request regarding permission because I was not dealing with it

[richt2000]

GLAD is a very important and historical part of GAGB, but is something that I don't see 'shouted about' very often.

There hasn't been any updates from a GLAD Manager in the Landowner Permissions forum since Alan (twoofnine) left the committee.

There also appears to be an unanswered post from a member about Yorkshire WT. (It may have been answered privately - but should have been acknowledge publically).


However, having read the Annual Reports and Manifestos (and Minutes from the last year) it appears to have been extensions/negotiations with Landowners but nobody has told the members what they are (I've not checked past Facebook posts).

Dominic: "As GLAD manager I have negotiated extensions to several agreements throughout my tenure"

Rich: Mentions doing something with Derbyshire Wildlife Trust (but I'm not sure what). I can't find Derbyshire WT in the database (with either a Yes or No permission) so assume it is still in progress.


I'm aware that there will be a lot happening behind the scenes of GAGB (and I expect posted in committee forum) ... but you need to tell the members/caching public what the GAGB are doing / wanting to do. There are probably lots of cachers that have contacts/permissions that they will be happy to share.

If a change / extension has been done to an agreement - tell people.


So, not really a question - more an observation (as if I had just read the forum, I wouldn't have thought the GLAD Manager/s had done anything for several years)

I have been working with the Derbyshire Wildlife Trust since before I was a committee member. So far, I have an agreement to place caches in one nature reserve and I hope to get more as the months progress. They are very pro- caching as it drives visitors to the reserves.

I'll look at adding the contact details into the GLAD.

[Maattmoo]

A very important, yet a probably thankless task...

I think getting more info out about the extensions and agreements might achieve some praise or appreciation from the community to the on-going and significant efforts placed into this role.

[Maple Leaf]

A very important, yet a probably thankless task...

I think getting more info out about the extensions and agreements might achieve some praise or appreciation from the community to the on-going and significant efforts placed into this role.

Exactly.

[richt2000]

A very important, yet a probably thankless task...

I think getting more info out about the extensions and agreements might achieve some praise or appreciation from the community to the on-going and significant efforts placed into this role.

Agreed. It goes hand in hand with the many incidents I had to deal with this year from landowners having issues with geocaches on their property. I dealt with the vast majority of them on behalf of the GAGB from Orkney, through Derbyshire to Kent. All were dealt with to the landowners' satisfaction.

It is worth noting that not all were negative and many landowners were happy for geocaches to be placed but wanted hints or coordinates updating to ensure that cachers looked for them in the right place.

[Bear and Ragged]

Snipped
I’m sorry I haven’t necessarily posted this on the public forum but I have acknowledged it publicly via social media
Edited I will also include on the forum in future

I'm not one for 'social media sites' and would much prefer that it was added to the GAGB forums.
(But, with that, excellent work!)

[Maple Leaf]

Whilst looking for something else, I have just come across a GLAD database question on Social Media (Geocaching Association of Great Britain - Chat).

It hasn't got a response (publically) .... so to me it looks like nobody has responded.

That post would have disappeared off the radar very quickly.

If people think Social Media is a good place for GAGB discussions - then they need to be monitored answered (or posted in forum so that can be followed up by other members of the team).

GAGB Chat.jpg

[Griff Grof]

I think GLAD is one of the things the GAGB is best known for, and the Association has gained a lot of respect because of its work negotiating land agreements across the country.

I agree with Maple Leaf’s observation, in that there has not been an exciting new agreement to shout about in recent times. Obviously, many of them take time to negotiate, so work has certainly been ongoing, and Richard is doing a fantastic job with the Derbyshire Wildlife Trust - this will definitely be something we can share once it’s in the database.

I think the GLAD Manager must drive the process, and actively negotiate and update agreements as their top priority. But I think there’s also something for the rest of us to do - fellow committee members, GAGB friends and also members. We all need permission for our caches, and should work to share agreements that might benefit/help others so that they can be added to the GLAD.

I also notice a few ‘not permitted’ areas, which (as some of the wording in their reasoning confirms) previously allowed geocaching, so it would perhaps be a good idea to approach them again in the near future to see if they’ve changed their mind.

[Saza36]

I agree with a lot of the sentiment above but would like to stress that if work is currently being done, rather than awaiting news to publish we should keep people updated. This (a) keeps people aware of ongoing work and (b) hopefully minimises any independent approach by others.

Rather than being in a thread there should be links for each county or even a clickable map to get a county status.

Further, rather than just committee and friends publishing permissions we ought to aim to get to the point where cachers request more open permission with the aim of automatically publishing details to us.

I did exactly this years ago - took ages to get permission then shared the letter once received. I was not on the committee then as I am not now ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moira Crackers]

I think GLAD is a very important part of what GAGB is about, permission etc and Richard has done a fantastic job this year answering many queries as to why there are caches on a persons land and no permission had been asked. Each one has been dealt with in a professional manner and within a reasonable time frame to everyone's appreciation and satisfaction, engaging with the landowner, CO's who have placed caches as well as reviewer's when needed.
I would hope the good work continues and could lead to many more land agreements being negotiated and placed on the forum.

[richt2000]

I agree with a lot of the sentiment above but would like to stress that if work is currently being done, rather than awaiting news to publish we should keep people updated. This (a) keeps people aware of ongoing work and (b) hopefully minimises any independent approach by others.

Rather than being in a thread there should be links for each county or even a clickable map to get a county status.

Further, rather than just committee and friends publishing permissions we ought to aim to get to the point where cachers request more open permission with the aim of automatically publishing details to us.

I did exactly this years ago - took ages to get permission then shared the letter once received. I was not on the committee then as I am not now ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I totally agree with the sentiment here. At recent events I have been to, I have been pushing this agenda. Locally, I've seen that if you approach land owners, they are often only too keen to allow permission for geocaches to be placed. I've done it with DWT and a nearby cacher ErewashPaddler was able to do the same with Erewash Council. Those details are now on GLAD.

Any cacher who gets permission for a geocache should forward the details to us so, at the very minimum, we know who to contact in the landowner organisation.