Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I’ve listed three North Moor caches on opencaching now that aren’t on geocaching.com: Ockerton Court, Queen Of The Moor (near Fur Tor) and OP 17 (near Steeperton Tor). I think I may look to carry on doing it this way until the “ban” is lifted…
Unfortunately I can’t see the restrictions ever being lifted. I was out on the North Moor today and thinking that it is such a shame that no new caches can be places in such a huge and beautiful area for no reason, I know I am in the minority but I tend to only enjoy caching on the moor and this limits it somewhat!
I placed a new cache today out near Steeperton Tor, if it doesn’t get listed (which it won’t) I might try Open Caching and see if that’s an option. Really, we need our own “catalogue” like the letterboxers, but this would be so much effort to set up and benefit so few people. Just wish the reviewers would see sense!!
Still no progress, unfortunately…
Tried once again to list my cache which is outside the range, providing all the details and photos relevant to the situation:
“Thank you for your patience while we investigated the land use issues with this area. Because of the delicate nature of the negotiations between the geocaching community and the Ministry of Defense, we simply cannot publish a geocache that is not certain on all maps to be outside of the military property. We are denying your appeal and ask that you relocate your cache farther away where there will be no controversy about the property where it is located. I will notify your reviewer so he knows the outcome of your appeal. Good luck with your new location.”
Certain on ALL maps?? I provided the military maps for them but obviously a guess-work line drawn on google maps by a reviewer doesn’t correlate to this!
Also can’t understand the “controversy” comment, why would there be controversy?
Can’t believe how long this saga has rumbled on for…I can imagine that there is in fact no “negotiations” and that this ban is now permenant.
The reviewing process is complex, with no accountability, unfair and relies too much on a single persons (stubborn and biased) opinion. The appeal system is worthless too.
If you upset the reviewer by not simply accepting a ruling, your caches are not going to get published!!
If you ask for them to re consider, they archive your cache so they don’t have to talk with you. Very rude, as you quite rightly point out, seeing as it is my cache and not the reviewers. I too have experienced arrogance and rudeness from the reviewers, but I simply can’t see anything changing.
It’s a very sad state of affairs, but I would imagine that the majority of geocachers are finders rather than placers and would not have had experience of this. Walking for hours to place a cache on Dartmoor is a lot different to driving to place an urban cache.
The state of some caches I’ve found is ridiculous, and yet these still get published!!
It is a ridiculous situation.
I have made my point repeatedly to Lindinis, I can’t see where else I would get any joy.
Thank you all for the kind words and effort being invested in this.
A few points really – if these boundaries are so “arbitrary” why were they being enforced rigidly for over a month?
I offered an official MoD map of the land ownership to Lindinis at the start of this saga and to say he wasn’t remotely interested is an understatement. Granted, I could have made it up, but why not look and then he would have realised it is clearly official and extremely detailed, from an official MoD publication. Ironically, it is also fairly easy to find online so they clearly can’t be investing too much effort in determining the boundaries.
Unfortunately, they are right that the land ownership and the Willsworthy Range are not 100% correlated. For example, they also own Standon Hill to the South, but not all of Willsworthy Range. It is also quite clear, however, that they do not own ANY of the land inside the other two ranges at all.
There are also boundary posts on the ground and I would imagine quite a bit of literature on the subject of this historic land ownership online. It is quite clear to me that no work is being done on the reviewers part to determine the boundaries.
My cache is a ridiculous case in point really, these “arbitrary” boundaries meant it was refused for being in the range, when it quite clearly wasn’t. Dave even took pictures when he was in the area, as well as co-ordinates of the nearest range poles. Common sense did not prevail, they did not want to be wrong so simply ignored the blinding evidence.
Other cachers sticking up for the reviewers are clearly not aware of the scale of the ranges, how long this “ban” has been ongoing, the attitude of the reviewers and probably only cache in cities. Why comment on something you know nothing about?
A huge part of the North Moor has been out of action for placing caches for the entire month of August, Dartmoor’s busiest season, which also coincides with guaranteed public access (the MoD are not allowed to close the ranges at all during August). Ridiculous.
I am not sure how good the appeals process is, I would like to complain but think we would likely be ignored. I appealed against my cache waited days and it was rejected, with a few words. Pointless. No feedback.
The “red triangles” comment is especially amusing, has he looked at the Dartmoor map?? The ranges are clearly marked by their boundaries on the map, not a child throwing a crayon at it. To not mark the range boundaries accurately in this way would be extremely dangerous.
The “lives at risk” comment is also perplexing, does placing a cache on Willsworthy Range now pose a threat to life? Are the army waiting to shoot us if we dare to put a box under a rock? Someone being proved wrong and not accepting it.
I don’t think the reviewers are purely attention seeking, I think it is power-based as well. They must get their kicks from being able to stop geocaching in an area with a single word.
The fact they self appoint is ridiculous, there is no accountability.
Lift the ban!
So, on the basis of this new information I tried to get my long-suffering cache Knattaborough Tor (not even in the range but that’s another story) published.
I explained the letter from the MoD, and gave a link.
The reviewer then wrote out an edited version of the letter (intentionally excluding parts, including the bit about Dartmoor) and stated “Until you can supply a ruling from the MoD that superceeds this, your cache cannot be published at this location.”
So I replied, thinking they had missed the most important paragraph and the fact that this was an MoD letter, and stated it was an MoD letter and quoted the paragraph:
“There are a small number of training areas that the MOD do not own or hold under leasehold arrangements. These are areas where the MOD is licensed to train but are not the primary occupier. In these circumstances the MOD has no control over geocaching or many other recreational activities and thus it still remains the landowner’s decision to allow the placing of geo-caches e.g. Dartmoor Training Area with the exception of Willsworthy Range which is owned by the MOD. ”
Clearly, this is an official MoD letter, from the GAGB site (the site they based the ban on in the first place).
The result? My cache has now been archived so I can’t complain or ask for it to be reconsidered, pretty disgusting in my opinion and very disheartening. No explanation.
Clearly this ban is not over while the reviewer wants to play God. He clearly has an issue with me (I’ve been civil throughout) but what is the point in appealing when the reviewers are so powerful. They can, and will, do what they like.
Thanks for the update.
It is sad that it has come to this, but if it is land that they own there is not a lot we can do.
We were all aware that the MoD had no legal basis to restrict caching on most of Dartmoor months ago (and made this point to the reviewers). This really does show that the reviewers were far too eager to slap a ban down, contrary to local information, and denied placing caches on a huge part of the moor for the main summer season.
I am glad that this stupid and pointless ban will now be lifted for the two main ranges, although it is a shame Willsworthy has been denied, especially since it is connected to the other two ranges and as such I doubt anyone on the MoD will actively be looking to remove geocaches or letterboxes from the area.
Lets get back on the ranges!
I would be happy to adopt the Spitchwick if nobody else wants to, it’s the only one near me and my other caches. I can’t post on that forum though.
I think the Dartmoor cachers would, but I’m guessing it wouldn’t appeal to most. It’s a shame there aren’t more Dartmoor cachers, or we could set up something like the letterboxers and maybe use opencaching. Who knows!
Yes, GAGB seem to be the problem, but also the reviewers obedience to them – the reviewers must know certain things such as Dartmoor not belonging to the MoD, but they turn a blind eye to it and just go by what GAGB said. Are any of the reviewers high up in GAGB by any chance?
Indeed. I think there needs to be a mix of these two extremes in an ideal world, where power is given to the people to review caches, but only those with some experience and local to the area, with some ability to ban those that abuse the system. Rather than an absolute all powerful reviewer who isn’t local or bored people from America thinking it’s funny to negatively vote!
Thanks Dave.
I agree with a review by cachers, but this system is simply unworkable, people can and are saying no to caches “just because they can”, never mind the people who are ignorant of Dartmoor/can’t read who I probably rubbed up the wrong way! Oh well…
I must say I’ve just found a downside of the peer review system on opencaching – someone just claimed that there was no right of way to my cache on Fur Tor??? Only about 48000 hectares of it!!!
And that “who would want to go caching on a firing range”?? If you don’t know Dartmoor why are you reviewing my cache! Dartmoor is a beautiful, remote wilderness not a firing range!
I think we need some more local reviewers, and not keyboard warriors from Lancashire…
Spitchwick Commons is unfortunately not just Spitchwick, it includes all the common land around Sharp Tor, Aish Tor, Mel Tor, Luckey Tor, Yar Tor and Corndon Tor, and all along the river to Dartmeet. 883 ha (8.83 sq km).
The landowner said he may review his position in a few years, and seeing as letterboxing is absolutely huge in this area I don’t see why he would say no. It can’t hurt to ask.
Why haven’t the GAGB ever re-contacted with the landowner, when they were the ones who drew up the agreement (ban)??
Thanks for the hard work, Dave.
I have no doubt that through the hard work of certain individuals and the facts of the case that we will eventually be caching on the ranges again (including Willsworthy).
My correspondence with Groundspeak is currently about how this situation came about, that it should never happen again and how the reviewers have inflated the situation massively.
I am also questioning why the Roos Tor ban is so huge and unnecessary, and if anyone has followed upon the Spitchwick Commons ban.
I agree that the DNPA are the ideal body to get this matter sorted, and I’m sure we can all petition the MoD if no progress is made.
It’s such a joke, the original statement was “land they own” but it seems to have been extended to “land they use” purely by the reviewers. I have offered to show them the official military map showing military land ownership (pretty much just Willsworthy range) but they simply are not interested in any factual information.
I currently have a cache not published which is outside a range because it’s “land they use” – it’s not even in a range let alone on land owned by the MoD!! Just because a reviewer from Wales has drawn a line on google maps…brilliant!
There appear to be a lot of self-important people on power trips, who would far rather rush into banning geocaching on a massive scale than represent the people they are supposed to serve.
Do you think the MoD really want caching banned on the ranges they don’t own?!?? I bet they aren’t even aware there is a “ban” and they certainly don’t even have the legal standing to do so on land they don’t own.
It is getting stupid now and I think some radical change is needed in the reviewing process.
I am already talking to groundspeak, but I guess I may also need to get in touch with the National Park and the defence estate who I’m sure would be dumbfounded to learn of a “ban”. But why is it that we have to fight against the people appointed to keep us caching? Has really soured my experience of the sport.
Their maps may not be the most accurate, and I would assume that areas can change over time or with further study. I would assume Oke Tor is okay, as the Ten Tors Checkpoint was actually moved to there instead of East Mill Tor (bird nesting fears) in recent years. The remote caches get very few visits so I guess it’s ok to place a cache in a bird nesting area per se, but could be something we could all think about.
As a side note, I like the convenient break in the middle of the Steeperton “bird nesting area” on the military map, where one of the military roads runs through it!
If anybody would like to see the maps I can email them, I don’t think they want to upload on this site.
They really don’t represent us, do they.
I recently placed a series of caches near Belstone. Aware of the MoD “ban” I avoided placing any in the range areas, but despite the fact that a certain cache (at Knattaborough Tor, halfway along the ridge between Oke and Higher) was outside the range area, I have still had it refused.
I’m not bashing the reviewer here, as they have a thankless task sometimes, but it does seem odd that this national “ban” is now enforced with very little information, a sort of guess at the boundaries. I actually have some military maps taken from documents available online that show the range boundaries in far more detail, and also another one that shows the land owned by the MoD (basically Willsworthy).
The very few official statements regarding this issue are also confusing, some say land “used” by the MoD and others (and more likely to be true) land “owned” by the MoD. In my opinion there is a massive difference, as for example, I “use” a lot of of the moor when hiking, does that mean if I object to geocaches I can ban them all? Surely the same legal basis?
The cache in question is definitely outside of the range (the range poles here cross at least 30/40m south), but because it is close it probably won’t be listed. I think I will try opencaching and see if it gets enabled. It’s time like this I get tempted to place letterboxes!
I will try and upload the range maps or find a link.
p.s. reading the link above reminded me of the Roos Tor ban – does anyone actually know why it exists/is still in place?
I know people get worked up about it but I can’t see the issue really other than “I found this spot first”. People in the middle of the moor are usually familiar with both, and respectful enough to re-hide both caches and LBs when found.
One of my caches actually shares a hide with a letterbox now, I had to find a better place for it in the vicinity and it was the only hide available. I wouldn’t have shared if the hide wasn’t huge, in the middle of nowhere and totally obvious in the first place (piled stones in front of big overhang)!
I get a lot of logs saying why they’re in the same place and I guess I will have to archive it when I visit them next, but it does seem a shame, a lot of people myself included enjoy finding a letterbox as much as a cache, and surely a letterbox is meant to be found by those who are looking!
For some reason letterboxes go missing a lot (unlike geocaches which are easier to find, go figure), so giving hints to locations openly would be a huge issue. Nice topic!
Is opencaching free? I know geocaching.com is if you don’t go premium, but I never really understood why we should pay for the privilege of using their website.
It wouldn’t make a lot of sense in using OC I guess, as there is simply not enough people on there to make it work. Also, would OC be so quick to ban geocaches and make stupid rules? Or are they subject by the same powers that be?
Just read through that forum, it’s interesting to read opinions from people who have clearly never been to Dartmoor in their lives.
They seem to think the MoD are the “land managers”?!? of the ranges? Despite them having no ownership whatsoever.
And don’t seem to realise that access on Dartmoor was enshrined as common land well before the CRoW legislation. Yes, every part of the moor is owned by someone, but they have no say over access by the public. Unless you happen to own Vixen Tor of course…
Keep up the fight Dave!
Reading it again, I think the new rule can only apply to land the MoD owns (i.e. one of the three Dartmoor Ranges) and that the geocaching powers that be have jumped the gun somewhat, as per usual. This is sometimes why I wish Dartmoor had it’s own body (such as letterboxing) as it such a special case, rather than abiding by the central rules which are not tailored to our situation (e.g. over a century of letterboxing, one of the last wildernesses in the UK, the land not belonging to the MoD and historical public access).
I think the issue has to be one of land ownership, really, which is fair enough. If the MoD does not want caches on it’s land (Willsworthy) then that has to be respected, although since the MoD is a public body and I can see no benefits in denying the sport, then I am strongly opposed to this.
It hurts the military’s public relations, and I know of many people who went on to serve in the forces only after a lot of time spent on the moors in younger years.
National security can apply to areas on or near bases I would agree, but to apply that to Dartmoor as a whole is absolutely ludicrous. There have been no incidences of “suspicious packages” on the moor, and neither will there ever be, they are well aware of letterboxing/geocaching.
As a side note, it is disappointing that geocaching and letterboxing communities on the moor are so distant from each other, as many people do both. When I meet people letterboxing on the moor they are the nicest people, and yet there seems to be some resentment by certain individuals of geocaching.
I disagree with you there I’m afraid. I think there are not nearly enough remote caches on the moor. There are vast tracts of Dartmoor with not a single cache, unlike letterboxing which is rife in every place you look.
I would also say most caches on the moor relate to a particular feature, for example points of interest or summits, or can be used as waypoints. In the very centre of the North and South moors there are very few caches at all.
As for using Cranmere Pool as your example of “remoteness” – it is only a 15 minute walk from the military road network. Hardly remote!
First cache was Dartmoor Dave’s Beardown Man cache on Devil’s Tor last year. Had heard of geocaching and had been using a GPS for a few years when hiking but hadn’t put the two together until then, and found it almost by mistake!
Since then it’s given me many reasons to get out on the open moor, and see places I’d never been off it.
In response to the initial question, I think perhaps the “Dartmoor” trails (and there are a few) are completely different to the others, in that they require a lot more commitment, and are a serious walk which casual hikers mostly aren’t bothered with.
I enjoy both types (especially the remote Dartmoor trails), but must say I have never actually followed a “Dartmoor” trail all the way through, and instead tend to combine these caches with other caches to create my own walk.
To create a “well visited” trail on the moor would require close hides, a shortish walk close to the road, paths, and a fairly sheltered location (like Bellever Forest), which doesn’t really tie in with the high moors which are remote, inaccessible, wild, wet and usually raining – or the people who visit them who are perhaps more committed to going further for a cache, like Dartmoor Dave’s series.
The reveiwer is now claiming I need NT permission anyway! Ridiculous! What is the difference between a letterbox and a geocache?
Fantastic news, great effort on your part to persist for too long in what is a pretty ridiculous situation! I tried to list the caches placed I placed in an SSSI 2months ago, but they have been rejected again today unfortunately, I’m hoping the reviewer will accept the new guidelines soon, I don’t understand why it has to be such a battle though when surely a bit of common sense is all that is required, we do this for fun after all!! 🙂
So is the land agreement between land owners and the DNPA still in place then? From reading this thread it seems so, but I still can’t get my caches published as apparently the agreement was “withdrawn earlier this year”! So frustrating!
Despite my post being so general, I was only meaning to reply to this specific topic! Thanks for trying to confirm the rules.
Hi,
I’m a new geocacher (having only discovered it existed a month ago) and found this forum while looking for clarification on what kind of permission is needed to place a cache.
I tried to place two today on the south moor, as I believed that on open moor land it was pretty much the same rules as placing letterboxes, in that you have to apply a little bit of common sense, i.e. not near anything remotely old or fragile or clearly on private land.
I have contacted the regional National Trust office to see if i can gain permission for the two to be published, which is fair enough, but I don’t see why it’s any different to letterboxing! The sport is essentially letterboxing with a GPS!
It requires a lot of research to find a suitable location for just one cache, far enough away from others in the area, and then it is quite complicated to find out who owns the land and what kind of monuments are in the area to keep away from etc. I can see it discouraging others from placing caches. I actually had another cache disabled as it was too near a premium members only cache (which I can’t see unless I zoom right out on the area as I am not a premium member).
I’m not having a go at the reviewer or others at all as I understand why these rules exist, but it is rather complicated and there do seem to be a lot of rules! Any clarification would be appreciated 🙂
