♿- Disabled Cacher - handicaching

[Cache on Wheels]

As a disabled geocacher, there are still a lot of caches that are inaccessible to me due to stiles and kissing gates. I would like to see more of these replaced with gates with Radar keys - where the surrounding paths/environment was suitable for mobility scooters, wheelchairs, buggies etc.

This is something I have enquired about (unofficially) with a member of my local parish council, but was wondering if this would be something that the GAGB would be willing to help with on a nationwide basis?

I also use the handicaching.com site and would like to encourage more people to use it. I would like to thank all the Cachers who have supported and encouraged me to get out and enjoy caching :) :)

I would also like to thank all the Cache Owners who have supported the handicaching reviews I have done on their caches so far by simply adding the HTML code that I email them, under the 'Long Description' of their cache pages that gives a direct link to the handicaching review :applause: Could the GAGB help to promote this?

Many thanks
Heather aka Cache on Wheels

[Team Microdot]

I'm probably the least qualified person to answer this but I can't see it sat here without a reply - so here goes :)

I've tried through various means to gauge the demand for and the usefulness of Handicache ratings to no avail.

My local friendly reviewer went to great lengths to encourage me that it was a worthwhile exercise and, on the basis that the local friendly reviewer is happy to contribute so much of their own spare time for the benefit of the rest of us, I figured this small repayment was the very least I could do to show my gratitude in return.

And I've rated a good number of caches to the best of my limited ability on the basis that someone might make use of them - both caches that I have placed and the caches of others that I have found.

Whenever I've found a really good example of a cache that I've felt would be particularly suitable for and enjoyable to a less able cacher, I've approached the CO and asked them to add the review to their cache page - and most of them, to their credit, did so :socool:

Admittedly though I haven't done any Handicache reviews for a few months, and I'll tell you why. Never once have I had any feedback that anyone ever has benefited from a single one of those reviews.

Now I'm not looking for anyone to pledge their undying gratitude - absolutely not. It would be useful though to know that I wasn't compiling / providing information that wasn't being used. Nobody wants to invest time doing something pointless which benefits nobody.

So I guess what I'm saying is that if more people demanded such information AND fed back on how useful (or indeed how rubbish) it had been - more people might, seeing that their time would be invested usefully, make an extra effort to contribute themselves.

[geocaching womble]

I'm probably the best qualified candidate to answer this, due to my work as a member of Team OC UK because we liaise with handicaching in our work and have links to the handicaching site on the OC UK website. Whilst I understand the concerns of this in relation to the people involved, my dad being one of the mobility impaired. I do not think that the GAGB have the power, the legal authority, the training, own enough land thought the membership or possess the level of full understanding to discuss, to even attempt to create or implement such a wide ranging scheme thoughout the country to the extent you have asked. I'm sorry to have to tell you this but I just don't belive its possible.

Sorry again
Dominic

[sandvika]

As my wife has limited mobility I'm aware of the challenge that just a modest countryside excursion can entail, however, she does not use a wheelchair, so appreciate this takes the challenge to a greater level.

It is clear that stiles and kissing gates present insurmountable obstacles to someone restricted to a wheelchair, so I would support their replacement with regular gates, if they are located on a route that could otherwise be negotiated by wheelchair. The use of locks with Radar keys would be an appropriate measure to ensure that footpaths don't become bridle paths inadvertently.

However, I would resist measures that would urbanise the countryside, such as putting a solid surface on a footpath, or artificially widening a path through vegetation. An exception to this would be high traffic areas that become quagmires, where appropriate measures should be taken to improve drainage and ensure wheeled passage is manageable.

I think we should do more as an association, to support our less able members, however, I think we are too small a voice and too marginal an interest group to be able to get commitment from authorities to act on a nationwide basis. To this end, I think GAGB should affiliate itself with the Ramblers Association, which has a much larger and broader membership and is thus much better able to campaign nationally in this regard.

[geocaching womble]

What he said

Thanks
Dominic

[Cache on Wheels]

As my wife has limited mobility I'm aware of the challenge that just a modest countryside excursion can entail, however, she does not use a wheelchair, so appreciate this takes the challenge to a greater level.

It is clear that stiles and kissing gates present insurmountable obstacles to someone restricted to a wheelchair, so I would support their replacement with regular gates, if they are located on a route that could otherwise be negotiated by wheelchair. The use of locks with Radar keys would be an appropriate measure to ensure that footpaths don't become bridle paths inadvertently.

However, I would resist measures that would urbanise the countryside, such as putting a solid surface on a footpath, or artificially widening a path through vegetation. An exception to this would be high traffic areas that become quagmires, where appropriate measures should be taken to improve drainage and ensure wheeled passage is manageable.

I think we should do more as an association, to support our less able members, however, I think we are too small a voice and too marginal an interest group to be able to get commitment from authorities to act on a nationwide basis. To this end, I think GAGB should affiliate itself with the Ramblers Association, which has a much larger and broader membership and is thus much better able to campaign nationally in this regard.
I would not wish to seek urbanising the countryside by any means.
I do not think it is impossible to liaise with the councils to have some gates replaced by radar key gates, it will be something that will take time to work out the best approach and maybe something that would filter into the countryside as maintanence is required by the council.
.
I am not meaning we start approaching the councils to replace all of them either, :) maybe identify some key routes that will be used regularly by many Cachers, that are already suitable for wheelchairs and approaching our local parish council for advice on how we would go about this.

[Cache on Wheels]

I will approach my local parish council about this and seek their advice on any projects or such like that may already be in place or on their agenda of making the countryside more accessible to wheelchair users. After all, if they already have something in place, it could save a lot if time and effort.

From my knowledge and experience of making parts of my local village accessible via wheelchair / scooter, I know these things usually start at Parish Council level and require their support. Measures have been out in place to make this happen too :)

I have searched disabled accessible routes in the countryside but not been very successful so far. I understand that taking this on on a nationwide level would be massive, and that is not what I am asking.

Does anyone know of any maps already available? Some bridle ways are acessible but as one comment pointed out, this can make the tracks very muddy.

I am happy to work with the gagb committee in feeding back info I recieve from my local parish council ... Perhaps from this, we could work at producing a standard letter, hopefully with the support of the gagb, that we could download from the site and send to our parish council.
That way, there would be one standard letter that clearly outlines our aim in making the countryside more accessible not just to geocachers by any means, but to all who use a wheelchair or mobility scooter.

Mainly what I would like to know from the gagb committee, is:
1- Are you willing to explore this possability and
2- Are you willing to help promote handicaching or any other means of supporting disabled Cachers? I know handicaching has been around for some time, and despite great efforts of other Cachers, it has not become well used. However, there are always new Cachers joining and knowledge if handicaching will be the important key hopefully making it well known.
A great start would be having info and a link on the gagb site for all to see.

One if the hosts from the UK Geocaching Podcast show (Octiber show) did post notes to I think grease monkey? That automatically asks you if you want to do a handicaching review when submitting a cache. Here is the link:
http://www.ukgcpodcast.com/2012/10/07/geocaching-greasemonkey-and-handicaching/
This would be great if this could be incorporated into GC.com when submitting a cache and even better, logging a cache as found. :)

[sandvika]

I think GAGB should support specific requests for better access, and if it doesn't help, be prepared to escalate the matter too.

I've been a parish councillor since 2003 (it's an unpaid elected position) and in my experience, public rights of way are the responsibility of borough or district councils or unitary authorities. The parish council can be supportive of reasonable requests and can also support restoration work, where this is needed.

(I'm happy to report that the tiny land holding that my parish council has is accessible through gates easily wide enough for a wheel chair, as well as by a vehicular entrance. Our current premises are rented, we hope in due course to have custom-built premises and have already specified that the new council chamber must be accessible by wheelchair.)

[Cache on Wheels]

That's very good advice, thank you :) do you think I would be better going straight to the rights of way, whom I have a named contact, or thorough] the parish council first by requesting it in the agenda for an upcoming meeting?

[sandvika]

That's very good advice, thank you :) do you think I would be better going straight to the rights of way, whom I have a named contact, or thorough] the parish council first by requesting it in the agenda for an upcoming meeting?

If there are specific locations where you would like gates installing, in your parish, then now might be a good time to ask as it's budget setting time for 2013/14. It might be easier to convince your parish council to allocate funds to this than a more remote borough or district council, especially as borough and district council budgets are under pressure and tax increases are limited by law, whereas parish councils don't have the same restrictions, as far as I am aware.

However, if you have a supportive rights of way officer then by all means ask them too and also let them know you are asking your parish, because they might have costings to hand, saving your parish some work :)

[The Wombles]

Perhaps it would be useful to have a formal GAGB "Access officer" (who doesn't necessarily need to be a member of the committee) but who could provide information and support for these sort of issues and indeed other access issues such as footpath availability.

I'm aware that others such as the Ramblers have such a capability and we could potentially join forces with them on many issues.

[daddyanddude]

As a disabled geocacher, there are still a lot of caches that are inaccessible to me due to stiles and kissing gates. I would like to see more of these replaced with gates with Radar keys - where the surrounding paths/environment was suitable for mobility scooters, wheelchairs, buggies etc.

This is something I have enquired about (unofficially) with a member of my local parish council, but was wondering if this would be something that the GAGB would be willing to help with on a nationwide basis?

I also use the handicaching.com site and would like to encourage more people to use it. I would like to thank all the Cachers who have supported and encouraged me to get out and enjoy caching :) :)

I would also like to thank all the Cache Owners who have supported the handicaching reviews I have done on their caches so far by simply adding the HTML code that I email them, under the 'Long Description' of their cache pages that gives a direct link to the handicaching review :applause: Could the GAGB help to promote this?

Many thanks
Heather aka Cache on Wheels
I would have to admit when it comes to disabled caching i know little to nothing about the problems a person in that position faces . personally i feel that the GAGB needs to be behind/support someone like your self who could be an adviser, and maybe work with other organisations who are trying to highlight the problems faced by disabled people if we could approach other organisations and work together we would have a bigger voice when asking for change.* TOGERTHER WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE*

[Palujia]

She who must be obeyed cannot walk far either - so my solution has been to put out a small series of "drive by" caches that she can help me with maintenance, It ensure that she stays involved and interested - I think that those of us with limited mobility, or partners etc., who have these problems put out more drive bys and encourage other cache hiders to consider mobility when doing so we would have a better hobby for all concerned :socool:

[northking]

This is something that I would strenuously support, I believe that the GAGB ought to be the conduit for our players to gain a voice.

[Cache on Wheels]

I would have to admit when it comes to disabled caching i know little to nothing about the problems a person in that position faces . personally i feel that the GAGB needs to be behind/support someone like your self who could be an adviser, and maybe work with other organisations who are trying to highlight the problems faced by disabled people if we could approach other organisations and work together we would have a bigger voice when asking for change.* TOGERTHER WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE*

thank you so much for your kind words of support :)
I would be happy to be in board as an advisor for this. Like co-opted but not a full committee member - that's if members and the new committee would accept my offer :)
Thank you fir your comment :)

[Team Microdot]

I would be happy to be in board as an advisor for this. Like co-opted but not a full committee member - that's if members and the new committee would accept my offer :)

Absolutely superb idea :applause:

Real feedback from those who benefit directly is the best possible fuel for continued support and improvement :cheers:

People are generally likely to contribute more in cases where they can actually see positive results arising from their efforts :wub:

[Cache on Wheels]

I know it is difficult as people have such a wide range of conditions, disabilities or illnesses that can affect them differently throughout a day, sometimes changing within minutes like myself. So I understand it is difficult especially for others to know where to start in assessing if a cache would be accessible for people with any type of disabilities or limited mobility.
All one can do, is provide a more detailed breakdown of access to a cache - the great thing is you do not have to be disabled to rate a cache and anyone can rate a cache that either they own or have found. The great thing about this is it helps us all gain info and educates us on what to think about when assessing a cache for accessibility :):
That is why handicaching.com is so good, to give you an idea, these are the headings you choose one of the options from the drop down list

1- D/T Rating: Our opinion if what the D/T should be.
2- distance to cache: this helps enormously when planning if to use my walker, someone's arm, or scooter / wheelchair.
3- Route Surface.
4- Route Slope
5- Route obstructions eg stiles: if a route is relatively short to the GZ, I can be pushed or push my wheelchair as I would my walker, if there is a gate, it is easy for my husband or caching buddy to fold my W/C in order to get it over the style / kissing gate etc
6- Cache Height: this helps so j know if I can likely retrieve the cache using my helping hand or if I need help to retrieve the cache :)
Just to be clear, I am NOT talking about having help to retrieve a cache that is up a tree :lol: I'm talking about a cache that would be within easy reach of a fully able bodied person eg 0-6ft
7 you can then add info specifically related to the cache in the description section.

If you would like to see an example of how the link looks in a cache page and what the review looks like, please feel free to have a look at one of my caches.
Click on the yellow handicaching logo that will take you straight to the handicaching rating. This is think link to one of my caches 'The Square': https://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=405f9148-b2ce-4dee-a2a6-7c0197f943d6

You may find some of the wording I have used helpful with your own descriptions on your caches: eg 'depending on how you feel at that moment ...'
A Handicaching.com can be useful to have on your page, especially when you are unsure if the W/C icon is appropriate to use. You could leave it off but add a link to handicaching.com and write some info on your description part if the cache page :)

Please let me know if you find this helpful or give me feedback. I am happy to answer questions via PM or help others to do handicaching reviews or advise when setting out caches.

[Cache on Wheels]

Absolutely superb idea :applause:

Real feedback from those who benefit directly is the best possible fuel for continued support and improvement :cheers:

People are generally likely to contribute more in cases where they can actually see positive results arising from their efforts :wub:

Thank you :) I always think anything that can help others and make things easier for them is fantastic :) I think good communication of sharing information is key here :):socool:

[Dorsetgal]

Speaking personally, as a disabled person who has almost seven and a half years experience of finding and hiding geocaches, I'd say that although it has merit, if the handicaching website was going to catch on, it would have done so by now.

I would much rather GAGB encourage cache setters to consider using the cache difficulty and terrain rating widget thing for every cache they set, rather than a finger in the wind, approach.

Also I would like to see setters encouraged to consider in detail obstacles en route to a cache from their suggested parking / approach route. Without giving too much away, it's fairly straightforward to say, x stiles between parking and cache, or thes a kissing gate or whatever the obstacle might be.

I see the main problem is not unwillingness of geocachers to share this info they simply don't think about it. That's the main reason they won't visit handicaching either.

I spend my life wanting to be included, by moving accessible information to a separate site it's another separation rather than working for one integrated community.

Also, this access information is of use to many others, like cyclists, young families etc, none of whom would regard themselves necessarily as disabled and wouldn't likely think to go to handicaching. Geocaching is for all, so lets encourage setters to consider the whole community but not burden them with joining another site that not many people use anyway.

So I for one would be asking GAGB to raise awareness amongst geocachers of accurate access information on their main cache page.

Who seriously, when looking up a geocache on a phone or gpsr is going to then log on to another site?

[Cache on Wheels]

Perhaps it would be useful to have a formal GAGB "Access officer" (who doesn't necessarily need to be a member of the committee) but who could provide information and support for these sort of issues and indeed other access issues such as footpath availability.

I'm aware that others such as the Ramblers have such a capability and we could potentially join forces with them on many issues.


That sounds like a great idea Dave to join forces and pool resources. :applause: There are many Cachers and or their family members or friends that maybe work for an agency where their knowledge and experience would be valuable.
Perhaps like a sub committee of members who are willing to work together on some of these as a project.
Every little step counts :)

[Dorsetgal]

Heather, seriously, have you read what geocaching.com provide on this? The list inspired by Clayjar? Everyone is invited to fill it in, and if they did so, it would make every geocache have good quality access information, not just a few.

https://www.geocaching.com/hide/rate.aspx

Answer the following questions based on the most difficult parts of the cache:

Is an overnight stay likely?
Will it take more than a day to hike in, find the cache, and hike out again?


No

Yes
What is the length of the hike?
This is the length of the hike from the most logical parking area to the cache.


Less than 1/2 mile
Less than 1 km

1/2 mile to 2 miles
About 1 to 3 km

2 miles to 10 miles
About 3 to 16 km

Over 10 miles
Over 16 km
What is the trail like?
How is the the most difficult part of the cache? If the cache is within a few feet of a trail, don't worry about the last few feet.


Paved pathways
Asphalt, concrete, or boardwalks.

Well marked/defined hardpack
Well packed dirt. You could ride a standard bicycle or push a stroller on this trail without too much effort.

Other trail types
Could be gravel, sand, mud, etc. May be an animal trail. If you're riding a bike, it had better be a mountain bike.

Trail? What trail?
There is no real trail. Wheels are out. May be following a stream bed or be very rocky.
Is the path bushy or overgrown?
Overgrowth refers to any plant or other substance that impedes the path. Keep in mind that conditions change; rate based on your understanding of worst-case conditions.


Not at all
There is no overgrowth at all.

Some light overgrowth
An adult could step over or around this.

Yeah, it's pretty overgrown
It's waist-high or so, or it may be thorny or have poison plants.

The overgrowth is very heavy
I can't see the other side! Some type of machete or other cutting device is probably needed. Very likely to have thorns or poison plants.
What is the terrain elevation like?
How hard is the steepest part of the cache?


Basically flat
Only slight elevation changes. Easy to do in a wheelchair, stroller, bike, etc.

Some elevation changes
Changes are slight enough that someone could ride a bike up such a slope.

Steep elevation changes
Change is steep. Probably could not ride a bike up this slope, but could push it up.

Severe elevation changes
The only way up the slope is to use your hands. Going down may require the use of your backside.
How easy is it to find the cache?
Please consider visibility, accessibility, and relative signal strength due to tree cover or other obstructions when answering this question.


Cache is in plain sight or location is fairly obvious.

Cache could be in one of several locations. Hunter may have to look for a while.

Cache may be very well hidden, may be multi-leg, or may use clues to location.

Cache likely requires special skills, knowledge, or in-depth preparation to find. May require multiple days or trips to find.

Finding this cache requires very specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment. This is a serious mental or physical challenge.
|






I know it is difficult as people have such a wide range of conditions, disabilities or illnesses that can affect them differently throughout a day, sometimes changing within minutes like myself. So I understand it is difficult especially for others to know where to start in assessing if a cache would be accessible for people with any type of disabilities or limited mobility.
All one can do, is provide a more detailed breakdown of access to a cache - the great thing is you do not have to be disabled to rate a cache and anyone can rate a cache that either they own or have found. The great thing about this is it helps us all gain info and educates us on what to think about when assessing a cache for accessibility :):
That is why handicaching.com is so good, to give you an idea, these are the headings you choose one of the options from the drop down list

1- D/T Rating: Our opinion if what the D/T should be.
2- distance to cache: this helps enormously when planning if to use my walker, someone's arm, or scooter / wheelchair.
3- Route Surface.
4- Route Slope
5- Route obstructions eg stiles: if a route is relatively short to the GZ, I can be pushed or push my wheelchair as I would my walker, if there is a gate, it is easy for my husband or caching buddy to fold my W/C in order to get it over the style / kissing gate etc
6- Cache Height: this helps so j know if I can likely retrieve the cache using my helping hand or if I need help to retrieve the cache :)
Just to be clear, I am NOT talking about having help to retrieve a cache that is up a tree :lol: I'm talking about a cache that would be within easy reach of a fully able bodied person eg 0-6ft
7 you can then add info specifically related to the cache in the description section.

If you would like to see an example of how the link looks in a cache page and what the review looks like, please feel free to have a look at one of my caches.
Click on the yellow handicaching logo that will take you straight to the handicaching rating. This is think link to one of my caches 'The Square': https://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=405f9148-b2ce-4dee-a2a6-7c0197f943d6

You may find some of the wording I have used helpful with your own descriptions on your caches: eg 'depending on how you feel at that moment ...'
A Handicaching.com can be useful to have on your page, especially when you are unsure if the W/C icon is appropriate to use. You could leave it off but add a link to handicaching.com and write some info on your description part if the cache page :)

Please let me know if you find this helpful or give me feedback. I am happy to answer questions via PM or help others to do handicaching reviews or advise when setting out caches.

[Team Microdot]

The main problems with relying on the D/T rating on the cache page are:

1. People often inflate them to make the cache seem more exciting
2. People often manipulate them to make them appeal to grid fillers*
3. Lots of people aren't even aware of the Clayjar originated criteria - and so guess
4. The D/T rating is decided once - by one person - taking a single route to the cache

*I'm a grid filler myself - it's one of the games I like to play - this is not a criticism of grid fillers

At least a Handicache rating allows each and every rater to provide THEIR view of the D/T and, as those people are taking the time to put together a handicache review, I'm inclined to imagine they will take the time to consider the D/T more fully.

I've actually suggested an additional alternative rating mechanism in the past, but this would require listing site integration.

My idea is this...

A cacher's ability level is a comparatively fixed thing - so they rate their own ability once.

Every time they log a cache, their ability level is recorded against that cache.

Over time these automatic ratings build and form the basis of statistical data clearly demonstrating which ability levels have been able to successfully complete that cache.

So those people who do not typically actively rate caches in this way end up doing so automatically :)

Those who do typically rate caches in terms of ability could continue to add further text guidance to supplement the automatic rating.

Sounds simple to me:)

[bobo frett]

I am one of a handful of people who maintain the public rights of access in Lincolnshire on a voluntary basis. I offered my services due to the amount of time spent on them!

While I have no experience of caching with someone whose mobility is impaired I have built up a relationship with the RoA team on Lincs council and regardless of whether I am elected or not I am happy to get in touch and find out the processes required to perhaps start that change.

[Cache on Wheels]

At least a Handicache rating allows each and every rater to provide THEIR view of the D/T and, as those people are taking the time to put together a handicache review, I'm inclined to imagine they will take the time to consider the D/T more fully.

I totally agree :) and that is the main difference. If Groundspeak had something in place that allowed us to do the same, all well and good, but on the other hand, as handicaching is already there and very simple to use, then why not use it? It's down to individuals if they will take the time eg 2-3 mins to do a handicaching rating on a cache they feel would be great and suitable for people with disabilities etc


I've actually suggested an additional alternative rating mechanism in the past, but this would require listing site integration.

My idea is this...

A cacher's ability level is a comparatively fixed thing - so they rate their own ability once.

some great ideas here :) thank you :)
the only problem with this I could see with this for eg is ones condition / ability can vary so much. Not talking 'good day' or 'bad day' type of thing. Sometimes for many, it can change drastically within minutes.
So whilst that is a good idea, I'm not sure how it could work.

Every time they log a cache, their ability level is recorded against that cache.
How awesome would that be though if you could do that? :)

Over time these automatic ratings build and form the basis of statistical data clearly demonstrating which ability levels have been able to successfully complete that cache.

So those people who do not typically actively rate caches in this way end up doing so automatically :)

with every handicaching review that is done, it averages out the score rating for the cache so you will see individual reviews and an average too.

Those who do typically rate caches in terms of ability could continue to add further text guidance to supplement the automatic rating.

[COLOR="purple"]it would be great for Cachers to add more text in their description to supplement the auto rating.
It has amazed me on occasions where a cacher actually write not wheelchair / scooter friendly on the cache page - I made sure I let them know when I logged it that I was able to easily access the route via my scooter. :)
I'm having trouble getting my words out and explaining what I mean today, please bear with me, accept my apologies if I have not worded something correctly :) [/COLOR

Sounds simple to me:)
]

[Cache on Wheels]

I am one of a handful of people who maintain the public rights of access in Lincolnshire on a voluntary basis. I offered my services due to the amount of time spent on them!

While I have no experience of caching with someone whose mobility is impaired I have built up a relationship with the RoA team on Lincs council and regardless of whether I am elected or not I am happy to get in touch and find out the processes required to perhaps start that change.

Thank you for your comment :)
it is fantastic that you have built up such a great relationship with the RoA team on Lincs council :socool: well done on the work you are doing too, it makes a huge difference :) it is great to read that prople are so positive about moving forward, establishing and building on existing relationships with Agencies and exploring ideas in a positive way to make a difference :) :cheers:

[Team Microdot]

I'm having trouble getting my words out and explaining what I mean today, please bear with me, accept my apologies if I have not worded something correctly

You're doing just fine :)

With regard to the ability of some cacher's changing from moment to moment I expect there will be cachers with conditions in which this happens.

With the best will in the world no rating system can be a perfect fit in all situations.

I think every rating has to come with an on a good day I can or an on an average day I can clause.

Also - as it is automated - the vast majority of the auto-ratings would I expect be coming from fully able cachers - so it might be argued that the only useful data from my suggested mechanism would be the upper and lower ability limits - which is fair as that's exactly what it measures.

The idea was mainly to gather useful data even from those who don't actively Handicache rate their hides and finds.

Its usefulness for less able cachers will depend on those less able cachers getting out there, finding the caches and driving the data :)

[Dorsetgal]

Like I said before, if the handicaching website was going to work, it would have done so looooooong before now.

I still think it is better to have the information included on the cache page, taking people to anotherr site to make a rating is a big ask when they're not even putting it on cache pages now, and secondly it is not inclusive having people who need access information going to another site.

The game has diversified, and so have the types of individual who geocache, it is high time people understood the changing demographic of the community and adjusted geocache pages accordingly, and an awareness campaign for cache setters to understand the importance of this.

Also the information needs to be standalone insofar as it shouldn't matter if someone is having a good or bad day, if the information is complete, they can make their decision accordingly.

[Team Microdot]

I'd like to take that, from a slightly different perspective, and tip it on its head for a moment - if you'll permit me?

Over the past few days I've become familiar with the term listing site agnostic - more to do with people's apparent fear of handing control to any particular listing site as far as I can tell. Not something which worries me personally I have to say.

Listing site agnostic does seem to be a popular idea though.

Yet you seem to be voting for Handicache style ratings which are listing site specific?

Would the inclusion of Handicache style ratings by a listing site encourage you to favour that listing site over one which didn't include them?




Like I said before, if the handicaching website was going to work, it would have done so looooooong before now.

I still think it is better to have the information included on the cache page, taking people to anotherr site to make a rating is a big ask when they're not even putting it on cache pages now, and secondly it is not inclusive having people who need access information going to another site.

The game has diversified, and so have the types of individual who geocache, it is high time people understood the changing demographic of the community and adjusted geocache pages accordingly, and an awareness campaign for cache setters to understand the importance of this.

Also the information needs to be standalone insofar as it shouldn't matter if someone is having a good or bad day, if the information is complete, they can make their decision accordingly.

[Dorsetgal]

I speak of geocaching.com because that is all i know and do.

Anything which takes the geocacher away from the main geocaching page will not work in my opinion.

Especially now we have so much more access to the cache pages via mobile devices etc.

I tend to open the geocaching app and read the cache page there, if there's not information about access there, however comprehensive it may be elsewhere, it is no good to me. Also, when loading the gpsr, it doesn't include information from other sites, so again, no matter how comprehensive it may be, I am not going to access it.

For the record, I do have a significant impairment, I do geocache using a range of different mobility aids, I often geocache alone, and although there was a time when I saw handicaching as the way to go, I no longer feel that way and haven't done so for at least six years.

It is no secret, I dislike the site name intensely. It stems from the American accepted term handicapped, which is nowadays seen as derogatory in the UK.

Because it is separate, it underlines the difference of cachers requiring access information rather than including them into the main game, which is divisive, and not really within the social model of disability.

I prefer to play an integrated game and not focus on disability but more a can do sense, hence although I will mention it when necessary, some people who read my logs have no idea I have a mobility impairment.

Separate, special and all those kinds of terms are now passé, the disability community has moved on, integration is the key, not separating people out.

Access information such as stiles, kissing gates, narrow bridges, gullies etc is useful to more than this who have mobility impairments or would self label as disabled, it is useful to those with temporary impairments, those who decide to take their grandparents with them, those with small children, buggies and the like.

Integration is the key in my mind, not further separation.

Access information should be on the shoulders of the whole community not just one person whose experience might be limited.

I would like to see GAGB promote awareness of good access information on geocache pages and encourage integration. When it is a separate entity people will always see it as someone else's responsibility, when in reality it is the responsibility of every geocache setter.

[Team Microdot]

OK - good :)

Here's some things I struggle with - and would value your input on :)

I struggle with the concept that the group I refer to as less able - well I even struggle with that to be completely honest - just the term - am I at risk of upsetting anyone by using that term as a frame to convey that the information I'm providing is specifically for a specific group of people?

What is the correct or preferred or culturally appropriate term to use for a human being who is not operating at the physical / mental optimum?

I'll leave it at that one question for now :)

Incidentally - I only use geocaching.com myself too - never felt the need to use anything else as it does everything I need :)

EDIT TO ADD: I realise I might be grasping a nettle here - but I've been caching that long I've grown somewhat immune to nettle stings :lol:

[JackieC]

I dont have an answer to making all caches more accessible, I wish I did, but what I would like to do is bring the information on what little things can make a huge dfference into the mainstream.

I agree with Dorsetgal, if handicaching was the way forward it would have taken off my now, its got some great stuff on there, but its seperate from the main listing sites.

Having recently tried to make a recent event fully accessible (a Halloween event in the dark) and spent alot more time ensuring that all areas involved were wheelchair/buggy friendly, I was then scuppered by a week of heavy rain that turned everything into thick mud (even on the stone paths), so I've a new appreciation of how just a couple of extra lines in the description can make all the difference (in my case mentioning that they aren't easily accessible if there has been heavy rain).

So I'd like to increase the amount of easily available information out there, whether its in the form of articles in the Seeker, downloadable leaflets, fully accessible events and/or the best practice guidelines.

I dont know if that will increase the number of fully accessible caches being placed, but if it gets cachers providing more information on the gates/stiles/paths in the cache description then at least cachers can make a more informed choice.

[Team Microdot]

I dont know if that will increase the number of fully accessible caches being placed, but if it gets cachers providing more information on the gates/stiles/paths in the cache description then at least cachers can make a more informed choice.

Agreed :cheers:

And the difficulty in doing that - sometimes - is in predicting the route a cacher is most likely to take to get to a particular cache :confused:

The last think I would want to do is try to help by rating a cache, only to find that I've inadvertently and unintentionally led them up the garden path (metaphorically and perhaps literally) because they took a completely different route to get there :(

[Dorsetgal]

For the record, I appreciate when caches are made wheelchair accessible, however, I use a range of mobility aids, a manual wheelchair, a manual wheelchair with power trike attached, an electric wheelchair and an all singing all dancing all terrain buggy which frankly can get where some of those who regard themselves as able bodied cannot walk - too bloomin' big to negotiate stiles etc and as I do not drive can only use it within a certain radius of my home co-ords, so in short, I can and do attempt geocaches which aren't wheelchair accessible if they have accurate information on the cache page and I feel it's worth a try.

Also, and this is something to consider, in the woods I can get off my buggy and stagger / crawl or whatever, if say, I started doing that on London Bridge either an ambulance, white van or the police might be called :lol:

There really are so many variables in the life of even one disabled Cacher that is why I consider accurate information is the key, and the place to put it should be on the geocache page.

[Team Microdot]

There really are so many variables in the life of even one disabled Cacher that is why I consider accurate information is the key, and the place to put it should be on the geocache page.

OK - so I'm going to assume that disabled cacher is an acceptable description that we can use going forward?

[Dorsetgal]

OK - so I'm going to assume that disabled cacher is an acceptable description that we can use going forward?

Yes, disabled Cacher is fine, however, "the disabled" wouldn't be fine. Disabled people would also be fine.

Referring to a disability, when asking me would result in an answer like a stile or a river ... people have impairments and are disabled by the environment :socool:

I know this can seem pedantic, but really it isn't. Disabled people have campaigned long and hard for inclusion, that's why for example, there's no reference to disability in my geocaching name, I am a person first and foremost, impairment is part of me as a person, but I am not that impairment.


(For those who might not be aware, I have a track record in advising in the field of disability access, from 2006-2009 at the Dept for Transport advising the govt on transport issues that affect / impact upon disabled people, from 2007-2012 LOCOG on the specific requirements of those partnered with assistance dogs and 2011 to date as a member of the Metropolitan Police Disability Independent Advisory Group, which most recently included advising officers involved with the Torch Security Team, but usually includes all aspects of policy, public order, access etc that might impact on disabled people).

[Team Microdot]

(For those who might not be aware, I have a track record in advising in the field of disability access, from 2006-2009 at the Dept for Transport advising the govt on transport issues that affect / impact upon disabled people, from 2007-2012 LOCOG on the specific requirements of those partnered with assistance dogs and 2011 to date as a member of the Metropolitan Police Disability Independent Advisory Group, which most recently included advising officers involved with the Torch Security Team, but usually includes all aspects of policy, public order, access etc that might impact on disabled people).

Have you ever approached Groundspeak about opportunities for the inclusion of extra features / information useful to disabled cachers in their website / apps / other offerings?

And if you have, what sort of response(s) did you get?

(Just for the purposes of background information / context for this discussion)

[Dorsetgal]

I have had some contact with Groundspeak inclusing Jeremy, over the years, both in person and by email.

I have always felt them very approachable.

I have for at least six years felt that enlightening cache setters was the way to go rather than take people elsewhere though.

[Brenin Tegeingl]

Groundspeak would love to incorporate a Handicaching.com style Terrain rating into the site, even if that was to incorporate the site it's self.

But that involves Bandwidth and Developer Time. And whilst they did post about Handicaching.com in the weekly news letter, currently the whole project has a very low priority!

Part of that is because of the apathy within the whole community towards them doing such a project.

The solution, is as a community to campaign directly to Groundspeak over this. If people will not get of their backsides and support a campaign, then it is Never going to happen.

Personally I've campaigned directly to Groundspeak over this, I've even put up 2 of only 30 Gold Deceangi Geocoins (the 30 were gifted to me, and I have given each one away, from my heart) in a effort to try and drive up ratings of UK caches on Handicaching.com.

I've shouted myself to a standstill, only to have those within the community cut me off at the knee's, and refuse to support things.

Wendy I understand* where your coming from re the name, and the fact it is a external site. But look at it this way .

Why should Groundspeak put such a project towards the top of the priority list, when the community will not even get behind the project! When there are other projects, a majority of the community are clamouring for. Look at the fact they bought and incorporated a independent Stats site. Because the community showed by a saturation level of usage, that was what they wanted.

So the question is, can you and others put aside their personal bias, and help drive up to a Saturation Level, ratings on Handicaching.com. And cause Groundspeak to move the issue, towards the top of the priority list, and not as it currently appears at the bottom.

Get Groundspeak on-board, and the other Listing Sites, will be given a huge push to produce something similar on their Sites.

If people do not pull their fingers out, it is never going to happen.

One or two shouting and pushing for it to happen, are drowned out b y the voices of bigger wish groups. So lets make this a big wish group, and really move things forward, so that it is incorporated within Listing Sites.

Handicaching.com rattings, whatever name is used, are more than just for usage by those in Wheelchairs, they are for those of the whole spectrum range of Disabilities. And we should be actively incorporating all of them, into our Hobby!

And that is something the GAGB should behind, if it wishes to represent the Geocaching Community in the UK. And not just ABLE Bodied Community Members.

So the question has to be, are those standing for election, intending to support all members of the community, whatever their abilities?

Or will those with Disabilities, be put to the bottom of the totem pole for support?

If you think I'm being Bolshie over this, well I've been Bolshie with Groundspeak as well over this!

Dave
Mancunian Pyrocacher
Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer-Groundspeak
*Full Time 24/7/365 Carer to MY Spouse and 2 Adult Children, so I have a very good understanding of issues faced by those with Disabilities of spectrum

[Dorsetgal]

It's more than the name Dave - it is about the separation.

It's also about terminology you used "in wheelchairs" which is a particular bugbear, people use wheelchairs ... Access is about so much more than wheelchair users, and many of the people who need that access advice would not readily self identify as disabled, it is for that reason, that i steadfastly will not touch handicaching again. That doesn't mean I am less experienced or my opinions are less valid, it's highly probable that I have found more caches using a wheelchair than anyone else in this thread ...


Really, people should appreciate the difficulty with the site and push to have integration. All this talk of separation makes my toes curl.

[countrymatters]

Dave raises many valid points that are worth following through. :)

But I think that part of the problem may lie in the lack of real understanding that those of us not disabled have of the issues facing those who are. Of course, we all realise that you can't get a wheelchair over a stile, and when I 'Terrain rate' any of my caches, I use a system I understand, even if no one actually know about it. But it means that I'm consistent, although I'm conscious of the fact that it's a purely arbitrary thing, and probably not much better than useless.

If, however, I had clear guidance on how to rate a cache for less abled people, I'd more than happily revise all my caches on that basis.

[Team Microdot]

It's more than the name Dave - it is about the separation.

It's also about terminology you used "in wheelchairs" which is a particular bugbear, people use wheelchairs ... Access is about so much more than wheelchair users, and many of the people who need that access advice would not readily self identify as disabled, it is for that reason, that i steadfastly will not touch handicaching again. That doesn't mean I am less experienced or my opinions are less valid, it's highly probable that I have found more caches using a wheelchair than anyone else in this thread ...


Really, people should appreciate the difficulty with the site and push to have integration. All this talk of separation makes my toes curl.


Grasping the nettle again - sadly I have to say that trying to engage in a useful dialogue where every single word / term / definition is subjected to microscopic scrutiny makes my toes curl :(

I appreciate how it would be important that the finished product be useful and respectful but I think it would slow discussion if people have to spend more time choosing precise wording than they do actually conveying their thoughts in the early stages - at least those of us who don't have the benefit of your insight and experience to date.

Can we push past that if it helps to get things moving in the right direction?

[Brenin Tegeingl]

Wendy my Spouse on the few occasions she goes out nowdays, and then it's usually just for DR appointments or Tribunal Hearings. Spends her time being propelled around in a wheelchair. She does not have a issue with being said to be "In" a Wheelchair, so sorry not all have issues with that.

And if you actually took the time to fully read my post, I was championing those of all abilities!

I've seen a Wheelchair user access places where those with sticks or frames could not. I've seen Prestatyn have the Pavements revamped recently, so taking out choke points on corners, and a horrendous slope at one part, which was torturous for wheelchair users to traverse, because the slope from the buildings to the edge of the pavement and the parked cars there. Was forcing the wheelchair downwards towards those parked cars. In fact I actually damaged my back, keeping my spouse straight on that section, after a ejit tried walking thru her!

The point being, please stop arguing semantics over terms being used. Because that alone drives people away from the issue.

Please remember your not dealing with a Government Committee, but a community who for the most part do not have a clue, and sadly from the personal experience of the last number of years. Do not as a whole community give a damn.

Lets stop arguing terms, and reach out to the community as a whole, and teach them. Lets use anyway possible to move the Priority from the bottom to the top.

Terry try rating a cache on Handicaching.com, you do not need knowledge of peoples abilities, you just answer a series of simple multiple answer questions. The site then produces a rating which when decoded, gives the user Multiple levels of information on what to expect. and so Empowering the user to make a informed decision.

Bickering over terms, does not empower anyone. Just like in the US they do not have a issue with Handicapped, and it is considered discriminatory here in the UK. If your going to argue semantics over the name of the site, and terms used to reference people of restricted abilities. Then your not concentrating on what you should be. That is getting a suitable Terrain rating system active on "All" Listing Sites. I've personally been Championing that for GC directly with Groundspeak for over 6 years, and yet the priority is still a low one. If I have to fight over "Terms" used, then I'm not fighting for the actual issue. And instead I'm just :wacko:

My Spouse does not give a ^$%£ about what terms are used, just like many others do not, they are more concerned about getting the Priority moved up and implemented.

Dave

[Dorsetgal]

I am not arguing semantics, but it seems that if people don't wish to move forward in a progressive and inclusive style then there's no point discussing the issue.

As always those who shout loudest will have their way and will turn people, with extremely pertinent experience away because of this.

Example: I pointed out which terms many find unacceptable and best not used and am accused of bickering ... same old GAGB eh?

[Mongoose39uk]

The last time I looked Dave either speaks for himself or if he signs Deci as a reviewer.

He does not speak on behalf of the GAGB.

I ill not use handicaching for similar reasons and would prefer to see a integrated system.

The GAGB if it gets its act together could be a vehicle through which people could apply a pressure of change to the listing sites (there are more than groundspeak).

It's always going to be a hot potato and we need to look at outcomes not words

[Team Microdot]

I am not arguing semantics, but it seems that if people don't wish to move forward in a progressive and inclusive style then there's no point discussing the issue.

As always those who shout loudest will have their way and will turn people, with extremely pertinent experience away because of this.

Example: I pointed out which terms many find unacceptable and best not used and am accused of bickering ... same old GAGB eh?

Sorry you feel that way - I thought we were having a frank discussion with a view to making some progress. :(

I'll step back and let someone better qualified take up the mantle :)

[Dorsetgal]

Sorry you feel that way - I thought we were having a frank discussion with a view to making some progress. :(

I'll step back and let someone better qualified take up the mantle :)

I too thought it was a worthwhile discussion until Mancunian said this

"Bickering over terms, does not empower anyone. Just like in the US they do not have a issue with Handicapped, and it is considered discriminatory here in the UK. If your going to argue semantics over the name of the site, and terms used to reference people of restricted abilities. Then your not concentrating on what you should be. That is getting a suitable Terrain rating system active on "All" Listing Sites. I've personally been Championing that for GC directly with Groundspeak for over 6 years, and yet the priority is still a low one. If I have to fight over "Terms" used, then I'm not fighting for the actual issue."

Enough to stifle any creative and progressive discussion.

If people really want to know why the handicaching website isn't popular and what we as a community could do to improve awareness of access issues among cache setters, they could well listen rather than dismiss heartfelt feelings by trivialising them as bickering.

[Team Microdot]

Sorry - I don't think that is entirely fair.

Dialogue involves both parties listening.

I listened to your thoughts and feelings - or at least tried to yet when I tried to articulate my own things seemed to go downhill :(

As I said - it looks like I'm the wrong man for the job here, which makes me sad, but I'd rather back off and hopefully allow the thread to continue in a positive way than make a hash of things through lack of experience and ability.

Mancunian has a big heart, speaks plainly, and fights for things and people he believes in - which gets my vote.


I too thought it was a worthwhile discussion until Mancunian said this

"Bickering over terms, does not empower anyone. Just like in the US they do not have a issue with Handicapped, and it is considered discriminatory here in the UK. If your going to argue semantics over the name of the site, and terms used to reference people of restricted abilities. Then your not concentrating on what you should be. That is getting a suitable Terrain rating system active on "All" Listing Sites. I've personally been Championing that for GC directly with Groundspeak for over 6 years, and yet the priority is still a low one. If I have to fight over "Terms" used, then I'm not fighting for the actual issue."

Enough to stifle any creative and progressive discussion.

If people really want to know why the handicaching website isn't popular and what we as a community could do to improve awareness of access issues among cache setters, they could well listen rather than dismiss heartfelt feelings by trivialising them as bickering.

[Dorsetgal]

Sorry - I don't think that is entirely fair.

Dialogue involves both parties listening.

I listened to your thoughts and feelings - or at least tried to yet when I tried to articulate my own things seemed to go downhill :(

As I said - it looks like I'm the wrong man for the job here, which makes me sad, but I'd rather back off and hopefully allow the thread to continue in a positive way than make a hash of things through lack of experience and ability. <snip>



I think you might have misunderstood.

Actually, I thought you were asking pertinent questions, and I was happy to listen and answer them, it certainly wasn't your thoughts or feeling that I took umbridge at. I was actually relieved that someone was taking the trouble to understand and I thank you for that.

Please keep asking :applause:

However, others have stated they don't think it is about semantics, in many ways it isn't , but in some ways it is ... a word can convey powerful meaning and if words used, with the best will in the world are archaic or not acceptable to those they are directed at, then people will turn away. For others to dismiss my feelings as bickering is really not understanding nor trying to understand.

[Team Microdot]

I think you might have misunderstood.

Actually, I thought you were asking pertinent questions, and I was happy to listen and answer them, it certainly wasn't your thoughts or feeling that I took umbridge at. I was actually relieved that someone was taking the trouble to understand and I thank you for that.

Please keep asking :applause:

However, others have stated they don't think it is about semantics, in many ways it isn't , but in some ways it is ... a word can convey powerful meaning and if words used, with the best will in the world are archaic or not acceptable to those they are directed at, then people will turn away. For others to dismiss my feelings as bickering is really not understanding nor trying to understand.

Separated by a common language eh? :lol:

I have fond memories once of a slogan t-shirt on Blackpool Prom which read - If you don't burp - I won't fart

So maybe we could bumble along together, metaphorically speaking of course, on that basis? :)

[Team Microdot]

So - next question(s) then.

Your preference seems center on encouraging individual cachers to include more information on their cache pages which is useful to disabled geocachers rather than incorporating specific additional features into the interface of the listing site itself?

[sandvika]

Who seriously, when looking up a geocache on a phone or gpsr is going to then log on to another site?

That's a very good point. The strength of GCvote is that it integrates with the dominant listing site. Handicaching might be better served by adopting the same approach.

How about a listing site that gives the distance for each cache, the elevation gain, % off trail, % moderate overgrowth, % heavy overgrowth, estimates for physical challenge, mental challenge and camouflage? It's TerraCaching, the Betamax of listing sites! I don't know why they are alone in having adopted this years ago, as good ideas should be infectious, but it shows that GAGB should make adding information like this, and the handicaching ratings a campaign to take to all listing sites. I'm definitely up for this - anything that makes planning of caching trips easier for those with restricted mobility.

[The magna defender]

I think the integration of handi caching into gc.com is a great idea the reason why I don't use it is because its currently a complete faff.

[Poole_Man]

Many people with alternate access needs have a fear of admitting their needs so often do not thank people they don't know for their help. I have seen people harassed due to admitting their alternative needs. I would read reviews for access in many environments but wouldn't want to reveal that I had a disability.

Many people with alternative access needs have problems with revealing such needs due to the complexity of their health issues. For many months I denied to others my issues and wouldn't have posted anything that may have caused people to know of them.

Because the way that some people treat people with alternative needs they never reveal them to anyone often to the detriment of themselves. If society in general was more alternative needs friendly this wouldn't happen and people would be more open to say thank you and not worried about the consequences of admitting to having alternative access needs.

SO FAR EVERYONE I HAVE HAD CONTACT WITH IN GEOCACHING HAS BEEN ALTERNATIVE ACCESS NEED FRIENDLY, WE DO KNOW THAT NOT ALL CACHES WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE TO US THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN NOT ALWAYS ACHIEVE FOR MANY REASONS.

THANK YOU TO ANYONE THAT RATES THEIR CACHES ON HANDICACHING.COM, OR ADDS RELEVANT ENTRIES TO THEIR CACHE PAGE ON GEOCACHING.COM ITS A HELP TO ME AND MANY OTHERS.


Admittedly though I haven't done any Handicache reviews for a few months, and I'll tell you why. Never once have I had any feedback that anyone ever has benefited from a single one of those reviews.

[Poole_Man]

The Dorset County section of the Ramblers Association would be a good first port of call for access issues connected with Rights of Ways.

They have a website at http://www.dorset-ramblers.org.uk/ they keep a good eye on developments Right of Way wise throughout the County.


That's very good advice, thank you :) do you think I would be better going straight to the rights of way, whom I have a named contact, or thorough] the parish council first by requesting it in the agenda for an upcoming meeting?

[lfc4eva]

I have handicache rated some of my hides and was regularly rating my finds until a couple of months ago when I read on Facebook that the ratings on Handicaching.com weren't useful because they required a link through to a different website.. :(

I don't have any specialist knowledge nor am I qualified to speak on behalf of disabled cachers, but if the GAGB want to campaign for trying to get some kind of Handicache rating facility incorporated in the listing sites, which will make it more user friendly and of benefit to those who need it then you have my full support and I am happy to help in any way I can. :)

[Cache on Wheels]

Dave raises many valid points that are worth following through. :)

But I think that part of the problem may lie in the lack of real understanding that those of us not disabled have of the issues facing those who are. Of course, we all realise that you can't get a wheelchair over a stile, and when I 'Terrain rate' any of my caches, I use a system I understand, even if no one actually know about it. But it means that I'm consistent, although I'm conscious of the fact that it's a purely arbitrary thing, and probably not much better than useless.

If, however, I had clear guidance on how to rate a cache for less abled people, I'd more than happily revise all my caches on that basis.

. Thank you for your reply. If you look at handicaching.com, what you are rating is the distance to cacher, height if cache, obstructions etc and not the abilities of the cacher are :) you are basically given options on the drop down list to choose from which are broken down more so than on GC.com, thus providing more in depth info for the cacher reading it. Having this extra info then helps on make a more informed decision on if they are happy to try and find that particular cache :)

[martlakes]

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!) ;)

[Cache on Wheels]

I agree with you Dave, just because something has not worked before, does not mean we should stop trying.
For those who are interested, we need to come up with a plan of action at moving forward.
I posted a thread on the Groundspeak forums about handicaching at the beginning of the year and io the whole, people were very supportive of it, went off and rated caches, some took groups on routes to find caches ...
Here is the link to that forum thread: https://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=288785&st=0&gopid=5157839&#entry5157839

The difference with handicaching rating is there are options from drop down lists that you choose from in order to rate the cache that are more detailed than on GC.com so one does not need to know the ability of a cacher, just the terrain split down into sections of the general route to the cache. Eg distance to cache, route surface, height from ground ...

Is there are routes we have taken that I have used my old mobility scooter that came apart easy, into lighter pieces that my hubby and friends had to take apart and lift over a gate that was locked when we came back.
We have also used routes that we knew beforehand after enquiring that there were a couple of kissing gates: I was able to walk through the kissing gate and my hubby collapse a lift over my wheelchair, so that was not impossible, as the rest if the route surface was easy for me to use my scooter / wheelchair on.

Thank you all so much for your input so far, it's great to see so many responses and good to hear people's different points of view :)
Positivity is contagious, nothing is impossible :) :)

[Cache on Wheels]

I agree with you Dave, just because something has not worked before, does not mean we should stop trying.
For those who are interested, we need to come up with a plan of action at moving forward.
I posted a thread on the Groundspeak forums about handicaching at the beginning of the year and io the whole, people were very supportive of it, went off and rated caches, some took groups on routes to find caches ...
Here is the link to that forum thread: https://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=288785&st=0&gopid=5157839&#entry5157839

The difference with handicaching rating is there are options from drop down lists that you choose from in order to rate the cache that are more detailed than on GC.com so one does not need to know the ability of a cacher, just the terrain split down into sections of the general route to the cache. Eg distance to cache, route surface, height from ground ...

Is there are routes we have taken that I have used my old mobility scooter that came apart easy, into lighter pieces that my hubby and friends had to take apart and lift over a gate that was locked when we came back.
We have also used routes that we knew beforehand after enquiring that there were a couple of kissing gates: I was able to walk through the kissing gate and my hubby collapse a lift over my wheelchair, so that was not impossible, as the rest if the route surface was easy for me to use my scooter / wheelchair on.

Thank you all so much for your input so far, it's great to see so many responses and good to hear people's different points of view :)
Positivity is contagious, nothing is impossible :) :)

[Dorsetgal]

I agree with you Dave, just because something has not worked before, does not mean we should stop trying.
For those who are interested, we need to come up with a plan of action at moving forward.


The handicaching website has been going for years, at least seven and a half to my knowledge, and even when the geocaching community was much smaller than it is now, it was impossible to get people to move away from the geocaching.com website to use it.

How many years would you wish to waste flogging it? I think it's time to try a different tack, and go for raising awareness of increased information on cache pages from the get go, rather than some bolt on that not many people use, and that some find divisive anyway.

Access information shouldn't be about "those who are interested" it should be the responsibility of the community. People often shy away from providing such information as they aren't sure what's needed, that's why an awareness drive might help.

[Dorsetgal]

I have seen people harassed due to admitting their alternative needs. I would read reviews for access in many environments but wouldn't want to reveal that I had a disability.


I trust this is not in a geocaching environment?

In seven and a half years I have only come across negativity from one person, that person is still active now, they know who they are and I suspect given my caching record they recognise their error.

As a person who has recently been victim of disability hate crime (a serious offence last week), I am very well aware of the magnitude of discrimination in society, but I wish to stress it IS NOT IN THE GEOCACHING COMMUNITY, so please, rest easy, you won't get any trouble from people within this game. They will respect you for what you can do, but I have learned the best way is to integrate and be a part of the larger community, I have no wish to be separate because I may or may not have a wish for accurate access information.

[Dorsetgal]

So - next question(s) then.

Your preference seems center on encouraging individual cachers to include more information on their cache pages which is useful to disabled geocachers rather than incorporating specific additional features into the interface of the listing site itself?

I don't necessarily think its an either or, and would be happy with the exploration of both.

Inclusion is my main concern, for two reasons, firstly, I play this game to be part of the community, as indeed I lead my life, and don't wish to visit a separate site, and secondly, the information is not just useful to those who self declare as disabled, lots of other people in the community might benefit from additional info.

[Poole_Man]

No it wasn't in a geocaching environment that I was referring to but the same fears would apply to the possibility it would happen in the geocaching environment.

I would say that with the thousands of geocachers I am unsure how you could be sure it never happens in the geocaching environment. You just need to take proper safety precautions to protect yourself.


I trust this is not in a geocaching environment?

In seven and a half years I have only come across negativity from one person, that person is still active now, they know who they are and I suspect given my caching record they recognise their error.

As a person who has recently been victim of disability hate crime (a serious offence last week), I am very well aware of the magnitude of discrimination in society, but I wish to stress it IS NOT IN THE GEOCACHING COMMUNITY, so please, rest easy, you won't get any trouble from people within this game. They will respect you for what you can do, but I have learned the best way is to integrate and be a part of the larger community, I have no wish to be separate because I may or may not have a wish for accurate access information.

[markandlynn]

The handicaching website has been going for years, at least seven and a half to my knowledge, and even when the geocaching community was much smaller than it is now, it was impossible to get people to move away from the geocaching.com website to use it.

How many years would you wish to waste flogging it? .

If enough people used it then GC would see the demand and probably consider including it in the website.

Dont say they wont as they allready have included stats when they purchased a stake the my geocaching profile website after seeing how popular it was.

As for how many years thats a daft argument, you have to put the number of people caching into that equation for it to make sense, if 1% use it then you will get more rated now than 7 years ago.

Promote the tool we have and use those stats to beat down a listing sites door.

After all GC are a for profit company give them a business case rather than a lone voice in the wilderness.

[Team Microdot]

I might not have much time to post today, but I wanted to try to set a ball rolling.

As always, I'm going to speak plainly - if I were digging a swimming pool I'd start with a shovel or even an excavator, rather than a teaspoon ;)

So far in this thread we've had input from three cachers with disabilities. That demonstrates to the listing sites that at least three cachers would benefit from what we are seeking.

Three cachers isn't many - a bit like using that teaspoon I mentioned earlier to crack a walnut :blink:

I'm looking for ideas on how we can encourage more disabled cachers to come forward and demonstrate real demand for useful rating data and information on cache pages themselves.

Taking Groundspeak as the biggest player by several orders of magnitude, how do we in Great Britain, as probably only their fourth largest customer on a global scale, build a large enough voice to convince them to take positive action?

[sandvika]

Taking Groundspeak as the biggest player by several orders of magnitude, how do we in Great Britain, as probably only their fourth largest customer on a global scale, build a large enough voice to convince them to take positive action?

Regrettably, I don't think they'll care about this from a UK perspective; it's really up to our global community to put pressure on them, particularly from the US. This should be achievable because there is already a legal precedent in case law (http://www.dralegal.org/cases/private_business/Smith_v_Hotels_com.php) where hotel booking web site operators have been required to add web site features to search for and reserve hotel rooms that have accessible accommodation. This is the precise analogue of Groundspeak having to add web site features to search for accessible geocaches. GS might argue that the searchable wheelchair accessible attribute meets this requirement, however, I think the very different criteria on handicaching demonstrate clearly that this is not enough.

[mantonclan]

I have followed the discussion here and on thread on other forums, and it made me think.

I have always be supportive of inclusion, but as an able bodied individual I have never actively done anything to support/help complete the inclusion of everyone in the game. I have seen handicaching.com and previously never gave it much thought. What a complacent view and one I set about changing.

This morning I started to rate all my caches on handicaching.com, granted I do not have many, but it doesn't take long and is a painless process. I have also ensured I link to Handicaching.com via my cache pages. I will make a point of rating all my caches, both current and future going forward.

Why the change? Well we see here and in other forums individuals talking of the merits of inclusion in the game and in the same breath stating Groundspeak will be slow in making changes. Why slow? Well from what I can see there is a lot of talk but no real action. If we want Groundspeak to recognise the significant support then we ALL need to take some small action, lots of small actions will quickly become a very large statement of support and one Groundspeak will find it hard to ignore.

Rather than continually debating, lets all make a small contribution and start to rate our caches. A few minutes investment in our own time could result in a much improved game for EVERYONE.

[Team Microdot]

:wub:

I think I wub you!

:lol:




I have followed the discussion here and on thread on other forums, and it made me think.

I have always be supportive of inclusion, but as an able bodied individual I have never actively done anything to support/help complete the inclusion of everyone in the game. I have seen handicaching.com and previously never gave it much thought. What a complacent view and one I set about changing.

This morning I started to rate all my caches on handicaching.com, granted I do not have many, but it doesn't take long and is a painless process. I have also ensured I link to Handicaching.com via my cache pages. I will make a point of rating all my caches, both current and future going forward.

Why the change? Well we see here and in other forums individuals talking of the merits of inclusion in the game and in the same breath stating Groundspeak will be slow in making changes. Why slow? Well from what I can see there is a lot of talk but no real action. If we want Groundspeak to recognise the significant support then we ALL need to take some small action, lots of small actions will quickly become a very large statement of support and one Groundspeak will find it hard to ignore.

Rather than continually debating, lets all make a small contribution and start to rate our caches. A few minutes investment in our own time could result in a much improved game for EVERYONE.

[Team Microdot]

I'm aiming for friendly cooperation - not capitulation.

And yes - I rather than we - as this is something I've been interested in for quite a while now - and it's something I'd like to pursue - if there is proof of sufficient need - regardless of my status within the GAGB - elected or not.

So again I would ask again - please - that more cachers with disabilities come forward and speak up and help build a case to convince listing sites to invest the required resource to move things forward :cheers:



Regrettably, I don't think they'll care about this from a UK perspective; it's really up to our global community to put pressure on them, particularly from the US. This should be achievable because there is already a legal precedent in case law (http://www.dralegal.org/cases/private_business/Smith_v_Hotels_com.php) where hotel booking web site operators have been required to add web site features to search for and reserve hotel rooms that have accessible accommodation. This is the precise analogue of Groundspeak having to add web site features to search for accessible geocaches. GS might argue that the searchable wheelchair accessible attribute meets this requirement, however, I think the very different criteria on handicaching demonstrate clearly that this is not enough.

[The magna defender]

I know micro and lfc rate every cache they find with the script provided by Jeremyr. I find a lot of caches and hide a lot of caches imagine how many handi caching ratings that would be overall

Sorry my point is do you have a link to the Jeremy r script and how do I use it thanks

[Team Microdot]

I know micro and lfc rate every cache they find with the script provided by Jeremyr. I find a lot of caches and hide a lot of caches imagine how many handi caching ratings that would be overall

Sorry my point is do you have a link to the Jeremy r script and how do I use it thanks

Not strictly true on a couple of counts.

I've rated a bunch of the caches I've found but have done none now for a few months for reasons mentioned earlier - I want to know that it is of use - hence asking more disabled cachers to come forward :)

I know that LFC4eva has done lots too and also Schnuz - his ratings are particularly excellent - plenty of detail :)

I did try out the script you mention and it worked pretty well as I remember - but for reasons I don't recall I reverted back to doing it the way I'd got used to.

I'd have my notepad open with the notes I'd made while out in the field - not pages and pages, just a few key notes about things like nearby parking, path surfaces and widths, an idea of the inclination of any slopes, how many stiles / kissing gates / ladder stiles etc.

I find the concept of a mountain bike a good indicator of how suitable a path is for anything on wheels i.e. this would be a doddle on a mountain bike or a fully fit person on a mountain bike could manage this but anything else with wheels would struggle.

As far as computer stuff goes, if I'm logging finds I'll have the cache page open in one browser tab, the Handicache site on a second, probably the OS map of the location open in a third and probably Google Earth running in the background so I can use the ruler tool to measure distances.

I'll rate the cache before logging it - that way I can paste a hyperlink to the rating right there in my log, so anyone reading my log just has to click on the link to get to the rating on the Handicache site.

It does take effort, but it's not difficult once you get a rhythm going - especially if you're logging and rating caches along a trail as a lot of the information from one rating can be copy/pasted to the others.

I will try to find the script - think it was a Greasemonkey script and post a link here if I can :)

[The magna defender]

Yeah got me thinking as I find a tonne of caches every year and got 200 last month which is a poor month for me. Just think how many ratings would be done over the years

[Team Microdot]

Yeah got me thinking as I find a tonne of caches every year and got 200 last month which is a poor month for me. Just think how many ratings would be done over the years

Why not start by rating all the caches on your favourites list?

It's vitally important - at least as far as I'm concerned - that we try to assist disabled cachers in getting to quality caches - not just easy drive-bys which they can probably already get to with no Handicache rating at all :cool:

[lfc4eva]

I will try to find the script - think it was a Greasemonkey script and post a link here if I can :)

This is what you're looking for http://www.nwcaching.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5575&p=75445 ;)


I pretty much follow the same format as Microdot.. the main reason for stopping using the Greasemonkey script is because it doesn't work when you are logging your finds via the field notes option. :(

I have my log open in one tab.. handicache open in another.. and the clayjar ratings website open in another, just to remind myself of the suggested D/T ratings. I use Google Earth and the ruler to measure distances from parking to cache and/or from cache to cache if doing a series.

It might sound like a bit of a faff, but once you get into the swing of it and make it part of your routine, it's not too bad... and it's worth the effort if it helps others. :)

[martlakes]

I posted a long reply yesterday evening but it's disappeared into the void / review Q.

[Team Microdot]

I posted a long reply yesterday evening but it's disappeared into the void / review Q.

:(

I'm not aware that there is a review Q on here - although unfortunately the server which hosts the website seems to be creaking a bit at the moment :(

I don't suppose you could try again please?

Might be a good idea to type it up in notepad or something and then copy/paste here - just in case the web server farts again when you hit Submit :mad:

[Maple Leaf]

I posted a long reply yesterday evening but it's disappeared into the void / review Q.

Sorry, didn't spot that it needed approving ... perhaps because it was so long :p

It is there now ... post #57

[Brenin Tegeingl]

Ok lets list a few points and add suggestions on how we achieve them

1: We wish to see a "All Physical Abilities" Terrain rating, on all Listing Sites. By persuading the Largest Listing Site to do so, we have a extra tool to persuade, the Other Listing Sites who have not yet done so at that point.

So how to achieve this?

Groundspeak have specifically stated that they would love to incorporate such a system, but (and there is always a but) they do not have the available Bandwidth, nor do they currently have the available Developer Resources. Yet they both Purchased a Independent Stats Site, and Incorporated it into GC. So with a large % of the community, having that on their wish list, they found both for that.

2:So to move things forward, we as a community have to show to Groundspeak, that this is a hight priority on the communities wish List

So how to achieve this?

Create a Saturation Point for caches in the UK rated on Handicachig.com (lets all agree to throw out the issues over the name for now, we as a group could agree to simply refer to it as HC.com), then once Saturation is reached in the UK. The GAGB reaches out to other Geocaching Associations in the World (the elections already show one link, with the Returning Officer, being a Officer in the Alaska Geocaching Association) and persuade them to come on board with the idea, and build up Saturation around the world.

Once we start getting to that level, then Groundspeak will have to move the priority from the bottom of the List to the top.

Will this be easy? No it will be a sheer bloody climb to achieve the goal. But the end result will be worth it.

So yes at first it would entail, using a Off GC or other Listing Site Resource, but please look at that as a tool to achieve the end goal. There is the saying "No Pain, No Gain", well using HC.com is the pain, the Goal, every Listing Site Incorporating a "All Physical Abilities" Terrain rating system.

Lets instead of a small shout, all get together and give All Listing Sites a Roar!

Together we can do it, where a small group will never achieve it. Lets create a Giant Snow Ball on it's way down the slope, and not a tiny one being pushed up the slope.

Personally I've been pushing the Snow Ball up the slope, for the last 6 years. Lets see the next 12 months for the GAGB, change that to a Giant Snow Ball on it's way down the slope. If everyone just rates just 10% of the finds they make, just think of the affect that alone would have.

Please, Please get behind this and help push!

Dave

[The magna defender]

I've done a few of my recent driveby hides and have done my Earthcaches which are all over the place: Somerset, Yorkshire, Northumberland so maybe thatll spread awareness down there. Its not as hard a process as I thought. I'll try do one for all my cache hides. That'll get the numbers up :P

[mantonclan]

I thinks its great we now have a growing number of cachers who are actively going to rate their caches (and finds) on HC

Could I also point out (I know you all already to know but it never hurts to mention it) that when you do rate the cache at then end of the raring process you are give a unique piece of code that allows you to add a HC rated seal to your cache page that will link your GC listing to the rating page on HC

It only takes a few minutes to update the cache page and the seal adds a great prompt for others to go over to HC and see what its all about. It might even encourage others to rate their own caches and finds if they start to see the seal appearing more often.

[amberel]

I thinks its great we now have a growing number of cachers who are actively going to rate their caches ...For several years I did rate all my caches on HC. But I found it difficult to answer some of the questions because of different routes, different weather conditions, different disabilities. I know people would not necessarily mention it, but in several years I never saw any indication that it had been the slightest use to anybody. And when I read a while back that DorsetGal discouraged it, I stopped doing it. I will reconsider my position on this.

On the subject of which words to use to describe disability, I feel it is the same as it is for racial issues - the intention is far more important than the actual words. The problem is that each new word picks up associations from badly intentioned usage, at which point it becomes non-PC and a new word gets invented. The "PC-life" of each new variation seems to be getting shorter and shorter. Add in regional differences that can't keep up with the changes and the written word which still shows yesterday's PC word and it's clear to me that we should get out of this cycle of PC change.

Rgds, Andy

[Team Microdot]

Our earliest cache hide is GC26YW3 Weir could it be? and that's also probably the most decent cache we have which is easily accessible to less able cachers :)

The handicache rating code for that cache - which is automatically generated for you each time you rate a cache looks like this:

<!--start of handicaching link-->
<p>
<a href="http://www.handicaching.com/show.php?waypoint= GC26YW3" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.handicaching.com/images/seal_rater2.gif" border="0" alt="View the ratings for GC26YW3"></a>
</p>
<!--end of handicaching link-->

And on the cache page that code is copied into, the result looks like this (unfortunately I don't know how to make this image a clickable hyperlink in this forum - easy enough on the NW Cacher's forum but not sure how I would do it here) :

http://www.handicaching.com/images/seal_rater2.gif

[Team Microdot]

I think Mongoose39UK summed it up rather nicely - it's about outcomes - not words :)




On the subject of which words to use to describe disability, I feel it is the same as it is for racial issues - the intention is far more important than the actual words. The problem is that each new word picks up associations from badly intentioned usage, at which point it becomes non-PC and a new word gets invented. The "PC-life" of each new variation seems to be getting shorter and shorter. Add in regional differences that can't keep up with the changes and the written word which still shows yesterday's PC word and it's clear to me that we should get out of this cycle of PC change.

Rgds, Andy

[Team Microdot]

I've done a few of my recent driveby hides and have done my Earthcaches which are all over the place: Somerset, Yorkshire, Northumberland so maybe thatll spread awareness down there. Its not as hard a process as I thought. I'll try do one for all my cache hides. That'll get the numbers up :P

Excellent news :cool:

I never even thought about Earthcaches - but now you mention them they potentially lend themselves perfectly as accessible caches as they can usually be completed without a physically demanding hunt :socool:

Nice one Mangna :applause:

[eusty]

I thinks its great we now have a growing number of cachers who are actively going to rate their caches (and finds) on HC
Actually it's after reading this thread I decided to rate those of mine which maybe suitable for disabled cachers. :)

[Cache on Wheels]

I thinks its great we now have a growing number of cachers who are actively going to rate their caches (and finds) on HC

Could I also point out (I know you all already to know but it never hurts to mention it) that when you do rate the cache at then end of the raring process you are give a unique piece of code that allows you to add a HC rated seal to your cache page that will link your GC listing to the rating page on HC

It only takes a few minutes to update the cache page and the seal adds a great prompt for others to go over to HC and see what its all about. It might even encourage others to rate their own caches and finds if they start to see the seal appearing more often.

Thanks for pointing that our again, I have it in my profile and when I rate a cache, I email the link to the CO and ask if they could add it to the description part in their cache page. So far all if them have :) thank you :) all you have to do is then click on the yellow icon which takes you directly to the rating, no logging on required :) :applause:

[Cache on Wheels]

Actually it's after reading this thread I decided to rate those of mine which maybe suitable for disabled cachers. :)

thank you very much for doing that, it's great to read that others are becoming more aware of the facility :) :applause:

[Cache on Wheels]

Our earliest cache hide is GC26YW3 Weir could it be? and that's also probably the most decent cache we have which is easily accessible to less able cachers :)

The handicache rating code for that cache - which is automatically generated for you each time you rate a cache looks like this:

<!--start of handicaching link-->
<p>
<a href="http://www.handicaching.com/show.php?waypoint= GC26YW3" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.handicaching.com/images/seal_rater2.gif" border="0" alt="View the ratings for GC26YW3"></a>
</p>
<!--end of handicaching link-->

And on the cache page that code is copied into, the result looks like this (unfortunately I don't know how to make this image a clickable hyperlink in this forum - easy enough on the NW Cacher's forum but not sure how I would do it here) :

http://www.handicaching.com/images/seal_rater2.gif

and the best bit is tgere is no need to log in to another site, you just click on the big yellow icon and its as quick as clicking on the hint button :)

[Cache on Wheels]

for those who may have missed the post, I had a chat on the UK Geocaching podcast show with 3 hosts on their October show about handicaching and the benefits of it. The whole show is a great listen, especially where 2 of the hosts cut off ore recording in the hope of a FTF of a new cache published, :) but to keep on topic, it starts at 20 mins in and explains a bit about how handicaching.com works to rate a cache using the drop down menus on their site. Sure it would be great to have the more detailed facility for anyone to rate a cache on GC.com but as Dave points out, maybe we need to go with what is already there at the moment, (hope I understood that correct Dave)
I have just submitted some new caches, and whilst I was able to add some useful disabled access info to the main page on one eg Church Micro Puddletown, there is only minimal space so had to add extra useful info on the description part on handicaching rating eg Church Micro Dewlish.

Here is the link to the show:http://www.ukgcpodcast.com/2012/10/04/show-october-2012-the-one-with-three-hosts/ :applause:

They also added show notes on grease monkey about rating the caches, but technically I'm not understanding that part about Firefox etc but it may mean something to a lot if others who have posted about band width etc. :) the link for that part is: http://www.ukgcpodcast.com/2012/10/07/geocaching-greasemonkey-and-handicaching/

I hope some of you will find this info useful.

Ps I'm still not seeing a Thank button which is the only reason I have not thanked people for their posts. Do I have to earn points to do that? :)

[Cache on Wheels]

Excellent news :cool:

I never even thought about Earthcaches - but now you mention them they potentially lend themselves perfectly as accessible caches as they can usually be completed without a physically demanding hunt :socool:

Nice one Mangna :applause:

thats a great idea, I never thought of that either :) :applause:

[eusty]

Ps I'm still not seeing a Thank button which is the only reason I have not thanked people for their posts. Do I have to earn points to do that? :)
Now sure as I looked for it the other day and couldn't find it...but noticed it at the bottom right of a post the next day! :)

[Team Microdot]

Ps I'm still not seeing a Thank button which is the only reason I have not thanked people for their posts. Do I have to earn points to do that? :)

I think it magically appears after you've made a certain minimum number of posts - not sure how many it is though - sorry :(

[Cache on Wheels]

Now sure as I looked for it the other day and couldn't find it...but noticed it at the bottom right of a post the next day! :)

looks like you made it appear by magic :) :applause: it is just a plain empty box 2 to the rhs of the quite box, I just clicked it and hey presto, a thanks popped up :) thank you :)

[Team Microdot]

I'm bringing this post forward by quoting it, as I think it fell foul of sitting in queue and might not be spotted otherwise as the thread has moved on quite a bit - and that would be a shame as there's obviously a lot of thought and effort gone into it :cheers:


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!) ;)

[markandlynn]

If enough people used it then GC would see the demand and probably consider including it in the website.

Dont say they wont as they allready have included stats when they purchased a stake the my geocaching profile website after seeing how popular it was.

As for how many years thats a daft argument, you have to put the number of people caching into that equation for it to make sense, if 1% use it then you will get more rated now than 7 years ago.

Promote the tool we have and use those stats to beat down a listing sites door.

After all GC are a for profit company give them a business case rather than a lone voice in the wilderness.

As i said use the existing site as a tool to get the other sites to listen.

Its a for profit organisation money and numbers works lone voices do not

[Cache on Wheels]

that was very useful info, thank you. I would like to add to your point you make about your either in a wheelchair or your not.
My mobility scooter has got me to lots of places, over 2*
We look on the map and if it is unclear, I will emailtge cacher owner and ask if there are any stiles or locked gates that prevent access. Sometimes they can offer me an alternative route. Sometimes I can get round the route but need help to retrieve the cache or use crutches or a helpers arm to get in the woods bit where the cache is hidden so I can enjoy the hunt too. :)

Like you say though, by using the rating system on handicaching I and others can choose from the drop down lust and so others can see the more detailed info like obstructions. One eg of a rating I put words to effect of : there is a kissing gate to gain access to the next part, however, 30 meters to your right is a gate that is never locked and you can get your scooter through '

At least if the cache has been rated by other Cachers and the Cache owner is happy to put the link on the description part of their cache page, it will benefit others.
If course it's not just people in wheelchairs, scooters, the ratings include distance to the cache too which helps especially on multis when you don't have a lot if energy. This will also benefit those needing to use pushchairs and having children with them.

It will of course take thinking about the details of terminology etc but if the lines if communication are open,and people are willing to get behind it as a project, maybe we could see it as a general part of the Geocaching page with Groundspeak in the not too distant future.

I for one am willing to be part of that and would like to work with the new gagb committee on this project if they are willing to do this :)

It's great to see so much interest in this subject and that lots if people have already done handicaching ratings as a result of this thread:) :applause:
Thank you maybe you could add a link to handicaching.com on your Geocaching profile like I have, you can get it from their site.
Off to bed now - night all and thank you :)

[Dorsetgal]

So again I would ask again - please - that more cachers with disabilities come forward and speak up and help <snip>

Firstly, let me say, thi sis not a nit picking comment, as I know some will perceive it to be, but meant to be helpful and informative from someone who works in the field of access.

Please use the term disabled cachers. That follows the social model of disability, and describes cachers who are disabled by their environment.

Nowadays, the parlance is impairment not disability to describe a condition or illness, so it would become cachers with impairments.

I know this is confusing as at least two people here have been describing themselves as having disabilities, but if we are going to have this discussion, we should be progressive and contemporary in our language use.

Many thanks for understanding.

[Dorsetgal]

What is disappointing, is that you all seem so smitten with this external site, that you are missing the main point, which, I believe is to get cache setters to consider access when they get the cache page published.

The cache submission page does now question a setter if they select terrain 1, but I feel the effort should be to raise awareness for people to consider terrain settings at the point of publication, rather than as an afterthought.

At this point, they may consider adding to the cache page, there are a number of stiles, there's a gate which requires a RADAR key etc.

The key to the problem is awareness, so many people never consider anything other than the route they walked to the geocache as being accessible simply because they walked it. Even adding patches may be very muddy after heavy rain would be helpful.

[Dorsetgal]

No it wasn't in a geocaching environment that I was referring to but the same fears would apply to the possibility it would happen in the geocaching environment.

I would say that with the thousands of geocachers I am unsure how you could be sure it never happens in the geocaching environment. You just need to take proper safety precautions to protect yourself.

I don't think you need take any greater precautions than you would on a daily basis in a similar environment Paul.

You started this theme on a local forum and I thought had been reassured?

[Cache on Wheels]

What is disappointing, is that you all seem so smitten with this external site, that you are missing the main point, which, I believe is to get cache setters to consider access when they get the cache page published.

The cache submission page does now question a setter if they select terrain 1, but I feel the effort should be to raise awareness for people to consider terrain settings at the point of publication, rather than as an afterthought.

At this point, they may consider adding to the cache page, there are a number of stiles, there's a gate which requires a RADAR key etc.

The key to the problem is awareness, so many people never consider anything other than the route they walked to the geocache as being accessible simply because they walked it. Even adding patches may be very muddy after heavy rain would be helpful.

thank you for your input DG, on the correct terminology for Disabled Cachers and above: your comments prompted me to add the following on one of my caches that is fully W/C accessible and has the W/C attribute.:

I have written the following on my cache page of one of the church micros that has recently been published, however I still did a handicaching rating because it includes much more info than I could fit on the page. I will go and amend and add some info where I can to the others I own. https://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=dfed8fc7-bc73-46b6-b5ea-61369ac938fa

Disabled Access
This Cache is fully wheelchair accessible if you do not go through the church yard from the coords to WP1. Instead go to WP1 via WP2. There is wheelchair access to the church room and the church through the gates at WP1. For more in depth details of disabled access via a handicaching rating, please click on the icon below:
I hope this will be helpful when people come to do the cache, there is the option for them to gain further info should they require it.
i feel when rating a cache, t's not just about showing if one is able to get a wheelchair to the WP / GZ, it also helps people who may struggle on uneven ground to know there is an alternative route that is flat :)

[Cache on Wheels]

Firstly, let me say, thi sis not a nit picking comment, as I know some will perceive it to be, but meant to be helpful and informative from someone who works in the field of access.

Please use the term disabled cachers. That follows the social model of disability, and describes cachers who are disabled by their environment.

Nowadays, the parlance is impairment not disability to describe a condition or illness, so it would become cachers with impairments.

I know this is confusing as at least two people here have been describing themselves as having disabilities, but if we are going to have this discussion, we should be progressive and contemporary in our language use.

Many thanks for understanding.

thank you for your input on PC terminology GC :) it is very helpful :) it is confusing for me as in magazines I read and a newsletter I receive says for people with disabilities, and on any forms I fill in eg. One recently for a hospital procedure, it asks you to list any 'disabilities' you have.

There are so many words used like disabilities, impairments, some benefits like Incapacity Benefit, although that has now changed, severe disablement allowance, it is difficult to know what terms are acceptable.

I didn't really think there was a significant difference between saying I have disabilities and I am disabled, but your explanation above demonstrates that there clearly is :) thank you :)

I'm not able to think very clearly at mo - brain fog, so please forgive me if I have not explained my thoughts clearly or have misunderstood what you are saying :)
As I understand it, it is the environment we are in at any one time that disables us from doing x,y,z have I understood that right? :)

It is good to have the benefit of your vast experience in many areas with things like this DG :) thank you for sharing :) :applause:

My heading on my cache is titled 'Disabled Access', do you think this I a Good title? I chose those words as I feel it refers not just to wheelchair access.

[Cache on Wheels]

Ok lets list a few points and add suggestions on how we achieve them

1: We wish to see a "All Physical Abilities" Terrain rating, on all Listing Sites. By persuading the Largest Listing Site to do so, we have a extra tool to persuade, the Other Listing Sites who have not yet done so at that point.

So how to achieve this?

Groundspeak have specifically stated that they would love to incorporate such a system, but (and there is always a but) they do not have the available Bandwidth, nor do they currently have the available Developer Resources. Yet they both Purchased a Independent Stats Site, and Incorporated it into GC. So with a large % of the community, having that on their wish list, they found both for that.

2:So to move things forward, we as a community have to show to Groundspeak, that this is a hight priority on the communities wish List

So how to achieve this?

Create a Saturation Point for caches in the UK rated on Handicachig.com (lets all agree to throw out the issues over the name for now, we as a group could agree to simply refer to it as HC.com), then once Saturation is reached in the UK. The GAGB reaches out to other Geocaching Associations in the World (the elections already show one link, with the Returning Officer, being a Officer in the Alaska Geocaching Association) and persuade them to come on board with the idea, and build up Saturation around the world.

Once we start getting to that level, then Groundspeak will have to move the priority from the bottom of the List to the top.

Will this be easy? No it will be a sheer bloody climb to achieve the goal. But the end result will be worth it.

So yes at first it would entail, using a Off GC or other Listing Site Resource, but please look at that as a tool to achieve the end goal. There is the saying "No Pain, No Gain", well using HC.com is the pain, the Goal, every Listing Site Incorporating a "All Physical Abilities" Terrain rating system.

Lets instead of a small shout, all get together and give All Listing Sites a Roar!

Together we can do it, where a small group will never achieve it. Lets create a Giant Snow Ball on it's way down the slope, and not a tiny one being pushed up the slope.

Thank you also to Team Microdot for bringing this post forward for those who are adding to the thread to see :)

[QUOTE=Team Microdot;60921]I'm bringing this post forward by quoting it, as I think it fell foul of sitting in queue and might not be spotted otherwise as the thread has moved on quite a bit - and that would be a shame as there's obviously a lot of thought and effort gone into it :cheers:

Thank you, This info is very helpful in putting forward a clear idea and summary of the discussion so far and outlining what we could do and how. It is very helpful with any discussion to take a moment and do this - thank you, it is clear you have put a lot of time, thought and effort Into your response, thank you :) :applause:

[northking]

Thanks to all those that have posted here and re-ignited this debate (and pricked my conscience). I started linking to HC.com some time ago, but recently stopped doing so, through lack of thought and laziness. I've 90 active caches, and will re-visit those that I haven't linked and rectify. You can count on my support from now on, whether elected to the committee or not. This is something that we can all make a difference on.

[Brenin Tegeingl]

Sorry Wendy but you are missing the point. The usage of the external site, is a Lever to obtain the Ultimate Goal of getting something Hard Coded into the Cache Submission Process.

A simple analogy, someone breaks a bone, is taken to hospital, where a cast is applied. To provide a temporary support. It is never intended to be permanent.

So the usage of a external site, is the Temporary support only. Not a permanent solution. The permanent solution is Hard Coding on each Listing Site.

The Stats Hounds got their Wish granted, by huge Numbers using a External Stats Site. Groundspeak eventually bought out the owners of that external site, and hard coded it in to GC.

So reach a saturation point on Handicaching, with people adding the Link directly into the description of their Caches! And when a saturation level has been reached, Groundspeak will be looking at 2 options

Block access to the external site from GC due to the huge amount of Bandwidth used (which they have to pay for), and face a huge backlash. Not a situation they will wish to see themselves in

or

They either develop and incorporate a similar system into the Cache Submission Process, alternatively they can go down the same route as they did with the external Stats Site. Buy out the Owner, and bring the Site Lock Stock and Barrel into Groundspeak's own Server Farm. So that it is no longer a external site, but a Groundspeak product. Which would then move it higher up the Priority List, to be completely incorporated into the Cache Submission and Cache Logging Processes.

So please Champion the External Site, as a Huge Tool, with which to reach the ultimate Goal, Dumping of the Current Unworkable Terrain Rating System (need a 5/5 0r a 5/1.5 0r a 4.5/1.5 for your Grid, hold a Event in McDonalds. Or have a Mate change the D/T rating on their cache, to the one your Missing. And yes these are all very real genuine examples), and have the Terrain Rating replaced by something which gives genuine access information.

By Reaching a Saturation Level, especially if everyone adds the Link directly to "All" caches they own. Groundspeak will have the metrics on the Bandwidth being used, that is Bandwidth they are responsible for paying for, and that is a highly persuasive situation for the community to be powering.

The more people get behind this, the quicker the lever will work. It is a solution which the community can power through to achievement, if they just get behind it today/tomorrow. The more who do the faster the result will be.

Please do not think you'll ever reach a saturation point, re having CO's put the information in their Descriptions. Six and a Half years of being a Reviewer, have shown me personally, that will never happen. So lets all concentrate on what can be achieved, and will result in empowering those of all abilities.

Working Smartly together, we have the tools to empower the process, and provide the Lever to Persuade Groundspeak to act. Then once they have, the other Listing Sites, because there is the Groundspeak Example to use as a Lever. Empower the Biggest Listing Site, and the Others will follow, as they will have a example of how things can be achieved, and benefit their users. That is the Win Win situation we need to be in.

We have a extremely Smart and Passionate Community, lets all work together, and persuade them to get behind this!

Dave
Mancunian Pyrocacher
Deceangi Volunteer UK Reviewer Groundspeak
Full Time Carer

I have been fighting for well over the Last six and a Half years, to empower those of all abilities, and in all that time. This is the first time, the community have started getting behind the idea, I honestly believe that if this time fizzles out. We may never see another chance to get so much community support, for something which is so important.

[Dorsetgal]

Sorry Wendy but you are missing the point. The usage of the external site, is a Lever to obtain the Ultimate Goal of getting something Hard Coded into the Cache Submission Process.
.

Dave, thank you for disregarding my opinion again, even though I have been finding geocaches using a wheelchair for longer than you have apparently been "championing" the handicaching website! At least even if you disagree with my opinion, I have a right to own it, and I do so after seven and a half years of geocaching using a wheelchair - many times alone, and thus will, more than most benefit from improved information.

Seriously though, it hasn't gone well has it if in six and a half years not much has changed?

It's only a few days since you felt my experience was irrelevant as it was at government level, well at least they listen!!!

As you detailed your position as Groundspeak Reviewer at the bottom of your post, I wonder if in that capacity you have had correspondence with Groundspeak?

I can recall times I have specifically written to UK reviewers asking for one star terrain geocaches to be looked at again (immediately after publication) as they clearly were not wheelchair accessible and was waved away ...

At least Groundspeak changed the cache submission page and people submitting are specifically asked about the one star terrain rating and wheelchair access, so they are showing some appreciation of the problems experienced by some.

I still believe the shorter route would be for GAGB to raise awareness for more accuracy on geocache pages and yes, maybe for Groundspeak to incorporate more terrain criteria in the rating system, but don't believe separation is a solution in the short or long term.

[Dorsetgal]

[COLOR="Purple"] thank you for your input on PC terminology GC :) it is very helpful :) it is confusing for me as in magazines I read and a newsletter I receive says for people with disabilities, and on any forms I fill in eg. One recently for a hospital procedure, it asks you to list any 'disabilities' you have.



Unfortunately Heather, although they try their best, hospitals are institutions and very good at the medical model of disability as opposed to the social more empowering model.

A few years ago some staff at Poole Hospital started quoting policy at me late at night, as they'd just delivered the news my partner might not last the night, I chose not to argue.

However, I returned the next day and asked to see that piece of hospital policy, and after investigation it did not exist, staff were acting on what they thought was correct, not what was actually correct.

Once they understood their error, I was invited to help them move forward, and this there is one piece of hospital policy within the local NHS Trust that has my name on it as co-author!

I say this not to big myself up, but to explain, it's very easy for these big institutions to get things wrong and for others to believe they're right and follow suit.

You might also be interested to know that the London 2012 Gamesmaker handbook had cerebral palsy and epilepsy listed as learning disabilities until I got my hands on it!!!!

[lfc4eva]

What is disappointing, is that you all seem so smitten with this external site, that you are missing the main point, which, I believe is to get cache setters to consider access when they get the cache page published.

The cache submission page does now question a setter if they select terrain 1, but I feel the effort should be to raise awareness for people to consider terrain settings at the point of publication, rather than as an afterthought.

At this point, they may consider adding to the cache page, there are a number of stiles, there's a gate which requires a RADAR key etc.

The key to the problem is awareness, so many people never consider anything other than the route they walked to the geocache as being accessible simply because they walked it. Even adding patches may be very muddy after heavy rain would be helpful.

What I find disappointing is that there are a whole bunch of people who have expressed an interest in championing what they think is a good cause, by raising awareness and promoting the use of a facility that will help people with disabilities by giving them more information about the difficulty/terrain of geocaches.. yet we're met with negativity and nit picking about using the right terminology. :(

I posted a link to this topic on the main Geocaching groups on Facebook which seemed to be well received by a good number of people.. and then today we have someone who starts his/her reply with "Oh here we go again!.." :rolleyes:

If we are to to gain any kind of momentum for this we need enthusiasm and positivity, not just from those willing to jump on board to try and make a difference, but from those we're trying to help. :)

I can see how having the information readily available on the cache page on publication will be the ideal..

BUT, the caches I set are being set by someone who has no idea what trials may be faced by someone with any kind of disability/impairment and while I could write a paragraph on the cache pages which highlights how many gates/stiles I negotiated or indeed how much mud there was on the path when I set the cache, I can't possibly know which route someone else is going to take and allow for every eventuality.

Handicaching.com may not be ideal but it does at least give a variety of reviews from individual finders who may have used a different approach, at a different time of year, when their experience may have been totally different to that of the cache setter.

Surely, that's a good starting point and having something similar incorporated into geocaching.com will benefit all? :)

[Team Microdot]

I still believe the shorter route would be for GAGB to raise awareness for more accuracy on geocache pages and yes, maybe for Groundspeak to incorporate more terrain criteria in the rating system, but don't believe separation is a solution in the short or long term.

Well, two out of three isn't bad :)

I partially agree with two of your points - incorporating more rating data (not just terrain rating) into the geocaching websites and that integration is the best way to go in the long term. So that's probably just one point of agreement then. It'll do for now :)

Do you think GAGB should just raise awareness? Or would you like their input to lead to measurable results?

So far from this thread I'd say we've had both - which is probably what we should really be aiming for.

I don't think anybody has disregarded your opinion - simply voiced their own, which differ in certain regards - and that's a good thing :)

It's a good thing because many hands (and minds) make light work - and different perspectives on a common goal generally help to produce results which benefit the greatest number of interested parties :socool:

I don't know how many active cachers there are in the world today but I expect it's into the millions by now. Is trying to educate them all to write cache pages which are more useful to disabled cachers or cachers with impairments going to achieve traction and measurable results in the short term? I doubt it.

I also wonder about consistency.

I've referenced this cache of ours previously but it makes a good example:

http://tinyurl.com/d7ll9xm

Think this might even have been our very first cache placement - and I was quite chuffed with the page - but I see now that I missed out the distance from parking to the cache - so that's something I might have to fix.

Now this one was easy to do - it's a managed park, it has a carpark at one end which corresponds with a significant natural entrance and also the visitor centre - so there's one painfully obvious start point and logical route to the cache. It would even be easy to write a bread-crumb-trail style guide to this one - and possibly remove any sense of adventure completely from the experience (that being just a minor point here)

But how should we go about providing accurate useful data where there are multiple routes to get to the cache?

Should the cache owner travel and document every potential route before submitting the cache for publication? Sounds like rather a lot of work and probably a very long cache page to read before you can decide if the cache is within your capability. Not that I'm saying people should write the shortest cache pages possible - but I think there has to be a happy medium as there often needs to be room for other interesting information too, geographical, historical, local legend etc. etc.

When I look at a cache page I know that I'll find the key information - coordinates, rating etc. in the same place on every page - right at the top of the page usually. I like it that way. Imagine if you had to search through the entire cache page scanning for the coordinates - wouldn't that be somewhat inefficient or even laborious? Especially as each cacher builds their cache pages according to their own ideas - which means no fixed standards at all.

So I'd put my money on a mechanism which ensured that the key information was found in the same place every time - so that I could find it quickly, sort the wheat from the chaff and avoid wasting time trawling through data which ultimately turned out to be useless.

And I think the handicache website does just that - so I reckon it might form a useful basis for anything the listing sites might incorporate themselves.

Another positive aspect to the handicache website, at least I think it is, is that EACH rater rates for THEIR perception of difficulty and terrain at different times and probably via various routes - and that these are averaged out over time. Whereas if we rely on just the cache page we perhaps have data for a single route taken on a single day by the cache hider and their subjective or even retrospective view of D/T on the day in question.

And we actually have some very good Handicache raters around my area - people who put a lot of thought, effort and detail into their ratings - and bring those vital alternative viewpoints.

One of my caching friends - hold on - let's scroll back and find the acceptable term - has an impairment which I know as BPPV. This impairment can have significant impact on my friend's balance and can make certain types of terrain a real challenge, which usually renders them off limits for solo caching missions. And that impairment informs said friend's handicache ratings - information which wouldn't even be available if that site didn't exist - no matter how much effort the cache owner had put into the cache page.

Sure, that information could be included in logs - but do you really want to have to trawl through a lengthy cache page, picking out useful information and then through all the found logs, hoping to see something useful from one of the previous finders? Or would you rather have that information neatly presented in a consistent, purposeful manner? I know which one I'd choose.

And no - I'm not smitten with that particular rating site - but it's there - and it offers a workable solution - and I'm not aware of anything better - so I'll continue to use it for now and, subject to more people coming forward to prove there's a real demand for the data - will try to convince listing sites to implement something themselves.

Apologies for the longish post - had a lot of time to think about it - and it represents a fraction of the thoughts I've had on the subject.

[sandvika]

:wub: I rather like the way this thread has taken on a life of its own and it has grown well beyond its original scope. It inspired me to do my bit - I have added handicaching ratings to the short description of each of my Groundspeak caches and a link to the corresponding ratings page at the end of each detailed description. It took a couple of hours but then I've got quite a few caches! I weeded out the last of the links to dead rating sites like G:UK whilst I was at it.

In doing so, I rediscovered that I'd been rating caches whilst G:UK had been alive and in fact, the only ratings that were ever made by others on my oldest caches and on my older adoptions were via G:UK. I recall that G:UK had Handicaching integrated to it, exactly as is now being asked for and I think this is positive proof that integration is essential: it cannot work on its own. So, had G:UK survived and remained popular, I think we would have been in much better shape now.

I think this also shows that a community-led approach is viable, in the absence of initiatives by the listing sites, and therefore think that it's up to our association to take the initiative and provide a rating system with greater depth and breadth than Handicaching (or GCVote, for that matter). I'm thinking about integration with phone applications like C:Geo and tools like GSAK, in addition to listing site widgets. It would be great to have an API that can be called from C:Geo and a GSAK macro to retrieve accessibility information.

[Bear and Ragged]

Snipped...
In doing so, I rediscovered that I'd been rating caches whilst G:UK had been alive and in fact, the only ratings that were ever made by others on my oldest caches and on my older adoptions were via G:UK. I recall that G:UK had Handicaching integrated to it, exactly as is now being asked for and I think this is positive proof that integration is essential: it cannot work on its own. So, had G:UK survived and remained popular, I think we would have been in much better shape now.
../snipped
Back in the day of G:UK, I too used to rate my Finds...

It was made easier as G:UK would link to Groundspeak and list the caches you had found, but not rated, and linked to Handicaching to rate the Found caches.

Seems GS are (or at least were!) prepared to do some form of 'link up' with other sites for this purpose.

[markandlynn]

Well, two out of three isn't bad :)

I partially agree with two of your points - incorporating more rating data (not just terrain rating) into the geocaching websites and that integration is the best way to go in the long term. So that's probably just one point of agreement then. It'll do for now :)

Do you think GAGB should just raise awareness? Or would you like their input to lead to measurable results?

So far from this thread I'd say we've had both - which is probably what we should really be aiming for.

I don't think anybody has disregarded your opinion - simply voiced their own, which differ in certain regards - and that's a good thing :)

It's a good thing because many hands (and minds) make light work - and different perspectives on a common goal generally help to produce results which benefit the greatest number of interested parties :socool:

I don't know how many active cachers there are in the world today but I expect it's into the millions by now. Is trying to educate them all to write cache pages which are more useful to disabled cachers or cachers with impairments going to achieve traction and measurable results in the short term? I doubt it.

I also wonder about consistency.

I've referenced this cache of ours previously but it makes a good example:

http://tinyurl.com/d7ll9xm

Think this might even have been our very first cache placement - and I was quite chuffed with the page - but I see now that I missed out the distance from parking to the cache - so that's something I might have to fix.

Now this one was easy to do - it's a managed park, it has a carpark at one end which corresponds with a significant natural entrance and also the visitor centre - so there's one painfully obvious start point and logical route to the cache. It would even be easy to write a bread-crumb-trail style guide to this one - and possibly remove any sense of adventure completely from the experience (that being just a minor point here)

But how should we go about providing accurate useful data where there are multiple routes to get to the cache?

Should the cache owner travel and document every potential route before submitting the cache for publication? Sounds like rather a lot of work and probably a very long cache page to read before you can decide if the cache is within your capability. Not that I'm saying people should write the shortest cache pages possible - but I think there has to be a happy medium as there often needs to be room for other interesting information too, geographical, historical, local legend etc. etc.

When I look at a cache page I know that I'll find the key information - coordinates, rating etc. in the same place on every page - right at the top of the page usually. I like it that way. Imagine if you had to search through the entire cache page scanning for the coordinates - wouldn't that be somewhat inefficient or even laborious? Especially as each cacher builds their cache pages according to their own ideas - which means no fixed standards at all.

So I'd put my money on a mechanism which ensured that the key information was found in the same place every time - so that I could find it quickly, sort the wheat from the chaff and avoid wasting time trawling through data which ultimately turned out to be useless.

And I think the handicache website does just that - so I reckon it might form a useful basis for anything the listing sites might incorporate themselves.

Another positive aspect to the handicache website, at least I think it is, is that EACH rater rates for THEIR perception of difficulty and terrain at different times and probably via various routes - and that these are averaged out over time. Whereas if we rely on just the cache page we perhaps have data for a single route taken on a single day by the cache hider and their subjective or even retrospective view of D/T on the day in question.

And we actually have some very good Handicache raters around my area - people who put a lot of thought, effort and detail into their ratings - and bring those vital alternative viewpoints.

One of my caching friends - hold on - let's scroll back and find the acceptable term - has an impairment which I know as BPPV. This impairment can have significant impact on my friend's balance and can make certain types of terrain a real challenge, which usually renders them off limits for solo caching missions. And that impairment informs said friend's handicache ratings - information which wouldn't even be available if that site didn't exist - no matter how much effort the cache owner had put into the cache page.

Sure, that information could be included in logs - but do you really want to have to trawl through a lengthy cache page, picking out useful information and then through all the found logs, hoping to see something useful from one of the previous finders? Or would you rather have that information neatly presented in a consistent, purposeful manner? I know which one I'd choose.

And no - I'm not smitten with that particular rating site - but it's there - and it offers a workable solution - and I'm not aware of anything better - so I'll continue to use it for now and, subject to more people coming forward to prove there's a real demand for the data - will try to convince listing sites to implement something themselves.

Apologies for the longish post - had a lot of time to think about it - and it represents a fraction of the thoughts I've had on the subject.
Sums my thoughts up perfectly. Thank you

[Team sturge8]

I back this whole heartedly, i think the handicache rating system is a great tool to have, and opens the great outdoors to more cachers with disability's, and hope that with more people pushing this then the more use it will become, and hope that many benefit from it. :socool:i use this for my cache placements and finds, and i hope it helps fellow cachers for now and the future.:)

Daz.

[countrymatters]

Had already rated one or two of my caches, and will look at the others asap, although I may also take the approach that I'll add an extra para to cache pages to explain accessibility.:)

[martlakes]

What is disappointing, is that you all seem so smitten with this external site, that you are missing the main point, which, I believe is to get cache setters to consider access when they get the cache page published.I disagree with both your points, above. I don't think anyone is particularly "smitten" with HC. It would appear to be the 'only game in town' for those who would like to be helpful and add access info in a standardized and clear format. I don't find it entirely easy to match the descriptions to reality at times. There are issues about definitions and how to include the actual finding of the box, or is it more important to rate the route to the site, etc etc. And you have expressed issues with the language/title etc.

If you can point me and others at a similar site/tool/method etc for rating a cache's accessibility, I'll happily use it.

I understand what you mean about it being a separate site, but to me that's more just mechanics. If there was a permanent link on the cache page, eg under attributes or something, does it matter where the info is held? If I put the Cache Rater Seal on my page, that gets the info out there and raises awareness, although some still find that confusing!

As for your second point, yes, indeed. The ultimate aim is to get everyone to consider access and include accurate info in the cache page. I don't think those who have commented here have missed this point though! The question is always going to be HOW? It's hard enough to get everyone to add attributes, to rate the T & D correctly, to check, read & understand the guidelines etc etc etc. So, yes, let's have some form of rating and info about access on the cache page as part of the submitting process. Even if this happens, don't expect everyone to manage to complete it, or to complete it accurately etc.


The cache submission page does now question a setter if they select terrain 1, but I feel the effort should be to raise awareness for people to consider terrain settings at the point of publication, rather than as an afterthoughtAgreed, so perhaps a link to HC would flag it up to folk and give them a clear method for providing the info that's wanted. If many people object to HC then a different tool needs to be developed, but in the meantime ...

Like with T&D ratings and attributes, it will need to be clear and simple, easy to use and, indeed, right there when doing the cache page. It's amazing how much variety there is in T&D scores though! And many folk seem to miss attributes off entirely.

I think there are a lot of folk who are and would be supportive of the idea of getting access data out there. Maybe we need to be careful arguing too much about ways and means, or terminology at this stage. I can see Dave''s point about trying to get 'something' happening to create momentum, and currently HC seems to be 'it'. I can also see your points about wanting to 'set off in the right direction' rather than go down the HC route and then have to change to something more acceptable later; and that language is important. I think both of you have exactly the same goal of getting clear info integrated into the cache pages.

Many others also support this and would act if given clear info about what's needed and an easy method to do so. Disability issues (or whatever the term is!) have moved a long way in recent years and I feel and there is more awareness in the media. Maybe the time is ripe to try and get some movement from GS and other sites.

[markandlynn]

I have edited all my cache pages to add a bandwidth soaking image , all my current caches have been HC rated for ages.

I will now HC rate my favourites.

Many thanks for the prompt Dave, i have idle time in the day when i can go through my old finds and start to rate them all.

As you say the more links there are on the lising sites the more they will take notice and the more prominent the issue of bandwidth becomes as per the my geocaching profile website that GC actually bought a stake in as it was used so much.

[John Stead]

I have to confess to having been too lazy to rate my caches for handicapped use beyond using the appropriate icon when relevant, but support this effort and will try harder in future. Those of us who can get about should be thankful for that and having once hurt myself while caching I am so glad that I was only disabled temporarily.

[The magna defender]

I have to confess to having been too lazy to rate my caches for handicapped use beyond using the appropriate icon when relevant, but support this effort and will try harder in future. Those of us who can get about should be thankful for that and having once hurt myself while caching I am so glad that I was only disabled temporarily.


Sorry about that John

[Cache on Wheels]

it is truly fantastic how this thread has raised awareness, inspired people, enthused people into rating caches both of their own and those they have visited and developed into some great ideas of a positive way forward to benefit many Disabled Cachers, those with limited mobility, impairments ... This ultimately has raised awareness and understanding all round.
I am so pleased and grateful for everyone's input to this discussion. :) :applause: :socool:

We may not all agree with what everyone has to say, but it is important that we listen to everyone's point of view and ideas :)

I thank those candidates who are up for election for their input too :) it has been great to hear / read your views on this subject and your ideas for increasing awareness and ideas you would like to see implemented in the short and long term :) :applause:

It was also great to read some summaries and proposals of the discussion so far :) especially beneficial to those who have just joined the thread.
It would be good if you could post that again please someone :)
Please keep the ideas coming and let's not allow this important topic to be lost and archived once the elections have finished. :)

Will these threads stay active once the elections are over gagb?
Is it possible to keep this thread open and active for people to continue to contribute please? I don't know how these things work, so would it stay where it is or be moved under a different heading please?

I would very much like to be involved with the new committee somehow on this subject, and know there are others who have contributed whose input would be of great benefit too :)
Many thanks :)
Heather aka Cache on Wheels

[Maple Leaf]

Will these threads stay active once the elections are over gagb?
Is it possible to keep this thread open and active for people to continue to contribute please? I don't know how these things work, so would it stay where it is or be moved under a different heading please?



I had already thought that it would be good to move (or copy) this thread after the elections ... as it has been very active and informative. So, yes we will sort out over the weekend.

[Team Microdot]

Please keep the ideas coming and let's not allow this important topic to be lost and archived once the elections have finished. :)

The best way to convince Groundspeak to incorporate any of the suggested functionality is to prove beyond doubt that doing so will benefit lots of people - and to do that we need lots of disabled cachers or cachers with impairments to come forward and show that.

The squeaky wheel gets the oil ;)

[Dorsetgal]

As a disabled person, who sadly has failed to get some people here to understand the importance of language to the community, including some of those who apparently self identify as disabled, I share this article for your consideration. It's a fact that newly disabled people simply don't understand the history and culture of the community - this takes time. Just as newbies to geocaching ...

For me it's not a novelty, it's not the first thing I tell people about myself, in fact on the phone and via electronic media I'm likely not to mention it at all.

I've said before that some of the terminology in this thread makes my toes curl, if I can do nothing else, I can share with you something that may help you understand that my opinions as expressed here about inclusion, terminology etc are not marginal, they are, within my community mainstream.


I'm Not A "Person With a Disability": I'm a Disabled Person

http://m.xojane.com/issues/i-am-not-a-person-with-a-disability-i-am-a-disabled-person%20

Lisa Egan - Nov 9, 2012
Posted in Issues, disability, person-first language, disability rights, words words words
I am not a “person with a disability.” I do not “have a disability.” Given that I look like this:


Image Credit: ewheeling.
You probably think I’m either delusional or in denial. I’m not, I just have a real problem with the phrase “person with a disability” and the notion of “having a disability.”

I am disabled. More specifically, I am disabled by a society that places social, attitudinal and architectural barriers in my way. This world we live in disables me by treating me like a second-class citizen because I have a few impairments -- most obviously a mobility impairment.

Two ways of looking at disability

What’s the difference between “having a disability” and “being disabled”? It all comes down to two sociological theories: the medical/individual model of disability and the social model of disability.

The medical model -- the idea that a person has a disability -- is the dominant notion in our society. It’s the idea that a person is prevented from functioning in our society by their body or brain and it’s just that person’s tough luck. If they can’t blend into this world, it’s not the world’s problem.

The social model is the way I prefer to view the world. It’s the idea that a person with an impairment or illness is disabled by the society we live in because of all the barriers that are put in our way.

Society disables me.

I live in London, which has a world famous underground train network. Only around 20% of the stations have wheelchair access. Someone with a medical/individual perspective would state that I am prevented from getting around my city because I’m a person with a disability and it’s tough luck that the Tube is so inaccessible. If I want to use the Tube then I’m just gonna have to find a new skeleton from somewhere.

The way I see it is that I’ve been disabled when it comes to travelling around my city by the architects that installed stairs and escalators instead of ramps and lifts at the majority of Underground stations. Stairs and escalators are man-made barriers put in the way by a discriminatory society that excludes me because I have impaired mobility. I continue to be disabled by a Mayor who has set the budget for improving access on the Tube to £0 for the next 3 years.

Most people look at the word “disabled” and assume it means “less able.” It doesn’t. It means “prevented from functioning.” When I turn the wireless connection off on my computer, I get told that the connection has been “disabled”:


Does this mean that my wifi has suddenly become less able or broken? Has my wifi acquired a disability? Of course not. It has been prevented from functioning by an external force. In a very similar way to how I’m disabled by bus drivers that just won’t stop if they see me -- a wheelchair user -- waiting at the bus stop.

Hannah Cockroft is not someone you’d describe as “less able.” The woman is an unstoppable force on an athletics track. But she is disabled when it comes to travelling around London because of the man-made stairs and escalators at Tube stations.

As a person with a mobility impairment I am disabled by steps, stairs, escalators, being denied computer access as I can’t write by hand, inaccessible housing, and so on. To me a flight of stairs without a lift as an alternative is the equivalent of right-clicking me and selecting “disable Lisa.”


Once I learned about the social model, I realized that my body wasn’t the problem at all.

There are many who would argue that they do have a disability. They point out that even if all barriers put in place by society were removed, they’d still have things they can’t do.

Firstly in response to that: It’s a person’s right to identify however the hell they want. If they’re more comfortable as a “person with a disability” than as a “disabled person” then that’s nothing to do with me.

Secondly, most of these people haven’t noticed the social model’s distinction between “impairment” (the things you can’t do because of your body/brain) and “disability” (the social barriers disabling you on the grounds that you have an illness or impairment). I have a mobility impairment and because of that society gets all right-clicky and prevents me from functioning to my full potential.

Some people state that the social model is just a sociological theory; it doesn’t make a bit of difference in one’s everyday life. For me that’s just not true. I was about 17 when I learned about the social model and it radically changed how I thought about my own body.

When I was a child I would wonder “why me?” on a daily basis. I would wonder why my spirit had been put into this body that hurt so much of the time. I hated my body when I was not allowed on school trips or when I was left in the classroom on my own while my classmates were doing something more fun. I’d get left in the classroom on my own with a math textbook -- anything is more fun than that.

Once I learned about the social model, I realized that my body wasn’t the problem at all. The reason I spent so much time in pain was because I’d get half a paracetamol1 every 4 hours for multiple broken bones. There was no need for me to be in pain; effective painkillers existed by the 1980s. I just wasn’t given any. Denying someone needed pain meds is an attitudinal barrier making their life needlessly difficult.


I may have been a smiley child, but those broken bones all hurt.
It also made me realize that the reason I was treated like crap at school wasn’t my body’s fault at all. It was disablist discrimination. With hindsight, it seems so odd that I just accepted that my impaired body was to blame for all the misery I put up with during primary school2, but it was the only difference I could see between me and all the other kids. No one stopped and told me that I was being discriminated against, that it didn’t have to be happening, and that it wasn’t my body’s fault.

No one has ever told me that I should describe myself as a “person with gayness” or a “person with womanliness.”

The main argument in favor of the phrase “person with a disability” is that it’s “person first.” Whaaaat? No one has ever told me that I should describe myself as a “person with gayness” or a “person with womanliness.” I’m gay and I’m a woman -- no need to qualify that I’m a person too. But I have been told that I’m wrong for calling myself “disabled” rather than a “person with a disability.” Unsurprisingly my response either tends to be about as long as this article or a short string of expletives.

We had the Paralympics here in London 2 months ago. During the games, it became the cool thing for unimpaired celebrities to tweet that the word disabled is “ridiculous” and needs to be replaced. I’d love to see if they still feel the same once they’ve been denied access to transport, housing, medical care and educational opportunities. “Disabled” is the best word in the world for describing the barriers I confront and no nondisabled person has the right to try and take that from me.

1. Or acetaminophen as it’s called on your side of the Atlantic. Return

2. I understand that British primary school years are the equivalent of grades K – 5 in the US. Return

[Team Microdot]

As a disabled person, who sadly has failed to get some people here to understand the importance of language to the community, including some of those who apparently self identify as disabled, I share this article for your consideration. It's a fact that newly disabled people simply don't understand the history and culture of the community - this takes time. Just as newbies to geocaching ...

For me it's not a novelty, it's not the first thing I tell people about myself, in fact on the phone and via electronic media I'm likely not to mention it at all.

I've said before that some of the terminology in this thread makes my toes curl, if I can do nothing else, I can share with you something that may help you understand that my opinions as expressed here about inclusion, terminology etc are not marginal, they are, within my community mainstream.

Firstly, thanks for sharing that extract - I found it interesting and thought provoking - and I think I have a better appreciation of your perspective on this topic - so even if that's all I gained from it, it was worth the time and effort it took to read, digest and cogitate :)

I also drilled down another level into an article linked from the one you linked in your post - which was equally thought provoking:

--> this article here (http://labracknell.blogspot.co.uk/2009/05/chestnuts-roasting-on-open-fire.html)

I've gained some insight into some of the differences between the social and medical models of disability and can see how the social model might be a more useful and relevant perspective where the objective is more information on cache pages which aims to ENable.

For now though I'll have to take your word for it when you say that your opinions as expressed here about inclusion terminology are mainstream as that, and the two articles I've read from two other individuals, are all the evidence I have to support that at the moment.

So a question - if I may - for my greater understanding?

Is the terminology important because it originates in / forms part of the social model of disability?

[Dorsetgal]

Firstly, thanks for sharing that extract - I found it interesting and thought provoking - and I think I have a better appreciation of your perspective on this topic - so even if that's all I gained from it, it was worth the time and effort it took to read, digest and cogitate :)
<snip>

So a question - if I may - for my greater understanding?

Is the terminology important because it originates in / forms part of the social model of disability?

Yes, indeed it is, geocaching is a hobby not a rehabilitation course (even though for some it might serve as such), and IMHO should firmly embrace the social model of disability.

Sadly, due to the blue font on brown background I was unable to read the article you linked to. Edit to add; I have now read it, but hold the same view as it illustrates it might be appropriate in a medical environment, but this is about a hobby in the woods ;-)

I don't feel people can have it both ways, embrace an outdoor challenging hobby and then want it to embrace the medical (dependent) model of disability.

If GAGB seriously wishes to embrace and promote accessible geocaching, then they owe it to the disabled community to do so by embracing the social model, otherwise it's simply a waste of time.

[Team Microdot]

Yes, indeed it is, geocaching is a hobby not a rehabilitation course (even though for some it might serve as such), and IMHO should firmly embrace the social model of disability.

I'm not sure what is meant by the geocaching is a hobby not a rehabilitation course comment :confused:

If I've understood the rest of your answer correctly you believe that geocaching should embrace the social model of disability and in doing so use the standard terminology arising from that particular model?


Sadly, due to the blue font on brown background I was unable to read the article you linked to. Edit to add; I have now read it, but hold the same view as it illustrates it might be appropriate in a medical environment, but this is about a hobby in the woods ;-)

Sorry - a bit lost again here :o

The blue font on a brown background I'm not responsible for. I arrived there after following a link from the article you linked to earlier - and noted that your own views seemed to resonate quite strongly with those of the article you linked to and the article that article linked to (the one on the blog).

It's only a transient issue, caused by a delay in the browser applying the CSS formatting rules put in place by the site owner arising from, I think, lots of external material being downloaded first. I did find it very slightly ironic that an article centred on being disabled by one's environment was temporarily inaccessible until the environment had been correctly configured by the web browser. Might be worth mentioning that to the site owner to see if the load order can be adjusted so as to get the white background in place first so the text can be read while the other stuff downloads in the background?

When you say that you hold the same view - do you mean your view hasn't changed from what it was before, or that you hold the same view as the writer of the article or as the person the writer quotes in the article?


...as it illustrates it might be appropriate in a medical environment, but this is about a hobby in the woods ;-)

This bit I don't follow at all. My best guess is that you're saying that the medical model of disability is inappropriate in relation to geocaching?



I don't feel people can have it both ways, embrace an outdoor challenging hobby and then want it to embrace the medical (dependent) model of disability.

Which people are we talking about here? Disabled people? Cachers? People in general?

I embrace the outdoor challenging hobby - I'm not disabled - and I don't want geocaching to embrace any particular model in preference to any other. However - if a particular model can be used to enhance the hobby by making it available to more people then I would consider it worthy of investigation. That's not to say that other models which might be useful in different ways should be relegated or dismissed.


If GAGB seriously wishes to embrace and promote accessible geocaching, then they owe it to the disabled community to do so by embracing the social model, otherwise it's simply a waste of time.

I can't comment on the wishes of the GAGB - I don't have access to the data that would enable me to do so. The views I express here are purely my own.

On balance, having learned a little more about it, I think embracing the social model of disability would be a positive step but I think dismissing anything else as a waste of time is a backwards step - and I think Lady Bracknell (author of the aforementioned blue text on brown background article) herself illustrates this:


Under the medical model of disability, you “have a disability” if there is something fairly seriously medically “wrong with” you. Having something “wrong with” you diminishes your position in society. It reduces your rights. Under the medical model, there is no obligation on society to adapt the general environment so that it’s accessible to you. Such obligation as there is lies with the medical profession – hence, “medical model”. Their job is to normalise you; to change and improve you until you fit in. Can’t be done in your particular situation? Oh, shame. Well, in that case, you get to be hidden away, either in your own home or in an institution, so that normal people – the ones with rights – aren’t exposed to your hideous deformities and distressing tics.In simple terms I read this as saying that normalising people, to make them conform to a single 'acceptable' standard is undesirable.

So if I've read that right, surely insisting that any efforts to improve the lot of disabled cachers which don't conform rigidly and only to the social model of disability is also undesirable?

At the very least, it sounds like a good way to stifle creativity which might otherwise yield considerable benefits?

As Lady Bracknell says:


Let’s start with the basics. Models of disability are sociological models. In other words, they are models of the position those of us who have impairments hold within society. That is both what they are and all they are. They’re not designed to do anything.

[Maple Leaf]

As this thread was very active, and as requested by the thread owner, I am am copying it to the general forum thread so that it doesn't get lost/buried in the middle of the election Q&A.

This thread will remain here for reference, but I am closing.

Please continue the discussion in the duplicated thread (click here (https://www.gagb.org.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=4890))