HHooligan

it's there and no there were only a few who didnt find it or it was to slipery in thier logs most people liked it. lets leave it alone there is no "cover up" I'm sure that details will be forthcoming... just wait... HHooligan, you did the cache in '04. The terrain rating and cache description accurately portrays any hazards and the cache was a very straightforward hide. The poor guy just took a bad step, it seems, and went down. I'm pretty sure that I discovered who he was. He was a brand new cacher who started at the beginning of this month. He has one logged find. There really is no "cover-up". I think I can speak for the rest of the community by asking everyone to just wait. We really don't have any hard facts and speculation is pointless. Just give it a little bit for more info to come in. Thanks for the info Chumpo. I think it's worth noting there have been more than 150 finds on that cache. What a tragedy. My sympathies to everyone involved.

The only archived cache I can locate in that area was archived 4 months ago so that's obviously not it. I think the cache in question has been archived in a "different" way. I'd have liked to had a chance to read the logs of people who had previously found it. Taking it off the site totally (if that's what's been done) causes me to wonder: 1) Had there been warnings about potential danger posted in prior logs or 2) Had everyone loved it. The answers to those questions are important to me. Someone seems to have decided that is something we don't get to know.

As an Ex-Spokane cacher I came here hoping to find out what cache was involved to see if I could remember having done it. I also hoped to find the victims Geocaching name to see if I might know him or if he'd ever commented on any of my hides. Nothing morbid, just natural curiosity. I understand that the owner would be devasted by this but I would never blame him or her for this tragedy. There are so many caches in that area I don't know if you can even be sure what one he was after. He may have found the one closest to the accident site and was headed for another. We all know what the risks involved in finding some caches are and I'm sure following the arrow has put many of us in some tricky spots on more than one occasion. I got into a lot of those spots before getting detailed Topos loaded into my GPSr.

I like Terracaching.com because of what they don't offer --> Thoughtlessly lame parking lot micros and other crappy caches. Almost all of the terracaches in my area of the Northwest get you out of town and away from it all where I like it. If you hide a crappy cache on that site it will last about a month before it is automatically archived by their system based on the voting opinions of the people who have found it. They even have a link on their cache pages to "Find Nearby Geocaches" so you can stay active on both sites. I don't understand the complaints about their sponsorship system. Your sponsors are just the approvers of the caches you hide, nothing more. Somebody has to approve new hides and in their system it is the people who are sponsoring you. What is the big turnoff about that? I was originally sponsored by someone I didn't even know but as our area grew in membership I picked up a local sponsor who knows our area better and is better equipped to approve my hides. I once thought GC.com was all I would ever need but I was wrong. There are close to 100 TC's within 100 miles of Spokane so having caches to find is not a problem here. If you have a competitive bone in your body you are really missing out on something.

The additional memory for maps is the biggest advantage of the Vista over the Legend. You may think you have all the map memory you would ever want with the Legend but the Vista will hold 3 times more and I'm using every bit of it. I'd have to delete/load different mapsets whenever I wanted to travel very far from home with a Legend but I've got it all in there permanently with the Vista.

I had that same problem with my Venture too. Powering it off then back on fixed the problem but later I found a shortcut by just giving it a good whack on the side. I used it alot and it probably happened a half dozen times alltogether. Santa brought me a Vista for Christmas and I haven't had any problems with it but I still have the Venture as a backup.

Thanks Harrald for the link to several other threads where this topic has already been debated at length. While I've been caching for a little over a year, I am a newbie as far as using the forums is concerned and was not able to locate these threads that were already active. I'm going to use the link you provided to see what people are saying. Thanks again.

I was wondering how many other cachers would like to see a new Log Type (Found, Not Found, etc.) created that would allow you to remove a cache from your list of caches to find. Cachers could use this new log type to get caches they can't/won't/don't want to try off their not found lists. I'm sure everyone has caches that keep showing up at the top of their not found lists that they have no intention of every going after. This new Log Type would give you a way to remove these caches. Cachers that are not able to go after hides that have a difficult terrain level could use this new Log Type and cachers like me, could use it to remove highly Urban micros that they hate having to hunt.