Knight-Errant

Actually, it is highly unlikely that the cache owner is "watching" their own cache. (Yes, it is possible to add you own cache to your watch list, but the only benefit would be to get two emails with each posting rather than just one.) As previously mentioned, you cannot see that no cachers are watching a cache (yours or someone elses), just if someone is. While it would be nice to see who is watching your caches, having that information available would likely create too many problems. (Have you ever misdialed a phone number and then hung up before the other party answered, but then have them call back demanding to know who you are and why you are calling them?)

A good cache owner will specify (if applicable) that cache that cannot be found in winter. On the other hand, in the higher altitudes there are actually some caches that can only be found with several feet of snow on the ground, and a good cache owner with specify this as well.

ALL Travel Bugs (those officially issued by Groundspeak) have the same icon . The icon for other travelers varies. (Calling a traveler a travel bug does not make it a Travel Bug.

You can add us to the list of cachers that do not log travelers on websites other than geocaching.com.

If all else fails, you could hang on to the Red Jeep until you eventually discover, retrieve, or grab a "Red Jeep" that has been replaced with something other than the original (we have seen several of these). Then you could replace the replacement with an original.

Is a cache really a cache if it has not been published? While we have no objections against storing, dipping, etc. your OWN travelers in your unlisted cache. We would prefer that you not log our travelers into an unlisted cache (exception being a cache that has been submitted, but no yet published).

They are not ALR's because you have to do the challenge part PRIOR to finding the final cache. ALR's you FIND the cache and then do something additional before you can log them. That seems to be a valid reasoning, but not exactly accurate. Many challenge caches specifically state that you can find the cache (and even log a note), but cannot LOG the find until the challenge is met (some specifically allowing for your previous note to be changed to a find). Unfortunatley, Groundspeak guidelines address the matter of challenge caches, but make NO reference to how they relate to the matter of addional logging requirements. Later in the guidelines, they indicated how additional logging requirements are not permitted (indicating that this applies to "all physical caches"), but then make no mention of how they prohibition applies to or exempts challenge caches. Apparently reviewers have been given some more specific guidance than is contained in the published guidelines.

While we agree with your first point, auto adoption could only really work if Groundspeak owned the caches--which do not and will not and go to great lengths to clarify that they do not. As much as we don't like the results of no-adoption-without-owners-consent, we agree that overall, it is necessary policy. Besides, cache neglect and no finds are only loosely connected. We can recall a specific cache that was in great shape, but we were still the only find in a period of nearly 22 months. Nothwithstanding, to address your point and the original issue, could there be a way to have cache owners VOLUNTARILY give Groundspeak consent to have their caches adopted out under certain conditions (that is consent before the need for adoption arises)?

For what its worth, we have been advised by a fellow local cacher that on at least one military installation in Iraq had all its caches removed by order of the installation commander. However, to comply with this order the cacher had to first FIND each and every one of the caches on the installation, before the removal could be facilitated. We do see valid arguements for both sides of the issue and our opinion is that if express permission is given by the military authority in charge AND it is in a publicly accessible area, then the possibility of cache placement (on property controlled by a military installation) should exist. Another issue to consider is the sometimes unclear boundries of a military installations. In one of the previous posts, there was mention of a publicly accessible museum. Next to one of our local installations there is a museum that would seem to be part of the facility, but is actually entirely owned and operated by the local city and has been for years. However, Google Maps, Mapquest, Yahoo!, Rand McNally, and Bing all still show it being part of the installation proper.

I think it kind of depends on the length of the project. We had a well loved Virtual in our area that was Disabled for nearly two years. That seems a bit excessive and goes well beyond the intent of what the Disable feature is supposed to be used for: We agree that two years would be excessive time for disabling a cache. However, we would hope that Virtual Caches are given a little more latittude as they have NO possiblility of being unarchived at a later date as do other caches.

On the Bug page, under Trackable Item Options is the option "Mark item Missing". Click Go. You can always retrieve it back out at a later time if it is found or re-released. Edit: looks like someone took care of it for you. Clarification for cachers with the same question. . . The "move to missing" can ONLY be done by the owner of the traveler, the owner of the cache where the travler is logged into, or by a reviewer. Other cachers are limited to just posting notes indicating that the traveler is no longer present (NO tracking code required for this).

If you are really set on finding geocoins (or other travelers), you can always do a bit of research first to increase your chances of finding them. Before going out to find a cache (or revisit one already found) check the history of the traveler. If it has only recently been placed, it is much more likely to be there--especially if the cache is not frequently visited. Also, there may be notes on the travelers page that may already tell you that it is no longer in the cache. Eventually you will find travelers in caches that they were NOT logged into for several reasons, including the following: 1. The cacher just hasn't had a chance enter the logs yet (this lag time is usually increased if they are away from home). 2. The cacher made a mistake in logging the traveler (logged into wrong cache, mistakely altogether missed logging the traveler). 3. The cacher picked up the traveler and dropped it without recording (or correctly recording) the tracking number and now is unable to log a retrieve or the drop. 4. The cacher dosen't care to log the movements (bad form).

I would like to emphasize that a "DNF" is not a failure and should not be taken as such. Don't be embarrassed! The cache owner needs to know if people suddenly can't find their cache - it might be a symptom of a problem. It's also useful to keep track of caches you might want to visit again at a later time, etc. One more addition to a very good response. . . DNF's should be used when you have given a reasonable effort for that cache without success. (Five minutes on a 5.0 difficulty would not be reasonable.) If you were unsuccessful for other reasons, (i.e., pulled up to location, but there were WAY too many muggles around or started searching in the downpour, but quickly gave up) a posted note would probably be more appropriate.

NONE of these cool features are automatic. Usually you will see a note somewhere amongst all the cool stats that indicate which website and/or program was used to generate the "pie charts and graphs of all kinds". If you find a profile with a stats format that you like and can't figure out how they were created, we would suggest emailing the cacher for more information. You may be limited in using some of these with you Mac, but it can't hurt to try.

One bit of caution. . . Although you can access your cache page before it is published AND log a traveler drop to the cache, the traveler owner will NOT be able to view the cache information. They will get a email indicating that the traveler has been placed in your cache, but will be prevented from actually accessing the webpage for the cache. Usually this is not a problem, but something to keep in mind--especially if approval of your cache is delayed for some reason.

That's not necessarily true. If you want it to show up in your 'owned' list, it does need to be activated. Activating it will also be necessary if you intend to let others discover your geocoin (even if you never plan to release it).

Not that its a problem, but interesting to note. . . When you log your find, you can selecte the date of the actual find. However, when you log a needs maintenance it will default to the date the log entry is made (regarless of what date you may have selected). Usually this isn't even noticed unless there is a delay between finding and logging.

This link also allows you to create & post Canada, Europe, and world maps as well. However, adding countries to your profile is a little more complicated.

How would the item be tracked? It seems like your intent is to have the item picked up dropped off at locations other than caches. Trackables can only be logged in an out of caches (including virtual caches, but not EarthCaches). Cachers know where to find the travelers as they appear on the various cache pages. Another consideration, since you specifically mentioned airports, are you actually planning to leave "an unattended item" in a airport or having some one else travel with an item that could be considered questionable (origin and/or exact nature unknown)? Hopefully you can see the potential for problems there. On a releated note, however, are you possibly thinking of something that is more along the lines of a book? If so, are you aware of bookcrossing.com?

This could seem like a good idea, but. . . 1. How do you know your number is unique. Groundspeak keeps track of this for all the tracking numbers it issues. 2. How would you propose to, as you say "customize it for my profile"? 3. How would your travel bug be easily recognized as such and not just swag? MOST very cachers know what a travel bug dog tag looks like and what it means. 4. How would it be tracked if not through geocaching.com? Keep in mind that most of the cost of travel bug dog tags is to pay for the service provided, not the actual dog tags themselves. Also, as mentioned by Blue Deuce, there are other tracking sites, but many cachers choose not to log items to other sites.

You've discovered one of the greatest aspects of geocaching--there is room for many different styles, preferences, etc. (within certain limits of course). And if you keep this in mind you'll save yourself a lot of grief. If you spend much time in the forums, you'll quickly see too many cachers getting too worked up over things that probably shouldn't matter.

In addition (if not already done) you could "post a note" for the travel bug explaining the situation. This can be done either before or after it it moved to "missing" and will provide other cachers the same information that you provided the owner--particularly cachers that may have the travel bug on their watch list.

Micros can be just big enough to fit a log inside. Yes, a bison tude is considered a micro. Anything much smaller than than that (while still a micro) is often referred to as a "nano". Some of the smaller nanos are not much bigger than a pencil eraser. If you haven't every seen one, we would suggest researching them on thought Shop Groundspeak--many of the pictures are close to actual size. If you have never encountered them, they can EASILY be missed in your search.

Sol Seaker, I agree with your basic premise - that we all need to be good land stewards and practice Leave No Trace. I too become perturbed when I see damage caused by careless cachers (or other park users). But - wow - way to misrepresent the facts and sound alarmist. Chicken Little, the sky is not falling. In fact, geocaching is gaining greater acceptance among land managers, not less. To wit: Mercer Slough (Bellevue City Parks) - Anyone who actually reads the thread in the Northwest Forum will know that, in fact, Mercer Slough is supportive of geocaching and specifically stated they welcomed it and did NOT want all caches removed. But, as a nature preserve, they decided they would like to review the cache placements, based on a couple of concerns, and in the interim, asked that we disable them. Bellevue City Parks has always supported geocaching, with no permissions required, and I don't see this changing overall. Discovery Park (Seattle City Parks) - Different park system, different dynamics, different issues. This single city park banned geocaching two years ago, based on the misconceptions of a couple of influential personnel and perhaps an unfortunate (but unverified) incident or two. We (WSGA - Washington State Geocaching Assn) have been working with them since then to restore trust, build bridges, and hopefully restore caching to the park at some future point. This is the only park in the Seattle system to ban caching; in fact, our two CITOs there last spring changed some minds and nipped in the bud ideas about banning caching in Seattle's other "wild" parks. Washington State Parks - Yes, there's a permit system, not unlike those in several other states. And in a show of support for geocaching, WSP just designated a statewide geocaching representative to work with its regional and park managers, and the geocaching community, to facilitate geocaching as a recreational activity throughout its parks. Sounds like a step forward to me. And a far cry from several years ago, when they wanted to ban geocaching - which led to the formation of WSGA (our statewide geocaching org), a dialog with the state parks, and the creation of that permitting system. National Parks - NPS no longer bans geocaching outright. Instead, they issued a geocaching directive a couple years ago that states that geocaching can be a useful activity and explicitly leaves it to park superintendents to decide whether geocaching is permissible in their individual parks. In fact, a physical cache was approved at Mt St Helens National Monument this year, and I've been working with North Cascades National Park, which views geocaching as a great educational opportunity and may permit the first physical placement in 2010. There are myriad other park systems that support geocaching without question. King County (Seattle and surrounding area), one of the largest counties in the U.S., has supported geocaching from the get-go in all 180 parks. Just last week, at the annual appreciation dinner for volunteers, the KCP director told us this will continue; they singled out geocacher work parties (CITOs to us) as one of their hardest-working groups; and the director said geocaching will still be allowed in the 40 parks that are being "mothballed" due to budget cuts. I call that one heck of a show of support. And that's just Washington State (portions of it). Others in this forum could cite equally positive examples from around the country, and the world. Sol Seaker, you're relatively new to this activity, but you have an alarming propensity to be...alarmist. You know little of the history, yet you presume to lecture those of us who've been working with land managers for years. And your assumptions and judgments are often incorrect, which doesn't help your credibility. I've been working with parks personnel for years, for orienteering as well as geocaching purposes. I'm currently chair of the WSGA Parks Advocacy Committee, and have formed relationships with park systems at the city, county, state, and national level within Washington. My observation is that geocaching is gaining greater acceptance, not less. Most land managers are interested in activities that will benefit their parks and encourage public support, esp. in times of budget shortfalls. I've found that it's often just a matter of educating them on geocaching, indicating our willingness to work with them and adhere to park policies, and making them comfortable that we understand their concerns and needs. Most park managers also understand there are a few "bad apples" within any group, whether it's hikers, campers, or geocachers, but that the majority of participants are conscientious, well-intentioned visitors. I personally am more concerned with wild-eyed commentary that conveys inaccurate information and needlessly riles up the geocaching community by suggesting that geocaching will soon be "outlawed." Yes, there are occasional setbacks, but overall, the trend is toward greater awareness and support from land managers. So....deep breaths....ooohhhmmmmm. Look, the sky is still up there! hydnsek, please be careful, you are beginning to confuse the paranoia issue with actual facts.

Actually you are not required to enter anything in the tracking number field to post a note. Just the Date, Log Type: Note and a comment are all that is required to submit a Note. That is a more correct answer than we actually gave. Apperently what we stated and ment to indicate were not synonymous. Thanks Blue Deuce!