VKsnr
-
Posts
24 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by VKsnr
-
-
It is an irrigation ditch isn't it? Around here, they say no trespassing, not just no swimming. I would do it. Many years of familiarity with irrigation companies and their ditches has made me cavalier about trespassing on them. I ride my bike on them all the time for example. It has been my observation that they post no trespassing signs so that they can't get sued when some moron gets himself Darwined at a head gate. Close call tho. The hider should have asked for permission since it is private property, swimming sign or not.
VKsnr
-
I'd like to know what version of GE for what operating system opens GPX files, because mine sure doesn't (version 4.0.2723 on Linux).
Same here. I have the same version on openSuSE 10.1
If I try and drag and drop I get a message "This file format is not supported by Google Earth"
I like my gpsbable process - no limit to the number of stuff on the screen, icons correct.
VKsnr
-
There's no need to convert a pocket query GPX file into a KML file prior to opening it in Google Earth. Earth will open the GPX files directly. If there's a benefit to converting them first, I'd be grateful if someone could post about it.
I am not able to open a gpx file directly in GE. I can use the Geocaching Network KML file for connection to Geocaching.com, but then I experience the problems the the OP reports. By converting a PQ gpx into a local kml, I do not have this problem at all.
Also, I am then able to use the local kml file in other things like ww2d without needing a live connection. Among other things.
VKsnr
-
I'm sure there is more than one way, but what I do is run them through gpsbabel and export them as .kml files. You can have GE open those from the file menu. No drifting problems, and I get the nice icons. Labels are stable too.
(Running Linux version of GE)
VKsnr
-
I do not think it is backwards, for all the reasons previously stated.
Seems like the real problem is that people get angry when their cache is not approved.
First of all, why get angry? Work it out with the reviewer or appeal. Simple and anger free.
Second, if someone is going to get angry about a disapproval under the current system, they will get angry under your proposed system.
Third, it will still be possible to "get around" your proposed system and still produce lame caches, even ones that the hider is enthusiastically maintaining.
VKsnr
-
It may be true that if you are an innocent cacher that you should not have anything to fear from the cops. However, the police are going to arrive thinking about potential problems and not with potential innocent behavior. There is a chance, however slight, for a misunderstanding between them and the cacher. Why invite this?
I agree that having police show up while you are caching is a possibility - that is the nature of the sport in a (sub)urban setting. However, placing your cache in a playground invites more suspicion and increases this likelihood.
Sure we all have the right to be there. Place it if you want, but discretion seems to be the better part of valor in this case.
VKsnr
-
I have not noticed this. I guess it is something with the geocahcing specific stuff?
I just do a few PQs, download the gpx files and run them through gpsbabel to turn them into kml files. These display with no problem. If I plan on going after a cache, I check it out on the website first to make sure it is not diasbled.
VKsnr
-
Seems funny that a common refrain on these forums is "if you don't like that kind of cache (LPC, Micro, etc.) then don't do them", yet people did not like virtuals and so they were discontinued and turned into Waymarks.
My experience with trying out the Waymarking site has been one of frustration. I have not found it is as easy to navigate as the Geocaching one. And then I have a couple ideas that would require creation of new categories, but I don't want to manage a category - I just want to share a cool spot. I'm stuck.. But that is just me. YMMV.
VKsnr
-
OK, so what is a "bong"???
A water pipe. Usually used to smoke marijuana, and occasionally tobacco or some other substance.
VKsnr
-
U.S. Navy, 1983 - 1991
Separated as ET1. Served on board USS Shreveport (LPD-12) and at NTCC St. Mawgan at RAF St. Mawgan in the UK.
Proud to have done it, miss being at sea VERY much.
Thanks to everyone else who has served.
VKsnr
-
Just reading over older topics and came across this one. Had to add my two cents about caches on BLM lands. Especially since I have lived in and around BLM lands for a long time and make heavy recreational use of them. Considering the archival of GCKJTJ Cabin Creek Cache:
<public lands usage rant>
It seems odd that you can prospect on BLM and Forest Service lands, and when you stake a claim you are *required* to drive a post or pipe into the ground, or build a clearly recognizable cairn, or in some other way "deface" the land to mark the claim. If you are a rancher you can run cattle to graze the bejibbers out of it and leave tons of feces laying all over especially around riparian areas. You can plow new roads to new gas and oil drilling sites and run thousands of tons of truck traffic over them. (And here in CO you can do the same across private lands too). You can log thousands of acres of forest leaving rutty erosion prone logging roads for heavy trucks. Geodetic survey markers literally dot the landscape with posts, rods, and concrete pylons driven into or poured onto the land (we even use them for part of our game)..
But we can't place a small PVC pipe out there, even well hidden or buried, because people are paranoid that the BLM will shut us down? (Oh-Brother-Eye-Roll). Isn't moving a bunch of rocks around to hide a cache equally as defacing? I guess it's OK if I hide my bag of trash under some rocks out there. Isn't it littering with all those metal and plastic cache containers laying around out there, even if under some rocks or brush? Oh - I see - just because I have a logbook jammed into them makes them non-litter. Really though, it seems like the placement of a geocache on public lands, in whatever form, is in no way in the "defacing" category that the other allowed or disallowed uses of public lands are.
I suppose my main complaint is that my minimal impact use of the public lands is so heavily controlled out of fear of "defacing" the lands when the real defacers get to do it all day every day. Not that I want to be able to deface lands, but that I can't enjoy my public lands fully with minimal impact recreation while others get to pollute them with relative impunity.
</public lands usage rant>
I understand the reasoning behind the no burying rule. Just irritated that I can't hide or enjoy finding such a cache on public lands considering what you can legally do to these lands that is much much worse in every conceivable way. Sheesh.
VKsnr
P.S. <wink mode> And under this current administration do you really think we would be pursued for this on public lands? </wink mode>
-
When we are headed out into the middle of nowhere we have always taken a printed map. Is it unfair to use a printed map to navigate to where you want to go?
Consider too that the printed maps from DeLorme and others are not always 100% correct either. USGS topo maps are pretty good, but many times are pretty old for areas we go to. On most maps and especially on commercial maps we have run into many instances of inaccuracies, omissions, and "ghost" roads or other features. We have made countless notes and corrections to our printed maps. Now we have a map on our 60CSx in addition to the printed maps. We are beginning to notice the "edges" to these maps too. They are helpful for sure, but hardly cheating. You are getting coordinates that put you within 10-20 ft of a spot already for heaven's sake!
If you really want more of a challenge, try finding benchmarks from their legal descriptions without help from a GPSr.
VKsnr
-
I have one cache out there now. A recent log entry was a DNF stating that the cacher had seen where others had been looking. Should she/he claim a Found It just because they went to the trouble to arrive at some location? I do not think so.
Recently we went looking for a local micro. We could not find it and logged a DNF. There were a couple previous DNF logs, and I think one after. I was starting to think that it was MIA. But Lo! Behold! Someone found it, and then another. Just 'cuz you think it is not there does not mean it is not.
If you find it, say so. If you can't find it, log a DNF. Simple. Has nothing to do with honesty or stealing or anything, just stating what happened when you went for it.
Perhaps some people do get wrapped up in find counts. Maybe the solution is to not display them to anyone but the member. That way no one has any idea how many anyone else has. At least that would eliminate some onf this.
My 0.02 FWTW
VKsnr
-
It's ok to mention the bug, just don't post the tracking number. On the bug page it will say something like Use TBM2FM to reference this item. That info is okay to post.
So they left the bug hidden under a rock nearby? I've seen it before but it's not a good idea.
Any chance of going out and getting it?
Thanks for the info about posting details.
Well, as it happens, we are planning on going out this weekend for hiking/caching. I already felt the need to rescue it, so I will try to include it on our way. (Kinda depends on what the Minister of Travel has in mind for the trip)
VKsnr
-
I am a newbie at this, and thought this looked weird. Someone left a TB at a virtual cache site. The virtual is for looking at some pictographs, and the cacher stopping there left the TB close by:
"Great stop with a lot of our early history involved. Made the mistake of taking the dirt road north of the cache and coming over the mountain. It was still a magnificient climb with the mule deer visible in the canyon below. Left TB "abcdef" at xx xx.xxx N x yyy yy.yyy W b/w a rock and hard place eye to eye."
Is this against the rules? Common sense? Seems strange to leave TB someplace like that. I changed the TB name and location info 'cuz I am not sure about posting that in the forum.
VKsnr
-
BTW, why does anyone need to carry a sidearm to go caching?
Don't get me wrong, I have several firearms in my arsenal, but the only reason I bring a gun into the woods is for hunting.
I certainly don't bring a laptop - the point of caching for me is to get away from everyday trappings and to commune with nature.
I guess it depends on where you are going. For us, it comes down to possible rabid coyote, aggressive bear, starving lion, or rotten two-legger. Better to have it and not need it. Actually I am glad to see so many carrying!
I don't carry a laptop either. Usually I print out the cache listings I intend to visit, or take some quick notes to stuff in the pack.
Except for the new GPSr and swag, this has been standard hiking-in-the-wilds equipment for a long time:
- Garmin 60CSx, with some paper notes on caches
- compass
- maps
- ziplock with swag
- pencil
- S&W model 1955 .45 or Springfield 1911 .45, occasionally 20" 870 12ga instead
- water
- lighter
- dogs
VKsnr
-
Solar flares do more than just cause problems with the GPS satellites and receivers. I think if a flare comes along that knocks out GPS you are going to have other things knocked out too. And those are probably more immediately irritating to lose, like the power grid itself. Although the flare in December was the strongest yet recorded, electronic and electrical systems on earth have been enduring periodic outages and other problems from solar acticity for as long as we have been using those systems. And we have had many sever solar storms.
Personally I don't worry about it.
VKsnr
-
I think rather than post the coordinates you should post something about the sport of geocaching and suggest the geocaching.com website. This will filter out casual observers to a good degree, and help to point to the rules and spirit of geocaching for those that show an interest.
It has been my observation that the easier it is for people to get to something, the more abused it is. Having to go through the website to see coordinates makes sense IMHO.
VKsnr
-
First off, Groundspeak, as the owners of this website, has the right to support any agenda or commercial agenda that they want. This is why they allowed A.P.E. caches, but we can't can't place caches that solicit or advertize. Its why they worked with Jeep in promoting their travel bugs and why they chose to participate in the Unite for Diabetes TB promotion.
As far as the difference between TBs and caches. Caches go through a review process and there are rules in place regarding what is acceptable and what is not. TBs do not go through a review process, hence they are on a much longer leash (though they are not totally without rules. Try to circulate a pro-Nazi TB and see how long it lasts).
The no agenda rule for caches makes sense. If there were no rule, everybody and their mother would be trying to place caches promoting a pet agenda. Many agendas are widely considered to be worthwhile. Fighting cancer would be one. Many agendas are controversial. What if some holocaust deniers wanted to place a cache promoting their agenda, or someone who has a racist agenda? While those would be pretty obviously rejected, there are many other agendas that are controversial. A cache promoting Boy Scouting? Many would think it was wonderful, but some would see that as evil as a cache with a racist agenda. Planned Parenthood? Same thing. Even organizations like the Red Cross and Toys for Tots have their detractors.
So you then put the reviewers in the position of choosing which agendas are acceptable and which are not. There is sometimes controversy about their decisions regarding their interpretation of the cache guidelines, which is their supposed area of expertise. Do we really want them to be the arbiters of what agendas are worthwhile and which ones aren't?
Thanks for your reply.
No, I do not want the reviewers to be in the unenviable positon of deciding what agendas are and are not worthwhile. As I have stated before, this rule makes good sense.
Certainly there are hotheads for all issues - they even pop up in forums like this in the middle of civil discussion.
I can understand that Groundspeak can do what they want since this is their business. And from what I have seen, they have shown sound rational judgement in their support for the diabetes TBs, and solid practical sense in their working with Jeep for those TBs. They will no doubt continue to do so in the future. The rules do state that you can ask for permission fo rwhatever you may have in mind for both TB and cache.
Thanks again,
VKsnr
-
Thanks. That makes things a little more clear. I appreciate the perspective.
VKsnr
-
From the rules:
Geocaching is supposed to be a light, fun activity, not a platform for an agenda.
And from the diabetes TB campaign (emphasis added):
"Participate in Unite for Diabetes geocaching
Give a message of support for the United Nations Resolution on diabetes.
Unite for Diabetes geocaching is part of the IDF-led Unite for Diabetes campaign and is supported by a grant from Merck & Co., Inc. which operates in many countries as MSD (Merck Sharp & Dohme)."
...
The Unite for Diabetes campaign is calling for the support of cachers through the launch of the Unite for Diabetes challenge, an online competition designed to raise awareness of the impact of diabetes on the lives of children around the globe.
...
What is Geocaching?
Geocaching is an entertaining outdoor adventure. It is a treasure hunt that requires people to use a global positioning system (GPS) to search for containers, known as ‘geocaches’, that are hidden around the world by other treasure hunters, or ‘geocachers’. For more information visit the ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ section of Geocaching.com."
Given the above, it certainly makes the denial of a cache dedicated FOR all victims of cancer but an acceptance of a cache DEDICATED to all victims of cancer seem silly.
In light of the above quotes, why are caches that "solicit" or have an "agenda" not allowed but TBs are, especially given the intimate tie between them on Groudspeak's own site? Why is it "Unite for Diabetes geocahcing" instead of "Unite for Diabetes travel bugging" ?
Again, just looking for any logic behind the rule. Seems like the restrictions should apply to both to prevent any real or perceived bias on the part of reviewers or Geospeak, and to keep this light and fun.
VKsnr
-
Just wanted to let everyone know that when I submitted the cache for publication, it stated that this cache was being placed in honor of ALL cancer victims and survivors. Of course, it's called Survivor's Cache (GC11P9E). It has been published as of 27Mar06. The name was not the problem. It was the fact that in the description I had put the main reason being the cache was placed FOR all cancer victims and survivors. There is no social/political agenda related with this cache. There are no requests (or wants) for donations to anywhere. There are no petitions or hyped up talk about this matter. It is a cache. That's all. DEDICATED (that's the key word here), to the victims, survivors, family, and friends of cancer related individuals. Thank you.
Thanks for letting us know what the problem was with the cache description. I had a hard time trying to think what my opinion would be without this info.
Now that I know, I am still puzzled. According to the rules:
"Solicitations are off-limits. For example, caches perceived to be posted for religious, political, charitable or social agendas are not permitted. Geocaching is supposed to be a light, fun activity, not a platform for an agenda." Placing a cache FOR all cancer victims hardly sounds like a solicitation. Neither does a cache DEDICATED to all cancer victims. I have seen several caches in the Satellite Beach, FL area posted that require searching the Old and New Testaments to solve. That sure looks like a religious agenda to me. A cache placed FOR a certain religion wold not be OK, but a cache DEDICATED to a certain religion would be?
I am NOT trying to start flame wars - I am just trying to understand the reasoning. Especially since I see no difference between FOR and DEDICATED. Imagine a cache placed FOR all the victims of terrorism. Not OK, but if it was DEDICATED to all victims of terrorism it is? And why is this not allowed for caches, but for TBs it is? You mean you can have a TB dedicated to <hot-button-isssue> but not a cache? Seems like TBs should be restricted the same way as caches, or caches should be allowed the same freedom of expression as TBs. A mix seems illogical to me. (I lean towards restricting them all).
Can someone, especially someone who has been caching a long time, please help illuminate a newbie's understanding of these things?
VKsnr
-
Seems like they should have outlined the reason for the objection a little more, rather than only saying there was some social agenda problem. What wording? Which part? If the notice about the delay had been a little more informative, then perhaps this thread would not exist, or we could be more definitive in our opinions.
I understand why solicitations are off limits, but it does seem strange that you can create a "charitable" agenda TB (e.g. diabetes awareness) and circulate it through the network of caches. The intent is surely not to just make people know that such a thing exists, but to do something about it. The difference? Any ideas?
VKsnr
"Private Property" sign...Pass or don't?
in General geocaching topics
Posted
I have encountered a similar situation here in Colorado myself. When I was sure it was public, I went on through anyway, with no problem. I have seen other places like this in eastern Arizona and southwest New Mexico.
VKsnr