CacheDrone

I really don't like the idea of suggesting that people should lie in their logs, especially coming from a reviewer. I personally believe in being honest and if I have a good cache experience I usually write about it in detail. You and I have both been around long enough to know and you even gave examples of the logs that Ontario Parks showed to you about what cachers do. Cachers bushwack, Cachers go off trail, Cachers go into parks after hours, cachers find other ways into a park without paying, cachers jump fences, cachers ignore leash and stoop and scoop signs\laws, cachers trespass and probably most of all, we leave geotrails. It happens and I believe it happens frequently and we are all guilty of it. It sounds like Parks Canada was lied to ("convinced") that this doesn't happen when it clearly does based on the log examples you gave. However even though cachers do all of this, most likely the amount of non cachers probably do all of this a lot more. Lets be honest with the land managers. Tell them the truth. Work with them to give cachers an enjoyable caching experience. If a land manager doesn't want caching as an activity on their land, then that is fine. There are so many other places to hide caches. I cannot believe that you could have possibly come that conclusion. Seriously, you are so far off the mark it is unbelievable. The correct answer, which should be obvious and apparent to anyone with a brain in their head is DON'T HOP FENCES, DON'T IGNORE SIGNAGE, DON'T SNEAK INTO PARKS WITHOUT PAYING... etc etc. And DO NOT imply that I am telling anyone to lie in their logs. Nowhere in my posts did I say anything even close to that, and to infer that I did is again completely irresponsible. It is not about what non-cachers do. It is about what cachers do, and stopping them from doing things that are hurtful to the game. And I would bet that a majority of the people that have read from where I first posted would not have drawn any of the conclusions that a few of the replies have reached. CD

I'm suggesting that if you are associating with people that blatantly ignore posted signs stating no trespassing or park hours that need be respected that I would question your level of integrity and ethics. To post that you are aware of such actions going on with such laissez faire serves no benefit to anyone. This isn't something as minor as picking one's nose at the dinner table (disgusting as that might be). By stating you are aware of it and not following up that you have said or done something about it implies to the casual observer that it is not taken seriously or is even condoned. It is not and should not be. See below for why that is a problem. When Ontario Parks met with some people, myself included, they were quick to show us cache logs and cache pages with content like this (these are not direct quotes, merely examples in the same genre) We didn't pay the admission fee, we hopped over the fence at highway 5150 to get to the cache Since we couldn't find it we started digging around (which they took as actual digging) There is a back entrance one can sneak into We bushwacked all the way there only to find a trail right beside the cache. etc etc Saying these things raised flags of caution, which escalated into Ontario Parks banning geocaching. Statements like "I know people have trespassed to get a cache" or "walked right past signs saying... {whatever}... is exactly the same thing that caused the ban. All I am saying that if a group is looking at geocaching, or worse that they are looking for a reason to ban it, when they read that some people are being irresponsible and illegal and no one says something back like "That is not what we are supposed to do and jerks like that make us all look bad." then they feel justified in saying "Oh really? We don't want their type around on OUR land"... just like Ontario Parks did and Parks Canada did until we were able to convince them that what they heard was not accurate.

I don't often step into the Canada Forums under my reviewer account but some aspects of this thread are a cause for concern. Please remember that anyone is able to read these forums. That is not to say that healthy discussion and debate is not a good thing but some postings have been a bit irresponsible. Suggesting that the bomb squad goes around blowing things up simply because they can and that they enjoy doing so seems rather in bad taste. Suggesting that other geocachers brazenly ignore no trespassing and similar signage casts a dark shadow on our activity. Likely in every large pool of participants there may be those few that shirk common sense but to an outside reader of this thread all they might see is that geocachers are disrespectful of laws, rules and ancillary requirements. Under my player account I have never witnessed any of my friends do anything while geocaching that I would not be proud to tell a news reporter, police officer or curious land manager. It's been said that less than 2% of geocachers even look at the forums. Please do not be making "large brush" statements that potentially could restrict geocaching for everyone. Remember, all it took was a few poorly written cache logs to start the ban on geocaching in Ontario Provincial Parks. Cracker Barrel in the US did the same thing, issued a policy to stop caching in the "Off Yer Rocker" series. It does not take much and comments that put us in a bad light do nothing to help promote our fun activity. If you see something wrong when caching you can contact the cache owner, log a needs archived or contact the publishing reviewer. And yes we do review from the position of assumed permission. We also are not local to every single spot so we have to rely on locals to update us about problems. People that care about the hobby will want to preserve it. CD

Well, there's a good way to knock the smiley count off by one..... if you found the cache before, and then celebrated #5000 at a glorious cache but went to a park'n'grab for 4999, guess what ...... Appears we have uncovered a bug. If you look at flight idle's profile, the cache is still listed. But if you click on it, it shows unpublished. Groundspeak is aware of this bug item and plans to address/clarify it in a future update CD

Check your email! CD

Likely many of you have noticed the "Feedback" add-on in the regular part of Geocaching.com Groundspeak is looking for feedback from locations outside of the US of A with regard to payment options. If you have a suggestion or would like to throw your support behind another already suggested addition then I would encourage you to contribute. Replying in the Canada Forum will not return the same results as the link provided earlier but if you want to discuss it, who am I to say not to? Please remember that you are suggesting extra or alternate ways to pay for a Groundspeak Premium Membership, not aspects associated with that membership or any included features. CD

Apparently summer has slowed down Juicepig as they have only score 4 points in the last two months. A few others have made some ground but so far the lead is still 27 points.

1... till I archive it

Sine I haven't stirred the pot in a few weeks Let's start with the official stuff. I've made the text bold in places All too often I see comments on caches that are under the (again) minimum 528ft/162m about this terrain feature or that building or how the trails flow or whoever built whatever things and put something near it or around it... and that is why it says to "seek out new areas". When I review I consider every physical item as if it is a magnetic disk. When two disks get too close together, they stick. (I would use a landmine analogy but .. oh wait, I just did ). In general I don't worry too much about 515ft unless the area looks like a shotgun shot at the map. But by the same token, it is best to make the effort to exceed the minimum. Isn't that how most of us would like to be thought of, as one that does more than the bare minimum? So it isn't about cachers getting confused or accidentally finding the wrong cache because many people find a "final location" while walking to a farther cache just by seeing a good spot to hide another cache. The saturation guideline is about keeping things separated. CD

Good review helpful gives direction This is reviewer Cache drone Thanks for the kind words FWIW, I've posted more than my share of curt, blunt and sometimes even a few hundred notes that offended the recipient. Maybe you caught me on a good day CD

1) What idea? To try to find some of the caches that haven't found in a long time? Based on the inference in your post, those caches sound like the type you prefer to seek. I hope that those people that enjoy attempting caches that have not been found in a long time will continue to do so. 2) The idea of visiting caches is not limited to Ontario. Or do you mean the idea that cache owners need to follow the guidelines that they agreed to? If yes, then no that isn't limited to Ontario. 3) Is what Groundspeak's idea? For people to try and find caches that haven't been found in a long time? Or that cache owners need to maintain their caches by responding to reported problems AND periodically checking on them? They are Groundspeak's listing guidelines for geocaching. Responsible cache owners check on their caches periodically. I'm not sure what it is that you want me to re-assure you about. "Needs Maintenance" was used because the cache owners need to do maintenance as outlined in the listing guidelines that they agreed to when they submitted their listings. If one is supposed to perform maintenance periodically then it was the correct log types to have them log an "owner maintenance". No one said there was a reported problem, what was said is that periodic maintenance has not occurred.

Another skillful move by Juicepig has increased his lead to 59 points. And to think, summer isn't even here yet. Way to go JP! CD

Canada Post mailboxes are federal property. As such, if you can receive permission from a duly appointed CP representative like the local postmaster, then of course it is fine to place a cache there. This is no different than placing a cache on any other off-limits area, like schools, airports, military property, etc. If the local mail office has no issue with it, then it should be no problem to get permission from them.

Traditional Caches, of which there are many, represent a significant amount of data which will take some extra time to compile and go through. It is expected to be later this week. Cache Owners that chose to archive their caches instead of checking on them made that choice themselves. It certainly sounds like they would not have performed any required maintenance had something been reported. If you are a Cache Owner that received such a note, hopefully you can check on your cache in the next 6 months. For those that did not, and seem to be having trouble understanding what is being asked of other people then I fail to see how this is your issue. Cache Owners are 100% responsible for checking on their cache periodically, and that is what is being asked of them. edit to include: It really shouldn't matter if it is the final of a complicated and lengthy series. The Cache Owner simply needs to check that one cache and post an "Owner Maintenance". It has no bearing on the caches that lead up to it.

This morning all of the Multi-Caches, Mystery Caches, Letterbox Hybrids and Wherigo caches in Ontario were checked to isolate any that have not been found for over a year. My Bookmark List - Public Certainly I'm not saying that anyone should go out and perform maintenance for the cache owner, as that is technically their responsibility, but if you are looking for something that might be rewarding and challenging then consider downloading this list and trying to find a few. Imagine the thrill of finding a cache that has gone unseen for more than a year! Of course, I'm sure that any cache owner would appreciate any efforts that finders make to help them out with damp logbooks and containers. If you do anything for them then be sure to recommend that they log an "Owner Maintenance" log due in part to your wonderful community service CD

Since it has been nearly two years since this has been raised and due to an apparent influx of new players, perhaps this is a good time to bump this thread. Any and all caches that are attached to Canada Post property should be removed by the cache owners and archived. If you own the mailbox that is fine, otherwise it is not. This differs from the USA where it is such that your personal mailbox falls under federal property until such time that it is not used for USPS delivery. CD

There is no requirement to log a DNF. Actually there is also no requirement to log a Found It either. Many people do not log their finds online. As BQ, I've cached with one person that has not logged a cache in over 3 years but has found thousands. Instead they take a picture of each find. I guess they do not want their stats or activity posted as some people judge that stuff as important.

I would still like see you add the "Additional Waypoint" box to Waymarking. These could be used for parking, entrances or places where the actual listed co-ordinates are not the the place being waymarked or some distance from the a Waymark. Jake... Waymarking does not need this feature as every category leader can add a variable for additional waypoints if they want them. Waymarking is also not restricted to only 6 different types, we can make additional waypoints for whatever we can dream up. "Best Viewing Position" for example, compared to marking the actual location of the item which would be required. BQ Sorry... for some reason I am logged in as my reviewer account, which I never use in this browser.

For those that may not have seen it, please note This means all Cache Pages and features like PQ's, Insta-Notify, and all reviewing will be unavailable during that period.

At this time I am not willing to reveal any specific point totals but I will say that Juicepig did earn 14 points during the second week of January. Some other people have put in quite a good performance over the last half of 2009, but in the words of "Highlander"... CD

Is this the time where I point out that Groundspeak does not condone such activities and that no one needs to have an offline database as described by the OP? Regardless of whatever reason you can dream up, no one ever needs to have all of that data. CD

Caches do not get archived because they have not been found for long periods of time. Caches can go for years without being found and still be active and the source of dreams for the adventurous. This is not about archiving caches. This is about cache owner maintenance. Here is one example of a responsive owner And here is an example of a cache that is of more concern, due to there being 10 DNFs and never been found. GC1HA1R Bridge Over Troubled Water It could be there or the cache is really hard to find or perhaps something has happened at the cache site or the coordinates might be incorrect.... or... or.... or... so a note from the CO might be a good idea.

Agreed of course that winter can be a factor, which can always be expressed. However, as stated in the other thread and in by the quote from the OP, the sweep will be done quarterly. Thus the minimum spacing would be seven months for any single cache. Example 1. Last find was 21 DEC ... my sweep on 21 MAR would ignore it, my sweep on 21 JUN would cause me to look at it, possibly disable it, then 22 JUL would be one month after disabling and if nothing updated then it likely would be archived. Of course, this is all if the CO does absolutely nothing. Example 2. Last find was 21 JUN... my sweep on 21 SEP would ignore it, my sweep on 21 DEC would cause me to look at it, possibly disable it, then 22 JAN would be one month after disabling and if nothing updated then it likely would be archived. Of course, this is all if the CO does absolutely nothing. Naturally, if the CO logs on and says "The cache site is buried under snow, I'll check it in the Spring... that is fine. On the 21 MAR sweep would be another 'nudge' and if they can't get their listing enabled by 21 JUN then I see no reason why the listing should remain. At that point we would be talking about an entire year having passed. CO's do have to taken some sort of responsibility for their caches, and responding to queries about the conditions of their cache would be one of them. Also, remember that we are talking about "not found in over 6 months" and that being done once every three months. So the examples above are the absolute bare minimum. Many would likely be in the neighbourhood of 8 months with no real action being taken for a total of 9 months. Lastly, nearly every geocache that has been archived can be unarchived if the CO (and no one else) contacts the reviewer. I unarchive stuff all the time as long as it is still compliant with the current listing guidelines.

If this is true, can you provide a list to the public. A cache that has never been found will probably be of interest to the harder core cachers who may want the challenge. If the owner responds favorably, then I bet there will be a good chance it will be visited. It is my understanding that premium members are capable of creating pocket queries. If you are unsure how to do so then perhaps it would be worth your while investigating how this is done. The Groundspeak Knowledgebase is a great place to start as is Membership Features

Yes, I did post that note on all active geocaches in Ontario that have never been found. Yes, starting in the spring I will be filtering through all active geocaches in Ontario and looking at the history. * If a listing appears to have logs which raise concern about the cache and/or that they might not be available then it is likely that I will disable them and request that the CO take some form of maintenance action within a timely fashion, as required under the listing guidelines that they agreed to at the time of cache submission. One possible test would be that it has not been found in more than 6 months and there are three unique DNF logs by three unique players on three unique dates, but other methods may exist. * It also follows that inactive accounts, which coincidentally are those that have not logged in for more than six months, may not be receiving site emails due to various reasons. Calls for maintenance that are not being addressed will also likely result in listings being disabled. * If a cache does not appear to have any issues but still has not been found in more than six months then I will likely suggest that the CO might want to physically check on their cache and then post an Owner Maintenance log. This action would update the entire caching community that the cache is verified to be in good condition and still in place. It gives the CO the opportunity to reassure those that might be apprehensive about seeking the cache that it is in fact still viable. Whether the CO chooses to check on it or not is not relevant since there are no reported maintenance issues for me to act upon. Notwithstanding, please do note that owner maintenance is covered under the listing guidelines When it has been long time since anyone has visited a cache site, a responsible cache owner will check on their cache if it has not been found to ensure that all is fine and that the cache is ready to be enjoyed. Call it preventive maintenance Many reviewers have raised concerns about caches that have not been found in extended periods of time. One of the time frames suggested was six months but it is still at the discretion of the local reviewers. Often I will compare geocaching to a video store. When a movie has been sitting on the shelf untouched for long periods of time, staff or management will move it to a special shelf to highlight it. In short, they call attention to it and sometimes that is all it takes to get someone to rent it. CD