BigOpe

I know how to get a simple roadmap from GoogleEarth, and I know how to get an identical map with every geocache using the .kml overlay to GoogleEarth. But I don't know of a way that I can select a list of specific geocaches I'm interested in -- only traditionals, or only difficulty 3's, or whatever -- and get a map that shows the roads and ONLY the caches I want to go for on a particular day. Can be done? Anybody know how?

Okay, thanks. Solves the mystery. Guess they'll have to invest in a for-real GPSr.

Visited Florida recently and infected my brother's kids with the geocaching virus. When I left they were trying to figure out how to use their IPod Touch as a GPSr. They had downloaded some $10 app from the ITunes store that displays caches, but what the IPod was NOT doing was displaying their own location correctly -- showed them someplace completely different, which of course resulted in bad distance and bearing information on the IPod map display. I know zip about IPod/IPad/IPhone/I-anything, and don't particularly want to, I'm a happy Garmin camper. Has anyone using the iPod for caching experienced what I described, and if so, do you have any suggestions?

Ah so, thanks.

Have a TB that wants to return to UK, also have a friend/neighbor who is traveling soon to Glossop, near Manchester, and would be glad to take it. But she's not a cacher herself, would need someone to pick it up from her and drop it into a nearby cache. Anybody in/near Glossop willing to take on the task?

Couldn't think of a way to search the forum for this. TBs have a tracking number on the tag, which you need to do just about anything with it. There's another, different number on the TB's site page -- what's it good for?

Yes, the map you can launch from the web page of an individual cache. OK, was just hoping it was hiding there somewhere and I was overlooking it. I can always use the .kml, just a minor inconvenience.

Double duh, there it was in the .kml, but NOT when you launch the google map from the geocaching.com website. So question still stands....

Duh, never mind, just looked again and there it was.

In GoogleEarth I frequently use the Ruler feature to mark points along a route and get an approximation of the distance. If I launch the geocaching.com GoogleMap I haven't yet found an equivalent. Is it there and I'm just missing it? (Yes, I know I could grab a series of coordinates and eventually get the same result, but the GoogleEarth feature is WAY convenient....)

I picked up a TB in NM and was going to drop it somewhere in AZ, but now can't find it anywhere. I posted a note with apologies for the owner, but how do I get it off my inventory list?

I'm not exactly "new," 600+ caches over almost 3 years, but just became a premium member. Wondering if there's a way to build a pocket query to run every week and show me anything new about my personal DNFs. "I haven't Found" doesn't cut it, gives me everything in the otherwise-specified area etc. that I haven't found whether I've ever tried or not. Can this be done? If not, is it something we should ask for? (BTW, I'm a database programmer, so I speak pretty good query, but I couldn't find the necessary criteria to give me what I'd like to have.)

Is there a way to do this? I've looked around the Hide and Seek screen including advanced search options and haven't noticed one. It would be useful, all the more so if one could combine it with other search options, as in "Traditional caches published since 11/1/09 and located within 10 miles of xxxxxxx."

Talk about stirring the pot! I posted and then went off deer hunting et al for awhile. Thanks for responses. Yeah, I guess it's hard to nail down active cache #1000000, was just thinking of the moment when the display on the website hits a million, even if it changes right away.

Is anything in planning for when the one millionth cache is activated? Sounds like the kind of thing that would spawn some events, but I haven't heard/read anything. BigOpe/Tucson AZ/nearing The Big 500

Apparently not, $50 individual/$75 family. If you're a resident you can buy a hunting license for about $32 and just be sure you're hunting any time you go on Trust Land, but if you're a non-resident the hunting license will cost you way more than the simple use permit. Bummer, huh. Unfortunately the "charter" for State Trust land (given to the state when Arizona was created back in 1912) is to make as much money as they can off it for the public good -- schools, etc. -- and they're obviously milking that for all it's worth during the current rough economic times. Let's all watch and see if the fees go back down when the economy has recovered ... yeah, let's watch for that! Oh, I forgot to add, yes, there are"atlas"-like books available at Walmart, in convenience stores, etc., that purport to show Trust land, private land, BLM land, etc. They don't offer much detail, and When I've driven the boonies referring to one I've had the feeling that (1) maybe they're not kept all that up to date and (2) maybe the ranchers -- that would be the guys with the cowboy hats and big guns -- aren't aware that their south range is Trust land and therefore open to anybody with a permit. Nonetheless, a map book like that might give you a general idea. So if the borders of state trust land are not clearly communicated, (no accurate maps available, no signage in the area, how can we be held responsible for trespassing on it? The map books are at least a start -- and there are better maps available online, though I'm a bit skeptical of their up-to-dateness too. Ones I downloaded last fall for hunting showed STL in places where there was clearly a pocket of private property with big ol' Keep The @#$% Out signs. As for the STL signs, as I said somewhere else, I've seen lots and lots of signs on pretty much every significant road leading into STL, so unless you're walking or ATVing in away from roads, odds are you'd get a warning indication. I must say I have never, say again never, seen anyone looking like they were checking for permits out in the trust lands, and I've spent a fair bit of time out there. But if you DO get checked, I wouldn't bet the farm on the "I didn't know" defense, remember this is about the state needing revenue! When you get nailed at one of the red light cameras in Tucson and have to go to Traffic Bad Boy School, I'm told the instructor flatly admits "Hey, it's about the MONEY, dummy!" I'm sure this huge jump in STL fees is in the same category.

Apparently not, $50 individual/$75 family. If you're a resident you can buy a hunting license for about $32 and just be sure you're hunting any time you go on Trust Land, but if you're a non-resident the hunting license will cost you way more than the simple use permit. Bummer, huh. Unfortunately the "charter" for State Trust land (given to the state when Arizona was created back in 1912) is to make as much money as they can off it for the public good -- schools, etc. -- and they're obviously milking that for all it's worth during the current rough economic times. Let's all watch and see if the fees go back down when the economy has recovered ... yeah, let's watch for that! Oh, I forgot to add, yes, there are"atlas"-like books available at Walmart, in convenience stores, etc., that purport to show Trust land, private land, BLM land, etc. They don't offer much detail, and When I've driven the boonies referring to one I've had the feeling that (1) maybe they're not kept all that up to date and (2) maybe the ranchers -- that would be the guys with the cowboy hats and big guns -- aren't aware that their south range is Trust land and therefore open to anybody with a permit. Nonetheless, a map book like that might give you a general idea.

Apparently not, $50 individual/$75 family. If you're a resident you can buy a hunting license for about $32 and just be sure you're hunting any time you go on Trust Land, but if you're a non-resident the hunting license will cost you way more than the simple use permit. Bummer, huh. Unfortunately the "charter" for State Trust land (given to the state when Arizona was created back in 1912) is to make as much money as they can off it for the public good -- schools, etc. -- and they're obviously milking that for all it's worth during the current rough economic times. Let's all watch and see if the fees go back down when the economy has recovered ... yeah, let's watch for that!

Yes, there's usually a sign that says you need a permit unless you are hunting with a valid license. Won't swear that's 100%, but I've seen a plethora of such signs.

I posted about this on the geocaching.com forum but they said they bumped it over here where the Arizona "new cache reviewers" hang out. I don't see my actual post, so will kinda restate my case. Got an EMail that somebody would have liked to try one of my new caches but the $50 fee was to steep for him. Last I knew the fee for recreational use of State Trust lands was around $10-15, so I checked it out, and it's true -- they've bumped it up to $50 for one person. Bummer, since State Trust land is about 2/3 of the entire state, and I'm sure it affects about a zillion existing caches, never mind new ones. I guess maybe the reviewers might consider making COs of proposed new caches aware of the high fee, sort of like they do if you try to put one in a National Park. I can imagine that that pricetag might limit traffic considerably! But I would also offer the observation that if you are HUNTING on State Trust land with a valid license (about $32, I believe) and happen to stumble upon a cache, well, stuff happens, doesn't it. There are various species that can be hunted all year, bunnies are one, so if you're out there with your hunting license and anything from a slingshot on up I would guess you're okay. I've already bought my combined annual hunting and fishing license for $55, so you can bet any time I step onto State Trust land I'll be hunting -- ain't no way I want to pay another $50 for another permit to just wander around with a GPS in my hand.

Saw you closed this, but want to raise it here again as it's something the people who approve or disapprove new caches may want to be aware of, so I think it's more of a geocaching.com-level matter. AZ fees for recreational use of State Trust Land are now $50, up from $10 or $15, which affects a ton of existing caches and whatever new ones are created on State Trust Land, which is darn near 2/3 of the entire state of Arizona. One guy already EMailed me that he wanted to take a shot at my new cache but that's too pricey for him. So your new cache reviewers might be doing cache-hiders a favor to let them know about this relatively high fee BEFORE they decide to place their cache on State Trust Land -- sort of like you do if they try to put one on National Park property. I know I will look for other alternatives from now on before putting out any more caches on State Trust land.

I resisted the temptation to engage in hour-to-hour back and forth, as I asked the question to hear other viewpoints. Thanks to all who contributed thoughtful observations both pro and con, and to those few whose thing is sarcasm and condescension, Happy New Year anyway. There's another graveyard cache in our area that I'm just fine with, a multi-cache that takes one past the tombstones of a number of early settlers, telling their story along the way, and ultimately to the cache at a point not directly at any grave. And, as I tried to say initially, I'm okay with a cache that says "After signing the log, step across the street and check out the xxxxxx memorial." Just can't get comfortable with looking around behind the plaque, or under the bench next to the angel statue, or whatever. That's just me, and as some pointed out, I'm free to avoid those; I just need to read the descriptions before downloading, which I often have not done! Happy caching 2009 to all. Just passed 250, thinking now of putting out a few caches myself to repay others for the fun they've given me.

I got into an EMail head-to-head recently about a cache that creeped me out because it was located at a memorial site -- not NEAR a memorial site, actually ON the site. Today I attempted two more and had the same reaction. What does the cacher population at large think about this subject? I at least would feel much more comfortable with a cache that is NEAR a memorial, gravesite, or whatever, with a description that says "after you've found it, take a moment to visit the nearby xxxxxx and spend a quiet moment of contemplation." I just can't deal with the idea of searching through the bushes, under the benches, or whatever, directly at the site.

I posted in the general Groundspeak forum suggesting it might be neat to be able to search for caches specifically identified as TB hotels, or motels, or depots, or whatever. First response said "that's an unofficial category, every cache is a TB cache, you dummy!" Second response said "designated TB caches just lead to more Muggling." After sulking for awhile I decided that's an interesting question, but needed to move to this forum. Should there be caches that specialize in TBs? If so, should there be a way to search for them so that while traveling, one can drop off a handful of TBs and pick up a handful of new ones in the interest of supporting the whole TB "thing"? I enjoy playing the TB part of the game, though I've been frustrated from time to time at finding a TB with no attached clue about its mission. I've also found TBs from time to time in caches that are way out in the boonies, and when I read or research their mission statement I say "yeah, like that's gonna happen with this thing parked way out here at the end of the known universe!" What say you, other cachers interested enough to log onto this particular forum?

Somewhat to my surprise, a similar post from me generated some "I hate hotels" feedback. One reply said "every cache is a TB hotel, you dummy!" while another said that identifying TB hotels leads to mega-Muggling. This inspires me to transplant my initial I-thought-harmless-but-apparently-not posting over to the TB Forum.