S Keillan

At least I had the foresight to take a few photographs of the cemetery. As I said, it's our family plot on my father's side, going back to my great-great-grandfather. I can probably work a little geneology into the listing. I hope that doesn't sound too self-serving.

By the way, I was in Virginia a week ago, where I have a cemetery geocache. (It's our family plot and maintained by my mother.) I had been considering making it Virginia Spirit Quest, but Virginia isn't exactly a pioneer state. (The part that I was in sort of was, in the Daniel Boone model.) Any thoughts?

I take it that the Minnesota Spirit Quest is SDT approved. Will there be a bookmark list created for them?

Now if someone could start a bookmark list for the NDSQ, I'll add that to the ISQ bookmark lists description. At least I have a couple of edits to make anyway. The pages look good so far. BTW, I'm up to 116 finds according to my personal bookmark list.

Well, I'm not too worried about that. Indiana's legislature isn't exactly known for competency. I wouldn't be surprised if they were still debating the value of pi.

On a slightly more serious note, I wonder if it would make sense to poll the candidates J for Indiana's governor (Gov. Daniels, Rep. Long Thompson, and Mr. Horning) what their opinions on GEOCACHING in INDIANA are. I suspect that the winner would have influence on the IDNR and thus might be worth while at least posing the question. Just something to contemplate.

You could simply toss them out of the window while driving by at high speed, sort of a new twist to the usual method of hiding 35-mm film canisters.

I presume that should apply to state recreation areas as well. I'm pretty much in agreement. An omnibus policy doesn't quite take into account the diversity of the many DNR properties. The points brought up seem reasonable to me.

The time frame has a rationale to it. It allows an area of the park (inclusive sense) to "recover" from human presence. Not the best of explanations, but that's how I interpret it. Looking at the policy, most of the points do have a logic to it. The maximum density minimises ecological damage; the permits allow for contact information and for IDNR staff to know of where placements are. To me, the only part that doesn't quite make sense is the limit per geocaching team. There are several geocachers that have the ability and willingness to maintain more than two geocaches. On top of that, I would expect that they would prefer to reduce the numbers so that they have fewer of us to work with. I suppose that an argument for diversity and allowing others the chance to place geocaches can be made, but I feel that should be a community decision rather than IDNR policy. Just my inane thoughts.

Hey Joypa, I just saw you on Channel 18 news. Joypa's alive and on televised news? Golly!

I wonder if anyone is keeping a count of the number of geocaches that have been archived. I suppose that feels a bit morbid but I'm curious as to the level of carnage that is taking place.

Regardless of the discussion about multiple find logs, the topic of being able to filter out specific geocache owners is a valid one on its own merits. I can even provide a non-cynical rationale for this. One time I was meeting up with another geocacher for some hunts. Obviously it made sense to rule out geocaches that either of us found, and there are programmes that can create that filter. However, this specific geocacher is rather prolific with hides (over 500 at last check), so ruling those out on my PQ makes sense as well. True, I can use Watcher to filter them out that way, but I would still have a smaller PQ (and thus area) to work with. Come to think about it, perhaps a similar feature that can filter out a specific geocacher's finds as well might make sense, even more sense in some ways. I rather not have to shuffle my Ignore list each time I plan a geocaching hunt with someone or a solo excursion.

In something of a similar situation, I post multiple logs when I do geocache maintenance. I write a note for visiting and a separate log (usually very short) indicating what I did on my visit. My reasoning is that I like to keep tracks of my travels, but the maintenance logs are out of order on the account page. Also, I might enable or disable a geocache without a visit, so that distinction is made with the single log. Just something I thought fits in with the subject.

Sorry that I missed the big events this weekend. I wasn't up for heavy travelling very early in the morning this weekend, perhaps from a lot of GEOCACHING IN INDIANA. I did go down to the Indianapolis metro area and picked up the Indiana Delorme Challenge yesterday evening as well as planted a geocache on Saturday. Perhaps next year.

I'm up to 112 total. Link to my bookmark list for the series.

The "oldest" geocache in the state, Indiana's First, is in the Elkhart area. That might be worth going for.

Maybe on based on townships within the county might be useful. If there's a township (or other sub-county division) that is lacking a geocache, this might be a way to inspire a geocache hide there. Just a thought.

Well, I'm back from my accidental trip to Australia thanks to a certain bottomless pit that I fell into. Good thing I know how a harmonic oscillator works; otherwise I might have had to take an aeroplane back to do GEOCACHING in INDIANA. As I quoted on the trail, it was just a flesh wound. Oh, I'm likely to have a nice long, straight scar on my elbow, but otherwise the worse is that I'm back at work with a sore back from all that hiking up and down hills. I did add to my ISQ finds this weekend (and last also), including one that I couldn't find (along with five others) two years ago. Once I have the chance to log them, I'll report an updated total.

Consider me in. While I might be a little brain-buzzed from a lack of sleep overnight, I suspect that my slumber until 15.30 h yesterday will counterbalance that, along with quaffing generous quantities of caffeinated beverages. I’ll try to be there on-time, assuming that I do not get distracted by the “Oh, there’s a geocache over there and I must stop to look for it” paradigm too much. Fortunately, all my waypoints are within 30 km of the meeting-place, so that should be too major of an issue. IOVA DELENDA EST!

I have a PQ set to run for the area tomorrow, so if I can get up early enough I'm planning on coming. (I say if as I needed to take off from work today due to exhaustion.)

I plan on caching over at Salomonie on Saturday, so if someone wants to bring the doughnuts we can call it a non-event event. Maybe it can be a MEGA non-event event if enough people show up.... Interesting, I have been considering geocaching in that part of the state on Sunday with another destination planned for Saturday. However, there's no reason that I couldn't switch them around. If others want a non-event event in that area, I might just show up. (That is if my hideous countenance is not an impediment to others. )

The same here regarding one's first find. I still remember my visit to the Skywatchers geocache in northern Tippecanoe County. The interesting tidbit of history from the nearby monument was likely one of the major draws to geocaching for me. It was a little over five years ago, but I still remember details about my trip (the route taken, the weather conditions, etc.) as if it were a recent memory. Congrats on find #1.

I bought an annual pass last year, thinking that I was going to geocache a lot in state parks. Alas, I used it one time, the same day that I bought it. That was when I was in a geocaching rut. However, I'm pretty much out of it as the 49 geocaches that I found in 22 counties this last weekend demonstrates. (I'm still logging them.) Thanks for bringing this to my attention. IOVA DELENDA EST!

I keep a bookmark list of my ISQ finds. Unless I have missed some, my total is 104. I also have an OSQ find as well. IOVA DELENDA EST!

You could have said something at the event last night! Congratulations!