wildearth2001

Actually it seams that most of the community dissagrees with you on this point, a few agree but many others, myself included do not. It probably wont, but the issue still remains, why did Co Admin feel that he needed to archive the cache. I wrote this post without the intent to flame anybody, thats why I did not name names (other than CO Admin). Please realize that this is MHO!! You are intitled to yours and so am I.

I hate water, so I guess I live in the right place, "Greetings From Tucson" (title of a TV show that I only watched once, though I know exactly where they filmed it) Isnt it interesting how a former state champion swimmer hates water...well that is exactly the reason, you try spending 6 hours a day swimming. The only water I like is a heavy...heavy downpour of nice freezing cold rain, but which is not accompanied by wind or electrical storms, I usually win my events and do my best times in said conditions

did someone say NORM? yep EDIT TO ADD: (Read post below this one to see what I am refering to), sorry for letting my AS stuff leak here. I wasnt gonna get involved in this thread, but now that I have been asked (and I guess I should, I did post here) I will voice my opinion. I do not want to flame anybody but El Diablo, IMHO this is not over, Jeremy/Hydee havnt looked at this subject closly yet, CoAdmin has not stated his reasonings. I do not think that CO should have archived this cache, particularly for maintainable distance reasons (which Jeremy gave permission for), but I am not reading to bash him, I have had nothing but good experiences from CO both here in the forums and as my approver. This is the first action of his I even mildly question, and am reluctant to do so untill I here his side of the story. As for 360, I have a lot of respect for him, I have found two(maybe more) of his caches and enjoyed both. Both were interesting caches. I have witnessed him trying to come up with new and interesting cache ideas and when I first noted that the cache tribute plaque was spearheaded by him, I earned even more respect for him. I look upon 360 highly, as well as a few others on "The List" Once agian, I sencerily appologize for straying off topic in this rather serious thread EDITED AGAIN TO ADD MORE: I also question why CO Admin archived a cache well out of his area, but I am not trying to bash him or any other of the admins or approvers, I respect them all and this site and have no intention to ever use another listing service. I am also trying to find the funds to become a paying member of this site.

I have looked at that cache page before, when I was on a boy scout "campout" (we actually stayed in a 5 room hotel SUITE, with fully stocked kitchenett etc) flagsaff. I was gonna try and hunt for several caches nearby our "campground" and if we headed in that direction, the cache in question. When I saw that warning I looked on a map and really didnt see what his big deal was. Turns out I never found any of the caches because nobody wanted to go with. So I also think I wont bother looking for the cache if the owner is gonna be like this.

As soon as I took my own advice in reverse and unchekc them all. They all dissapeared. So far so good. Then to check out the TB ability and see if it matches my stats post I just did TB's. Nothing. Then I chekced them all again and only got the ones that I had found. So it looks like the bug strikes in strange ways. when i uncheck the boxes nothing happens, I have to click on of the pan in/out buttons and then click the opposite button before any changes happen

I had the same problem today, hmm I am gonna go check to see if it is still like that for me EDIT: I just checked and they are all still gone, and the last time I tried was about 6 hrs ago

I agree with brian on these. The first one was good, but way short and redundant on a few points. The second one I didnt get to work either and the last one I also couldnt get to open, but if it has anything that might give a reason for them rejecting it, dont even mention it, unless they specifically ask for that info. THe last one might be usefull for YOU to look at so YOU know what they might ask, but do not bring anything about any of those up.

If the town has no policy, they other cachers in your area probably wish you wouldnt, because if you do, the aswer will likely be no. The fact that they have no rule that says you cant place a cache means that there is no rule against it, so why give the authoritys the opportunity to make such a rule, which they could well do. This is all just IMHO, but I do ask that you please deeply consider what you are gonna do, where you are gonna place the cache, and do you really need to ask permission. Also note that if you place a cache correctly no one, other than cachers, should find it, so why would they care, they will have no idea its there. My theory is if it is an area where you are allowed to walk (like the right of way for a road, or a sidewalk or path) or let your kids play (like a city park) then go ahead. This is how I do it but to each his own. (One last thing, most of my post here only applys to urban cachers and not wilderness ones)

I thought you were gonna talk about something on the site that jeremy finally got back up, but the idea the others speak of also came to mind

Thats why I only posted a note, and I will delete that in a few minutes

there are two ways to look at this, they might place new caches in a new, different and interesting way, not just an ammo can under some rocks or a altoids tin under the skirt of a light pole, they dont have anything to copy so they are forced to come up with the idea themselfs then the other side is as you are saying, they might place a cache stupidly I dont think that making a limit is a good idea, because we dont want to shove away new cachers, or prevent the first thing I mentioned from happening. Also some people dont log their finds online, which would make a limit hard to do. It all comes down to the reviewer should email a cachers who submitted a cache with a very vauge or non-existant discription, and should be hesitent of approving a cache without a description.

I know this is true for the eastern timber rattler that is common in our local area, but is this true for ALL species of rattlesnake? In my recent travels out west, several people told me the rattlers out there were more venomous then what we are used to. Yup, pretty much all of them are non-lethal if treated properly. Most rattlesnake deaths are a result of an anaphylactic (allergic) reaction, much the same as bee stings can cause for some people (like me). The venom produces an allergen that can stop respiratory function. The venom itself isn't deadly unless you have a particular allergy to it. Who wants to let a snake bite them to see if they're allergic? Yes the ones out west have a more potent venom (particularly the mojave) but they are still only lethal if you have a reation, as Sparky said. Out here there are a few deaths caused by them in people who didnt have a reaction, but that is because of the deleyed treatment time (I have heard stories of it taking several days to hike out to a road and flag someone down, then a mutiple hour drive to the nearest hospital). In my area, if you need an ambulance, they dont send one, they send a MediVac, because the ambulance ride would be more than an hour, and I live in a residential area. the key t surviving is to 1)not get bit 2)dont be allergic 3)get help fast also many times rattlesnake bites from an adult snake will be dry bites (no venom) but with babies they always release ALL of the venom they have

I check abject silliness about 7-8 times per day, but I check the rest of the forums maybe twice per day

The idea generally is cool, but like you suggested, you may run into maintaining issues, depending how geocacher-dense area you live in. Better have the caches close to your house or other place you frequent. Another idea is to print only few transparencies, and obligate the cachers to bring them back to where they got them. This should be made clear in the cache description already. You could hide the first cache near the obvious parking spot. Place few transparencies here with an accompanying instructions to take one transparency with and go find the next caches either Here (set of coords) or There (another set of coords). The point is, you give the next caches' coords not earlier than at this first container, so the searchers don't know them beforehand. Here and There would have hidden containers with different cryptographic images, printed on paper. When the cachers find either of them, they just place the transparency they took from the first container on the paper, and they get the final coords for the cache. When they've found the cache and are coming back to their car/whatever, they're supposed to drop by at the first container and leave the transparency there. You can place more than one transparency there, should more than one geocachers happen to come there at the same time. I know this wasn't quite the same idea you originally had in mind, but this could save you from some maintenance visits to the caches. Feel free to elaborate. now thats a great idea

Cool, does this mean I can post all my bike and cycling news info in here?

Get well soon Ms Mtn-Man and good luck to both of you! I am so sorry to hear of this.

I have only caches in 1 state, AZ, hoping to add to that sometime soon NORM

You mean you need a Rec use permit? (which seems to be required for about everything) or the other one? (for groups) rec use (which takes about a month to get), if you are alone or family, other than that you need the group one which can take several months to get

I want to be a Mod!! El Diablo I'll snatch that pitchfork out of your hands and <cool it chicken> This post has been edited by Keystone Approver on Jun 7 2004, 08:17 PM That was one fast edit KA! Though I would have like to have seen the original reply. El Diablo it was fast because KA did not edit it, if it real;ly was edited by KA when it is quoted the "this post has been edited by" line would not show up. The chicken added that into his post simply by changing the size to zero and typing that line. (Surprise! Yes it does show by the way. mtn-man) yes but not when I quote it

I want to be a Mod!! El Diablo I'll snatch that pitchfork out of your hands and <cool it chicken> This post has been edited by Keystone Approver on Jun 7 2004, 08:17 PM That was one fast edit KA! Though I would have like to have seen the original reply. El Diablo it was fast because KA did not edit it, if it real;ly was edited by KA when it is quoted the "this post has been edited by" line would not show up. The chicken added that into his post simply by changing the size to zero and typing that line. (Surprise! Yes it does show by the way. mtn-man)

Here in az, clinton created massive amounts of national monuments, I live literally less than a mile from the one of these, Ironwood Forest National Monument. Fortunately most of IFNM was left to the BLM to manage, but about 1/3 is state land, off limits for the most part (see my other post). Currently they are closing off large areas of it to motorized traffic (which I support) and 2/3 of these 129,000 acres are currently in 3 different proposed wilderness areas (which I am supporting 2 of them). What really gets me mad is a lot of these lands that forbid geocaching in many cases have huge herds of cattle grazing on them, and hundred of 400-500kilo animals eating plants will do far more damage than the 20-40 people that will visit a remote cache in a year. Here is a link to the AZ-BLM's policy on geocaching. EDDITED TO ADD: The clinton administration created several new NMs in AZ Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument (the monument in question by the topic starter), 1,054,264acres Agua Fria National Monument, 71,000acres Ironwood Forest National Monument, 129,00acres Sonoran Desert National Monument, 496,000acres Vermilion Cliffs National Monument, 294,000acres all axcept the GC-PNM are under full BLM management (to my knowledge), GC-PNM is under JOINT BLM and NPS management, so you might want to check into the actual policy regaurding geocaching, it might be allowed in some areas but not others.

state lands in arizona are off limits to people without a permit, which is a bit of a hassle to get (no screening or anything, it just takes forever to get processed, and costs WAY to much). Our state seams to think that all land is open to cattle grasing (including several national monuments and all non-wilderness forest land) and that there state land should be closed from the public so those stupid cattle ranchers can have there cattle grow fat by eating the native plants and getting our endangered species sick (read, Desert Bighorn Sheep, all got pink eye from a ranchers herd) and that they wont get fat if people disturb them so we are not allowed in there

and where can this TB list be found?

I really would like to know wtf the DOD thinks they are doing, a 10 day outage of 2 vital resources (well more like 1 1/2) is no minor thing. I mean come on, do you know how many people could be affected by a CELL Phone outtage. Especialy because they arent even willing to ly to use about why they are doing it. This is one great reason why I do NOT trust our government at all.

my computer used to do that to certain websites but not others. It was a result of Viruses and/or Spyware