Lightning Jeff

Not responding to Abby, but to WTA's statements... That would be nice, but we haven't even managed to do that for public education in this state. I love state parks, but I hope the Legislature addresses funding for public schools before it raises taxes for parks. This does irk me. A hiking organization (which I generally support) thinks the answer is to increase taxes on some other set of users - users who presently pay as much if not more to use the parks and, arguably, generate less costs for the parks (being self-contained, you don't see a lot of RV owners using restrooms/showers). Besides, an excise tax on all RVs would tax even those that never enter a state park. I think we should pay for parks and other public amenities through general taxes, but if we're going to use user fees they should be fair, not the result of sniping between different groups of users.

Piece of what?? Brian, I didn't see any statement there about PQs. I suppose it's probably related to overall site issues, but also agree with others here who point out that this is well beyond the typical slowness we see with PQs. And while I appreciate that Groundspeak is working on the issue (seriously, who could think they're not concerned?), I also think it's fair for people to ask about the status of a feature they pay for. (Maybe not much, and maybe that's part of the problem.)

Logging out then back in fixed this for me.

Early on I used to take pictures of some of the caches (or waypoints) I found. Here are a few: Waypoint on a multi-cache (this is a Bison capsule; also frequently used for micro caches) Wide view of same Also a waypoint (coordinates for next step imprinted on object) Another waypoint (probably violates guidelines because it is buried) Same, covered Regular sized cache Where it was hidden Another regular As hidden (not well; base of stump) Cache in hand Where it's hidden This is a cache Hidden in plain site And check out this thread for lots of evil and innovative caches. I agree with others who have suggested that you should first try to find some easy (1 to 2 stars difficulty), regular-sized caches, then work your way down to smaller sizes as you feel your geo-sense sharpening. You might also want to focus on parks where you have a chance to search without feeling out of place, again until you start to develop that sense of where the cache is probably hidden (I have not achieved that yet). Have fun!

WOW. It took awhile for Google Earth (Mac version) to load the kmz file for Washington, but wow, this is cool. Thanks so much for this, Jon.

This isn't true. On a tour of the watershed (actually a small portion of it) earlier this month, I learned that only 5 cities in the US have completely protected watersheds - Seattle being one of them. Most watersheds have some access. I guess I was speaking regionally (and possibly ill-informedly?). But closure does appear to predominate in these parts (including Oregon, e.g. Portland, Corvallis, Ashland according to a quick Google search). Much more to the point, I take it the info you learned on the tour was in connection with a discussion of the merits of aggressively protecting watersheds? Seattle's approach may be overprotective and not strictly necessary, but from an authority standpoint I don't think any municipality will be challenged in regard to limiting access to municipal watersheds. The need for a total closure policy may be debatable but it isn't demonstrably unreasonable.

If only it were true. I read through the entire thread at NWHikers, and honestly can't make a lot of sense of it. It sounds like PUD is willing to maintain some access. However, as some have pointed out over on that board, most municipal water supply watersheds, including Tolt and Chester Morse, are entirely closed to public access. That always struck me as excessively protective, but I have little doubt that public agencies can designate certain publicly-owned lands as off-limits. I wonder if there is something different about the Spada licensing situation, but I kind of doubt it. DNR is a state agency. Your point is taken, but it does seem like there are special concerns in Morning Star that wouldn't apply anywhere else. I'm not sure the sky is falling. If this does turn out to be statewide, it may be the natural progression, with DNR possibly analogizing NRCAs to national parks, where caches aren't allowed (as opposed to state parks, where they are, barely). If so, that's a bad analogy, and the sky would indeed be falling.

I load Northwest Trails on both my Oregon 400T and my Nuvi 760, with no problems. On the 400T, you have the 100k topo basemap pre-loaded. (I also have the Washington/Oregon 24k topo product installed on a microSD card.) On my Mac, I use MapInstall to load Northwest Trails to the Oregon. On a PC, you'd use MapSource. Either way, install directly to the Oregon. You won't overwrite the basemap, as the software will create a new, supplemental map file. (You can load more than one mapset this way - e.g., Northwest Trails and another custom mapset or even City Navigator maps - as long as you have enough memory and load them all at the same time.) It's basically the same on my Nuvi, and I assume it would work on other Nuvi models as well. It's really cool being able to drive around and see the trails. If you load caches on the Nuvi as POI, this turns it into a great tool for navigating to trailheads. The Oregon is then a great dedicated trail unit. I think if Jon ever pulled the plug on this project, I'd probably give up caching. (Jon, don't get any ideas.)

Take a look at the first impressions, reviews, etc. here.

I've thought about ways to secure a box shut with a lock of some kind. For instance, there are kits to adapt a standard ammo can for a padlock. However, I've been concerned about the etiquette in doing this. It seems like land managers might frown on boxes they can't readily inspect (without the necessary info). Similarly, it seems like locked boxes might lead to more "it's a bomb!" scares (seems silly to me, but who knows). Thoughts?

You have to have the little belt clip "button" (the little round piece you see in the picture you linked to) attached to the GPS - no big deal. That fits into the loop at the top, then the bottom of the GPS snaps into the latch at the bottom of the handlebar bracket. I found it to be very secure. The piece that fits around the bar opens up pretty wide, so you don't have to slide it on (which would be impossible without removing your grips, levers, etc.). It comes with two rubber pieces of different thicknesses, so it can fit pretty much any size bar. The plastic bracket gets closed around the rubber piece and screwed down, so it is very secure. (Much better than the new handlebar brackets for the Colorado and I assume Oregon series - zip ties?!)

Yes, thanks Jon for pointing this out. As one of your Twitter followers, you also turned me on to Brightkite, which is both very cool and somewhat scary - just like Twitter but location-based. Interesting stuff. The coord.info/Twitter combo lets you see where your friends are caching, while Brightkite lets you see their photos from those adventures, and see where they are when they're not caching. Did I say scary?!

From King County: Bummer. Here's a map of the location. Marcus, isn't this bridge further than the Hancock permit will let you go? I know you could bypass the previous (Wagner's) bridge closure, but I think the Hancock road reconnects to the North Fork Road just past Wagner's bridge, and Sunday is further up. Unless maybe the mainline road from the Spur 10 gate will get you here. It's all kind of beside the point though, as the permit is, as you say, extortionate.

What are you trying to say about us Garmin users?

Did you search for it? That could be part of a letterbox. A quick search of two letterbox listing sites doesn't reveal an obvious match, but there are quite a few "word of mouth" and bonus boxes that would not necessarily be listed by location. On the other hand, the reference to "treasure" hints more at a cache. That looks pretty new - could be it's something not yet listed. Could also be that you found parts of two different rejected (due to proximity) caches whose owners have not retrieved the detritus.

I received my copy of the Garmin Northwest 24k last week, and had a chance to try it out over the weekend. I really like it. It is like looking at a 7.5 topo map - all the contours and other detail appear to be there. I think it will be great for caching, with a much higher, more usable level of detail than the 100k topo product. One thing to note, though, is that with that much detail, it can get a bit ugly (and slow to load) if you zoom out too far. (Of course if you're zoomed out, you can turn off the 24k layer and show whatever else you have loaded.) On the other hand, zoomed in to, say, .3 mi or closer, it looks fantastic. I tried it on my Colorado and my 60CSx. It looks good on the 60CSx, the main difference being you don't get the shading that is optional on the Colorado. I did not try copying the map file to my PC. I have the National Geographic TOPO product for that, so I'm happy with the SD format for this product. Screen Shots: .2 Miles, Shading On .2 Miles, Shading Off .8 Miles 2 Miles (The red trails are from Moun10bike's Northwest Trails mapset, not the Topo product.)

I'm intrigued about the iPhone's potential for casual caching, but would you really want it to be your main caching GPS? Where I live, it rains, and I cache in the rain. Google iphone water damage - you'll see that the first generation, at least, is highly susceptible to even moderate dampness. There is in fact a sensor that will tell Apple that you got it wet, and you can forget about any warranty repair/replacement. That $200/$300 phone will cost you at least $400/$500 to replace. (I'm also guessing that the iPhone will be less tolerant of being dropped than a ruggedized handheld GPS.) Doesn't seem like a very good idea to me.

WSGA - State Park Regulations The WSGA site links to the "directive" on geocaches. There is also a formal regulation at WAC 352-32-237. The definitions also clarify that the policy applies to letterboxes and "related activities" (e.g., terracaches). Punishable as an infraction, meaning fine up to $500 plus statutory assessments that bring the actual fine close to $1000. Not that I've heard of anyone actually being cited, but I suppose a blatant violation or violation in the wrong park could lead to enforcement. By the way, it's interesting to note that the WAC applies not only to the hider, but also to anyone who puts prohibited material in a cache - which includes anything that is "inappropriate" or "offensive." Wow. I place pathtags in most caches I find, and I wouldn't put it past someone to be offended by my little martini-drinking cacher.

FWIW, you can also create and save paths using Google Earth Plus (save as KML and import right into GSAK).

You should check out Waymarking.com or terracaching.com Not terracaching, unless you're talking about virtuals there. As hydnsek notes, physical caches are generally forbidden in national parks. That's not (just) a geocaching.com rule, it's a national parks rule. I wouldn't want caching in general to get a bad name among national park land managers because people list physical caches on another web site. Just because the listing mechanism at tc.com won't necessarily prevent you from listing a national park cache doesn't mean you should do so.

Or, we can just exercise good judgment. We don't need a one-size-fits-all approach to public lands. I think most of us are capable of figuring out the differences between, say, national parks, prison yards, city and county parks, hunting lands, public libraries, courthouses, state and national forests, military bases, freeways, and residential streets - and are capable of discerning what is appropriate in each such setting. Rather than requiring explicit permission in every setting, perhaps we as a community should apply more peer pressure to discourage those caches that are placed against better judgment. Certainly reviewers are the first line of defense here (and do a good job), but I see room for constructive criticism in logs, too.

I'm not sure that's so different from what you made the "sad mental note" of ... Seriously, how many people really follow this particular guideline? Makes a mental note of this comment. I think I see you saying that reviewers essentially ignore the permission requirement ("Please make sure to obtain permission from the landowner or land manager ... prior to placing your geocache."), at least on public lands that don't have specific restrictions - or at least, "assume" that permission has been obtained, when I think we all know it generally has not. I think we all knew that. Of the several dozen caches I've placed, I don't recall ever being asked by a reviewer about permission - even for at least one that is clearly on private property; I've never once asked for permission. I think that approach to reviewing cache submissions makes sense, and I agree with those who suggest that asking public land managers for permission is likely to lead to a lot of denials, when in fact they really don't care one way or the other. I'm not sure what is wrong with recognizing these facts - including the assumption that reviewers seem to make as a matter of course. I don't see it as "blatant disregard." Though the term often makes me cringe, I agree with EraSeek that there is a lot of value in "common sense" here.

Neat incentive - thanks! Is there a way to discern the source (GPS track or not) of a particular trail from "our" end?

Preston Mill II The building (now a granite shop) just to the north of the mill was used for external shots of Big Ed's Gas Barn, and you can briefly see the mill and its unique sign in the pilot or one of the early episodes. A house to the north of the granite shop was the Hurley residence. Snoqualmie Point View Park: I believe this was the site of the videotaped picnic. Cache at Snoqualmie Falls: The Great Northern and of course, the falls. If Fish Could Walk: Across and just up the road from the building used for external shots of the Roadhouse - now in a terrible state of disrepair, unfortunately. (Just to the east of that building is the Bookhouse.) Seekers History Log: The big log in the credits. Have fun!

Maybe it's a minor issue, but let's be accurate. This is not just an aesthetic issue. The icon tells you what kind of cache it is.