Jump to content

_Shaddow_

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    411
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by _Shaddow_

  1. Holey cow. Not only the ET but many offshoots. So the trails are there. I'm still a strong skeptic of the 2000+ finders. I'd be willing to concede that it's possible that at least one on that list has truly done it, however the incentive to fudge numbers here is too great while the risk of being caught is extremely low. Personally, I would need to see a GPS track to believe any claims.
  2. Wow! That's one find every 15 seconds for a 24 hour day! I'm astonished, astounded, and unbelieving. 2,000 finds is one every 7.2 minutes. for 24 hours. Even that is astounding! That's what I'm saying. Physically those kinds of number are impossible. I would have to think they went caching for a whole week or more and dated everything for the same day so they could claim those kinds of numbers. Either that or like what was mentioned above with people re logging previously found caches under a different account. Careful what you call impossible. 7.2 minutes per cache is pretty slow for a power trail. I've seen one video that shows less than a minute per find - that's working as a team in a van. I, myself, do find the 5,578 in a day hard to fathom... Yeah, I want a math check: 24 hours x 60 minutes = 1440 minutes in a full day (even at one per min, 2k is out of the question) Large claim: 5,578 caches is 3.9 caches per minute which is very close to 4/min (roughly one every 15 sec) Spacing of caches are a minimum of 528 ft which is 0.4 miles per minute x 60 minutes = 24 miles per hour average speed over a 24 hour span Also 5,578 caches x 0.1 miles = 558 miles traveled at the absolute minimum cache spacing So I guess you could argue that it's technically possible Of course there a lot of assumptions which include: - that there is a power trail with 5,578 caches spaced 0.1 miles apart - the vehicle maintains this average speed over 24 hours (no stopping only slowing of the vehicle to grab / replace caches - caches are tossed to the rig while still moving?) - no fuel stop - no bathroom stops - no food stops - probably a large support team so the cacher only quickly signs the logsheet and does little else Smaller Claim: 2,000 caches is 1.4 caches per minute (one every 43 sec) Spacing of caches are a minimum of 528 ft which is .14 miles per minute x 60 minutes = 8.4 miles per hour average speed over a 24 hour span Also 2,000 caches x 0.1 miles = 200 miles traveled at the absolute minimum cache spacing Assumptions include: - that there is a power trail with 2,000 caches spaced 0.1 miles apart - the vehicle maintains this average speed over 24 hours - no food stops - bathroom stops are made up with higher vehicle top speed between caches (time at 0 speed quickly drags down the average) - any slowing of vehicle below 8.4 mph to grab/replace is made up with higher vehicle top speed between caches - that the vehicle is able to accelerate to required top speed in less than 264 ft My 2 cents: anything close to 2k in a day would be very momentous achievement. Are there even any 2k+ cache power trails yet? Heck, I'd be impressed by someone signing their caching name on a piece of paper 2000 times straight
  3. _Shaddow_

    rideabent

    Here on the wet side, a few years ago we (many difference local cachers) were able to track down an absent CO, the owner of some very cool multi caches and others, and he adopted them out. Ironically, one of those cachers was hydnsek who posted above. I say, if you find them interesting and think worth saving, do it! Community care works well for the physical cache, there are still issues that come up on the page which requires access, those issues can be archive worthy so know that even the best community care will still not prevent the cache from being archived in the long run. My best suggestion is to try and figure out who the CO used to cache with and see if you can contact them for more information about the CO, or if they might be able to directly contact the CO. Researching the CO's old found logs on their profile page is a great place to start. Often the logs will mention who the found the cache with, or it can be deduced by a pattern of logs on the same day. Good luck
  4. Yes, overdue after more than a year. They did post an update in the forums on 4/21/16 but it all it really says they are going to take more time. http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=338633 It's a long read at 16 pages right now but I can summarize quickly. In the post the only new requirement they mention is that future challenge caches will need an online checker. But it's very clear that they haven't thought through any finer details of how it will work. The rest of the 16 pages of post are basically one of two things, catchers unhappy that GS appears to not have made any meaningful progress or about the problems / issues / details around the online checkers. For example that checker process would be through an uncompensated third party site and how it would work for a site of volunteers to take this work load. Back to your concern, I'm hopeful they will grandfather in existing challenge caches. Even if they don't, we can find a way for you to complete the challenge and log a find. I have some ideas we can discuss if it becomes a need
  5. Some more changes to the rules and description: In addition to the changes to rule 3 noted in my previous post, I've removed the wording "generally within" and specifically required that trips be completed on a road or trail in NW Topos. In a new bullet item located below the rule, I've noted that I'll accept most trips on roads and trails not yet in NW Topos with the understanding that tracks will be submitted to Switchbacks Since we use NW Topos as the official map for elevations and it now differs in extent from NW Trails I've gone through the cache description and made minor changes to make this more clear by removing most references to NW Trails. This effectively just clarifies the boundaries since NW Topos now covers a smaller area than NW Trails. I've updated my coordinate format request to remove the comma between the latitude and longitude, it is now NXX XX.XXX WXXX XX.XXX This helps ease my check effort as I can cut and paste quickly, MapSource is very picky and won't accept the comma. Significantly changed the text at the bullet under 'Additional Information; For each elevation, use NW Topos Maps or another topo map and round to the nearest 10'' to be more friendly and explain that some updates to posted trip elevations may be because of the differences between maps, and showing those differences improves our navigation skills which is a key goal for this challenge. Corrected spelling errors throughout the page. Additional Note: Up until now I've used the names NW Trails and NW Topos somewhat interchangeably since NW Topos was simply NW Trails data combined with a topo map and otherwise they had the same data. Now using the terms interchangeably creates confusion. Even in my recent log I used the wording "NW Topos (Trails) mapset" as if they are the essentially same which might have cause some confusion. From now on, I'll be referencing NW Topos separately from NW Trails.
  6. I am not sure where in Alberta you are located, but perhaps you can do the hikes in the areas covered by the mapset I live in Calgary. And this was my point. The map sets clearly included portions of Alberta, but the cache page excluded Alberta from rule 3. From this, I drew the assumption that you were drawing the line at the Continental Divide. Based on your response, I will now assume that the Alberta mountains W and SW of Calgary, which are included in the maps, are valid hikes. This all raises another point. I regularly record my tracks. If we contribute a track log to the project that is not part of the current mapset, can we then count that track toward this challenge? It would certainly encourage contributions. Nothing in rule 3 was meant to exclude Alberta, it only restricts to within the boundaries of NW Topos mapset. The bulleted info underneath, which is what I think you're referencing, clarified what areas are included in the mapset. At the time of the writing NW Topos didn't include any of Alberta so it wasn't included in that text. I've updated the bulleted item to make it current (pulled from the website) and also added some wording to indicate that it may change: "Currently includes Washington, North Idaho, western Montana, much of northern and western Oregon, the areas around Victoria and Vancouver in British Columbia, and Calgary, Alberta" In addition, in reviewing the Switchbacks pages on NW Trails and NW Topos, it looks like the NW Trails now includes all of Alberta as well as British Columbia and Alaska. And that area is much larger than the area covered in NW Topos. Because of that I've changed the rule wording from "NW Trails" to "NW Topos" to clarify we use the NW Topos mapset not the NW Trails mapset. It should have said Topos anyway, but now there is more of a need to make it clearer. These changes will their way to the page at the next trip update. I'm am not sure why the Topo mapset is smaller than the Trails mapset, though I'm sure it's a good reason. Could have to do with time and effort involved for a voluntary project, or the overall file size (currently at 1.25 GB). I'm also not sure about his desire to increase the size of NW Topos. So here's my thoughts: I am keeping the boundaries of the challenge within those areas covered by NW Topos. The boundary has to be drawn somewhere, and it has to affect some people. I'm sorry that affects you and I'd like you in the challenge. One option you can pursue is to get in touch with Jon at Switchbacks and see if he will extend the Topo Mapset into the your areas.
  7. A copying of my response on the cache page:
  8. I'd love to see #3 eliminated or at least add Alberta to your list. It's clearly part of the NW unless you're disqualifying it as being over the Continental Divide (as is most of MT and WY). I would have qualified just over the last year if Alberta were part of the challenge. First, thank you for reading this forum first before asking your question I think that the name of the mapset we're using is causing some misunderstanding, while it does have Northwest in the map title, I have not so much directly related this challenge to the NW. For example, if the mapset were to be updated to include more area outside of the NW, or renamed to something such as Western Trails, I would more than likely still use it. And good news that the newest mapset does have some areas of Alberta in it, per the Switchbacks page under the title General Information: I am not sure where in Alberta you are located, but perhaps you can do the hikes in the areas covered by the mapset
  9. Just tried it again and it's now working. I saw in the edit box what you mentioned with the content missing above the "<!-- data is inserted ending here -->" however that is -not- what I believe that pasted onto the edit page and was verified when I pasted the same info to my HTML viewer and had a correct display of the info. I posted the same info back into my cache page now and all is well. To double check, I took the html that on the cache page with the "<!-- data is inserted ending here -->" and it did -not- display correctly on my HTML viewer, it displayed the same as the cache page. It is possible that I had an error in my process, but I am unable to find it. My feeling is that the page changed what I posted to the edit box on the cache page to what you found and what was being displayed. If I am the only one reporting this issue then clearly it must be at my end. Though I wonder how many caches are as complicated as my page and where also edited shortly after the update, the chance that anyone would report an issue is relatively small. In any case, it's fixed now. I'll keep an eye on my process to see if I might find an issue with it
  10. There was an update this morning and now my cache GC24K9Z won't display the pictures or finisher's tables. I have not made a change at my end that would affect these items and have double checked my HTML code with another online tool. Did the update break something or has there been changes made that affects HTML?
  11. That's cos we're all commenting on the Facebook thread. I'm intrigued, too!NM - found it......or not. I'm going to need the thread link. The Facebook post she is speaking of is in the Cachers Of Puget Sound group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/317549528315995/permalink/773864149351195/ I posted nearly the exact same post in a couple of other groups as well (NW Hikers and Seattle Mountain Running Group)
  12. Hi everyone, I’m excited to present to you an opportunity to participate in a search and rescue (SAR) training event that I’m planning for the weekend of March 7th and 8th. I have a need for 8-12 mock subjects who act as the lost or injured people that the trainees spend the weekend searching for and treating. Normally we use SAR personnel for this role and I've decided to extend this opportunity to you so that you can have a chance to see what it is that we do and to give our members a more realistic training experience since they will not recognize you as they would a fellow SAR member. Who we are: King County Explorer Search and Rescue (KCESAR, or ESAR for short) kcesar.org What we are doing: This is a Course III, the sixth training course for new trainees which occurs over about 7 months, it’s the fourth overnight weekend for trainees. At this point the trainees have learned all their skills and this course gives them a chance to bring their newly learned skills into bigger picture action. Other participants are also doing advanced training including some of the leadership. What you would be doing: Your part will be to act a role based on the scenario, most often that will simply be as a lost person but possibly with a basic injury as a non-bleeding arm or leg injury (dislocated shoulder, broken arm or leg, twisted ankle, etc.) Based on the scenario you may be splinted and walked out or in case of an nonambulatory injury, packed out where we place you into a litter and carry you out (this is very comfortable, people sometimes even fall asleep.) You will never be alone, you will have at least one well-trained veteran SAR member as a shadow, this person will be the team leader providing navigation, safety oversight, communications and other needs including providing a temporary shelter if holding for a while as well as generally keeping an eye on you. This person will hide during when the teams find you and watch the interaction. Location: This training will occur somewhere in King County but the location not is being publicly disclosed yet to maintain realism, the ‘solution’ side will only be informed the evening before, and many of my Facebook and some of my geocaching friends are SAR members. Date and Times: Early morning Saturday March 7th to about noon on Sunday March 8th. You can participate either a full or nearly full day on Saturday or Sunday morning with possibly an overnight opportunity based on interesting and planning issues yet to be worked out. Requirements: Be at least 14 years of age and fit enough and comfortable with traveling about 0.5 to 2 miles round trip off trail, mostly open forest, some minor bush whacking, log hopping and minor stream crossings, no technical terrain. Depending on the scenario, you will be in the field for a few hours to all day, or even overnight (I will work together to match you with a preferred time frame). You will weather specific clothing to maintain warmth and dryness for many hours in possible poor weather (rain, cold, possibly snow). Pass a free basic background check completed by King County Sheriff’s Office (KCSO) to get a temporary Department of Emergency Management (DEM) card (provides insurance coverage). This is not overly strict, both the severity and the length of time since any items may be considered. Need to provide proof of auto insurance or get a ride from someone that has it. DEM insurance covers travel to and from the site and they have this requirement. Other Details: I’ll hold at least one planning meeting in Bellevue about one to two weeks before to go over details, get to know each other, etc. While the meeting is not absolutely mandatory, it is highly recommended to attend. If you can’t make it, we will try to work around it. The application deadline is Feb 20th to allow time to run the background checks. If you are interested or have questions then please post here or contact me via private message or email me (not posting here to avoid spam). Cheers, Kurt
  13. Myself and at least one other person that I know of have made inquires to adopt this cache but have not heard anything back. I responded to the two inquires that I received. I did make a mistake about my email address on my log to the cache page that has since been fixed, if you used that email, that could be the reason that I didn't receive it. Please reach out to me again if needed Shaddow.geo gmail.com
  14. Here's another one that I'm posting for a friend: This is a oldie (05/12/2001) located over in Burien: Slippery Root Cache GC931 It's been recently archived but the reviewer stated on the page that they are open to unarchiving it if it will be maintained. If you're interested please contact me and I'll arrange the adoption with the CO (who is very busy at the moment...)
  15. I have an lahontan cache The Dust Upon Which You Now Stand GCP95X on the PCT near Snoqualmie Pass that needs maintenance that I have not been able to find the time to complete. It's under a reviewer archive warning so the maintenance would need to be completed at the first opportunity though snowfall recently covered it for the season. A note to the reviewer may extend the window until spring. If you're interested please post here or contact me at shaddow.geo at g mail dot com.
  16. What cache are you referring to lam? I thought that all the caches up there are enabled and in place.
  17. Turns out it was still buried by several feet of snow, so the 3/4 way up cache (didn't feel like going for the one slightly higher for little extra gain) will have to do anyway if we can log a cache we already found. Welcome to the 50,000 Feet Challenge. A qualifying trip includes finding a cache the traditional manner. Re-visiting a cache or checking on an owned one does not qualify. The good news is that you'll visit areas and find caches that you haven't been to or found before. Quoted from the cache page: Shaddow
  18. No. Tell me how virtuals have the same impact. Your Earth caches obviously aren't virtuals but physical caches. If they're in the area of concern the they should be removed. They may not have asked you to remove them for a very reasonable reason, that they didn't know that there are physical elements to what is almost always a virtual cache. It seems to me that they are attempting to do their job of protecting sensitive areas. I don't see any abuse of power but rather a normal and healthy use of it. I understand that they've made a not unreasonable decision based on their charter that has directly impacted you and you don't like it. Instead what I see is a person who is angry that they can't put their personal agenda in front of the greater good. Should I still call them? I can tell them that I think they are doing a good job with OUR land and make them aware of the physical caches that you're being sneaky about?
  19. I'm sure that you've never revisited any of your decisions
  20. Not sure why you bring that up and I'm afraid to ask From the article: Seems very reasonable. Not very many caches, really. Though I understand that if you're the CO of one of the caches then it's much different and feels very personal. Hopefully you can work something out with them
  21. The only difference appears to be in the personalities between Gavin and Molly. Your issue is with Molly at the BLM, not the BLM. Can you still reach GovBigDog? Maybe he can help you figure out how to deal with this new person. You may need to go above her head to her supervisor. We had a very similar issue a few years ago in Bellevue where a young new hire was trying to make a name for herself etc and caused all kinds of issues. After getting her supervisor involved then things calmed down and eventually returned to normal. In the end, things were a bit different, but for the better. A pain to be sure. But deal with it is the way to go, rather than taking one's ball and going home
  22. I don't know Molly or why you even bring her up but I've seen lots of geotrails to lots of caches so I'm going to guess that they are out there in places. To me it's obvious that virtuals and ECs would have much less impact since people are poking around the same areas over and over and over again looking for the cache, instead they roam about the general area somewhat randomly. It's the intensive ground beating that causes issues. For example, the ground compacts making it difficult for plants to grow - that is why plants don't grow on trails. How about you don't blast the BLM? You parting shot will only make things harder for the rest of us you leave in your dust
  23. Oh, ummm . Sorry about that. I agree with TotemLake, that's the main reason that most people I know tell me that they don't come back. People can be nasty in here, without a need for it. Basically most of the nice people want nice conversations and when it gets nasty they leave to get away from it. Not sure what the says about us that remain lol Though I disagree about 'these days' implying that it's gotten worse. Refer: Godwin's law from 1990 But, of course, Godwin's law was referring to the wild unmoderated usenet groups. But it does have application to forums. I might have missed it but this regional forum seems fairly, well, nice. Some other forums on this board get a bit wooly, but given the OP was asking about this forum in particular, not forums in general, do you have instances where the conversation got nasty in this forum? True but what you are also saying is it gets bad to the point where mom or dad says stop it. So it still heads that direction... Granted that isn't too bad compared to some places and for the most part, it's nice. But the un-nice is still going on, especially when they're here for a touchy subject, like a question about a log or something. And it doesn't have to get very bad for people to want to be somewhere else. And sure the NW forum is nicer on the surface than others, I agree, but only because instead of people acting aggressive they act passive-aggressive. People here try to seem nice even when they're really being mean. It's happened to me several times, there are a few bullies in here. I stuck to my guns which is why I'm still here rather then have left myself. I understand you want some backup of what I'm saying, and I understand if you don't take me for my word, but I'm not going to go back and dig it up. More about using my time elsewhere than fear that I'm full of it, though that is always a possibility. [edited for spelling, then reedited to add this note]
×
×
  • Create New...