ecanderson
-
Posts
5650 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by ecanderson
-
-
OK - from that description, I think my initial guess was right. Fortunately, there's not much traffic on the roads out there E of the airport. But if anyone DOES come by, you can sure find yourself eating dust! They don't bother treating any of the roads out there with mag chloride or anything, so their either dust or mud all year long.Yes, I found some.
Normally I would swing the car towards the cache (so we could use the headlights), and then ensure no cars were going to hit us (left flashers on) before exiting.
Normally the team of 3 would be at the cache site searching by the time I started my usual countdown with the gps.....40....30....20...
If they didn't find it by the time I got to zero, I would choose a spot and start hunting.
Was reading another of your posts above, and see you got introduced to our nasty little "sticky burrs". I'm not sure what the real name of the plant is, but those little barbed balls are a real PITA. They love socks, and you can actually pick them up on the bottom of your shoes and pretty well cover the floor mats with them. In any other year, the bugs wouldn't have been much of an issue, but we've had a very unusual amount of rain this summer.
So apart from the "0.1 strings" of caches, which ones did you find that were really interesting out here? Or is it still all a blur? Where else did you guys go in the area?
-
Varies widely with my first glance at the cache page. I will often have a quick look at the satellite view on the cache page. It's saved me a LOT of time more than once, especially as it regards water. I'll give you an example a recently published cache that I just looked at this morning (GC1XR5A).What's your process for preparing for finding a cache? Do you read the cache page? Logs? Hints?Saw the 2.0 difficulty. No problems there. Then saw all of the water (creeks and ponds) surrounding the cache, and thought "Uh oh, access could be really tricky on this one". Truth to tell, there's only ONE way in to this cache that 1) doesn't require crossing private property and 2) doesn't require fording at least one active ditch... a trailhead at 75th and Hygiene Rd into a trail with no other exit. I discovered the trailhead entrance with a quick look at the satellite view from the cache page map. So I have saved myself driving around endlessly looking for another way in.
Obviously, I don't use the satellite view on everything, but another case where I'll use it is where I suspect I'm involved in large and convoluted parking lots or open space that is surrounded by a lot of private property and access will be an issue. I search for public paths between houses from streets into the green-space.
The idea is to spend more time looking for the cache than figuring out how to position myself in the vehicle to GET there.
So in typical sequence:
1) Check the difficulty and terrain ratings. Decide if difficulty rating matches the amount of time I can likely spend on the cache for a search (many are done at lunch). Sometimes on a weekend I'll tackle the really nasty ones. I'll rarely tackle anything over 3.0 difficulty at lunch. I also rarely tackle high terrain rated caches (above 2.5) in my street clothes during lunch!
2) Take a quick look at the recent logs to be sure there aren't a string of DNFs on a cache whose difficulty doesn't appear to warrant this. Probably abandon the idea for now if there's a string of DNFs w/o a find and difficulty 2.0 or less. (This explains my comment in the DNF/notDNF thread - I'm not alone in this behavior). An exception is made for a rare few hiders that I know who regularly underrate the difficulty of their caches vs the average in our area.
3) Check the cache's map local terrain and find some sort of nearby vehicle and/or pedestrian access if it's not obvious, using the satellite view instead of map view as necessary. Get a "driving route" in my head.
4) Head for the site and start the search. Time to be sure I've looked a second time at the size information and the name of the cache along with any information in the hider's description. Nothing worse than forgetting that you're looking for a micro when you recalled it as a regular! The name of a cache can also often provide a clue as to its location. I've felt like an idiot any number of times when not finding a cache, only to realize that it was, as the hider often notes "in the name".
5) If, in my very subjective opinion, the time spent doesn't match up to to the rating after some period of time, that period determined by difficulty rating, I'll check the listing for a hint. If it's there, I'll use it.
6) If, in my very subjective opinion, the time spent with clue in hand doesn't match up to the rating after some period of time, I'll start looking in detail at recent logs to see if anyone else reported this cache as more difficult than expected, or anything else peculiar that might explain my lack of a find.
7) I'll either find the thing or I won't. Note that numbers for lifelines/phone-a-friend do not appear on a cache page (see sig line!)
-
On those occasions where I realize I've gotten in WAY over my head time-wise (this can happen easily during lunch caching runs), I won't DNF the cache until I return and can actually spend the amount of time appropriate to the difficulty rating. Once in a while, we'll leave a tough one (3 stars or more) to the end of our run and just use the few minutes we've got to look around and see what we'll be up against when we've got the time for a real search.Sometimes I won't be able to find a cache and I'm never sure if I should log a DNF right away or only after trying a few times. I'm hesitant about logging a DNF right away because I don't want to discourage other geocachers from thinking the cache may have been muggled or something when it might just be that I wasn't looking in the right spot.When do you log a DNF? Right away? Only after trying again?
A similar situation occurs (rarely) due to weather. While we don't often get much rain here in the Denver metro area, this summer has been quite the exception. If I start a search and get rained out before I've completed anything close to a decent search, I won't DNF on that trip.
If I show up, but I'm prevented from doing a search (muggles or physical barriers to the site), I'll likely drop a "note". Have had that happen again this summer when headed down to a mountain area cache where a slide had messed the road up pretty good. Figured the "note" would be fair warning to anyone else planning to come to that site before they got it cleaned up. As I pointed out to someone the other day in a similar thread, there's a difference between "Did Not Find" and "Did Not Look". And sometimes, a note as to the problem that caused the latter can be helpful to those that come afterward.
-
While I don't begrudge your record for a moment, if you spent a lot of time out east of the airport, that count doesn't come as much of a surprise to me as it might to others. A couple of local cachers have managed to place caches nearly ever 0.1 mile on a series of country roads out there. All 35mm cans up against fiber optic or gas line marker posts. Good way to run up the numbers, but about as low as it gets on the "interesting" scale. When you get around to logging them all (I REALLY don't envy you that job!) it will be interesting to see if you managed to cover them all.WHO:EMC of Northridge California
F0T0M0M
Ventura_Kids
WHAT:
Set a new World Record for Speed caching.
We found a total of 413 caches in one day.
WHEN:
August 29th 2009 - Midnight to Midnight
WHERE:
Denver, Colorado, USA
WHY:
We just wanted to see if it could be done.
HOW:
We had 4 cachers in one vehicle.
We started by waiting across the street from the first cache until exactly midnight.
At midnight we ran across the street and started searching.
The weather was perfect.
Total Mileage Driven = 471.5 (1.08 miles per cache)
Total Caches found/Dnf'd =413/23
Average cache time = 3 Minutes 18 Seconds
But with as many as you logged, you must have also gotten out of that territory and into some more interesting caches. We certainly do have a lot of them out here. Hope you had fun.
-
146. The first hundred are memorialized at GC182PF as part of the 100 day challenge. It started as an accident/addiction, and turned into an obsession to make that first 100 days.
http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...3a-38b4538b3933
and
http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...e6-5c99412e6592
After 146, I got onto a cruise ship, and although I did some caching during that trip, had an "at sea" day. Finally blew a hole in the streak.
-
Colorado and Oregon? I did that on my lowly little eTrex SummitHC and included the line "Reward for Return".Great advice....
And for all who get Garmin Colorado and Oregon, EDIT your startup page with your name, phone number and Email address.
(and forget all the warnings about putting your phone number on it. Your GPS isn't likely to be used as a tool to determine when you aren't home)
-
ARGH -- I saw that one when it published and I see only one brave group has made a "find" on it. Yeah, Denali certainly did you proud with that one. 50 caches to find with an average terrain of something on the order of 4.0 and a handful of 5.0 difficulty multis thrown in just to keep it interesting! You certainly won't be forgotten around here for a long time to come. If we could get more air here, would you consider coming back?I don't look at challenge caches much. But there is one in CO known as the Tahosa Challenge. And you have given me a nice idea for a challenge cache down here in AZ, that I'm going to have to work on this winter. -
As for the availability of L&Ls ... one of the easiest places to score these is at Bed, Bath & Beyond. They sell a 4 pack for $9.
http://www.bedbathandbeyond.com/product.as...mp;SKU=16183784
and a whole assortment of 20 of them for only $30.
http://www.bedbathandbeyond.com/product.as...mp;sku=16183628
-
Should have read this one before my reply to AR. Yeah, we see the same problem here. Nothing wrong with the container - will keep everything nice and dry if actually closed. Some finders don't seem to have the smarts or interest required to snap on the lid after the find. So while we've still got them out here, they've fallen into disfavor. Too bad - camo'd, they make great containers.When I find one type that gets wet consistently (e.g. decon boxes) I quickly remove them and replace them with better containers. -
Be fair, AR ... if you have any experience placing dcon containers, you know that they're as water tight as anything can be, but out here, we do run into problems with finders that don't secure the lids properly after the find, sometimes allowing in a good bit of water. So yes, cachers can be at fault for not securing easily closable waterproof containers that AREN'T ammo cans.Interesting... cachers are at fault because you don't use easily closable waterproof containers (see Ammo Can)? Speaking of taking responsibility...
-
The bookmark list above seems to have them pretty well covered. The toughest one I've had to deal with doesn't look all that tough (a 100 day streak challenge), but given the rate at which I was burning through caches last year, it was a LOT harder than I would have thought. Life can get in the way, along with vacations. My streak finally ended at something like 146 days when I took a cruise that had an "at sea" day. Wasn't much I could do about that! I didn't plan to do 100 straight days, but as I got close, realized that a complete lack of planning was going to make it hard.
http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...ca-7a1b0bc5d90b
-
And very few people use them that way. Most of the time, a "bug drop" is correctly used to indicate a separate visit to an already "found" cache with a bug or coin. I have an active bug hotel that I use when I find bugs that have been "stuck" and need to get back on their way along a more mainstream path to their destination. By necessity, I use a "note" log to drop them there, not multiple "found" logs! Hope that makes sense to the OP.WRASTRO: I agree if it's a stand-alone bug drop. But if the cacher just logged a find saying "I dropped the Karma Lite Fairies geocoin" and then immediately logs a "bug drop" note, I don't see any useful information in the latter. -
When that happens, it's always nice if you leave an email or log note for the owner so that they'll have the option of going out and moving it to the intended location.I recently found a cache simply lying on the ground. The cache description and clue gave no real idea where the original location was, nor did prior logs. The hint was "moss grows on trees" or something like it... So I stuck it on ledge created by a branch on the north side of the tree, about eye-height.Probably not where it goes, but it makes sense to me.
-
Anything smaller than a bison (aka "bullet") = nano for me. I appreciate it when those hiding nanos make note of it in the description. The ease of hiding a cache in a difficult spot seems to increase exponentially with decreasing size, and if it's well hidden, the reverse is also true.Ignoring the fact that TPTB have said that they won't create any more size categories...Where would you draw the line between a nano-cache and a micro-cache?
-
I wasn't suggesting that you appeal an action. That's typically pointless anyway.What exactly was the nature of the "threat"? Caches placed outside of their area of authority, followed up by threats? Even my skin isn't that thick. I'd have been working my way up the supervisory chain as a matter of principle, if for no other reason than to assure that someone, somewhere, learned some better manners.
Site volunteers are equipped with Kevlar flak jackets and a generous supply of Admin Bricks®. It's in the forum guidelines - you can look it up! That is all I need by way of "thick skin." Appealing actions up the food chain at NPS (or any other land manager) is above my pay grade. Fortunately, there are people who are paid to do that once the issue is highlighted. They are very good at it, and I am grateful for their support.
I was suggesting that perhaps someone up the chain far enough to give a rip should have been made aware of the "threat". You haven't yet described the nature of the threat you received. If your use of that word is accurate, it all sounds as though it was handled in a very unprofessional manner by the sender.
So ... what was it???
-
Interesting thing about Cachestats is the way they create their database.
If you log in at certain caches around the US you get on their site. If you never get to these caches you will never be listed.
Not exactly true. If you somehow miss all of the "sampling" caches, you won't be added automatically, but if you wish to be included and have >200, you can request it from the owner. FWIW, it's not just the US, it's international.
They are caches that they have figured out to be statistically high volume caches that the high volume cachers get to.Again, not exactly true. It's not looking for caches that "high volume cachers" get to, it's looking for caches were there is a high correlation between having >200 finds and having visited a particular cache. 200 isn't exactly "high volume" these days. The sampling method is pretty slick. Not very many folks who hit caches in major areas fall through the cracks.
I went to one such cache at about 250 caches, and have not been to one of these caches since then. So their statistics has me still at around 250 caches.There's something wrong with that. If your caching handle is in the list, your statistics are automatically updated every time the site does its update from the data at gc.com. You don't have to keep hitting the "sampling caches". Any chance your gc.com handle has changed since you hit the list?
-
Had no plan to get involved in this, but your post intrigues me.Because of my reviewer work, I am a lucky recipient of a threatening message from the National Park Service. Apparently my publishing of geocaches on lands which are next to NPS lands is part of the "geocaching problem." Once you've gotten such a message, one is understandably more cautious about publishing "edge case" caches such as the one you keep bringing up.
What exactly was the nature of the "threat"? Caches placed outside of their area of authority, followed up by threats? Even my skin isn't that thick. I'd have been working my way up the supervisory chain as a matter of principle, if for no other reason than to assure that someone, somewhere, learned some better manners.
-
People often get their ashes parked where they ask to be parked or in a favorite spot known to friends and family. No matter how out of the way that may seem to be, a cache may be nearby.Quick question since I never in a million years expected this to happen while geocaching on vacation... Went to a remote cache, found the typical cache site in a rock ledge with stones piled in front of hole, moved stones, found a black box with sealed plastic bag sticking out of it...not a cache but someone's remains.Had the exact same thing happen to us looking for a cache near one of the visitor pull-outs that is at one of the entrances to Estes Park, CO. The coordinates weren't right on the spot, and in the process of overturning a goodly number of rocks, found a brass box with "Donald" in it. We covertly got Donald back to his final resting place and looked about the same distance from GZ in other directions and finally found the cache.
I wrote the owner and suggested that 1) the coordinates be tightened up to keep people away from the cairn, and 2) a hint be added to suggest to the finder a more correct location for the search. Alternately, move the cache altogether.
As I recall, they opted for the "move the cache altogether" in the long run. GCQ6Q0
I added a note to my "found" log advising that if finders found something they did not expect during their search, to please be respectful. Nothing more specific than that, but enough for someone who actually ran across the same brass box to have a clue. Was a good thing, as a couple of others did find behind us.
Write the owner. Explain the problem. You've done what needs to be done.
-
For lots of reasons, this may be hard to say. One of those reasons is that some "cachers" are in fact groups of two or more cachers combining their finds (each of the individuals in the group does not necessarily visit each of the logged caches). It appears that Alamogul attends each of the caches logged, however, and he's currently top dog in the known rankings at over 35,000.Out of all the geocachers in the world, who is the person who has found the most? -
Could be worse. If that were the philosophy of Boulder Cty Colorado, I'd still be voting for their use of taxpayer funds for open space acquisition. Here, it's "Set aside some land that no one will be allowed to visit, period. Now, set aside some more land that no one will be allowed to visit, either." We are developing a large inventory of land here that no one can even SEE unless they've got access to an aircraft or thinks Google Earth is a reasonable alternative. Here in the Peoples' Republic, it's "People bad, fence good". The percentage of land being acquired that is accessible to the public is very low indeed compared to other areas of the country. So here, there's not much issue about whether a geocache is placed on THAT land.The ideal is: Preservation for the people, not from the people. Protecting land from us today so that our children can't use it either, serves no purpose whatsoever.
I think this oversimplifies the issue in a way that unfairly paints the government as being draconian.
The ideal is: Set aside some land that we are allowed to visit, but not alter, so that our children can visit, and also not alter.
The County finally budged at least a bit on the accessible open space, but requires a form be filled out and that the cache be pulled or moved after 6 months -- even if it only gets a find every other month. Better than nothing, but not great.
http://webpubapps.bouldercounty.org/pos/ge...e2/default.aspx
-
??? Who's to say you didn't slow down before taking the screen shot?Could you fight a speeding ticket with a screen shot of the Nuvi at the time the cops wrongfully pulled you over for speeding?
Think it through just a little bit and I believe you'll retract the question.
-
You lost me there. What is it that you would tell GSAK that would avoid having it send waypoints in GPX format when you transfer the caches to the handheld Garmin? GSAK's option is "GPS" / "Send Waypoints". For other units like your Nuvi, I fully understand, and in fact, my TomTom gets the full load via its own POI file format from GSAK (just a simple file copy - not using GSAK to transmit)... but an 60csx or an eTrex???This is one of the arguments in favor of using POIs instead of waypoints. I have 13,000 caches in my 60csx and Nuvi, so I have every single cache in the entire area that I often drive. You manage which ones will actually get stored on the GPSr by using GSAK filters, and each time you create a new POI file it replaces the entire old on on the garmin, there's never any manual deleting.
-
If you're caching in Quebec, I think you have to enter the coordinates in FrenchI have a Garmin Etrex Legend HCx and do most of my GC'ing in western New York. Occasionally I go into Canada but for some reason the accuracy is terrible. Do they have WAAS? I can't figure it out. As soon as I come back everything is fine again.Any ideas?
Apart from that, your performance should be identical to what you see in NY.
-
I'm not sure what anyone is smoking. Have never had the feature work as advertised. I've never been able to get the 'quoted expression' technique to work at all.
From:
Advanced Search
All Geocaches
By Keyword
Try placing "Side Bet" in quotes, like that. None of my "Side Bet" caches show up at all. Some that should include
GC19QE3
GC1B03D
GC1B049
If anyone can shed some light on that...
Think it through just a little bit and I believe you'll retract the question.
New World Record - 413 geocache finds in ONE day
in General geocaching topics
Posted
Brady (GHP) has a few tougher ones in that area that are worth a look, but most of the others out there are just a long series of 35's next to stakes. Center; yourself up on GC1WA6B and back up with the zoom. You won't back up more than 4 clicks before you reach the gc.com 500 max on the map. It's pretty crazy out there.