team crayfish

I have a multicache in Petoskey, MI. that has a person do research on the internet (or elsewhere) to obtain answers to some questions about Petoskey, then do some simple math; find a local benchmark, and find the two cache stages. I also encourgae the seekers to make use of local maps, topo, or some such else as the river the cache trail follows tends to meander. This helps a seeker from wandering aimlessly around gravel piles, factories, etc. Another idea would be to use a travel bug. I think travel bugs would be a great educational tool. One could use it to study geography, social sciences, statistics, and any number of analysis methods.

My intent in this post, as I noted, is there are a few people who would do damage to fragile areas. 99.99% of the geocachers I have met or talked with are very conscious of the environment and cache placements. The post was more intented for those who don't care. I am one of those who believe that just because an area has some special uniqueness does not necessarily mean it should be publized or advertised. As the NatGeo article indicated, there are Park rangers who watch and monitor that area. In their case, it just may give our sport some negative press. There are other areas that are not closely monitored. These are the spots to be wary of. It is understood that damage will undoubtedly occur without our caches, but at least we know we had no influence in it. I think the governmental regulations that have been posted in this forum speak to this need succinctly. Again, I speak primarily to that .01% of people. As we all know, it takes only one to ruin something!

I was recently reading an article in a National Geograhic magazine about the Badlands in South Dakota. There was mention of geocachers setting up a virtual cache and others coming in and removing archeological finds from the area. While this is only a minority, we should take great care in setting up caches, adding cautions to our listings, and perhaps even avoiding certain areas that could be irreversably damaged. While these actions are certainly from a minority, stealing artifacts, damaging the environment, etc. will give this great sport a bad image and promote banning the sport from many areas. We as stewards of our lands need to consider all of the aspects of a cache and the possibilities it may inspire in the long run.

I think a directory would be great as well. Often times, I have wanted to search for someone and end up reviewing old log entries trying to find them again!

I still tend to use true north as one seldom knows the mineral deposits nearby. Yet, for most applications, especially in places like Michigan magnetic and true north show little variance, unless something interferes, such as forest cover does with a satellite signal.

Thansk everyone! Your input has greatly helped. Years ago, all I ever used was a compass and map. With the advent of technology, I began to almost exclusively use my gps. I do still carry a compass for backup, but rarely use it. Perhaps it would be wise to combine skills and gear as everyone seems to do. Again, thanks for your help. Bill

I have wondered, which format do most use when locating a cache- true or magnetic north? I typically use true north. While most times and applications this does not seem to present any major variances, when seeking a small item or with weak sat. signals, it could certianly cause enough variance to miss one's target. So, which should I use?