JDandDD

What I wouldn't give for just 6". Here in the snowbelt around the Great Lakes I've got 3 feet on my front lawn already. Snowcaching is a must. Already have done a bunch in the snow with no problem. Actually, its not that hard. Snowshoes or xcountry skis get you over the snow and then a little digging finds it. I've found caches under 3-4feet of snow. Only a couple of times of year do I fail to find the cache, almost always because its under and ice-layer that you can't break through. Caches still tend to be hidden in the typical spots so you just use normal techinques and add the element of digging through the snow. Hadn't used the snowbrush idea Hippie Kidz mention. Great idea and will be using that one this season. Love snow-caching because it lets you do winter sports and since we started doing it the winter goes by much faster. JDandDD

We live in the snowbelt and know how uncertain the weather is at that time of year (this time of year?). Just had 25cm in a snowsquall on Friday. You can't move far in them. Love the idea though but will have to make the decision when the weather forecasts start showing that date. JDandDD

We use ours often but even in the snowbelt where we live the terrain we are travelling usually determines the need. Even on snowmobile trails and rail trails you can end up needing them at the end if the cache is off to the side in the deep stuff. Topo maps and local knowledge help make the decision. One other thing, get gators. They are an absolute essential as you will discover if you snowshoe without them. You will be kicking snow up the back of your legs and the gators will keep your pants from getting covered and you getting cold and wet. JD of JDandDD

I agree with that statement actually. To me these are the good virtuals. Same here. The issue with virtuals was the lack of clear specifications for virtuals. I think that virtuals shouldn't be thrown out from geocaching.com altogether but another attempt be made to come up with a good definition, and vague words like WOW factor aren't it. I haven't yet seen Waymarking handling virtuals well but it does seem to be a spot for locationless though its still a work in progress and needs polish. The interface makes it much harder to navigate than geocaching.com

Our goal was to continue to use geocaching to get outdoors and find different places. It has always worked for us and we found some really interesting spots. The highlight was 20 caches on a trip to Newfoundland from one end to the other and going to some spots like the Arches Provincial Park we otherwise wouldn't have stopped at. The numbers will take care of themselves as long as the fun continues. JDandDD

Quasy, you are right that most virtuals and almost all locationless didn't need a GPS. But I can also say, that a good virtual is the one I wouldn't otherwise have known about or found without geocaching.com and the coordinates. In some cases, I would never even have gone down the path or road that was required to find the virtual if the coordinates didn't tell me to go in that direction. One of the problems, of course, was the number of virtuals for which the GPS was not integral. That is one of the things that is making it hard for me to warm up to Waymarking, the lack of need for the GPS hunt, though that may change when a larger number of categories appear and the concept worked out a bit more. I would still like to see virtuals for which the GPS is required to find the site remain part of geocaching.

Couldn't agree more with that statement Jeremy. When a confusion occurs then I think the person who is confused should try to explain it calmly and try to work it through. Usually that way one can learn what is wanted. I only put that listing out there as an example to learn further what is really wanted in the category because it does meet some of the criteria.

With a little bit of fear I will enter this discussion, on the basis of the difficulties in clarifying a waymark description. Leprechaun, after reading your description I'm still not sure what it is precisely that you are looking for. The confusion for me comes in the requirement to not be near water. The page for Le Gabriel Restaurant in Cheticamp, Nova Scotia shows my confusion Le Gabriel Restaurant. This is a restaurant built like a lighthouse but never used as a lighthouse. It meets all of the criteria of your paragraph 3 except that it can be seen from the Gulf of St. Lawrence which would be a big body of water. I really don't know exactly what you were looking for and why the need for distance from water. Is it inland lighthouses, lighthouses that are something else, or something else altogether? All I'm pointing out is that what really needs to be specified is whether you are looking for unusual uses of lighthouses or mock lighthouses (like someone else suggested) or something else. This will be the problem for a lot of waymarks, being able to state precisely enough what is wanted and envisioned. Not an enviable task.

Easy. Its a find!! We've had that happen several times and it actually makes things more fun to do the hunt with others you've just happened to run into. Fun is the point of geocaching. Besides, it tends to balance out over time. Sometimes we find the cache first sometimes its the other team. JD of JDandDD

I'll add just a bit of a general caution about CDs in caches. Over the past summer I have come across 3 caches with CDs in them that had been cracked into pieces. Seems cachers aren't that careful when jamming stuff back into containers and broken CDs can be sharp, expecially when you don't see the bits (my scarred hands can attest to that). Maybe make sure the CD is in a container or something to contain the broken pieces (if that unfortunately happens) rather than just the CD themselves as the cachers at these 3 caches had done. JD of JDandDD

Again Couparangus I agree with what you are saying. I think the cache listing is confusing and should be made clearer. When I read it, it wasn't clear what you would get at part one. Is it just tide table info or a view or is there an actual cache? Without the latter its not possible to prove people went there and hard to see how it would be called a multi. You aren't asked to send in the time table for proof, you don't use it to calculate the coords for stage two. So what is there and why is it mandatory to visit when the listing also implise you can do this part if you have the time to view a tidal bore. Clarification in the listing really is needed. That said, to claim a multi all parts need to be completed for a claim. At the same time, we shouldn't take this activity (sport, game) too seriously and just enjoy it. The cache owner does get to make the ultimate decision of what logs they will accept but to allow everyone to enjoy the hunt they should ensure that their requirments are well and unambiguously stated in the listing.

I'm with Couperangus that the listing doesn't read like a multi. I take it that the owner implied that there were two physical caches, is that right? If so, I think he should have made that clearer since the listing implies only one and a view plus info sheet at the first. Maybe you could talk to the owner about the ambiguity of the listing.

This would appear to be going on a lot longer than I realized. The fact that they promised to talk before creating a policy is something to be angry about and the Minister should be unhappy with that. Ontario is supposed to be about customer service and someone looks like they've forgotten that. If you haven't you might want to make the Minister aware of that broken promise.

Actually, I am because I do believe that the hobby can exist properly and peacefully in the parks and yes the policies should reflect that and yes Ontario Parks should try to listen first. And you are right about the other activities that are potentially worse. But as my last paragraph said our geocaching sport is relatively new (this is a sport in its infancy afterall) and it will take a while to gain the same kind of clout that groups that have been around for a long time enjoy. History shows that many (most?) new groups struggle to get started and the first reaction of a lot of people to something new is often to try to prevent it or at least over control it out of fear of what they don't know. More power to the OGA for trying and I hope they succeed. My post was an attempt to say I'm willing to help out with that effort and if my experiences working within a civil service (not the Ontario MNR by the way) can help with strategies then I'm willing to share those. I believe that the more you know about how your opponent thinks the more successful you will be. We're all on the same side in this.

When working with government officials the most important thing is to understand the limitations that they work under. Those are codified in the applicable legislation first and then policies and regulations that flow from the legislation most of which have to approved at cabinet. They have no choice but to follow these. Both provincially and federally the first thing in the legislation is protection of the environment and the provincial legislation say that this takes precedence over other activities and the federal legislation says no person shall damage any flora etc. The problem for geocaching is that there is no group with the authority to supervise and enforce the policy and that’s what the government people need to see. The best strategy is to approach them with ways in which the sport (activity/game) can work with them to ensure that any problems that occur with caches can be dealt with. This means realistic proposals on how problematic caches will be removed and how caches in parks will be supervised to identify damage to the site's ecology and remedy it. Saying that’s the responsibility of the park staff will not fly. A statement that the cache owner will be asked to move it does not ensure that it will be done. Geocaching associations have to show how they will actively govern their sport. The development of the OGA and other groups is a good start but will have to have more clout to convince the officials that they can get problems dealt with. The activity will have to be more like the Bruce Trail or Ganaraska Trail associations or even the Snowmobile clubs who provide supervision of their activities and address concerns continuously.

These days I am a lurker I suppose. I got started on BBS systems dating back to the mid-80’s when there were very few people on line and was a major poster. Through the mid to late 90’s forums were interesting and fun to be on. Sometimes there were major disagreements but rarely anything that would now be called flaming. Just differences of opinion. Then the trolls and flamers came along and took the fun and much of the good information exchange out of it. I got tired of all the flaming by those who think shouting louder makes you more meaningful. The forums here have too many of that type as well. Groundspeak tries to make sure everyone is courteous but these days that’s impossible. So I read for information and contribute when I feel I have something positive to say that might not get jumped on.

Topo maps for all of Canada are available on the Federal government toporama site. The map including Copeland Forest is numbered 031D12. Here's a link: Toporama The maps can be saved and printed. JDandDD