Algonquin Bound

It can be done: See Ambitious Snorkeller

You can use this search for Algonquin and this one for Toronto. I can't really advise on what is good or not in either of these areas. You'd think I'd be an expert on Algonquin caches, but not yet!

You will not be disappointed with The Talented Mr. Bean. Well worth the trip. It is especially effective in the middle of the night!

Just wondered if anyone had any details on this. I caught a snippet on the news the other night, but missed the full story. Have tuned in to several newscasts looking for it, but haven't heard anything. A Google search turned up this article in a Buffalo newspaper. Strangely, nothing seems to have shown up in any St. Catharines/Niagara area newspapers, or even the Toronto papers. It would be nice to know some details as to exactly where this happened. Very, very sad.

OFF ROAD - Luther Marsh is an example of why people suggest that you get more than just a few finds, before placing your own caches. A pretty remote area and a long hike, only to discover that the coordinates are off!!! Not everyone does this, but it is common enough that people warn to get some solid experience first. It takes a while to get used to the nuances of a GPS and to learn how to be sure that your readings are accurate.

There are probably no caches because it is a private park. One would need to approach the owners and find out how they felt about it. The park is massive, so it probably shouldn't matter too much to them, but it probably will!

Hmmmnn! Couparangus's first point eliminates several cachers I know! MaisOui and Avrohead, you may want to look at Yorelken's "Joycie's Cache", which he specifically designed for a wheelchair-bound friend. Annie, I saw your comments on the chats and I'm sure I can help out. We'll talk.

Yup! Yup! And more yup! Fabulous work! In fact, I hereby move that we double their salaries. All in favour? Opposed? Carried! Unanimously. You are now getting twice as much as you were before, which is only fitting, since your workload has at least doubled. Thank you. Keep up the great work!

I think a lot of people are going for the high-end equipment, just because of the autorouting capabilities, which certainly make driving to the cache area much easier. No, we don't really need that, but for those who can afford it and who get a lot of use out of it, since they do a lot of caching... more power to them. However, I DO think we should all strive to switch to PDA's for cache info. We are in the business of loving and enjoying nature. It seems a little counter-productive to kill trees in order to do it. Granted, the paper used is negligible in the grand scheme of things, but in principle alone, we should try to avoid using paper.

Well it just so happens that I have friends in Arizona! Perhaps with some advance notice and cooperation from the bosses, I might just be able to go and visit them FOR THE FIRST TIME. I'm truly sorry to see you leave the area, Spudman. Thanks for all the hard work you did on this year's cache and good luck with your new venture/locale.

I think it is really difficult to name just one favourite. 2nd Annual Great Potato Head Multi-Cache Hunt by Spud_Potato_Head was amazing in so many different ways. It was physically and mentally challenging. The cache placements and containers were thoughtful and inventive. The terrain and the weather was something else. It was a lot of fun and very special. I would encourage any true cacher to try to get in on it next year! The Blue Quasar's Blue Box Series is definitely the most unique idea that I have yet to see in geocaching! Honouring long-time caches, tying in the ideas of re-using and re-cycling, (environmentally encouraging, which we obviously care about), as well as the days of the week, the locked boxes and the damned tags for the combination, were brilliant. All of the caches were great and the creative story-telling was great. The Golden Horseshoe Multi-Cacher Multi-Cache was another incredible challenge, just because it covers so much territory and so many people were involved. The work that Trimbles Trek & Flick put into the logistics of organizing it, as well as all the stats that are so faithfully and accurately updated and maintained, make for a pretty special cache. EmmaBean's Stupendously Wonderful Cache by EmmaBean was THE most creative container I have ever seen. Absolutely brilliant! Kiosk Trestle Rapids by TOMTEC is a favourite because it is in my favourite place in the world, it is a long-ish, but easy hike, very few people have done it and the day was gorgeous. Also, I caught the biggest fish of my life, just by following Tomtec's suggestion. For absolute beauty and serenity of the area, I have to go with Ball's Falls by kdkk17. I really don't know why, but I was moved almost to tears with the sheer beauty of this place, perhaps because I wasn't expecting it to be much. Finally, I must say that the virtual, Bruce Trail Break, is a must-see and one of the most moving surprises one could ever hope to come across in the woods.

Barring any schedule changes, I think I should be able to make that one, too. Probably! How's that for committment? I think we'll get along just fine.

Well, as you've noticed, there are some very active cachers in the Burlington area, but our "local community", as Kevin referred to it, basically includes the entire Golden Horseshoe area. Welcome aboard and congratulations on your first cache. As I advised you before, Down By The Bay is a sneaky little cache and not the best for a first attempt, but I'm confident you will find it next time. In keeping with the obvious Australian theme, I was in Melbourne last year, visiting my brother, as well as a friend of my girlfriend, with the same name as you.

The link doesn't work. Try this: GPSCity They've just dropped their price to $429.95 Most important: That is U.S. dollars! = $575.85 Cdn. TrimblesTrek still got the better deal.

This works fine with Cogeco. The new link for Tag works, too.

Hey Keith! I tried several times and get a page not found error. Can you check the link?

Yup! It's amazing!

Thank YOU, then!

And the thread slides ever so slowly to the left!

Wow! I see the problem with cache names not showing on the cache page or on the watchlist has already been fixed. Thanks, Jeremy! For anyone else, this was a problem with caches named "Geocache" or "Traditional Cache". The names were not showing on either the cache page or the watchlist. This meant you could not view the cache from your watchlist. You could only remove it. I mentioned it and within hours (maybe minutes - who knows?) the problem was fixed. Thanks again. I don't know how you keep up with the volume. Keep up the great work!

Thanks for clarifying this, Jeremy. Since I now know it is on your to-do list, I'll close the thread. I'll assume the "no-name" thing is also being worked out. Thanks.

Patiently wondering if this is in the planning stages or not. Also just dicovered 2 caches in my area that show no names, either on the cache page or the watchlist. GC3D7B & GC714. On the seek pages, they list as "Traditional Cache".

I hadn't heard the term, "notional" before, so I had to look it up. I like it! I also really like the idea, with a preference to zeroes over nines. It is just cleaner and far more obvious. CoyoteRed's point about proximity is valid but it must surely be an already existing problem. If I have a mystery cache which will eventually lead you to the co-ordinates of "The Bell Tower", I must submit those coordinates in my cache submission, though they will not appear on the page. If you then place a cache under the fountain in front of "The Bell Tower", would it currently be rejected because of proximity? Wouldn't that give away any nearby mystery cache? Any approvers want to clarify the current procedure? Anyway, I would much prefer to have the zeroes than the fakes, although it would mess up my sorting in GSAK.

It just occured to me, after spending ages reading this thread, that maybe this is an April Fool's prank: "Watch me get everybody all riled up!" Except that the responses from Jeremy and the Cache Approver, seem to indicate this is really happening. Clearly, this is the most important thing you've said in this whole rant. Perhaps the only rational thing you've said. Think about it. Your angers and frustrations and discontent don't belong here. They don't have anything to do with GC.COM or Jeremy or approvers or rules or caches or geocaching, at all. Everyone here has been patient and kind and understanding, but it doesn't belong here. No need for me to re-hash all of the rule-quoting and who is right or wrong or who should be e-mailing whom. All of that has been abundantly clear. Nothing here accounts for your anger. No one here has been direspectful. This is not a flame, so please don't flame me. It is a sincere, direct and honest observation. Go well.

Yes, the basic functionality is there, ie. if you click the "Watch this cache" button, it either adds it to your watchlist or removes it from your watchlist, but it doesn't tell you what you're doing until you are done and it has gone through all the time and effort of doing it. You then get a screen telling you that you have added or removed and giving you an option to undo it, again taking a lot of time and effort, for both user and machine. A check-box would show as either checked or un-checked and you would immediately know if you were watching that cache, or not. As I said originally, the same feature on the watchlist page, ie. a "remove" check-box beside each page you were watching, which you could click on, but which would not take any action until you clicked on a submit button at the bottom of the page. As it is now, I have to click "remove" for each cache, then wait for everything to reload, before I can remove another. If I want to remove twenty caches, it would be much easier to "check" each one, then hit "submit" or "remove" at the bottom of the page,