Waazdag

Judging from the well stomped geotrail ending at GZ, if my GPS brings me to the exact same spot as every other searcher, but the cache is 60 feet away I will note that the coords are in fact off... and suggest better ones... unless it is some G.D.F'ing nano in a pine tree 60 feet away, in which case, I would have logged a DNF unless someone more persistent had posted accurate coordinates...

Allowed as a cache? Sure, but not recommended. If it needs to be inside a plastic bag, it's not a good idea as the plastic bag will retain water, and the container itself is probably not able to withstand the elements. Found a cache in the middle of a drought that was wrapped in a plastic bag: and had water inside the plastic bag when I found it from the last precipitation months earlier.

Logged a few "micros" that could not be signed since the cache log was turning into paper mache, made my "X" then moved on. Even moist logs let me sign something :Date /Handle log in etc...

133 Logged DNFs and 1016 Founds... several DNF's are on the same caches though... I have no qualms about logging a DNF. It is accurate and gives feedback to the CO as to whether their cache may or may not be rated properly for difficulty, or that there may be issues with their cache.

is it just me or does that look like a human hand on the left side of the picture? Actually that would be a foot... given the human like appearance possibly a bear?

The one I am most proud of is my 901st cache find: GC2EGJX... It was not super special, or a super view, just that I scored a FTF on an unpublished wilderness cache due to a lead from a wrongly dropped TB. Second one is GC1RPBC . I was the 8/9th person to sign the logbook, even though some 27 before me claimed to have "found" it... tough for a bouncy area and way too many hidey holes for a micro.

"Where are you getting a 30' diameter top layer from?" That would be typical error margins... just because one GPS brings you to within 3 foot, or even zero, does not mean the same GPS on another day will do the same thing. All very dependent upon what satellites the GPS is locking onto that day. Given even a 15 foot radius circle, a person would be looking at 2221 square feet of surface space to search for a nano cache: even more if you start adding 'layers' onto it (such as a wall would do). These things are not dead on accurate... if they were this game would really be boring, "but there were only a couple of bricks that could be lifted off to get inside" If any bricks were lifted (25 lbs one searcher said) though, that weakens the bonds between other bricks... and the mortar that is loose today, will lead to even more loose mortar tomorrow: especially with each searcher adding to/weakening the wall. Also, just because one person finds a brick "loose" does not mean that another (with say a physical impairment) will find any bricks loose, and someone who is more muscular will definitely find more "loose" bricks... and then the next hunter would find even more loose bricks after that fellow... I was not going to critique, but hiding under a brick, or even under a capstone (judging from the picture it was under a brick though: which means under the capstones and then under the brick beneath the capstone: move 2 capstones and 1 brick to get to cache) is a rather poor judgment call on behalf of the CO. Hidden as it was would lead to the degradation of the wall if cachers were lifting capstones and bricks from the wall: which they would have to do to find the cache. Unless owned by/maintained by the CO, the "in wall" cache that would lead to wall degradation would be skirting the lines of private property at the least. Using the "given guidelines" for determining cache difficulty is all but useless. Relying on that as a tool to judge one's hide difficulty would rate most all caches lower then they actually are. Unlike the terrain rating tool, it seems the "difficulty" is determined by a single question. Quite misleading and open to the CO's interpretation/opinion... maybe they need a better tool for rating difficulty levels. The camo/cache itself though seemed most excellent from the photo. Has given me some ideas for some micros to be hidden next year. Will not be utilizing the same hide style mind you...

Posted now with a spoiler pic... I can see it in the pic I think, the part that is just too round in the middle of the pic. NOT a 2.5 difficulty, more like a 4.5, not going to critique the style, I'm sure the flames here will do that well enough. But looks like a good camo job.

A person wouldn't need to really... just change the settings on your their GPS to a different datum set and go to those coordinates (as long as they match the 1 terrain setting), give a quick search, repeat with each set of datum until found. Make the FTF and correction notice to everyone.

Likely just something simple like a noob using the wrong datum. Had a cacher in my area who had several finds and started doing hides, only to have no one able to find them. Local cachers just trashed them in the cache logs rather then offering assistance. I offered assistance, cached my way out to their town (an hour away straight driving) the next weekend, gave half the team a crash course on cache hiding, and discovered that their GPS was set to the wrong datum. Corrected that, and ever since then, seekers have been finding their hides. Not sure how the heck they were able to find any caches with the datum putting them as far out as they were, but I guess they were just really persistent in the hunts.

Or it is real, really tricky (beyond the given rating), and someone dropped an "easy" to find throwdown cache there, easy enough for other searchers, but out of the league of the CO.

Well darn, all those interesting "found" logs have been deleted and archived and cannot be viewed Now I'll have to add myself to the other 85 people watching this to not miss the drama...

Bear, wolf or coyote. Tough to call 100% from this particular angle.

Did one like that... actual rock fist sized, broken on a fault line. Hinge set on the inside of the rock, ground/set into the rock. Hollowed out just enough for a small baggie & log... hidden in a pile of rocks at the edge of a highway... Lucked out on my third visit and spotted it...

OMG... was this in the area around Hope BC and the south end of the Coquihalla? I spotted something like that one 2 different caches and 2 different occasions now! Both in the same region but miles apart...

Depends on the situation... At an event, 4 "groups" ended up hunting 3 caches together, there whoever made the visual would step a few steps away and smile while the others searched... especially since a youngling was with the group and it's always nice to let them make the actual "find". At 3 other times I have met a cacher at/en-route to a cache. All times it was fairly obvious what they were up to either from the GPS in hand, or the way they were poking into the bush/tree right at GZ. All 3 times it became an introduction/chat and retrieval of the cache in a joint effort, and another chat on the way out after the find before going our separate ways.

Un-sign-able soaked logbook, deck of cards (kiddie= "Old Maid") soaked and rotting, all other items starting to rust or corrode...

Mama bears with cubs are about as bad as mama moose with calf... actually I would probably rather run into the bear then the moose. Bear are more likely to do a fake charge then veer off to reunite with cubs. Moose are more likely to stomp you before running off. Unfortunately, up here both are likely to be encountered... and if really unlucky: The Grizzly bears: in which case all bets are off.

Google Earth/Sat views are rarely if ever reliable... hunted one last week that the sat image showed as some 200 ft into the trees when it was about 20 ft from the pull out..

Bison tube attached to a clump of real or fake grass attached to base of willows...

Ever "discover" an unpublished cache, and go out to hunt the sucker, and actually manage to FIND it?!... LPC's and obvious in town caches would not count... Managed to stumble onto one this afternoon due to an "oops" moment by the CO's transposing the drop locations on trackables... specifically as the FTF on: GC2EGJX Made my week... may make my whole 2010 geocaching year,

Get a dedicated GPS unit. Pool your resources if needed.

Does it say in the description that tree climbing will be required to access the cache? If so, then unless they sign the log, the cache should not be claimed. If you just gave a terrain rating of 3 with no telling them that they need to climb a tree, then that may be why they get there and just take the pic. Myself, I can/have and will again traverse terrain that the hider rated as a 4.5 as it is up a long, steep angle slope on a river valley: but no tree climbing, and it was stated ahead of time that a steep incline awaited. If I got my fat a** to GZ and discovered I was expected to climb a tree to access the cache, with no fore warning, I may not be so keen to try that since gravity and I have come to an understanding. I have also discovered that what many consider a 4 or 4.5 terrain, others consider only a 3 rating. Also, depending on the tree, and height of the cache, one may be expected to have climbing and safety gear to access the cache... which could make it a 5.

Actually... I do not think I have ever found a LPC... no.. none of my 888 are LPC's... closest was a Flagpost cache (skirt lifter), so not really a LPC, but the same idea. Only other ones I found in any sort of proximity to a LP was a small under some rocks at the foot of one, and a fake electrical outlet on another one (no skirt lifting). Any and all skirts I've lifted had no caches under them at all.

I have the same unit loaded with the maps program with 2 GB memory, set up with a in vehicle adapter for power and mounting on the dash board. I use it to get me to the general area, then use my "old trusty" Magellan 300 for when it is time to get out of the vehicle and do the search. With the amount of traveling I do I always try to find new routes to take so I have an excuse to stop and grab some new caches, plus with the maps program it makes navigating cities like Vancouver so much easier.