Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by parker2

  1. Well here are a few..... on the west side of the river....

    GCA71B - this is a quick easy find... right down town.. virtual BM plate

    GCT80P - another quick one... fairly easy... watch 4 muggles though

    GCQYHZ - fairly easy... trail to the cache... a bit of bush

    GCX2M7 - easy multi... but a long trip... 8 or 10 points really cool idea

    GCTBQH - a bit of a climb involved... but easy... need to park north of the cache

    East Side of river

    GCK8FJ - fairly easy... along trails

    GC13E4 - another easy one... same trails

    GCX504 - another quick one... same trails... a bit of a climb

    south east

    GCR07C - fairly easy

    GCV3GN - ||

    GCX13P - ||

    GCR3EG - ||

    GCNFW7 - ||


    Anymore... or if you need help w/ one ... just let me k now.

  2. Earth caches will be one of the only tools for the national parks a cacher can use. It is a bit more complicated to set up, but at least it will be properly listed and the land owner will know it is there. I know some of the virtuals were going way off tangent. I could just imaging the numbers of virtuals comming in to the revewers, and the numbers of them being listed would have over grown the servers so fast that gc.com would of gotten slower than ever. lol At least this way, Waymarking is kept seperate, the PQ's will be smaller, the servers will be faster, and the waymarkers have there own place. Don't get me wrong. I really enjoyed the fact of the virtual caches, and i wish they were still available for special circumstances.

  3. If they are all for geocaching, just give them a quick rundown of what it is, and place a few caches. It would be a good idea if the city would put up a webpage for this as well. If you do go with a logo, just have the cache owners dl it from the city site and place it on there cache page. It could include a link to the city page, especially if there are any regulations that they will be placing on caching on there lands. Remember the CITO idea as well. This always looks good for land managers.

  4. Please post the sites that have good prices and workmanship for geocoins. We have looked at a pin maker in regina already, but would like to know where some have been made already.


    Thanks in advance



  5. Just signed up.

    So, now when will we see a Saskcachers geocoin? <_<

    We have a cacher looking into the coin already as well as having a logo contest. Once the info is available, I will post it here for all too see.



  6. Ok I think I almost got this cased........ but I still have an issue. There are 3 zones in the province and I have to plot the cords in utm ( without the zone extention). Now my problem lies that the GIS system they use, uses UTM zone extentions and my points only show up in zone 13. Is there software (free) that will allow me to convert my waypoints to the extended datiums? I think this is what I am looking for.



  7. I have to agree with most of what DBC has said. It's rather concerning that an american company is so involved with creating policy within Canadian National Parks. I'm sure if there were foreigners figuring so prominently in policy being creating in US National Parks there would be quite an uproar there.


    I don't have any disrespect for the reviews at GC as they do an admirable job and I know they volunteer their time. However, they are representing GC whether they like it or not and this is not how to create policy in Canadian National Parks. We need Canadians looking our for the best interest of Canadians.

    Ok, I will say this one more time. Parks Canada will not allow any input from an American stakeholder. This is an actual fact. If there is to be any input from another country, it has to be delt with other ways.


    The survey of course was not created by GC but nevertheless it is concerning that it and most other discussions about geocaching center around GC and its guidelines. Any policy discussion regarding Canadian National Parks should not include references to an american company.


    IMHO, I do not beleave any company should be refrenced to, as this policy will cover any and all aspects of the game / sport of caching.


    I think the survey in general was setup pretty well and brought up some of the key points about creating policy in Canadian National Parks. But lets keep it Canadian.


    I was going to question you on the format of this, but realized that it was one of your fellow cachers from the LMGA that did not like it when it was first posted over 4 months ago on the Sask. Site. :laughing: I'm glad that you like the format and made a point of filling it out. It will make things a bit easyer for the workgroup when looking at subjects brought up by PC.



  8. Yes. Thanks for answering DBC's question Cache-tech. I give a bit more background on the survey, I posted the survey on my personal site along with our MSN group in October of last year to get a bit more input from the SaskCachers. I received quite a bit of feedback from within the Province, as well as a few outsiders. When the workgroup was looking at doing the same thing, one of the workgroup members took my survey, cleaned it up a bit and we decided to post it on all the sites (including gc.com) to get a better look at what Canadians want in this policy. I beleave it will run till the end of March or so, and the data will be compiled regulary to keep the workgroup up to speed as to how the survey is running.





    Could you explain why you feel you should be there in that workgroup ?

    I am still awaiting an answer to a similar question I posed to the other Albertan invited ?

    Were you also invited because you received an email about your website?


    Ok with this one, I feel that with my geocaching background and on going work with in the Wildlife Fed. , I beleave that I will be an asset in the making of the policy. I was asked by PC to be part of the workgroup in the fall, after sending quite a few emails on the subject. I'm not too sure what PC was looking for when making the workgroup, but from chatting with the group, I beleave that they have made some great choices.


    Is there any person posting on this thread who is actually acting on behalf of Parks Canada or the Park Service that has failed to identify themselves in that role ?


    Yes, PC is watching in the forums, but not adding any content.


    I would like to know why you have invited website operators and chat site participants to a Parks Canada workgroup on geocaching ?


    ?????? I guess this question is not for me... but I do not know of anybody besides Canadian Geocachers that have a love for the game that have been invited to join the workgroup.... well with a few exceptions.... Like a few NGO's (I do not even know who they are yet)


    Did anyone at Parks Canada identify which Provinces had no associations ?


    Yes/ and No... but this has nothing to do with the making of the policy. If I remember right, there might of been an issue finding someone from Quebec, but I'm not too sure. I think every prov. already has a group / org. in place.


    Did anyone at Parks Canada identify other geocache listing services that might have different concerns, solutions and participants ?


    I'm not sure with this either, but I do know that there was extensive work on there part in locating geocaching info. from around the world. Along with this, I'm not too sure if PC received anything from any of them during the public consultation period.


    Was Groundspeak invited to participate officially and did they decline ?


    Groundspeak and Geocaching.com would of never been asked as it is an American based company there for can not have any input into any policy making.


    Why were other listing services excluded ?


    I have no idea.... but I do not think anyone was excluded from the public consultation period.


    In my case, I am from Alberta and there are no legal associations of geocachers in this province, is Parks Canada and the team leader responsible for this process aware that there are no associations of geocachers in Alberta ?


    Same here, I do to know.... but it don't matter as IMHO, the policy will be made with the data the each workgroup member passes on to the PC workgroup. PC is making this policy, the workgroup is just helping with input and knowledge. The final say will be in PC's court.... not ours.


    {quote]Was any effort beyond sending email to a website, used by Parks Canada to make the Alberta selections ?


    What kind of question is this? I beleave PC made a choice to pick a few public people to help out with the making of the policy. enough said.


    I also want to ask Parks Canada why groups like the East Kootenay Cachers were excluded ?

    Was a list made of groups that would not get invited or were groups excluded through oversight ?


    No one was excluded. IMHO, PC picked a few of the geocachers that were interested in the policy.


    Is Parks Canada aware of the very fluid nature of geocaching and the tremendous rate of growth ?

    Were open door sessions considered ?


    I beleave so, that is why the interm policy was made.... don't you think?


    Why did web site operators and chat site participants get invited and those geocachers who had previously placed caches in National Parks get excluded ?

    Was there some particular reason Parks Canada decided to exclude those who could explain the impacts and effects of the cache they had previously placed ?


    No idea, maybe they did not want to be participants in the policy for all I know. Could be possible that they could not be found. Could be possible that they had no input. Who Knows. I do know that I am in contact with the members that had / have caches placed in our Prov.


    I geocache in Alberta and have voiced specific objections to those who have been invited from Alberta. I am objecting as a taxpayer, they have no qualifications at all, none, my money is being wasted.

    I am just making remarks for the record. Many of these remarks will never buttress actual real letters to a politician.

    And I am sure I have said enough. I can say bump can't I.

    Bump! :P

    If you listen to everything I have written backwards I am actually saying geocaching is fun.


    Well as a taxpayer, I beleave everyone in the workgroups have the qualifications (IF NOT MORE...) to make this policy. But that is YOUR opinion and YOU are welcome to YOUR OWN opinion. Some other cachers might share YOUR opinion, but I would bet that a majority (as seen from all the forums ... here and in the groups) either is 100% for the way things are going or are involve within the prov. groups.


    Ok that was IMHO, the best answers I could give being not from PC. I could be wrong on a few, but I made my best guess. Now if you are looking for an answer from PC, please visit there web site and go to the geocaching page. There you might be able to get your answers. :P


    sorry for the QUOTE thing i was having issues :P




    What are these listing services you speak of?


    I can go create several waymarks that are on Parks Canada land right now. I assure you, even if Parks Canada objects, they will not be removed. Why? Because they aren't illegal. Nor do they fall within the privy of the Parks Act. (Feel free to quote me the Parks Act where the listing of park coordinates by 3rd parties is something they can control and regulate.)


    Wow.... that was a mouth full..... I wonder if there is some sort of hidden agenda that you might have? Hopefully it will not be to cause any ill effects on the enviroment. I bet that if you put up a waymark to a fed. prision. and someone got shot.... I would almost put money that you would get seued at the least for tha damages that you caused. :anicute: I guess that is why GC.com & Groundspeak have a disclaimer. I wonder what PC would do? I guess that will be something that will be brought up in the making of the policy. :huh: I know at this time, all forms of phyisical caching are not allowed, and virtuals now known as Waymarking, have to be approved by PC prior to placement (please review the copy of the interm policy that you have). So where does that leave you? Hopefully not trying to send someone into a bear den. lol So let me see a waypoint that you create, that is active on PC land, and I will make sure it is archived. I do not want to see any one or thing get hurt to a poor cache placement, and I would bet that every other cacher that has a bit of sence would say the same thing.



  11. Thanks for your post JD, and yes I will be voicing my opinion as well. I have a background with dealing with the Gov. I have been on our local executive for a wildlife group, and I will be going in with all my experience I have gained over the years. I have studyed on ESA's, including riparian zones and breading areas of some animals. I have most of my experience in fisheries, but land issues fall right into this area. Most people do not realize that even 1 rock moved in a riparian zone can destroy or impeede a fish breeding area. So IMHO, I will not be just helping with the caching side of this, but the enviroment side as well.


    Also, in respect to another post about ibycus giving software to PC to ease the implementation of caching in the parks..... I can't see this as it would ever happen. I have seen prinouts from the Nat. Gov.'s GIS system and it would blow anything away that anyone here can produce. If anyone here can get real time top-notch satalite photos and overlay them in a GIS program, then they might be close. lol I have seen a few of these done up for conservation easements in the last few months. I only wish I had that kind of data for my outdoor activities. lol


    Also, in respect with yet another post about having a registered orginization involved. I beleave there just might already be a few involved at this time. As the last release states that there are other NGO's that are stakehloders in this policy. I would like to know who there are just as much as I do, but until it gets released, no one will know. And for a geocaching group that is registered as a NGO, our local groups will be meeting within the month to get the ball rolling. We have been trying to get something together for a few months now, but have not had enough membership in our group to even start. I did not want to start the process with 10 people, as some groups did and just have it fall apart after a month or so. So hopefully within a couple of months, an executive will be in place, and hopefully it will not be me doing the media / PR thing as this constant bickering about nothing is starting to make me wonder who some of these people are behind these posts. Im not saying that all the post in this forum are going down hill, as some people have legitimate questions, but come on now....... clean it up a bit. In 2 or 3 years down the road when someone is looking at these posts for knowledge, there are going to be a few fools that are going to stick out like a sore thumb.




  • Create New...