Jump to content

geoaware

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    386
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by geoaware

  1. The lesson here is that a land manager has the right to ask for an EarthCache to be removed. In North America, NSS also has that right for any cave as per the agreement it has with the EarthCache team. There are many reasons that a land manager might want to have an EarthCache removed...and whether we agree with their reason or not, we remove the cache. This thread is not a debate on the issue with this particular EarthCache...but rather to highlight to you all how the process works. Thanks for sharing geoawareCA. Good lessons for us all here.
  2. I hope we can find a creative person to do the same in Maine so that people can do the series when they attend the 1st International Earthcache Event!
  3. There are around 10 active EarthCache reviewers.
  4. Polish on, polish off???
  5. Mounds really are in a grey area of Earthcaching and require a sound Earth science basis to be published. I would suggest reading the published ones to see how cache owners have worked the Earth science into the descriptions...and work at doing an even better job (to make sure you meet the guidelines).
  6. You can easily appeal a decision via the EarthCache team leader (glewis@geosociety.org).
  7. The Burgess Shale is there! I really hope my planned trip to Calgary gets through! On a similar note: I would love to log an EC at Siccar Point, if there was one Hey, that's my EarthCache that made the list! This EarthCache is at a display near Emerald Lake that talks about the Burgess Shale and you can look up at the mountain where the actual fossil beds are. Someday, I would love to take the guided hike all the way up to the fossil beds. If you are planning to do that, then I recommend creating another Burgess Shale EarthCache up there. I have a friend that was up there years ago and she said it was absolutely amazing. There is a slab of the Burgess Shale at the display by Emerald Lake, so if you can't make it all the way up to the fossil beds, at least you can touch an actual piece of it. I agree with Me & Bucky that Garden of the Gods is worth a visit. and Þingvellir - The Mid-Atlantic Ridge is also on my "must do" list. I have actually been there before, but that was long before geocaching and even before taking some geology courses. I remember wondering why it looked like the Earth had just been ripped apart there. Turns out that's exactly what happened - you're walking between the North American and Eurasian continental plates. Surprisingly they don't really promote the geological aspects of this site much. It's far more known for it's historical aspects of being the site of their first parliament in 930 AD. Actually there is now a nice display....and of course you could always join a GSA GeoVenture to Iceland...and visit many EarthCache sites!
  8. I 'get' the issue...I just wholeheartedly disagree with you. I'll use the old "frisbee rule" to illustrate my position...it's ludicrous to have to ask permission to geocache (or visit a set of waypoints) where I can play frisbee or engage in any other activity the general public does without asking prior permission. The issue is that the land managers want to approve EC that are not where people play "frisbie" or picnic...but those that are currently protected because people do not know the sites exist....it has been a management practice for decades (and longer). Many of our best fossil sites, for example, on public lands have been protected because people do not know exactly where the site is. Once a site like this is published on the internet, you run the risk of unscrupulous people visiting the site and destroying it by trying to collect fossils. The same is true of caves, mineral sites, overhangs with paintings etc etc. So its a practice that has prevented the soiling of a huge number of our Earth science assets to allow further study. Asking permission means that the land manager can check that a site can cope with the influx of people. Also, they can check that other issues (outside of the Earth science of the site) will not be a concern - like rare plants, track safety etc. The only way to do this is for them to approve all EC that are developed in their sphere of management. It makes a load of sense. That is the theory. The practice also brings into play the land managers experience with geocaching and geocachers etc. It is a sad fact that a few EarthCachers have, in the pas,t set us back a long with with some local land managers by being rude (demanding phone calls for example) and even placing EC's in locations where they have been denied permission. Some places have been closed off to all caching as a result. We seemed to get slammed in these forums by people who have no understanding of all the hard work, endless meetings and careful negotiations that have and continue to go on behind the scenes to open up places for caching. But I truly believe that the EarthCache program has built many bridges with land managers around the globe. That EC are even allowed in many US National Parks where all other forms of geocaching is not, is just one example. Another example is that some parks now have active geocaching programs because of the work of ECers and Groundspeak. From the highest levels in the US NPS we have support for EarthCaching....but the system is decentralized and therefore it is the local staff that make the decisions. So I guess, some will groan and moan about having to seek permission.....but at the end of the day its part of a process which has to be done to meet the guidelines. I now think this issues has been stated and restated again and again..and that its probably time the thread was closed.
  9. I am so pleased that some people 'get' the issue - and I agree, the examples are great.
  10. Log away - if you have fulfilled the logging requirements!
  11. KK&M....I welcome you to write to the NPS service requesting that all geocaching be allowed on Park Service land. Your voice will always be welcome in the debate. However the current agreement in place with NPS, and similar agreements with other land management agencies, calls for you (as a developer) to seek and gain permission before placing an EarthCache. The NPS has asked us to check that that permission quoted is valid. This agreement is not to limit peoples access to the NP, but to assist the NPS to protect sites. It is their decision, and not the decision of the EarthCache team....we are just upholding our agreement with them (and other services across the country and around the world. Your beef here is with the land management agencies that request us to have such permissions - not with the EarthCache/Groundspeak team!
  12. Hey out there to any whom may care. Well, was it worth it to lose another earthcacher? Did you read GeoawareUSA4's post? Please tell us how not having land owner permission, not providing one's answers in a Reviewer Note, and not annotating one's sources of information on the cache page as clearly required in the guidelines is anyone but the cache developer's issue. The reviewer even provided tmitchh with the land manager's contact information to make obtaining permission as easy as possible. I am sorry, but you miss my point. Too many obstacles have been erected which turn off any incentive to develop earthcaches. GeoawareUSA4 simply regurgitating the party line doesn't change a thing! I think I can speak from a little bit of experience. Between ever changing and unclear guidelines and arbitrarily eliminating and/or severely limiting certain types of earthcaches, present and future EC developers are being turned off! As to 'needed' permission. I will not bore you with my, and shared by many others, opinions regarding asking National Parks to give them 'free' advertising to get people to visit their parks. If you are interested, search the thread library for additional information. One small note regarding the permission factor. Jeremy himself questioned the requirement and indicated there was room for a change! As far as opinions go, you cannot go any higher! Pedantic questions, overly ridged requirements, and totally unnecessary permissions are changing the face of earthcaching and while I fully appreciate your right to differ, I believe these changes and/or enforcements are making earthcaching exclusive not inclusive! Thanks. Ok...I am now starting to get very uncomfortable about this misinformation. It does not seem to matter what we say or how we try and help people to understand, this misinformation is just WRONG. Some facts: 1. The guidelines have been changed only four times since 2004. Some of the changes were to make them more clear. I think they are now VERY clear. Four changes in seven years is hardly "ever changing" 2. NO types of legitimate EarthCache topics have been eliminated. What we have said is that we will no longer accept duplicated EarthCaches (especially those with the exact same logging tasks) in the same area. This was a response to the cut and paste of EarthCache texts to multiple sites, often flooding an area with almost identical EarthCaches. That duplication could not have been good for the game. 3. The US National Park system has insisted that we follow the permission requirement. It has enable a HUGE positive swing in geocaching in the National Parks which were once extremely negative towards all forms of geocaching. Jeremy was in the initial meeting with the National Parks....and no suggestion has ever come from Jeremy to make any change to the permission guidelines. No matter what 'privilege" any individual feels they have to do what ever they like in a national park the bottom line is that they have no privilege at all, and they must abide by the rules and regulations set by the park. Please please please lets stop this regurgitation of misinformation and emotive vitriol. And just to reinforce my argument that the guidelines are clear and that what we do is not making the development of EarthCaches harder, we just broke the record for the most active EarthCaches with over 17,700! That is a HUGE growth...so surely the silent majority find the process fun and exciting!
  13. In part I have to agree with you - but only the part about how this has been a joint effort. I appreciate the huge effort all the Earthcache developers have put in over time.....and look what we have all accomplished. It is wonderful to read the logs and see the growth of Earthcaches around the globe. However, I want everyone to know that there has ALWAYS been guidelines...since day one! I wrote them with Groundspeak and with the US National Park Service folks who wanted to see caching work on their lands. So the premise that EarthCaches were developed before any guidelines is completely false. Yes the guidelines have evolved over time....just as the guidelines for all geocaching have evolved over time. We trust that people will do the right thing by following the guidelines....and its been by following the guidelines that we have gotten this far!
  14. Most EarthCaches I review are not published upon the initial submittal for the following reasons (given in approximate order of frequency, noting that many submittals have more than one issue):1. The Cache Owner did not provide contact information for the land manager who provided permission for placement of the EarthCache. Isee Guideline 8) 2. The Cache Owner did not provide the answers to his/her logging tasks (Guideline 6) 3. The Cache Owner did not properly attribute the source of his/her cache page information (Guideline 3) 4. The Cache Owner required a photograph to be posted with the visitor's log (Guideline 6) 5. The Cache Owner developed the EarthCache as a virtual cache (how tall is the sign post or how many words are on the first line of the sign?) with no interaction with the location and Earth Science/geology lesson. (Guideline 6) 6. The Cache Ower did not teach a unique lesson about the location (Guideline 2) 7. The EarthCache is written about something other than Earth Science or Geology. (Guideline 1) I see very little arbitrariness or subjectivity with the above issues. Instead, what I see is a tendency for the Cache Owner not to read and adhere to the basic tenets of the EarthCaching guidelines. When a cacher is struggling with a unique lesson, I'll oftentimes do my own research and give him/her suggestions on what could work. Some folks run with the idea(s) and some folks abandon their efforts. As an EarthCache Reviewer, I would MUCH rather publish an EarthCache on the first pass and that would happen a lot more often if the typical EarthCache creator would read the guidelines and verify for him/herself that their EarthCache complies at the most basic level before it even arrives in my review queue. I have to agree with you totally. The biggest issue for me in the years I have been reviewing EarthCaches is that the developers have not read the guidelines...and so we spend time working with developers to get the submission to meet the guidelines so it can be published. IN the meantime, the queue grows....and so there is a delay in us reading the next submissions. All the reviewers do the very best job they can to assist developers in getting their submissions published...and so, to help us A LOT, please read the guidelines and make sure you meet them before you submit!
  15. Believe it or not, EarthCahes ARE about people learning something about Earth science....and not just taking people to a wonderful location. Understanding something about the Earth science behind the wonderful location is the goal. The goal is NOT (and never was) to have thousands of duplicated EarthCaches. We watched and learned from the proliferation of other cache types (such as the so-called 'lame guard rail caches" and micros) and developed the EarthCache guidelines to try and avoid similar issues. As this thread and many others show us - we are "damned if we do and damned if we don't". And so we will continue to use the guidelines as they are...as it seems many CO have no trouble in developing great EarthCaches following them. So if you want to propose a glacial erratic or waterfall (or spring etc etc)...just follow the guidelines and make your site a wonderful unique place for people to learn...and it will be published.
  16. The guidelines say: 2. EarthCaches should highlight a unique feature. EarthCaches that duplicate existing EarthCache information about the site or related sites may be rejected. EarthCaches should be developed to provide a unique experience to the location's visitors, and to teach a unique lesson about the feature at the site. Multiple EarthCaches on the same feature should be avoided and content, rather than proximity, will be the guiding principle of EarthCache reviewers. The key word in there is "unique". You CAN get an EarthCache on a waterfall published, as long as the lesson is site specific and unique. We will NOT publish cut and pasted logging tasks about classification.....so just look at what is unique about the Earth science site....and write the text and logging tasks based on those. You CAN get an EarthCache on a glacial erratic published - as long as the lesson is site specific and unique. We will NOT publish 'determine the weight of the rock' type of logging tasks....what about a task about where the rock might have come from? or why is it 'out of place' at the site etc. There are many neat questions that can be asked about waterfalls and erratics that both make the visitor have to think about what they are seeing and that can only be done by being at the site. As the guideline says "content, rather than proximity, will be the guiding principle". However, if there is an EC on the SAME topic with the SAME type of logging tasks withing a short drive, maybe you should look for some other angle to your EC development.
  17. I think a visit to the one that started it all: - Earthcache I - a simple geology tour of Wasp Head
  18. I believe OxSling at 1042 is one of the top EarthCache loggers
  19. I am glad you stuck with the process. It took me five months to get my three earthcaches at the North Rim approved. My contact person told me (correctly) that these were the first earthcaches for the park and they wanted to be sure they were doing it right. She asked me some interesting questions, including the relationship of earthcaches to the existing virtuals. The submissions were reviewed by a park geologist. She wanted some information included to protect the park and make sure that visitors would be safe. It took awhile but I appreciated the park's interest and their help. For me, it was a good process. I had hoped that I would clear the way for future earthcaches, but it seems that you had to start over and the process took even longer! That seems to sometimes be the case. When I proposed an earthcache to the Pt. Reyes National Seashore, I thought it would be very fast because the park already had existing earthcaches, including one of my own. It turned out that there had been a change of administration and the new people knew nothing about earthcaching, so I had to start from the beginning. They made a point of telling me that traditional caching would never be approved on their watch, but thought earthcaching was a great program. In other NPS jurisdictions in my area, I have developed a good working relation with park officials, the resident geologist, and the trails supervisor. Those caches sometimes took awhile, up to a couple of months, but they had helpful suggestions and I felt we were working together as a team -- which is far better than simply submitting a cache that park officials would have no knowledge about. So the permission process has worked well for me. You are absolutely correct - working with NPS and other land managers as a team to develop and EarthCache is the best way to go. Rolling up with a complete submission and then asking them to approve it...without taking the effort to walk them through the process of what an EarthCache is can seem to lengthen the process. Remember that you are talking to people who may, in the first instance, have a very negative opinion of geocaching and so the relationship needs to be nurtured so they understand the huge benefits an EarthCache can bring to their park. In many cases, a thoughtful EarthCache developer working with Park people have paved the way for other cache types to be used in parks.
  20. Th 'skids' and constantly being greased....but the NPS system is decentralized so that these sort of decisions are made locally. That said, the situation is 500% better than 5 years ago, and I hope that trend continues.
  21. Let me just clarify that my intent was not to belittle anyone or anything and I am apologizing if you understood my question in that way. Apparently our ways of thinking and of expressing ourselves are too different. I am relieved that mulvaney understood my question just in the way I meant it - otherwise I would start to doubt about the functioning of my brain. Cezanne OT note: I am wondering whether you would accuse e.g. philosophers of belittling other people just because they reflect about a lot of things average people do not reflect about. And let me clarify as well - you were not asking a question (in fact there is no question at all in your opening thread post), but making a clear statement that you do not like people to have any reference to pride in their profiles. That is your opinion and I will defend your right not to have any reference to pride in your personal profile. It is my opinion that if people feel proud in their achievements then they have the right to post that in their personal profiles. "Reflecting" is a wonderful way to start discussions and debates. I question the need in these forums about EarthCaches to do so. That maybe a better question to ask in a broader forum, as your opinion seems to be about a wider topic than just EarthCaches. Lets try and keep on the topic of threads on EarthCaches and leave the philosophical debates about pride elsewhere. I humbly request that this thread be closed.
  22. "Springs and waterfalls are no longer accepted." This is actually NOT true. What we don't accept is springs and waterfalls that use the same old 'cut and paste' logging requirements that either not site specific. ie. what is the classification for this water fall or what is the temp of the spring water. EarthCaches on these topics with great local site-specific Earth science logging tasks will be published is they meet all the other guidelines.
  23. I think that people ought to be able to be proud for their own achievements ...what ever that might be. Belittling people who feel pride in their achievements is not a trait I can admire, for if you don't have pride in yourself, you can't understand pride in others or other things. So proud EarthCache Masters, proud EarthCache Discovery Awardees, proud EarthCache developers and proud EarthCache finders....I salute you all!
  24. Maybe.. "Proud holders of the Garnet EarthCache Discovery Award"
×
×
  • Create New...