trowel32

How fun! And Rats...I was just up in that area a few days ago but now I'm back in NJ. Hopefully somebody is able to locate/retrieve it

Thanks - it doesn't look like they have been active since they submitted it, so I guess it probably won't ever be published, but you never know. It was in a nice spot and was a nice triubute to their friend, so hopefully they decide to get the permit

Hi All, I was hiking in Harriman State Park with 4wheelin_fool and we found an unpublished geocache in the Seven Hills section. Closest cache is Seven Hills Summit The cache we found was dedicated to a young man referred to as "Matty Dirt" who apparently passed away earlier this year, most likely in the late spring or summer. The cache was a plastic ammo can filled with all different rubber duckies, which he apparently liked collecting, and there was a note stating that the cache was dedicated to him. Apparently he had a problem with either substance abuse and/or depression according to the note. They also said that they planted a Norway spruce nearby and gave coordinates for it, asking cachers to "pour one out" for him (water it) but we weren't able to locate it. Just curious if anyone knows who this person might be or who hid it. I found his instagram page and tried to message one of his friends on Facebook but couldn't get in touch with her since I'm not on her "friends" list - her name on instagram is noneofurbiznass but I don't think that is a geocacher's name. I'm sure its the same "Matty Dirt" because one of the instagram posts mentions rubber duckies. The cache must have been hidden within the last 5-6 months, but I have a feeling it won't ever be published.

Wow - I hate it. You can't search by cache name anymore? I'm trying to find a cache I visited today, so now I have to bring up the map and search for it on the map or type in the location coordinates near it to find it?

If you find yourself in northeaster Connecticut and you like night caches, this one is epic and is the best night cache I have ever done: Shroud of Shadows http://coord.info/GCRHE7 Its on a nice trail along the Fenton River and I believe there was a place to camp along the river somewhere in the middle of the cache hike. Its a long hike but can be done in one night (I did it over the course of a few nights as I was working in the area).

Sorry if this has been asked, but... When I'm navigating to a user waypoint, for some reason the compass screen shows the distance and name of the nearest geocache instead of the waypoint I'm trying to navigate to. If I switch to automotive mode the geocache goes away but its kind of annoying if I have to constantly switch modes. Has anyone else had this problem? I assume there's some setting I have to fix, but I don't know where to find it.

Wow I had no idea I could get paid by a "client" to create a geotrail. Who knew they were so lucrative? I'm in the wrong business, I guess. Seriously though, I know there's some cost for geocoins or pathtags and containers, but $5,000? C'mon

Okay so not to belabor the point but here is one of the new caches published today: http://coord.info/GC4TQ6D It is a micro hidden in a crack in a rock right next to the trail as far as I can tell. The "Christmas Presents for Brian Snat" cache http://coord.info/GC2JFXR, a giant sized ammo can, was archived so the one above could be placed. The new cache is 471 feet away from where the archived cache was, however its interesting that there is a note on the new cache page, showing the coordinates were moved 46 feet further north today. The initial listing/submission had it 517 feet from the archived cache, in which case, why couldn't they place it 11 feet further away to preserve the older cache? Especially since it is just a micro in a rock crack. Its likely that the coordinate change was due to the original coordinates being off, but either way, surely there are other cracks within 50 feet or so on the same rock outcrop being highlighted?

No park-related caches have been hidden there since so I'm not sure why there was a rush to bully the cacher to archive his puzzle FIVE months ago. The CO of that cache only has a handful of hides, but I had done one of his others. Nice way to turn off new cachers/hiders from geocaching We can only hope the NNJC Official had to sit through a bad 90 minute science fiction film and take notes to solve that puzzle, which it sounds like people have to. It was pointed out that I may be wrong in my prior post about know new caches being placed in that area after the forced archival...there is this one: http://coord.info/GC46AY2 Sorry for the mistake!

No park-related caches have been hidden there since so I'm not sure why there was a rush to bully the cacher to archive his puzzle FIVE months ago. The CO of that cache only has a handful of hides, but I had done one of his others. Nice way to turn off new cachers/hiders from geocaching

So, this is a long-term, on-going problem. Dang - I never even got a chance to find that one (although I bet it is still there). I like how he had to get a smiley on it before killing it .

Actually two of the new Griggstown Geotrail caches have the same name as previous caches there (Sourland View and The Copper Mine) and are placed in nearly the same locations. The Copper Mine was moved about 500 feet further east/northeast, presumably to squeeze more caches in. Maybe the new "copper mine" is closer to the actual historical location of the mine, but I doubt it. I wouldn't be surprised if the original CO put more time and research into it. The main problem with geotrails like this being placed around the state by the same group or individual is how sterile geocaching will become with 98% of the caching community exluded from hiding caches. We don't all want to do cookie-cutter family friendly/easy (boring) caches. Its like a big box store kicking out all the little guys. ...And we aren't all numbers hounds (although apparently I have been described as one in a "will attend" log on the CTTS page which is so far from the truth that its hilarious ) I agree with this somewhat, as I have one of his earlier caches on my "recommended caches" bookmark list (pre-favorite points era), but I haven't been as impressed with the geotrails and series I have seen which were pretty repetitive, particular some of the more recent ones in Lord Stirling. Some of the ones at Duke Farms were pretty "meh" in my opinion although most of the locations were nice. He has a tendency to "re-use" a park every year and archive the old and hide all new caches in nearly the same spots. Its still too oriented towards numbers caching. That's what these forced archivals and taking over the whole park seem like to me, a way to reserve a whole park. So next year the new ones at KVSP can be archived and a new set can be put in for next years CTTS. This may not be the case but is just the way it looks to me. In the case of Duke Farms, no caches were placed near the one cache that was force archived, but I see that additional caches have been added by NNJC since the geotrail came out, so it seems like they were trying to wipe the area clean to reserve spaces for future NNJC caches only. Again, just my opinion.

The closest cache, is about 0.2 miles away on a different trail and none were put on the trail or in the area. I think that archival might have been legit, at least by the e-mail from the park. Yeah, it does look like a legitimate archival in the listing and there doesn't seem to be a cache in the exact location, although I'm pretty sure the area it is in is still open to the public, but I do recall hearing some funny business regarding the archival, but can't remember where. I'm curious who actually controls the "Duke Farms Foundation" account though. The timing is kind of odd though with the removal request and the geotrail publication within a few weeks of one another. Actually, now that I think about it, I believe there were two to three other caches there that were hidden after the one referenced above and before the geotrail - they were presumably also archived for the geotrail but I think they were actually put out by the "Duke Farms Foundation" or some variation of that account. I'm fairly certain one was in the Hay Barn where the current geotrail Hay Barn cache is. I never found them as they sounded like kind of lame hides that were out in the open, so I don't have a record of them. Oh wait, here: http://coord.info/GC2YAP1 http://coord.info/GC2YAP8 http://coord.info/GC2YAPE One with bad coordinates and the other two hidden so poorly that they were muggled. Then they archived their own caches to hide new ones in less than a year

Ah yes - I forgot about that cache archival. The cache in question that was archived for the Duke Farms Geotrail was the first and only cache in that park until that geotrail came along. It was the cache that introuduced me to the park when it first became open to the public and I had a great time hiking around there with a group of central NJ geocacher buddies in the snow for miles to find the ONE cache there. This is the archived listing: http://coord.info/GC2AEHW It's not obvious what happened from the listing, but the "Duke Farms Foundation" stated that the area was "closed" and the cache should be removed and then a few weeks later the geotrail came out with caches in the same area. I remember that the CO was pretty upset about it but don't remember if the discussion was on here, on the central jersey geocaching site, or somewhere else...

It's as if you read my mind in writing this post It's a shame to see the CJCC final and other good caches go to squeeze 37 caches in on a grid system. When caches are placed in order to fit them exactly 528 feet apart, I really can't see how they are placed to highlight specific features of a park. What would have been wrong with placing 10, or even 5 new caches in the park for the event? The Griggstown preserve in particular, is not all that large, so it's kind of odd to see that many caches jammed in there. Of course individual CO's can do what they want with their own caches, and the caching placements in parks are ultimately under the control of the land managers, but if the purpose of a geo-trail is to highlight a park and it's natural and cultural features, I don't see how that type of saturation is serving the purpose. Instead of seeing the park and it's beauty you are just staring down at your GPS the whole time. Yes, In the one case (Griggstown), a small number of caches (I believe four) -- some of which had been in place for six years -- were archived to make way for thirty-seven new ones. The new caches block any possible new placements in that preserve, although there is an adjacent preserve/park of almost the same size that has only ONE cache in it.

Next Ramapo SF will want to establish an educational geotrail on the Blue Trail and they will archive the Gerbil

.

Hmmm... I'm not positive, but I believe a similar thing happened within the past few months for a new geotrail in Central NJ. Quality caches that had been around for six years were archived to put in 20+ new caches. One of the caches archived was a challenge cache that is the final for 26 caches hidden troughout central NJ--all of the other caches are still active, but now there is no final! I don't see why a geotrail couldn't have a few less caches (say 15 or so) so that the existing caches could remain. Also I have not done this new geotrail but in most cases these sorts of geotrail hides are all carbon copies of each other - identical containers, identical swag, standard ho-hum hides. It would be nice to have a few more interesting caches mixed in with a variety of hiders (IMHO). Kittany Valley SP, however, has had an ongoing geocaching program for a number of years, so maybe they want to "refresh" the caches there. I dunno! EDIT: oh I'm sorry - there were actually THIRTY-SEVEN caches in the new central jersey geotrail, yet they couldn't let the 5-6 that were already in the park remain...jeez!

You haven't been to Trenton, Huh? Do my Plum Cache' and read one of the books and you'll get a good idea about the area. I would say that caching is banned there, but definitely cache with a partner when you're there. There are a few nice caches in the city proper, but your best bet is to hop in a car or take mass transportation to a more cache rich and cache friendly area. Yes Plum Cache' is a good one in a neat historical area. I've also been meaning to visit the petty's run archaeological site which is near the state house: http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2013/05/pettys_run_archeological_dig_i.html That area should have a cache - could probably at least get a nano or mkh in there somewhere ;o)

There really just aren't all that many. While there are many nice areas in Trenton, there are still many areas that are pretty urban and probably aren't as "cacher friendly". There are four or so near waterfront park including the virtual "Sam's Place" and "Tribute to the____" - that is a nice area. There's a really great park above the Route 29 tunnel that is worth checking out, but there aren't any caches up there (although there used to be one) - "Scenic View" is closest to that park, just to the northwest. "Lady Victory" is just off State Street near the NJ State Museum and is closest to the State House.

I have to be honest, I found this cache a year or so ago, and when I found it I was kind of surprised at how many favorites it had, and I'm even more surprised that it has become the subject of a four page thread This CO has MANY creative caches that I have given favorite points to, but this was not one of them. Maybe because I had seen it before too many times or I just don't like the graffiti aspect of signing the container. At first it blends in with the environment, but once it has been "logged" enough, it no longer looks like a "log". The location wasn't the most scenic either as it was a little patch of grass along a dirt road leading to a sewerage facility and there were cars parked practically on top of the hide. There's another cache I did that was similar but was literally just a rock that you signed. I didn't even want to sign it as it felt like grafitti, but I was fairly certain that the CO had placed it there as it didn't seem to be natural to the area. For some reason I almost felt embarrased to log that one, as it was literally just a rock (and I have even logged a throw down cache in my time that I felt better about claiming as a find). The "rock" cache did/does have a clever title that gave me a laugh and was also listed as an "unknown" type which I have a weakness for, so those attributes made the experience better for me. I guess its just a matter of personal opinion, or whether a cache seems unique to you. As I said, I had seen others like it so it wasn't too unique to me. Even that rock cache I did has 10 favorites points now but that's only about 20% of the total logs. When you look at favorites points you really have to go look at the percentages versus total logs. I was looking up caches with favorites to do in Maine until I realized that the ones with the most favorite points (40+) only had that many because there were hundreds of finds on them.

FYI, my original hint was closer to "base of dead vertical branch. Should be reachable from boat at high tide. At lower tide you may have to get out of your boat" Since I wrote what I believed to be a standard, legitimate hint, I was puzzled by the response: "What you've included isn't so much a hint but something that will annoy fellow cachers, especially those who decode in the field. If you'd like to leave it, please enclose it in brackets [ ] so that is automatically decrypts. Or if you like, perhaps it can be added to the description." I guess that was a boiler plate response, but it confused me as it stated that it wasn't really a hint, so then I made it even longer as I thought they didn't think it was descriptive enough The high tide business was supposed to let the cacher know the vertical height of the hide, so I thought that should be in the hint, but I later removed that and put it in the description instead. I also hate hints that say "none", "none needed", and "email me for a hint" In general, I do wish more people would give SOME sort of hint though as many times coordinates are just off and it helps to know if you are in the right general area.

I assume you are referring to the "hidden by" not the "cache name" challenge. Here's a "9" that is in NJ (I made a bookmark list of these a while back, but never finished the challenge): The Science Prodject The closest "8" on my list is in Delaware - but keep in mind I made this list a few years ago, so there could be one closer: Hall's Hairpin

Since Williamsburg is a tourist destination, it could just be a delay in logging? That happens with trackables in heavy tourist areas. Sometimes they don't get logged until a few weeks later, after the vacationer gets home.

I haven't been able to generate any pocket queries this morning.