ZLA

THANK YOU!

And GC.com is STILL using Google Maps on every single cache listing. Look at the map in the lower right hand corner. Hope Google doesn't notice.

Right now, the new maps are pretty bad. Google Maps is WAY better. Where I live, here's what I observe: 1. No scale when zooming in or out. Hmmm, that cache is only 1/10th of a mile away or is it 10 miles away? 2. Zoom in / out is only useful if you have a mouse wheel. My map doesn't show the OSM zoom scale so I can quickly go from street to city zooms. 3. Twice as many (slow) mouse clicks to switch between topo, street and aerial views. The old beta way was much better! 4. You have to zoom in 2 to 4 times more to get street names than in Google Maps. (See I-270 and Page Ave in St. Louis, MO) Is GC.com petitioning Google to change their licensing or grant a waver or a reduction in price? Unhappy in St. Louis.

Ambrosia, I'm all for that. I feel the goal is to make the cache fun and useful for the cacher. Sometimes that means you can put imprortant info at the top. But sometimes the description has to flow a certain way. Good luck with your cache description.

I appreciate these last set of responses as I must have touched a nerve with my original post. I do not know what is required for EC approval, since I own but a single mystery cache. And to have me suggest you make them shorter when the approval process keeps forcing you to add content must have seemed like salt in the wound. Now that I know better, I will be much more appreciate of an EC. I do agree the best solution is for the electronic devices to handle more data. Thank you for increasing my knowledge of ECs. BTW, Chimney Rock is a fantastic place with an EC! We got to do that today.

For the last two posters, I take issue with your assumption that I'm am trying to do a park and go with the ECs. I am not. I am trying to do interesting caches during my trip. ECs are interesting and educational. If I come across a good one on my travels, I'd like to do it, if possible. Most of the "con" point of views seem to assume I'm trying to avoid reading the entire description and just get one for my "numbers". I am not. All I was saying was that very long descriptions can get cut off (which I wasn't aware of and can now be better prepared for) and that EC owners may want to consider that in their posting. But I don't think they have to. It was a suggestion, that's all. Whether or not you put the questions at the top or the bottom won't affect how the seeker fulfills the requirements. Just because they prepare in advance and print everything off doesn't mean they won't still just scan and answer (as an earlier poster incorrectly suggested I was doing). Nor would putting the questions at the top mean a traveler like myself wouldn't give due diligence and proper honors to the EC.

I never said EC weren't be courteous. And I don't think my comments are discourteous. For those of you who think we seekers need to prepare in advance, please quickly download all caches (because I like many types, not just ECs) between STL and Raleigh, NC. (Let's see, 5 PQs per day, max of 1000 per PQ means how many days / weeks to prepare for a 1 week vacation?) As you can see, it just ain't possible always to prepare. We're on vacation traveling through many states, geocaching along the way. Several earth caches looked very interesting but, sadly, the requirements were cut off. So we couldn't try them out en route. Sometimes, the best I can do is reading the descriptions for the first time on the road. When the cache can't be done (say for a puzzle cache with a steganographic puzzle) on route, I accept that. But when some simple editing could bring more cachers to your EC, that may be a good thing. I merely wanted to alert cache owners that some GPSrs cut off long descriptions. TTFN

As the OP, thank you all for the comments. All of you made reasonable reasons for and against my suggestion. And I realize my point can apply to any cache type but EC's tend to have much more because of the need to impart educational information. I do NOT want ECs to feel restricted by my suggestion. But if an EC is designed to teach something, then in some cases, putting the requirements first may let me attempt and enjoy the cache without having every last bit of information on my GPSr. As one example, if an EC asked you to identify a certain type of rock in a certain location and then gave you descriptions of the seven possible types of rock present in the park, switching the requirements and descriptions loses nothing because I will still have to read the missing section when I get back online to answer the question and fulfill the requirements. But if the questions come last, I only have the ability to learn without logging the cache. If the question says identify a particular rock, I won't know which one. From my viewpoint, it's best when nothing has to be cut off. But if the description will be long and the owner feels it won't compromise the cache, I would love to see the requirements sooner. It's also easier for quick reference in the wild.

For those of you creating earthcaches and including lots of interesting information, I strongly suggest you to put the requirements first. My Oregon 400t (and my friend's older 60sx) have a limit on the length of the downloaded description. We're traveling through Kentucky and came across a bunch of EarthCaches East of Berea, KY. For example, GC1HGJT, http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...80-448ddaf3e5f3. We were considering doing it when we read the description on our GPSr. We read all the way up to "...To get credit for this EC, post a photo of you (I do not accept pictures of just a hand) at the posted coordinates with the open valley or of West Pinnacle rock in the background and please answer the fol." I much prefer this EC's (GC22ZCK) description: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...af-9bef267d65f3. Now if I miss some of the description, I still have a chance (and reason) to try out the cache. I can read up on what I missed when I log it.

Thank you. That did the trick.

I just created my second bookmark list which has no caches in it yet. Unlike my first list, when I click on the second list, it doesn't show the Bookmark It! section with the Add Bookmark button. In Firefox: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.16) Gecko/2009120208 Firefox/3.0.16 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729) In Internet Explorer: IE 7.0. This is Win XP SP 3. Someone please tell me how to add items to a brand new bookmark list. Thanks.

Thanks for the info. I'd still like to know if I can see the comments without using my computer.

I'm learning how to use my Oregon 400t and am able to use it for geocaching as follows: Copy geocaches (.gpx) pocket query results to unit. Select a cache and hit go Find the cache Log Attempt as Found Add a comment for when I get back to my computer Now that I'm back at my computer, I can't see the comments I entered from the gps receiver itself. I'm pretty sure I can see it if I look at the files on the unit via the usb cable but I'd really like to see the comment I added by using the unit. Does anyone know how to do this? I can't find an option to see comments for found geocaches. Nor do my found caches from today appear in the waypoint manager list. Thanks in advance.

I saw somewhere that when asking for permission, always stress "No Digging" since that's often the first question. Is there a standard information sheet that can be printed out to give to potential land owner's managers? If not, what information would you suggest to convince someone to let you hide a cache? Thanks.

I just received my Orefon 400t yesterday so I'm in the same boat. I don't have the answers yet but I can give you some useful information: According to my manual, you can actually download caches directly from www.geocaching.com to your oregon once you download theGarmin Communicator (browser?) plug-in which is free. I've downloaded it but haven't used it yet. Also, if you decide to get the City Navigator Maps, I found Amazon to have the best price. They were about $20 or $25 less than the Garmin site. I haven't received the dvd yet but the product number was the same on both sites so I think it's the same.

I just received my Orefon 400t yesterday so I'm in the same boat. I don't have the answers yet but I can give you some useful information: According to my manual, you can actually download caches directly from www.geocaching.com to your oregon once you download theGarmin Communicator (browser?) plug-in which is free. I've downloaded it but haven't used it yet. Also, if you decide to get the City Navigator Maps, I found Amazon to have the best price. They were about $20 or $25 less than the Garmin site. I haven't received the dvd yet but the product number was the same on both sites so I think it's the same.

What topographic maps are included with the 400t? Is a basemap included; if so, what does it cover? Are any driving maps (roads / cities) included with the 400t or would I need to purchase something additional? If so, which driving maps are appropriate for the US? Thanks.