willowbrookfarm

Thanks!!! I had forgotten I had set up a notification where I used to work. Problem solved. It was between the chair and the keyboard.

Lately, I find that the cache notifications emailed to me have the incorrect distance from my home. The email says the cache is 5 miles away, and in fact it is about 30 miles. Searching for a cache from my home coordinates works fine. Is anyone else noticing this?

That is so neat. Thanks for pointing this out just in time for my vacation to BC. On my Magellan Meridian Gold, all I had to do was save the track line to the SD card, and then insert it into the notebook and the software read it find.

I am thinking of not picking up travel bugs anymore. There are so few caches I find lately that are large enough to place a travel bug, I get stuck holding on to them for far too long. Just wondering if others feel the same way...

I agree. The geochecker should be on puzzle caches. A good geocache puzzle should have enough hints or redundancy in the solution that it should be just there to confirm you didn't make an error. There are some puzzles not so well designed that the solver has to keep thinking of ideas and running it by the checker until it finally concurs.

You are not misunderstanding me. Thanks. Many puzzle caches, at least in our area, require some sort of obscure knowledge in order to solve it. The one which started me on this whole rant is one of them. I don't think it is likely that 1 in 500 people would be recognize what the puzzle is. There is no reference, hint, or clue that would lead you in the correct direction. And even if you did recognize it, I am sure that 9 out of 10 people would still have to look up the info. Truth be told, the cache could have been better written, but my point is, it does require the cacher to look up something to solve it. And the obvious place of reference these days is the web. So when I googled the info I was looking for, I got 2 hits. One was the cache itself. The other was the solution I was complaining about.

So apparently, I am the only one who thinks it is wrong and spoils it for the puzzle designer and subsequent puzzle solvers to POST THE ENTIRE PUZZLE ON THE WEB SO OTHERS CAN POST THE SOLUTION? Many, if not most, puzzles require research on the web to work out the solution. It would be impossible otherwise. Please get the point, the action I object to is the complete posting of the cache requesting the solution to be posted. If this is ok, why not post the solution in your found it logs? You could encrypt it if you felt guilty.

I agree with your sentiments and the previous posters, but as far as I can tell nobody is understanding my point. I don't care how much help anybody gets to do a cache, whether they tag along with the solver for the find, or whatever. We all rely on search engines to research some obscure puzzle cache to do the solution. Many depend on it. So..... If your approach to solving it is to ask the question on a bulletin board that is indexed by a search engine "Hey world, anybody now how to solve this puzzle? Please post a reply", everybody else is going to inadvertantly stumble across it while they try to enjoy the puzzle.

Research is one thing. Posting the entire puzzle, asking for the world to help by posting the solution is quite another.

Just because a spoiler is not placed directly in a log for a puzzle, it is still a spoiler if it is posted on a forum. There is a cacher in our area that is using a non-geocaching forum to ask for help solving puzzles that are eluding him/her. I stumbled upon it searching the web for some clue as to how to solve a puzzle, and the puzzle was spoiled. I think this sort of thing is wrong, and the cacher should take not pleasure in a smiley doing this. It is not a bad thing to ask a fellow cacher or cache owner for a little help in solving the puzzle, but this spoils the spirit of the puzzle cache that the owner put an effort in creating for all of us. I can only hope that the offending cacher reads this and ceases.

Is it worth the extra money to buy the Oregon instead of the Dakota?

The butterfly conservatory is great. Wear a bright coloured shirt! Also, they have a good aviary, there. The birds are free to fly around you, mostly.

Very nicely written log. We had a similar experience a couple of years ago: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...61-0ee9df4f7b6a

Someone would need to know the tracking number that is not available to grab it from you. Even if they knew it, I suppose you could just grab it back. So, don't worry about it.

That's not it, but right province. Keep guessing. Binrat I have to stop guessing, 'cause I googled it. Man... I should have know that.

Port Franks, ON

Indiana

I'll take more than one if there are more than one, but I wouldn't clean out a travel bug hotel. But if I take more than one, I won't move them both/all to the same new cache location. So, my personal guideline is, I will take as many as I can move to different locations in a reasonable length of time. With so many new caches being smaller, I generally will take two at the most, since I have ended up holding some for longer than I want only because the bugs would not fit in the caches I ended up doing next.

Don't we use coordinate, instead of directions?

6 muggles laying 5 Ammo cans 4 Shiny coins 3 log books 2 Garmin Oregons And a film canister in a tree?

We don't live in Durham, but live so close that we do a lot of our caching there. I'd say you could consider us Durham cachers. Hope to see you on the trails.

"none needed!" - and I DNF'd

They're coffee producing countries.

This issue I have with them in our area is they are all placed in spots where there already is a cache, so they don't take you to any new area. They also have no thought in the hide. Just bungeed to a tree in plain view, where I can see them from 50 metres away. On the plus side, the containers are good and I never found a wet log.

Do you mean there will be no more caches strapped to trees with bungee in plain view in places with no reason to visit? Say it isn't so!