fellsmanhiker

Don't you just love it when someone quotes the rule book at you,googling? I think half the fellwalkers in Cumbria could answer my question maybe having to check the height ASL (via a wainwright guide) so I'll give you that point,but anyway I've lost interest, the answer is Broadcrag tarn on Scafell Pike,the height of the tarn is 2725 Feet ASL, I have a cache there,fun while it lasted see you in another decade or so maybe!

Come on,it's not that hard to research an answer,blimey no wonder FaceBook has taken over this format!

Pharisee,You may be thinking of The Drunken Duck Inn,a few miles West of Ambleside,the pub is opposite Barngates Tarn, and also has it's own brewery (Barngates Brewery) This is not the answer to the question of course I'm just replying to your post.

There are several hundred tarns in the Lake District,Tarn Hows is but one of them and well down the pecking order where height ASL is concerned.

Looks like you are out of it Speakers Corner.

Sorry for the delay,my question is in 3 parts if that's allowed as I have never posed a question on here before, A,What is the the highest named tarn in England called.B,where is it,and C what is it's ASL height in Feet.

The lawn mower and adjustable spanner?

Someone with a big sword,Alexandra the Great?

Thanks for the link Paul, I have added this to a dozen or so of my caches and keeping an eye on when others of which we own reach a decade of existence. .

FTF on an Earth cache!are you for real?

Sad news indeed,I met John during the first of the Morecambe Bay crossing events where he kindly offered me the adoption of the previously mentioned cache on the summit of Hard Knott pass which I was honoured to accept, we continued the crossing together for a while,I found John to be a very nice person.

I'm amazed that the most important reason for giving a good clue has not been mentioned,A good clue should be given where possible if only to preserve the area from being disturbed or even trashed my last series of caches all have the hiding location in the cache title itself e.g. (CR&B6Under Stile)(CR&B7Behind Holly)all the caches of the series have had around 80 visits each and no complaints so far for having the concealment locations laid out on a plate so to speak,having said that it's not always possible to give a good clue for places like mountain summits where the cache could be under a rock in a boulder field for which on my such caches I have in the past written on my listing "clue worse than useless,use spoiler picture"and this is where spoiler pictures come in which I always supply,minimum disturbance to the cache location both as a hider and a seeker is my top priority.

We came across these 2 Fell ponies about 1500 feet up on Place Fell,lake District Cumbria. http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCXR6B_place-fell-aw-fe-20?guid=58c4e6b9-a92a-49dd-94f9-11289d4b9e8d

Such a great loss to the game and yet so little discussion on here,a sign of the times I suppose.

I've seen this topic on a few FB groups and now here,all I can think of is where are the other UK reviewers in all this?where and what is their stance are they backing their colleague,I remember the fiasco when Lacto and Eckington quit,but at least there was solidarity on that occasion.

I have quite a few caches in the Southern Lake District,as to weather they are great is not for me to say mostly they are on the high fells there are some which make up a series on The Coniston fells I also have a few on the Scafells,but my caches are Not artificially set as grid filling enticements,for that particular aspect of the game I have absolutely no interest,If I can be of any assistance in suggesting routes don't hesitate to email me.

Despite the OP's reply that this thread was not intended as an anti dog topic it has deteriorated into just that,as I suspected it would when I first read the topic headline,in fact it has become nothing more than a vehicle for the dog haters of the geocaching community to vent their spleen,a community in which I am at this moment questioning weather I still want to be associated with, after reading some of the postings on here from some of the "brave" individuals,is it any wonder that only a small percentage of geocachers frequent this forum and others have not a "trifling" amount of posts but many hundreds as they clearly revel in their own self importance not hesitating to jump in here at the drop of a hat,anyway it's over and out from me,I'm never tuning in again to this particular station.

Possibly the most ridiculous thing I have ever read on this forum. And Guanajuato , I see your dislike for dogs has not stopped you finding Tashington's caches,I feel a mass log deletion coming on

We have done very little caching over the last month due to the weather and the fact that there have been very few new caches placed anywhere near us but we visited some of our own for maintenance purposes,this pic is at our cache GC12QHR. I hope this is within the rules. This picture was taken with a Pentax Optio class 8 waterproof camera which amongst other tasks can be used for underwater photography,the reason I bought this one was that I have ruined previous cameras when they became internally damp with use in foul weather on the Fells,the Opti has stood up to everything thrown at it.

Here in The Lakes we have had plenty of snow on the High Fells for the last month or so, we managed to visit a great new Earth cache by Martlakes (Timley Knott)there being obviously no box to find. Here are 2 of our team members enjoying the white stuff.

I would just like to add my support to Martin's suggested rating system,now there's a novelty,a cacher from the same area in agreement about something and this thread shows Martin's enthusiasm for the matter by the way he responds to the comments so quickly,the same kind of way he responds to logs placed on his caches. The only slight problem I can think of is in rating felltop caches is that they would only be visited by like minded cachers as the setter, in other words "they would know what they are letting themselves in for" there being no such thing as a bad cache in any form in such a location

Without studying every posting on this topic may I suggest something that might not have been touched upon,but can significantly effect the grading,which is the seasonal weather,a climb to the top of Scafell Pike for instance,in the pursuit of a cache can be a long but relatively easy undertaking in the middle of summer,the summit is attained by hundreds every such weekend,and most but not all are properly equipped for the "challenge",however this same walk in winter conditions can be a whole different kettle of fish,where specialist equipment Will be needed,along with the ability to use it,therein lies the dilemma,do we as cache setters constantly alter the cache grading as the seasons change,or do we set them on the higher side for such inevitable eventualities, and at the same time risk being classed as someone who over rates their caches.

I can only assume from this,and from back checking the DNF logs that the cache is the one on Dow Crag,as there is not a Dove Crag on the Coniston Fells,The cache in question may have a useless clue,but the whole summit of Dow Crag is a boulder field and it would be difficult to give a more precise clue to it's location,even if a compass bearing was given say from the summit,(there is no trig point) and the distance given in yards to stride,this would still be no more accurate than the given co-ords given the terrain to scramble over,therefore ,sometimes a lousy clue can be all that is on offer weather hated or not,I can only suggest that would be searchers look carefully within a couple of yards of the co-ords,but more importantly,any rocks that are moved are replaced in there original locations,with moss,lichen uppermost.

Nothing wrong with micro's For me the essence of a good caching walk is to visit somewhere new or which introduces me to a variation of somewhere not so new,I really don't care what size the actual caches are on the route,be they large, micro or nanno,I don't mind if the caches consist of nothing more than a log book and pencil either,in fact not to bothered about the pencil, one thing I don't like to see however is 35mm film canisters used for the cache,they were never designed for anything like the purpose,and simply aren't up to the job.

Out of interest, I've just done something similar. Timed from clicking on the 'upload image' button on the cache page, to select and upload a 6Mb .jpg image (On 10 megabit Virgin Media cable broadband connection) took 2 minutes-26 seconds. Starting again at the same place, to select the image, make a reduced 800x600 copy using VSO Image Resizer and upload it to the cache page... 47 seconds. Go on... you know it makes sense Wow,that's nearly 18 seconds faster than my way,if I uploaded three in this new fangled manner I could save almost a full minute,what ever will I do with all this newly found time