Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RufusClupea

  1. I like to be able to look myself in the mirror, and to sleep at night.  Therefore, inaction in such a case as the OP is--to me--unthinkable.  Sure, there are all kinds of natural hazards in life, but that doesn't mean I won't warn someone if it might save them pain, anguish, or worse.


    Yet among nonhuman animals, the creatures that cause more American deaths than any other are bees and wasps. In a typical year, nearly 100 American deaths are caused by bee stings. In fact, this number probably represents an underestimate, since some bee sting deaths are erroneously attributed to heart attacks, sun stroke and other causes.

    --CDC: Bees are the Deadliest Non-Human Animals in America

    If it were me, I'd post an NM at the very least--as a caution/warning to others if nothing else.  I'd be stating my reasons/thinking to the CO, reviewer, and other GC, so ALL can make their own informed decisions.  As always, YMMV.

    • Upvote 2
  2. On 9/13/2017 at 10:04 AM, justintim1999 said:

    My main reason for 9 caches placed about 600 ft apart was to try to "cover" the area with caches I hoped would be fun, and knowing they would  be maintained. 


    18 hours ago, fizzymagic said:

    In other words, to prevent anyone else from being able to place a cache in the area and to minimize the amount of work for yourself.

    Yep, sounds like a power trail to me.


    5 hours ago, justintim1999 said:

    Your wrong again.

    [....]   I'll admit the placement was designed to prevent other caches being placed in the area but not for the reasons you've outlined. 

    [emphasis mine]

    Rhetorical question: Do the reasons (/excuses/justifications) really matter?  We're not a clairvoyant species.  Anyone looking at the map isn't going to know the intention/rationale; all they're going to see is a bunch/series of caches covering an area where no more can be placed (i.e. a power trail).

    From where I sit, I don't see much difference between knowing they would be maintained, and making that maintenance efficient (i.e. minimizing the work to do so).

    I don't have a dog in this fight.  I'm just an observer, and YMMV. 

  3. 5 hours ago, justintim1999 said:

    It seems that the word "power trail" carries with it a negative vibe.   God forbid your series of hides gets labeled a power trail. 

    For some.  For others, it may be just what they're into/looking for.

    5 hours ago, justintim1999 said:

    I have a series of 9 caches along a nice trail.  I don't think it would be classified as a power trail. 

    Others may.

    5 hours ago, justintim1999 said:

    My main reason for 9 caches placed about 600 ft apart was to try to "cover" the area with caches I hoped would be fun, and knowing they would  be maintained.  For me it was about trying to guarantee an overall experience by limiting the chance of someone dropping a cache in the middle of the series and then not taking care of it.

    I've heard very similar from COs of PTs.

    5 hours ago, justintim1999 said:

    I was just curious at what point dose a series become a power trail?

    Since it doesn't seem to be an objective term, at the point someone thinks/says it does.

    The PTs I know of around here usually follow some kind hiking trail, whether nature trail, former RR right-of-way, canal towpath, etc.  I've seen many spots I thought would make good hides for some reason or other (scenery, history, architecture, etc.), only to find out they're already between 2 hides in a PT that were dropped 528 ft.apart, to "cover" the area with caches.

    That said, I don't think PTs necessarily have to be linear either; I've seen clusters in parks dropped by the same CO to "cover" the area with caches.  I know of one that was hidden in some scrub rough, when there is the most gorgeous spreading tree I may have ever seen just a hundred feet away, which now can't be used because a first-time hider wanted to get one out there a.s.a.p. (but I digress...)

    IMO, it's--like so many other things--in the eye/mind of the beholder.

    • Upvote 1
  4. 9 hours ago, Mineral2 said:

    For each of the units you are interested in purchasing, or the units that you own, go to http://support.garmin.com , type in the name of the unit, and then where it says "Enter Topic (keywords)" type in "File limitations." It'll bring up the full limitation specs for that series of units. It was much easier to compare when Garmin listed it all on a single page.

    That was one reason (among many) that I created the spreadsheet. ;)

  5. 33 minutes ago, HHL said:

    Garmin units have three limits: Waypoints, Geocaches (populated from GPX files) and Geocaches (popuated from GGZ files).

    You're spreadsheet confuses waypoint limits with geocache limits.

    I don't think so.  The waypoint limits come directly from the respective spec tabs on Garmin's site (as per 5000 waypoint limit for GPSMAP® 64 series above).  The only other "limits" they specify are routes (200 for GPSMAP® 64 series) and Track log (10,000 points, 200 saved tracks Ibid.

    Likewise, the only other "limit" I see mentioned on Navigation Professional is 2,000 .gpx files for GPSMAP® 64 series.  That says, "No limit on geocaches (outside of max number of GPX files supported and memory available)".

    From the last few responses, it appears (to me) that there may be confusion between geocaches and .gpx files(?)

  6. 29 minutes ago, Mineral2 said:

    Waypoints are counted separately, and I believe that the handhelds all have a 2000 waypoint limit (edit: the Oregon 700 series has a 10,000 waypoint limit).

    From my spreadsheet:

    • eTrex® series have a 2000 waypoint limit
    • eTrex® Touch series have a 4000 waypoint limit
    • Montana® series have a 4000 waypoint limit.
    • GPSMAP® 64 series have a 5000 waypoint limit.
    • Oregon® series have a 10,000 waypoint limit

    I'm a little thick here (not to mention technologically bereft/challenged).  Just so I understand this... Are you saying that (e.g.) traditional cache coords. do or do not count against the waypoint limit?  From HHL's post (above):


    Assuming a theoretical content of 1000 caches per PQ: 16 PQs contain 16,000 caches which definitely hits the limit.

    That sounds like cache coords do count against the waypoint limit--or am I misreading that?


    We went caching near Hemlock Lake today (Hemlock Lake is the primary water supply for much of Rochester, NY)--beauty-full area--and saw one of these labels attached to a tree at the trail head. 


    We don't know if it meant something specific (e.g. tagging the tree as infested or for removal) or what, but it's the first We've seen in this area.  It sent chills down our spines.

  8. I think the determining factor(s) might be the ferry schedule(s) and possibly the day of the week (if the schedules change).  With approx.(~) 90 caches on Nantucket, and ~347 caches on "The Vineyard", schedules permitting, it should be doable.  Skimming through the lists, there are some pretty intriguing caches (a micro with 107 FPs, and Intro to Nantucket Geocaching mystery cache).

    Just do your homework (i.e. run your PQs, plan your caches, routes, & ferries ahead of time).  Get/take a map JIC.

    Hope the family business isn't the bad kind.  Good Luck, and have a great/safe hunt/trip!

  9. Yeah, I apologize profusely for that... muck-up.  I just spent 1/2 hr trying to find it myself (before seeing Touchstone's explanation), and came to the same discovery/conclusion myself.  I think what happened was that I must have thought it was part of the new guidelines, and that I had missed it in the OP (about the changes to guidelines).  It's really not like me to quote something like that secondhand in lieu of source.

    Again, I apologize.  I hope it's apparent that I've been trying to help from the beginning.  Here's to your event being a unqualified success!  What I remember of Salem (albeit several decades ago, when I lived/worked near there) is that it's an extremely cool place--the witch stuff notwithstanding.  My fave back then was the House of the Seven Gables (love the classic flick too--Vincent Price vs. George Sanders--two of the biggest hams in history!)

    Hope you'll have enough time to take in some of what MA/New England have to offer.

    Please come back & give us an update of how things go (went)!


  10. 19 hours ago, HHL said:

    Please have in mind that the content also counts against the limit. That is:
    Assuming a theoretical content of 1000 caches per PQ: 16 PQs contain 16,000 caches which definitely hits the limit.
    Also have in mind that the additional waypoint part could hold more than 1000 waypoints (That could be some thousands of waypoints).

    I'm not sure where you're getting those numbers (unless assuming a different model).  According to the site above (and info I already had from Garmin), there is "No limit on geocaches (outside of max number of GPX files supported and memory available)"  I don't have any supplemental maps (yet), so I don't think memory (with 8 GB) is an issue at this time.

    The PQs I ran hold ~11,000 caches.  Waypoints may be a problem; I don't have an exact # (or how much memory is used per waypoint), but the files total ~1800 KB.  If that exceeds the 5000 Waypoints, I would think re-running the PQs w/o multi-caches should solve that problem(?)  I spoze it depends if the cache coords of each cache are considered waypoints toward that 5,000 limit. 

    I prefer to filter content when creating the PQs

    There is a problem someplace; I don't know if it's related or not, but it wouldn't surprise me if it is.  We went out today, and noticed that one cache that should have been in memory was not.  That cache is 80 mi. from origin; radius of PQ is 200 mi. from origin.  The cache appears in the PQ, and on a map of the PQ, but not in the GPSr list (we drove past it, and wondered why it didn't show up).

  11. On 9/9/2017 at 8:31 AM, MrMrsMouse said:

    Unfortunately there isn't much on the web about comparing these 2 models together and the info that is available is quite old.

    AFAIK, nothing's changed in those two models, so even though the material is a few years old, it still applies.

    There are some (IMO) significant differences--enough that tipped me in favor of the 64 series--but that's me.  I don't find any problems with the resolution on the 64 series.

    What I did was read up & watch (Youtube) everything I could (reviews, ratings, comparisons) on the Garmin line, and then I plotted & notated everything on an Excel spreadsheet.  It made the choosing much easier, being able to see & compare everything right there in front of me, and I have NO regrets.  Obviously your criteria are different than mine or anyone else's. 

  12. 12 hours ago, WNCMama said:

    I'm quite new to geocaching (only 22 smileys so far), but I am crazy about it! There is not a geocaching Meetup in my area yet, but a little bit of interest. I'd love to organize a gathering, but I have some questions.

    What do you do when you gather with other geocachers? I'd like ours to be family centered as I have a tween and 2 small children. Do you search for caches together? Just meet to talk about geocaching? Some of both? More?

    I appreciate any input!

    Here's a list of upcoming events in NC.

    The events we've been going to are "regular" monthly weekend breakfasts/brunches at family restaurants.  They've been going on for quite a while (we're the newcomers there), so the restaurant mgmt. gives them a back room/table cluster.  Folks eat & chat, "make the rounds" with old acquaintances & new, exchange TBs & info, and if anyone has anything to announce, they do so.  Lots of "cache-chatter".  One group has a kind of "raffle"--everyone brings something geocache-related, and there's a drawing until everything's gone (so essentially, everyone gets something).

    After the event, some folks may break off into small groups to go caching--others go home or wherever...

  13. 17 hours ago, Müllipützchen said:

    I suggest to seperate the favorite-points, so that every cacher has the possibility to distinguish, why he adores a Geocache and relieves us to choose the best caches.

    What do you think about this? I am curios about your opinions :)


    11 hours ago, captnemo said:

    [...] Use the log to describe the reason for the FP

    That's what we've been doing. 

    Expanding upon reasons for (types of) FPs can easily evolve into a cache rating system, which has been discussed many times (check archives and/or goggle).

  14. 7 hours ago, RVtrvlkids said:

    Thank you, that works.  Just wish I could list only the favorite points ones, but this will work.

    As described above, go to your public profile page, click on (All Geocache Finds), then click on the blue heart. That'll sort your finds by # of Fav. Pts they have.  That should do it until you hit one that doesn't have any FPs.

  15. 6 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

    My thoughts are with all those currently in the path of nature's fury.

    Likewise.  In my younger & abler days, I helped out with cleanup after fires completely destroyed homes of family & friends (separate incidents), and following the infamous Corning flood of '72,  I'm (we're) not able to do the physical anymore, but there are other ways we still can help.

    It's always heartbreaking, but there are moments when the best in humanity shines through.  It's those moments I remember best now.

  16. 7 hours ago, The A-Team said:

    ...or select all the individual states to effectively get the same as if you had United States as an option.

    I wasn't aware that was an option.  I'd tried that before, and selecting subsequent states cancelled out the first state selected.  It isn't exactly intuitive (or explained anywhere that I recall), but I finally figured out that one has to press CTRL to select additional states.

    That accomplishes what I wanted, so thanks for the hint.

  17. 3 hours ago, Manville Possum said:

    I think we also have a set rule locally to not place a geocache within 258 feet of a RR track.

    Wow, that seems a bit extreme--even for safety's sake.  Out of curiosity, do you know how they came up with that particular number?

    I've never really understood the 150 ft. specified in the guidelines; every set of tracks within miles of me is almost perpetually populated by railfans with cameras, videos, or just hanging out on lawnchairs watching the trains go by and chatting.  RR personnel just exchange waves.

    I would think it would make more sense to say, "within x feet of a railroad right of way", except that most people might not know what that is or how to find out how far it extends in any particular place.

    So I can live with 150 ft. from tracks (even though I know of at least 3 caches right now that are closer than that). ;)

    • Upvote 1
  18. On 9/7/2017 at 1:52 PM, Team Hugs said:

    My GPSr doesn't make it convenient to record detailed notes on the find, and my memory isn't that outstanding, so ... a copy-and-paste log is about all I can manage at that point.   Maybe the name of the cache or the description or the hint will trigger a specific memory that I can add, but ... for a lot of those finds, I've got a lot of nothing.

    Other than taking along a log book and composing an essay on the spot which I'll have to type in later, I'm not sure what else I should be doing.

    Isn't there some medium?  I don't compose essays on the spot, but I usually have a piece of paper or small notebook (along with my pen) to jot down a few notes (my memory is suffering some too) when I get back to the car or between caches--enough to expound upon later when logging online.  ;)

    [EDIT] Didn't see cerberus1's response when I wrote the above.  Looks like we may have one thing in common after all.  :D


  • Create New...