rovers3

I've been using this method for some time now and do not agree with the above statement. For me it is "usually" but not "always" as I've had the unit freeze and need the batteries pulled after loading the waypoints. This method is better but not infallible.

The key here is "worked for some" I have tried and still use this method on every load and still often get the hang up when I boot my 400T after it's loaded using the GSAK colorado/oregon macro. I haven't tried the touch thingy but it always boots fine after I pull the batteries. I also check various random caches to see that they are loaded correctly and to date they always have been.

Thanks for the info and the links, Keith. Do you know of a similar program to use with a mac computer?

That's strange because when I checked the site on 25 Sept, the day I posted it was showing as not available.

Back on August (post #14) I posted a link for these maps for Ontario and did not get any reply to my post. I looked at the website again today and the maps are not available for Ontario any longer. Anyone have any ideas as to what's going on there? Thanks

From what I have read over the years, the roof prism models have fewer moving parts so less to go wrong and are easier to dust and waterproof. That being said, I have owned a pair of Pentax Papilio 6.5 X 21 since they came on the market several years ago and am extremely happy with them esp the close focus. see the following site http://www.pentaxcanada.ca/sportoptics/bin...pilio/index.php On sale at the following site for $129.00 or $149.00 for the 8.5 X 21 model, search around for best price http://store.birdwatching.net/store/Catego...culars%3APentax You might want to also look at the following site for more information on binoculars , I've linked to an article about porro prism binoculars but look around. http://www.thebinocularsite.com/consumer/p...binoculars.html Hope this helps

It has been like this from the get-go and I just ignored it but this past week got my attention and I would like to know the answer as to why the difference if possible

I have a Garmin Oregon 400t with the latest beta update. My problem is as follows, whenever I hike with others who have a Garmin 60? there are a number of different persons, some cachers and some not, my final odometer reading is always less than theirs and their reading seems to correlate with a paper trail map. For instance last week day 1 60 26.2km oregon 22.54km day 2 60 26.0km oregon 22.72km day 3 60 23.72km oregon 21.85km day 4 60 30.2km oregon 26.37km day 6 60 25.5km oregon 22.84km Day 5 my unit went its own way part way through the hike and was showing a 9.7km/hr moving average with farther distance than the 60. After I rebooted it seemed to settle back in line. The unit follows the track log I have for the trail and is quite accurate for finding caches. Any ideas? Is it just my unit or is there something else that is different between how these units track distance travelled? Thanks

I see that there is now an Ontario version available for $150. Covers the entire province. http://www.backroadmapbooks.com/shop/gps-m...ard-8-7185.html Has anyone tried this yet? If so, what is your opinion of it?

I have found 285 mystery caches and have solved most of them myself or with a bit of a nudge from the cache owner via emails. I have also been with others that have solved them but not that often as I usually cache alone. I must admit that I would really rather be out caching than solving puzzle caches but there is some strange demon that keeps drawing me to them. I tend to look at puzzles in the areas in which I plan to cache and try to solve them prior to my visit. I'm getting stronger now and have found that wonderful ignore button and now if I don't see the solution right away and it doesn't have a geochecker I use the button. I've tried quite a few puzzles where the CO doesn't respond to emails either to give a nudge or to confirm coords and this ticks me off, although most do not fall into that category. So put me in the "don't like them" group even though I do them.

I'm interested but may not be back from our trip to NL by then. If it's put off to a later date then count me in for sure. rovers3

I've finished downloading also and have left it running. It's pretty slow but have uploaded about 4gb so far. Will leave it go another day or so. Ibycus, Thanks for the effort and for sharing.

I'm at 42% after almost 11 hours. It shows 1 of 2 seeds connected for me. Does anyone know how good the detail is for Labrador and Newfoundland in this version. We're planning a trip there in about 2 weeks and would like the best maps available. Esp for the trip across Labrador.

Here's one that I found in the NWT last summer. It is in an area that is frequented by buffalo, so you can guess what it is! http://img.geocaching.com/cache/log/6a6cca...2b399a5eee8.jpg http://img.geocaching.com/cache/log/90bef7...a8ededa1fb3.jpg Sorry, I can't remember how to post the photos but the links will get you there. Edit to add photo links

FYI Here is the answer that I received when I enquired about placing a cache within an Ontario Provincial Park. I received it on 18 may, 2010 from the superintendent of that park. "My direction from Ontario Parks planning and policy is only allowing virtual geocaching with Park Superintendent written permission. With the popular increase of this activity Ontario Parks has been reviewing procedures on how we will manage this activity in the future."

Part of the problem with solving puzzles is that some of them are very specific as to platform. I've solved a couple of puzzles that could not be done on a mac but weren't that bad on a pc For one you had to use the program paint, none of the other programs like photoshop would work and for a couple of others there were sound files that could only be played using a pc program like winamp etc.

There are times of the year when the area is "posted" due to pollution so at those times swimming would not be a safe option.

We have a fairly new cache that was placed around here that has a terrain rating of 4.0. (GC273RD) In the description it states "You might need a canoe or kayak to reach this cache, (big boats might get hurt)". The cache is on a breakwater that require a boat or a swim of 90-100m (270-300 feet) to get to. Since a boat is required should the rating not be 5.0 as per the guidelines and should the reviewer who passed this cache not insisted on this rating? I know that terrain ratings have been a sore spot to others in the past but I've never heard mention of some onus being placed on the reviewer to try to ensure that the rating is correct. What do you think?

It's actually a 3.0/1.0. Some seasoned cachers had problems finding it while some newbies came up with a "quick find". I thought about that but it's difficult to read the log on the throw down as it was wet and not very legible. That's one of the reasons that iI posted the above quoted note in the logs. I guess the thing that really irks me is there was no mention of anyone doing any maintenance to the cache in the logs.

I have an "in plain sight cache" that has received a few strange logs so I went to check on it today. I had checked on it in March and other than the log being a bit damp it was in fine shape. I had replaced the log at that time. Today when I checked, the cache was fine and the log was perfectly dry. That's funny, because on May 8, a found log contained the following "could not sign the log due to being very wet". With my curiosity aroused I hunted around and lo-and-behold found that someone om May 10, 2009, that's a year ago, had placed a signed piece of paper in a plastic bag and placed it on the ground under a rock in the vicinity of the actual cache. The cache has been logged as found approx 28 times since last May but the false logsheet contains 8-10 signatures, not certain because it's a bit of a mess. I'm not anal about these things and intend to let things stand but just wanted your opinion on this type of situation and from reading the forums quite often I expect that there will be some opinions out there. I added the following note to the cache this evening. "I went by today to check on this cache and it is alive and well. HOWEVER, it seems that back in May, 2009 someone could not find the cache and placed a log in a plastic bag under a rock in the general vicinity of the cache. Some others have found this false log and signed it. I will not delete your finds but you may want to go and find the real cache as it is a unique hide."

That's why I used the quote above as it sounds like the poster, ecanderson, knows something that we don't.

I know how to delete all of the waypoints at once on the oregon. But as the OP stated in the thread heading using the word (nearly) he doesn't want to delete all of the waypoints, just most of them and that's what I was looking for also.

2 questions Where and how are the waypoints stored in the Oregon? Can you do the above with a mac computer?

FYI - I finished the reset and reinstalled the backup and everything seems to be working fine and don't get the "memory full" message any more. Still no idea why this occurred. Obviously due to being knocked around during the fall but the question is WHY?

Thanks for the reply I use a MAC for most things but when I upload waypoints I use an old laptop and GSAK and empty the trash with each transfer of PQ's to the Oregon.