welch

You want to celebrate, but only for 15 minutes?

Which are all good reasons it would useful to have an recenty archived PQ so those problem caches be easily removed from the offline databases noone is supposed to keep

Get some free film tubes, put a 13 gallon kitchen trash bag in each, and then an address labels around the side with instructions to CITO area.

A rose by any other name has thorns just as sharp. No, not really. For example... Yellow jackets are much more aggressive than ordinary bees. And a honeybee will likely leave the stinger in the skin. It can continue to pump venom even after detached. Yank it out as soon as possible. Ok so we need an attribute for bees and another for wasps. Maybe break the snake attribute down into sub groups? And how about 'fall rocks' be graduated, will I be smashed by a car sized rock or just knocked silly with a baseball sized one? You know I might wear a helmet and try it anyways if its just a baseball.

It depends on how your using your PQs. If you set up your pocket queries to give very specific things, like say all active traditional caches with 12 miles that are rated 3/3 or easier. Then you could just dump them on the gps (or if you requested a gpx, convert the file then dump it, unless you have a gps that can take gpx directly.) If you set up your pockets to get more general things, like say all caches within 12 miles of point A no matter size, type, rating, attributes, etc. Then GSAK might be useful for you to dissect the file into just what you want to put on the gps right now. Also, Some people will use gsak to collect several PQs into a database. Like say a large city, whole state, or something else it would be different to get quickly or easily from PQs.

I don't think there are any 'rules' for logging them. I think in theory there wouldn't be anything for you to log, are you sure you didn't imagine this cache?

I think that's one of the reasons Waymarking doesn't appeal to as many people as geocaching. Some really like cameras and will photograph anything and everything, perhaps they have pictures of every cache they've been to, etc. Those are the people to which Waymarking is geared. On the other hand are the people which either don't care to take pictures, or do and just don't wish to share them. Personally, I have terriable luck with cameras.... thankfully gps units are generally drop resistant . If I do have a camera with me, it is likely a disposable film camera. Works to keep me from breaking something expensive, but hard to tell if the tip of my finger was too close to the lens (again). It is also slower to turn them in for processing and having put on disk. Certainly not impossible to waymark this way, but a PITA I'd rather not deal with for the honor of someone letting me say I visited their (whatever). Getting back to the topic of the email. I can understand the waymark owner wanting to check out some fishy looking logs, but that email is very rude. Might have as well said 'you aren't doing it the way I would, I'm gonna delete your logs'.

And #2? I'am still searching all those years the caches for one of it. But Europe is far, far away, even for Moun10Bike(s) #2 is a coinament not a ver1 ok, fill me in. What's a coinament??

What you see as adequate permisson may not be what the cache owner, other cachers, the cache reviewer, etc. But adequate is really a whole thread of its own... (or several overlapping threads). "why not spend a few extra minutes checking with the land owner or manager to make sure it's ok" Because that could possibly mean filling out paperwork, talking to people, waiting for responses, and other stuff that could take months. Way easier to got the lamp post route and get some instant gratification.

let it hang on the wrist strap or put in pocket depending on which is more practical at that moment.

Really, if it was me, i would probably want to give that "accuser" a quick little heads up explanation. One email, nothing more, and if they still wanted to accuse you of somehow cheating, then ignore the heck out of em! I was looking to see if this was said. If someone sent me an email like that I would simply and politely explain the adoption situation. That should cover it. As to logging a find after adoption I can't see how anyone should have a problem with that. You didn't hide it, you didn't know where or how it was hidden, you didn't have any insider information. How could it possibly be a problem? It may not be that they didn't know where they were hidden, but that they are basically receiving credit for the same cache twice. Once as a find, and again being its current owner. But its like many things in geocaching, either you care about (whatever) or you don't.

Increasing cost yes. Lack of availabity, not so much. There are cans around, Its just kinda sticker shock when they double or triple in price from what 2-3? years ago. As for the government crushing them, who knows maybe. But rumors about the demise of ammo cans have been around for a long time. Different stories, sometimes its ammo cans going to be kept and reused, kept and sold for scrap, changed out for plastic, completely replaced with cheaper disposable vinyl bags, and so on. The point of the rumor though is that they will cost more so buy now for whatever they cost. If you look at the governmentliquation site there are still ammo cans out there. My personal option i the problem in Iowa is that none are being sold from the 'close' bases. That GL used to have auctions come up in different places in Illinois from time to time. Now most of the auction lots are farther away (and perhaps for larger amounts?) like Texas, Georgia, California, etc. Seems like the closest any have been in a while is the middle of Missouri. Do you happen to know where Uncle Stan gets his cans from? At one point in time someone there told me they go to fort riley Kansas and bring them back. I kinda wonder if maybe they can't find any 'locally' so they either have longer (higher) travel/shipping costs, and/or they aren't buy them directly of GL just a pallet at a time from a middleman. Either way it ends up costing the people buying them for caches more.

Built brand new to government spec... which is why ammo cans are/were such a good deal since when they get sold off its usually for much less than was paid for them new.

I want my find NOW NOW NOW!! And If I can't get that I want this page outta my way, yesterday There is more to it than this. There is no page (that I've seen) that explains what should be done when one encounters problems with the caches they encounter. I'm often bothered by the fact that people on their numbers runs never stop long enough to log a DNF or needs maintenance. I'm only going to go to that one cache once. If there's a problem, I'll mention it. Someone has got to be reporting problems. If there is a procedure than I want to know about it. Do we always write a "needs maintenance" then e-mail the cache owner, and then wait a while, and then if nothing gets done in a month, put a "needs archived?" No wonder no one ever puts any notes on caches!! What a hassle. I encounter sometimes 5 caches a week that may be missing, are in bad need of maintenance, or , very rarely, need archiving. I'm supposed to go through that procedure for each of those caches? Too many cache owners never read the logs. Only a "needs maintenance" catches their attention. I do not want to place caches in the places people have other caches. I want to see the game maintained for the people who come after me. So besides people being impatient they also need a flowsheet for the steps to follow? If you need guidance, maybe ask the local reviewer what they would prefer. Some search from disabled caches from time, some only deal with things pointed out to them. I would say unless there is some immediate need for the cache to be archived then do exactly as you suggested, notes, NM, NA waiting a good time between each. If its a hassle, then just log a DNF and move on to the next.

I want my find NOW NOW NOW!! And If I can't get that I want this page outta my way, yesterday

Oregon 550/550t, how durable is the camera? If I drop the gps unit will the camera keep on working or what?? Anyone one here using the camera feature on the new oregons?

Let's face it,. requesting the ability to hunt for something that is not there has always been nonsensical. It's hard enough looking for something that is there. The "no" that was given is more than sufficient and as definitive as a reasonable individual should make. Circumstances do change over time. "at this time the answer is 'No' " means that GS recognizes this and is not foolish enough to paint themselves in a corner that does not allow changes to be a consideration. Apparently it took 18 months because they were trying to accommodate those that wanted to hunt things that were not there. What is being called "flip/flop" is nothing more than adapting appropriately to all the variables. The only theatrics have been in some of these bullet pointed posts. Lets face it, things are never really deleted on this site. Archived only means it is harder to view, maybe only reviewers are given access, but the info is still there. Hunting for 'caches that are not there ' is only one possiable use for the mapping feature which gc.com has now decided it will not be returning.

Change the trigger. Or, allow the CO to choose the type of notification with the minimal being what it is now. Good. Of course it would be easier to just not allow people to edit logs or log type so they are forced to use the current trigger .

Yep. The thing I will add it that migration seems to be less for caches that confined in someway, like say inside a rotted tree or small rock crevice. Compared to say just laying along the side of a downed tree. People seem to be able to get caches back in the hole it came from, but not so much when remembering how far from the end of the fallen tree.

But what is the reason for this? I can see placing a TB to travel from cache to cache and following its journey to unknown places but if you never let it out of your hand then you know where it's going and where it's been. So what do those accumulated miles mean? What purpose do they serve? There's no prize for most miles. I think many add miles just to show they have moved the TB around and are not sitting on it. Perhaps where they went was not in line with the goal of the TB so they only dipped it. It could also be that the person moving it was out caching and didn't find a place they could or would leave a TB. Maybe the caches found were micros, maybe the TB would fit but they were afraid the cache would likely get muggled.

Yeah but the OP is talking about a cache site with a cache nearby. How easy we try to proclaim our innocence. There certain caches I will not look for cos I think that I will cause too much disruption to the surrounding enviroment. If there is a 'old weird shack thing' there then some suspicion should also fall on anyone else that has any interest in such places.

You're apply a small problem to a lot of caches. whats it called, kneejerk?

Replying to Why aren't cache owners notified when a finder changes their log? Because currently most (maybe all?) notices are triggered by log type, not whats in the log.

Perhaps the goal should be just spliting challenges into a new type, but dividing the catchall 'puzzle' into multiple sub groups. Puzzles you generally solve at home, puzzles you solve on location, puzzles completed by visiting tasks (challenges), etc.