Jump to content

CasheKicker

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    46
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CasheKicker

  1. OK now with all these acronym changes myhead hurts. I feel dizzy.
  2. Well when it comes to stats you can make them reflect pretty much anything you want depending how you formulate them.
  3. Perhaps you should contact GC.com and volunteer your services.
  4. If forgin countries all over the world. Including France can geocache whats stopping PQ? Here is an example of one in France that references Canada. Un petit coin de Canada ~ GCQEAA Google Language tools will do a pretty good jod of letting you read any language. Not a good excuse not to cache.
  5. The MGA site admin has stated that a name change wold be in order if there was enough intrest shown from the Rock. Arms wide open to receive you bye's. Just take the link up and voice your interest. Show your interest
  6. I would support MGA becoming AGA. Maritime to Atlantic. Something that could be brought up at our Next MGA-AGM (Maritime Geocaching Association - Annual General Meeting) on Sept.17, 2005. Perhaps it is something, no not perhaps, I will go back to MGA right now and Start the thread. Well I may have just made some waves but I posted the thread. You can view it RIGHT HERE and we will see how it goes.
  7. I do not see how it really makes any difference. The only way such an idea would work as described would be to have an approver in every county in every province. It is no more likely that an approver in Ontario could be familiar with Nova Scotia territory than an approver in Maine. Who to say an approver in Toronto has ever been to or is familiar with Thunder Bay even. The approvers have rules they must follow to allow a cache to be approved. Only the local communities can report back to an approver if such an cache is not appropriate for an area. Should it be unacceptable the approver can then take appropriate action. The rules already in place prevent MOST caches that are unacceptable from being approved. The rest is up to us to report what we find to be wrong with a cache. In any case the approvers we have are doing a bang up job no matter where they are from. I recently read a cache in N.B. that was approved by an approver from Europe. I see no problem with that what so ever. When the number of caches in Canada dictates that we need more approvers I am sure we will get more. In the mean time my hat is off to all of them. Foreign and domestic. Bravo Zulu
  8. WHen it come right down to it sure it would be nice for a MORE reviewers. Don't really matter where they are from. As long as the cache is approved or not in accordance with the "rules and regulations" that Groundspeak has in place. It is a shame that some ignorant fool would even think of placing such a cache as to be unfavorable. Hoeever we all have different tastes and the approvers can not nor should not discriminate because they don't like it. The rules guide them. We are the police of our sport. If is in in bad taste, poor repair, unsafe, or just unmaintained it is our job to report such things so action can then be taken. I applaud the approvers for doing their job and taking appropiate action when called upon. TGHe only reason we need more approvers it to lighten the load of some very heavy and abused sholders. I have said my piece. Goodbye.
  9. Well I do not know where to start. 1st I should start that I do not usually get involved with such subjects but this one did get me fired up. NOT so much on the original topic but more so with some of the comments. Nest I will give my 2 cents worth on the Cache itself. To put it simple in my opinion (and it is just that "MY opinion, and we all have one) The cache is wrong at this time. There may be a time in about 1000 yrs where we can call this a place to remember and learn from but until the dust settles let these people rest in peace and give the familys a chance for closure. Now on the MY real issues with some of the coments. - "take at the very least 20 minutes for the average healthy cacher to complete" Bang on the mark. We do not need more rules. However, the approvers are bound by these rules. If you are having a hard time getting a cache approved it is because you are trying to push the envelope. (usually) Also remember that this sport is orginated in the states and they make most of the rules based on dangerous or stupid actions of others. "I think there are w-a-a-a-y too many caches out there now. I think they should tighten up on them and not approve new ones" Hmm you again.. Well that is subjective on where you live. Perhaps where in the 50km or so around your home is over populated (in your opinion) however, there are many areas outside of Ontario that have yet to even come close to having Way to many caches.
  10. Makes me sick just thinking about someone out there trying to take advantage of people and make a buck. What is supposed to be a very affordable sport. Apart from gas prices that is.
  11. Well now that was interesting. That last one prompted me to do another Stat table. I started wondering how many caches are in Canada for every square KM of territory. Land Area Of Canada according to Stats Canada = 9,093,507 square KM Giving us 1.3544 Caches per 1000 sqkm Prov-----Land Area------Caches-----Caches/1000 sqkm NF----------373,872----------461-----------1.2330 PE-------------5660------------54-----------9.5406 NS-----------53,338----------803----------15.0549 NB-----------71,450---------1723---------24.1148 PQ-------1,365,128---------1237-----------0.9061 ON---------917,741---------3403-----------3.7080 MB---------553,556-----------282----------0.5094 SK---------591,670-----------195----------0.3296 AB---------642,317----------1322----------2.0582 BC---------925,186----------2760----------2.9832 YK----------474,391------------43----------0.0906 NT--------1,183,085------------26----------0.0220 NV--------1,936,113-------------7----------0.0036 So once again the tale of the tape shuffles the rankings and places NB as Champion Rank.....Prov.....Density/1000sqkm 1............NB.............24.1148 2............NS.............15.0549 3............PE...............9.5406 4............ON..............3.7080 5............BC..............2.9832 6............AB...............2.0582 7............NF...............1.2330 8............PQ...............0.9061 9............YK...............0.9606 10..........MB...............0.5094 11..........SK...............0.3296 12..........NT................0.0220 13..........NV................0.0036 All 3 Maritime provinces have the highest density of caches based on Land area. Again a big congrats to N.B. by far the winner of this catagory. Yes it helps by being so small but so is the population. Fact remains it is still holds the highest density of caches.
  12. Now that all looks good for the larger provinces. However, lets take a look at the same stats from a different angle: One thing that bothers me is it does not take into consideration the Cache density based on provincial population. Therefore I decided to work out the numbers based on that factor. Using the most current posted census stats from 2001 I made this table Cache Stats for Canada Based on Poulation according to 2001 Census Population of Canada 2001 = 30,007,090 PROV-----POP.-----CACHES-----#PER/CACHE-----Provincial Score ..............(X).............(Y).......................................................... NF-----512,930-------461-----------1,112.65-------------219 PE-----135,290--------54------------2,505.37------------ 97 NS-----908,005------803------------1,130.77-------------215 NB-----729,500-----1723--------------423.39-------------575 PQ---7,237,480-----1237------------5,850.83------------- 42 ON-11,410,045-----3403------------3,352.94-------------- 73 MB---1,119,585------282------------3,970.16-------------- 61 SK-----978,935------195------------5,020.18-------------- 49 AB---2,974,810-----1322-----------2,250.23---------------108 BC---3,907,735-----2760-----------1,415.85---------------172 YK-------28,675--------43-------------666.86---------------365 NT-------37,360--------26-----------1,436.92---------------170 NV-------26,745---------7------------3,820.71-------------- 64 .....................................................(Z).............................. Totals...30,007,095...12316..........2,436.43 In order to make the provincial score a number that makes sence I had to make up a formula that would make the score easier to read. Otherwise there would just be to many decimal places. For Example Based on the above information there are 2436.43 people for every cache placed in Canada. X=Provincial Population Y=# Caches in Province z= #of Caches per person in Canada Formula Y/X*(Z*100)=SCORE IE. For NF 461 Caches divided by population of 512,930 = .00089876 2436.43 multiplied by 100 = 243643 .00089876 X 243643 ------------ 218.976292 Rounded off gives a score of 219 So to put it all into perspective if we wanted to rank the provinces based on Cache density by provincial poulation it would be as follows Rank.....Prov.....Score 1............NB........575 2............YK........365 3............NF........219 4............NS........215 5............BC........172 6............NT........170 7............AB........108 8............PE...........97 9............ON..........73 10..........NV...........64 11..........MB...........61 12..........SK...........49 13..........PQ...........42 Hmmm now that sheads a different light on things now dont it. Big congrats goes out to New Brunswick for having the most caches per capita in Canada.!!!!
  13. The following are the current Cache Standings for Canada. Thanks to Funky Nassau of MGA for putting these Numbers together: Here are the current Standings: ON - 3403 BC - 2760 NB - 1723 AB - 1322 PQ - 1237 NS - 803 NF - 461 MB - 282 SK - 195 PE - 54 YK - 43 NT - 26 NV - 7 Standings effective Aug. 17/05
  14. This whole idea of charging people to cache is crap. I am surprized that Groundspeak has not jumped this idiot with a layer. It puts a very bad impression as an expensive sport to newcomers and may discourage new players. Someone needs to sort this out. I am glad I do not live near there. Do they actually call it geocaching or are they going under a different name?
  15. AS you are looking for a ,ap in the Alliston area you may wan't to try contacting CFB Borden reference library. You never know what they may have tucked into the corners.
  16. I have done all my business so far with GPS Central. The service was incredible. I made an Typo in my order and the called me an hour later to confrim what it was I wanted. I live in N.S. and I was shocked when I was only using their Xpress post for $12.00 and it was there in 36hrs. I have nothing but good things to say about this company. I am getting ready to make an order this week for some assy. and was considering trying GPS City but after reading this thread I think I will stick to GPS Central. KEEP IT IN CANADA.
  17. Well I hope I am not stepping on any toes but this just popped up in our fourm and I see no one has added us yet. So without further delay let me introduce you to MGA (The Maritime Geocaching Association) Our group covers all of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island
  18. I hope to see you there. Plan it and we shall come.
  19. Well admittedly this initial news is very disappointing. As usual the Government officials have panicked at something new that they do not understand.. What we as the GeoCaching community must do now is take a deep breath. I am sure that many reading this post so far are now upset with these recent developments. Even more so when the parks start to remove the caches. The best thing we can all do is co-operate and advocate. As much as it hurts bombarding the offices of Parks Canada with angry complaints and compliance refusal will do nothing but hurt us in the long run. Each GeoCaching organization will need diplomatic representatives to speak and meet with the offices in their region to try and work out an agreement and educate the ignorant on what GeoCaching is all about. Let them see it from our eyes as a tool that can improve the environment and help to protect it by educating our youth through involvement, CITO and bringing people into the parks. At the same time many of us need to re-educate ourselves on how to be a part of the environment without damaging it. I am sure we have all seen in our travels the effects of those whom do not respect the environment around a cache. Using terms and practices like "BUSHWACKING" does not sound, nor is it, environmentally friendly. Crashing thru the bush stepping on protected plants, ecosystem, moving rocks, climbing around old buildings, leaving the trails. All of this I am sure is what is freaking Parks Canada out. So in the meantime let’s sit back, reload, plan, learn, educate and win our parks back through co-operation. They are OUR parks and we must protect them. For everyone forever.
  20. Not a legend. in some areas of N.B. farmers actually put orange vests on their cows and horses for protection. Sory I can not agree. many dogs can appear to be wolf, fox or coyote. All of which may be hunted in various areas. I am not pro or con hunting but all should be aware. Hunters orange should always be worn by both people and pets if walking in a woodland area. Depending on the zone or province you are in you may be at risk only a couple hundred meters from a poulated area. WEAR BLAZE ORANGE. it is for your own saftety. I am not trying to support what happened in this case. It was certainly a horrible thing to happen. Just the risk is there so dress for it this time of year.
  21. The tearm bushwhacking has nothing to do with cutting, or machetes. This term means that when a trail ends, or a cache is off the beaten path, often a cacher must decide to make a bee-line through the "bush" often "whacking" their shins, head, face and other body areas off of limbs, stumps, rocks and so on. The practice of "bush-whacking" should only be used when all other avenues to reach a cache has been exhausted. After all most caches are placed just a few meters (yards) of the beaten path.
×
×
  • Create New...