South Surrey Scavengers

Thanks thats what i was looking for.

I get way too many emails. Is there a way to disable the automatic emails that I receive each time one of my caches is logged?

I have "placed" 18 earthcaches although I have not done so in quite a while now. Most of these were done prior to the requirement for getting permission from the public agency. Yes in the beginning (for the first month or so) you could place them without the public agency approval. When the regulations changed and I spent so much time trying to figure out who to get approval from whether its a provincial park or crown land I gave up placing Earthcaches. I didnt agree with the policy of getting approval to simply list GPS coordinates on a website where there was nothing physical left behind. Of course Groundspeak is entitled to have rules like that if they wish as it is there website. As for the requirement by the GSA again it is their perogative to invoke the rule if they wish. I disagree with it but it is their right to do so. I think it hurts the level of participation in the sport but on the other hand it might help ensure the quality of Earthcaches. Think about this: If you started your own website why couldnt you list the GPS coordinates of really any location on earth? Isn't that already happening? But in the end its Groundspeaks and GSA's decision as to what they want to allow for their game.

all my images and avatars are gone too

I can no longer print the cache page after this release. 1/3 of the left side of the page is missing. I've looked at changing to landscape, scaling, etc. No matter what size I print it cuts off the left side of the page.

You know, eventually most Biology Earthcaches will turn into true Earthcaches if you wait long enough.

Sell the coin in the new store.

One needs to consider all geographic locations when setting up a program such as the Earthcache Masters. It may be fine in Europe or USA where there is a fair density of EC's within a 500 - 1000 km radius (i.e. a road trip away). In certain parts of the world - Earthcaches are far less numerous. In South Africa - up until a month or so ago - there were only 3 Earthcaches in the entire country. I have since placed about 20 odd caches - and have encouraged a few new cachers to place some more - so we are starting to see some momentum here. But I see that there are other areas (Southern Europe; Asia; Middle East) where EC's are really lacking. So it is difficult to meet a requirement to find x EC's when there are so few about. But then again - my Silver (3 EC's where not even in Africa - I'm in the firtunate position that I do travel) - was REALLY SWEET!!!! So I am happy with the current grading - It would be good to recognise (additionally) EC hides. Sounds like we need some Earthcachers in Southern Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. I'm pretty sure there are good sites there! Just not enough enthusiasts.

I'm all for ensuring permission is granted by the appropriate people when necessary. But when is it necessary? Have a look at my White Rock Earthcache. Note that this glacial erratic is sitting on a public beach just above high tide line although it might get wet during a storm. You dont need permission to walk down the beach from anyone. But it is within the city of White Rock so should I bother someone at the city to get permission? I think not. Now if it was in a national park then fine make the phone call, or email, or some other source document that gives approval to be there. But then again, the national parks are open to the public and they encourage us to visit them and they provide maps of the roads and trails to get around in them. So can I have an Earthcache setup in a National park that is on the side of the road without asking permission. I see the two sides to this. On one hand Earthcaches are trying to avoid any sort of legal/liability/appearance issues by having approval up front. On the other hand it is burdensome and a waste of peoples time in some cases. But where to draw the line and say you need permission here but not there.

I think they do that so that you dont get LAME earthcaches. As it is, there isn't a geologic feature within 250km of my place worth creating a new earthcache for, but I bet you someone will! I think any additional focus should be on finding. Having an emphasis on developing earthcaches can lead to clusters of redundant caches because everyone wants to be an earthcache master. I know one area of the country that has a lot of good caches. They all tend to be on the same topic though, so it's almost a matter of going 2 miles and doing an "x" earthcache, then driving another 2 miles to do the next "X" earthache, and so on and so forth. They happen to have a lot of that kind of feature and not much else. You can't control what natural features exist near you, but you can choose where to visit. That's why I think the focus should be on different types of earthcaches visited. That way the quality will stay high and we'll all learn more. You're kidding right? Clusters of redundant caches? Geologic features occur where .. simply put where they occur. I would definitely expect clusters as some parts of the earth are rich in natural features. Like Yellowstone Park. There should be a hundred Earthcaches in the park while only 1 might occur in the same size area located in a featureless terrain. Any redundancy issues I'm sure would be prevented by Geoaware during the approval process. "You can't control what natural features exist near you, but you can choose where to visit." You can only choose places where Earthcaches exist. And Earthcaches exist (once again where nature put them). Earthcaches should exists wherever significant geologic or geographic features exist. We don't get to pick and choose where they are. They are where they are. Plus if Earthcaches are about educating the public about our natural world then we need to have more of them and in more accessible places so that they can be visited by larger numbers of people. That way we have the ability to educate people about them. If you want to restrict the numbers of Earthcaches you are restricting the learning opportunities.

I think they do that so that you dont get LAME earthcaches. As it is, there isn't a geologic feature within 250km of my place worth creating a new earthcache for, but I bet you someone will! We won't get LAME earthcaches because Geoaware won't be approving any.

Estimate thickness of alluvium?

There was a concept in place in the beginning to have several peers review from different countries or at least provide feedback to Geoaware. That concept seemed to fade away. Then EC's got moved to Waymarking which almost killed EC's in my opinion as an educational tool. Perhaps in the long run Waymarking will become more popular than geocaching. As it stands now I dont know who reviews other than Geoaware. And I don't know if he needs help. Perhaps he can answer this. I know I was available in the beginning to help on this sort of thing had it been needed.

My beef with Earthcache Masters is that it puts too much emphasis on finding and not enough on creating EC's. If you reversed the requirement for Gold from Visit 12 and develop 2 to Develop 12 and visit 2 I would be Gold right now. I think it should be something like: Visit and Develop a total of 14 Earthcaches. At least 2 of which must be Developed by the cacher and at least 2 must be visited by the cacher.

The guidelines were not as strict when I set up my first Earthcaches. Are they grandfathered? Or do I need to go get permission for them now? Also, is permission always needed on public land? If you can visit an Earthcache without leaving the highway and you're not in state/national park do you still need permission from someone? Ultimately all land is under the jurisdiction of a government or is privately owned. Or if you can visit it while on a city street, do you need permission from the "City". Who would you even ask?

I remember asking the museum curator when I was in school what was so special about this nondescript rock that sat on the floor. He said "lick it". I did! I am a Geologist. It was a bit salty for my taste.

On the adoption side, I am trying to adopt 4 Earthcaches in my area as the original lister no longer caches. I advised on the setup of them to begin with and I'm not doing just to trade EC's. Won't do me or him any good anyway.

I wouldnt go and find a cache that I adopt out - to me thats "cheating". Also, 3 caches in New Zealand were done by a Canadian, remotely, using the web and google earth..... Top notch EC's to. Can you post GC codes or links to these NZ EC's? What would be the point? - also, Im only going on hearsay. no pressure. I'm curious as to the quality of alleged EC's. Maybe you could do abit of detective work...... and report back to us? What's up with this? Visiting the site has to be a requirement. Unless someone can come up with a real virtual Earthcache that can be done from the sofa. Photos are a good way to prove you visited the site but not necessarily the only way. I would like to see these NZ EC's investigated and logs removed if they didn't visit the site.

I think all of my Earthcaches require a photo. But that's a relic from the past when it was used to ensure the cacher actually visited the site. Now, people have come up with many more ways to ensure compliance and photos should not be necessary. I will have to review my own Earthcaches and remove the photo requirement where its not necessary.

Earthcaches should include both "raw" sites and "visitor" sites. Not all geologic features have roads right up to them with visitor centres. We should be makeing both kinds.

I'm thinking "Biocache" as a new category.

We could use some more Earthcache events. I remember when geoaware was asking to have some setup a couple years ago. However, at the time I was setting up a CITO event already. Maybe next time!

Earthcache hats, shirts, coffee mugs, lounge chairs, special RV's? I can't wait for the store to open.

Actually, that statement isnt correct. The guidelines are as follows (for Earthcaches): "Under 30 ft is not allowed, period. Between 30 ft and 300 ft is allowed with permission from the other cache owner." That is for Physical waypoints. The statements WERE correct at the time they were made. Someone bumped a thread from fall 2006. Guidelines change over time, and apparently GSA has added some. The cache saturation guideline for geocaches has changed since that time, too. Good to know the new guidelines. When I created most of my Earthcaches there was no saturation limit. Indeed, cache guidelines do change over time.

Having taken a break on Earthcaches for about a year its time to catch up on the latest news. I know of the move to Waymarking (which put me off Earthcaches and I stopped doing them). I heard of their return but didnt jump on the bandwagon. Where do we see it going from here? Any goals as far as number of listings, visits, countries, etc. Also, I first looked at only really significant geological features but I have come to realize that there are hundreds or thousands of good smaller examples that occur almost anywhere. I see the spreading out of Earthcaches to more and more places which is good. It gives everyone a chance to create or visit one.