California66er

Is there a local cacher with whom you can "co-own" the cache? Maybe there is someone who doesn't want to - or can't - be responsible for all of the maintenance on the cache, but who does live locally and own a watercraft. Or someone who just never thought to put a cache out there, but would love to do it once the idea was brought up to him.

I love the new system, though of course there are some other features I would love to see. For instance, I would love to be able to quickly see a list of users who have favorited two or more of the same caches I've chosen. I'm not terribly active in the GC community, and it would be nice to find locals (or non-locals who have been to some of the same places I have) who look for the same things in caches as I do. I had no problem finding one in ten caches that were "favorites" of my - admittedly small - finds. As I find more and more caches, I expect that my standards will become higher, to the point where I won't feel the need to make ten percent of my finds "favorites." While you might look at that as having points that are going to waste, I'm not so sure I agree. What I prefer to do is to look at all of the caches someone has listed as a favorite. For instance, if I'm looking at a cache page and see that Joe Schmoe has favorited it, and then I see that he has also favorited a bunch of lamp post hides, I'm probably not going to put too much stock in his vote. Moreover, if he has 800 finds and only 2 or 3 favorites, I'm much more likely to go seek those out.

I wouldn't worry too much about it. A lot of caches don't have the names written on them anywhere. If anything, you might want to make it part of your maintenance routine, but otherwise I wouldn't sweat it too very much.

the reason being is where i'm at i think theirs only 2-3 payphones left You'd be surprised how many payphones are left if you start looking around for them. There are never any when I'm looking for them. When I don't need one, there are thousands.

This was exactly my idea - getting a toll-free number. I think you'd probably have to pay for that on your end, but the cacher wouldn't have to.

I have your exact model of GPSr. Here's how I go paperless: First, I read the cache page, including hints and other finders' posts. Then I download the .loc file. Next, I open the .loc file in a text editor. Then I replace the nameid and CDATA strings with important info. The nameid usually becomes the actual cache name instead of its number, and the CDATA string will look like "233 ammocan hollow log". The first three numbers are the size, difficulty and terrain, rounded up to the nearest whole number. After that are hints about the type of cache, placement, and anything else that's helpful. The nameid string has a maximum of 14 characters. The CDATA string has a maximum of 30 characters. Then I load them on my Garmin using GPSbabel. In the past, I would write this stuff in a notepad. I still use the notepad, but just for recording what I took and left. Ouch! Wouldn't it be worth it, from the labor standpoint alone, to pay the $30 / year for Premium membership and load the .gpx files into GSAK? I use a Nuvi for both getting to the general vicinity and for my paperless caching. But you do need GSAK, a premium membership, and of course... a Nuvi for that. Works great, though! To be honest, I have a bad habit of getting very into something and then quickly losing interest, so I've held off on placing caches, as well as investing even $30 for a premium membership. My interest doesn't seem to be waning, though, and I just plopped down the money for the eTrex. So the answer is yes, I do think it's worth it. I just haven't gotten around to it yet. Even thirty bucks is hard for me ATM; everything is tied up in the documentary I start shooting next week.

I have your exact model of GPSr. Here's how I go paperless: First, I read the cache page, including hints and other finders' posts. Then I download the .loc file. Next, I open the .loc file in a text editor. Then I replace the nameid and CDATA strings with important info. The nameid usually becomes the actual cache name instead of its number, and the CDATA string will look like "233 ammocan hollow log". The first three numbers are the size, difficulty and terrain, rounded up to the nearest whole number. After that are hints about the type of cache, placement, and anything else that's helpful. The nameid string has a maximum of 14 characters. The CDATA string has a maximum of 30 characters. Then I load them on my Garmin using GPSbabel. In the past, I would write this stuff in a notepad. I still use the notepad, but just for recording what I took and left. Very cool, and very helpful. I'll try that... only this time, I'll try it the old way on all but 1 or 2 of the caches I plan on grabbing.

Oh man, forget about it. Talk about failed experiments. And you know, beyond the puzzles, it NEVER OCCURRED TO ME that I might be making a mistake, going out with far less information. Which, in retrospect, was stupid. I mean, I'd toyed with typing in some notes, but the data field was too small, and I was feeling pretty lazy about it... ...that is, until I was halfway up what must have been a 40% incline, huffing and puffing and cursing myself for not knowing what size container I was looking for. Calling all of my lifelines, only to discover that they were all out enjoying the beautiful day. And me, all alone with my ignominy, not even knowing whether I was looking for an ammo can or a bison tube. Man, I felt dumb. It's funny looking back, but not so much while I was out there!

I guess that answered that question.

If your not a Premium member - your going to find it VERY difficult to do true paperless Geocaching. I see... I just got a Garmin eTrex Venture HC. So is the best thing to do, then, to hand-type the important stuff in? Or should I really just stick to paper caching? Stick to paper caching for now, and if you're serious about paperless caching, get a PDA like an old Palm Pilot, and a premium membership. That's about what I figured. I'm leaving a week from tomorrow on a month-long road trip, and I have several hundred caches along the way that I want to find. Was trying to figure out a way to keep from having to print a novel of cache pages to take with me, but I guess that'll have to wait for another day. I have found a way to essentially copy and paste only the vital information into Word. That's served me well so far; I can get 2-3 caches on one page, rather a page or two (or three) per cache. Thanks for the help.

If your not a Premium member - your going to find it VERY difficult to do true paperless Geocaching. I see... I just got a Garmin eTrex Venture HC. So is the best thing to do, then, to hand-type the important stuff in? Or should I really just stick to paper caching?

What I did was I went along the Google Map, chose the caches along the route I wanted to do, and downloaded them to my GPSr. Clearly, there are steps I am missing. Equally clearly, I don't know what those are. I can't do PQs, since I'm not a premium member. Is there an idiot's guide to paperless caching somewhere?

I had my very first attempt at paperless caching this weekend, and failed miserably. Of the six caches on my list, I came back with one find. There were a variety of problems: 1) I didn't know the size of the cache going in. This might have helped, though I suppose a cache is a cache is a cache, in some regards. 2) At least two of the caches I was looking for hadn't been found in ages. I'd pulled their coordinates into my GPSr because they were on my path, but then couldn't find them. Only when logging them did I learn how long it'd been since they'd been found. 3) Two were mystery caches. Though I wrote down the clues, I did it in shorthand, and having the full page would certainly have helped me find both of them (I actually did find one of these two.) 4) I didn't have access to hints, old logs, or anything in the cache description. When going the paperless route, what do you do to avoid these problems? Any advice for my next time out? I had a great time hiking through Griffith Park, but it sure would have been nice to have come out of it with more finds.

On my very first cache, I didn't have a GPS. It was a huge metal bridge, and all I knew was that it was in a magnetic Hide-A-Key. I searched each and every inch of that bridge three or four different times before I finally found it, and it was such an awesome feeling. After about 5 or 6 finds, I got a car GPS and started using Google Earth, and that would at the very least get me close and give me some idea where it was. Now, I've got an eTrex Venture HC. Saturday will be my trial run with it. I've got 11 caches routed up and ready to go. We'll see if I think it's boring. Probably not; I'm still really bad at geocaching, which provides its own set of challenges.

I have actually created a bookmark list for each leg of a trip and then take the time to view caches along the route I am driving using the Google maps feature through GC.com. The caches I want to find I then add to the bookmark list for that leg of the trip. It's time consuming to look through all the caches but it allows me to read the logs and skip any that might have issues. I did the trip through Va to TN and Geowoodstock 7 this way. We needed to get DeLorme grids in VA for the Challenge Cache during this trip and it worked out great! Once you have all the caches you like in the bookmark list you can then create a PQ for easy loading into GSAK or directly into you GPSr. Pretty much my strategy, too. I'm taking 3 weeks to drive Route 66, and have used the Google map to find the caches closest to where I will already be stopping -- one or two at meals, museums, etc. and 5 or 6 at hotels. Like you, I read through the cache descriptions - first, to make sure it's a cache that appeals to me; second, to make sure that someone has found it in the recent past; and third, to make sure it won't be TOO time-consuming to find (I don't have a lot of time to cache).

This isn't a style of caching that appeals to me... my theoretical limit is about 10 a day (I say theoretical because I only have a few more than 40 finds, so it's not like I've tried this sort of thing.) But I have a lot of respect for the VKs and f0t0m0m's Panorama series are among my favorite local caches. It's good to see some names I actually recognize from caching.

To me, the joy of Geocaching isn't in the "Found It"s, so maybe that gives me a bias. But an inability to sign the log is not a find, IMO. A DNF isn't a failure, anymore than a "Found It' is a success, in my book. Maybe we'd be better off if the logs were changed to "Signed It' and "DNS." Still, I wouldn't allow that as a find, myself.

Well, there was that time I was caching in the desert outside of Albuquerque and I came upon this RV...

I'd be extremely pleased just to have found a cache after 10 miles of bushwhacking! A 20 mile round trip would have to be good for my matrix With my luck, I'd bushwhack for ten miles, then while patting myself on the back, look up and notice my car right next to the cache and realize I'd just done a big loop for nothing.

Man, I couldn't remember where the cache was, but thank goodness that TB was hanging off of a tree in the vicinity!

I don't cache for the trading, but my girlfriend does. It's her favorite part. She puts a lot of thought into what she's going to leave in caches, and it stinks to see the look of sheer disappointment that crosses her face when she opens up a cache and there's junk inside. We found one recently that had two toothpicks, a wet nap (out of the package), and a washer. The only plus is that at least these are urban caches. If I had to bushwhack for 10 miles and came upon a cache with that inside, I'd go ballistic, and I don't even care about trading!

My first thought is that it would get CITO'd out pretty quickly in most areas. My second thought is that I'm not sure I'd want people digging through trash to get to my cache.

Oh man, that's fantastic. I would have punched Puzzleman right in the noggin after that. Haha! *applause*

My girlfriend and I have complementary talents. She seems to figure out the ones that confound me, and vice versa. Plus, she can figure out a lot of clues that I can't because she understands the differences between various plants and trees, and try as I might, I can't seem to get that info to sink in.

See, I'd be so on edge that I'd HAVE to find the cache at that point... A DNF and they might think I was making the whole thing up. Then again, this is the LAPD we're discussing.