Belleterre

BROWNIE FUDGE SUNDAES AT THE SCARY LADDER event cache has been put in for and is awaiting approval. Sorry about the short notice, but it's scheduled for this Saturday, October 2. For those that want to go out with the group - we will be leaving from the Bowman Bay boat launch parking area at 12:30pm. Sundaes will be served at the top of the ladder. Yum!!!!

Go after some of the locationless caches. Some 'purists' don't count them as 'real'caches - but heck, if it's all you can do during an Alaskan winter - go for it. There are some pretty interesting ones including 3 Steps Around the World

And I have a chicken hat from an archived cache of mine that can be borrowed by anyone who needs it.

A day of tromping over hill and dale is always worth a ferry ride, even if I get no finds for the day. Of course, there is always Rhody Ride. I had a very ugly DNF on that way back in Jan '02 (I was too shy to log a DNF back then, but now I can brazenly log the only one in the middle of 40 or so finds). I was a mere 2 month newbie and didn't know important things like - always bring a magnetic compass into the woods, always have spare batteries no matter how close to the car you are. Redeaming myself on that one would be worth the ferry by itself!

Yes, I found that one way back in the dark ages, July '02. And I'm taking you there for two reasons- - 1) Make sure you do it and don't chicken out 2) Catch you if you try to go 'splat'. Isn't that what friends are for?

It lives up to the nickname 'scary ladder', but I did it. You can too. No more whining!!!!

The numbers are from Eraseek's post last night. You already provided #1-5, so I just started where you left off..... Of course, strictly speaking, I guess I should have started at #500 - but who's counting anyway? To CG - yep, that looks like the ladder I remember.

6. . . . tunnel cache . . . scary ladder cache . . . Above The Clouds . . . 499.

EGH, I'd sure be logging the FTF on that cache if I had the GC# or the owners name.

So, is an M10B wooden nickel a collectors item also? I picked one up in a cache a month ago, but don't really need anything else collecting dust on my mantel.

Thanks, P&C. I tried it and apparently the geocoin hasn't been activated. Or else I just can't read the number.

How about logging a Canadian GeoCoin? I got my first one yesterday but it apparently doesn't get logged in on the geocaching site.

Not kosher! It's just padding your numbers.

Wow Shunra, I'd be totally wiped out if I'd done the three caches from one trailhead. It was definately a one-way trip. I wouldn't recommend starting at the Big Quil trail. It'll add 800 feet in elevation gain. Tubal Cain trailhead is at 3300, going to Tull Canyon cache only adds 1.4 miles and 300 feet, when you get to the saddle past Buckhorn pass, head uphill on the ridge and you'll save about 300-400 feet elevation as opposed to heading up to the cache from Marmot Pass. Big Quil trailhead is 2500 feet. That gives you about a 3700 gain and 4500 loss. I'm a slow hiker and it took us 10 hrs. 10 min. to do the hike. That was without any views to slow us down. Have a great hike!!!

Can someone please refresh my memory on how to find out what version my Vista is running? Thanks

1. The physical cache is your responsibility and shouldn't be pawned off on local cachers. If someone moves after placing a cache, they should either arrange for someone else to tend to it or they should remove the cache. 2. A spontaneous placement while on vacation usually isn't researched very well and could easily end up right next to an existing cache. 3. RE: the suggestion to archive a cache if it get's a few 'no find' logs. - If you can't verify that it's truly gone, isn't this just littering?

Oregon still has all 1000+ listed in chronological order, so maybe WA is the guinea pig. I just tried an area code search to see if that was a reasonable alternative, but I got more hits in OR than WA. It must include closest caches instead of just 1 area code.

I just logged on to check out the newest caches in the state and everythings different! What a shocker. It seems that we are now only shown the most currently placed 500 caches in a state. (we currently have just over 1000) The order seemed to be totally random. I realize that I can create a custom querry, but it's also limited to 500 caches. Am I missing out on something that would let me get a complete listing of state caches? [This message was edited by Belleterre on August 26, 2002 at 01:38 PM.]

I checked this morning and both caches are gone. MLB PRO made a log note on the 'Manchester Mines' site that gives some insite into 'Cheesy' and 'Ranger Dick'.

This possible explanation is also included in the cache description: WAC 352-32-090 Games. Playing games in a manner and/or location which subjects people or personal property, the park resource or facilities to risk of injury or damage shall be prohibited. Any violation of this section is an infraction under chapter 7.84 RCW. It sounds to me like they would also have to prohibit baseball, catch, frisbee, volleyball, basketball, soccer, tag, hide-and-go-seek, cards (it agravates my tendonitis), any board game with small pieces that could be swallowed or stepped on, etc. A precedent has already been set to allow these dangerous/damaging games. Can we claim discrimination or selective enforcement?

I just talked to another local cacher who personally talked to Ranger Dick (Cheesy) this morning. At least the guy did say that maybe he needed to talk to the state people to see what their policy actually is.

Here's part of an e-mail that I got from another cacher who I asked about the situation: all she (the ranger) could say was that it was illegal and anyone found placing or hunting a cache would be cited if they were found off an established trail. I sent Cheesy a polite e-mail asking to get the caches from him, since I live in the area, but I don't expect an answer. Has anyone talked to people at the state level to see what their policy is on caches in the state parks?

I read the thread you refer to sbell and I'm totally amazed a what some consider a find. It reminds me of Clinton wanting a definition of 'is'. How many rules do we really need when 'find' should be a pretty easy word to understand?