GeoawareGSA1

I just updated the web-page for EarthCache Day: http://community.geosociety.org/earthcache/events/earthcacheday --Matt Dawson, GSA

Thanks for checking. GSA has made no decision yet regarding the run/walk option. But it is something under consideration. We will post on Facebook and in the forums when we have a plan, but it probably won't be for a few more months. Matt Dawson, GSA

Thanks for the suggestion. We are likely to do one in Australia at some point in the near future, near the very first EarthCache, then afterward could maybe rotate back toward NZ, which certainly has fabulous geology. (We are actually running a field trip to New Zealand, for teachers, in 2015, so it's definitely on our radar ) --Matt

A date and location are in the works, and we hope to be able to make an announcement before the end of 2014. Best wishes, Matt, GSA

Hey EarthCachers, What do you think of the concept of "Crowdsourcing Digital Maps Using Citizen Geologists"? There is a nice article about this very idea in the recent edition of Eos, a publication of the American Geophysical Union (an organization similar to GSA, the Geological Society of America). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2014EO440001/pdf --Matt, GeoawareHQ

After receiving similar questions from Canadian cachers, GSA recently (just last month) updated the info on the EarthCache Masters page to say: "Silver EarthCache Master Visit and log six (6) or more EarthCaches in three (3) or more <b>states/provinces/countries</b> and have developed one (1) or more EarthCaches." We define "states/provinces" as defined by Geocaching.com on pages such as this: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?country_id=73 So when France is chosen as the country, the states/provinces box shows a list of what I assume are the "regions". Thus GSA considers these regions to be valid "states/provinces" for the purpose of the Masters program. So go get your Silver award!! --Matt, GeoawareHQ

If this is your definition of paranormal (from wikipedia): "Paranormal events are phenomena described in popular culture, folklore and other non-scientific bodies of knowledge, whose existence within these contexts is described to lie beyond normal experience or scientific explanation" Then it would have very little to no chance of being published as an EarthCache, as it would most likely not meet guidelines #1 and #2 (involving science, and education): http://community.geosociety.org/EarthCache/guidelines By definition, paranormal events do not fall within the realm of science, and therefore are not appropriate within the framework of a science education program. Best wishes, and happy caching, Matt, GSA

By the way, to those hosting an event for International EarthCache Day, please tell us about it in this simple survey, so that we can post info about your event on Facebook, our homepage, etc. (No worries, this survey will ONLY be used for the purpose of promoting your event and possibly discussing the event with you, and not to add you to an e-mail list, etc.) --Matt

Sounds good. Fossils are DEFINITELY a very good topic for an EarthCache. As a previous poster noted, the Help Center cites fossils as an acceptable topic: http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=292 Now the key is just to develop some great logging tasks! Best wishes, Matt

Big thanks to Geocaching.com for providing a souvenir for International EarthCache Day 2014! --Matt D, GSA

Since your event includes a nearby EarthCache, visitors can get a souvenir too!! http://blog.geocaching.com/2014/09/your-next-souvenir-reveals-mysteries-of-the-earth/ --Matt D, GSA

Good recommendations above. Other ideas: Study the EarthCache.org Guidelines, for this is what the reviewer will be checking your listing against: http://community.geosociety.org/EarthCache/guidelines Check the EarthCache.org FAQ, especially the part w/ resources and info sources: http://community.geosociety.org/EarthCache/newitem6/faqs And seek out a few more EarthCaches as examples. And look at other caches in the area where you plan to put yours, to avoid duplicating other information, and to get ideas of what types of concepts may not have been covered yet in that area. Best wishes, Matt D, GSA

To be consistent with Geocaching.com's guidance here: http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=80 GSA would advise "Save the smiley face for use when you've truly discovered a hidden geocache." One could debate the meaning of "hidden geocache". GSA would interpret that to mean "EarthCache with logging tasks developed by somebody else". Owning the EarthCache would imply you did research, visited the location, created the logging tasks, and can solve them all. Just as placing a physical geocache implies you were capable of traveling to the location, creating the container, and cleverly hiding it. Thus, logging it would seem redundant. That said, if a cache owner chooses to log their own EarthCache, so be it. I'd call it "bad form", and maybe even "cheesy", but wouldn't go as far as branding the person unethical or immoral. Matt (GeoawareHQ)

Hi, These are good questions. COs are expected to "maintain" EarthCaches. What this means, generally, is to keep an eye on changes "on the ground", or changes to access, land management, etc. We've seen EarthCaches along roads or trails that are closed due to construction or hazards. In those cases, the CO is expected to update the cache page accordingly. If the CO has disengaged, then usually we'll see Needs Archived or Needs Maintenance logs, and the local reviewers, or GSA, can take action in those cases. [in fact, we're working on one of these right now.] If you visit an EarthCache that requires maintenance because of local changes, please let it be known so that the proper steps can be taken. If an EarthCache is otherwise fine (access is the same, the geological features are still present and accessible, you can still perform logging tasks, the location is safe, etc.), but the CO is non-responsive, we generally won't take action. Thanks for caching, Matt Dawson, GSA geoawarehq

By the way, the researchers just closed the survey and de-activated the link. They obtained lots and lots of good data, thank you all so much! Also, I just learned that they plan to present results at 3IEE, and at that time, should have some written results that we can post as well. They may also present at the 2014 GSA Annual Meeting (or another GSA Meeting). --Matt

Thanks for participating. I believe the results, or at least the bulk of them, will be published in a public manner. We'll be sure to post here when that happens. --Matt

Check this other thread about permission in public lands for more background: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=225186&st=0&p=5305326&hl=permission&fromsearch=1entry5305326 At one point there was discussion of Great Smoky instituting a formal permitting system, but I'm not sure where that went. The matter is handled locally by individual parks, because each park has its own unique management considerations. As far as GSA knows, although there are some national "guidances" in federal agencies about how to handle caching, ultimately, it comes down to individual land managers to decide how and where they will allow caches. (In other words, there is no nationwide system for issuing permits, giving permission, etc.) Before putting in great effort to developing an EarthCache on NPS (or other federal) land, please be sure to check in with the local land managers to first determine if they will even provide permission. Some parks simply won't. Others will, after months of explanation and negotiation. Some will after just a few days/weeks. Best wishes, Matt

"and I wanted to raise the issue of consistency as this is now the worst example of an earthcache I've ever seen" Perhaps a more effective way to accomplish this, instead of calling out an individual reviewer about an individual cache in a public forum, might be to contact GSA (earthcache@geosociety.org) or Groundspeak, the folks who help coordinate the team of volunteer EarthCache Reviewers? --Matt Dawson (mdawson@geosociety.org) [GeoawareHQ]

Blue Rajah makes a good point. In some areas, like New York probably, the earlier EarthCaches are places with more visitors in general, whereas some of the newer ones may be a bit more obscure or off the beaten path. Makes sense.

There was a pretty big update to the guidelines that went into effect Jan. 1, 2011, that "tightened" things up a bit. The current guidelines went into effect Jan. 1, 2013. In 2010, I think we as a review team were in general were scrutinizing logging tasks more closely (photos, Internet searches, etc.), which then led to the formal revision at the start of 2011. --Matt

This is great, and the explanations make sense. We do have Masters data, let me see what I can find --Matt

Hi There, Thanks very much for making such an effort to get the necessary permission. We understand that it can be difficult at times, and appreciate your efforts in tracking down the permission. I'm not at all familiar with the area or organization, but I know that some people have had better luck getting permission via phone call or personal visits. I'd recommend giving one of those a shot. You never know how the email inbox is operated; maybe they only look at it occasionally, or it has filters, etc. Others more familiar with the area may have more specific advice. Perhaps the owners of the traditional caches there? Best wishes, Matt, GSA

This is awesome, and as expected, the stats raise some fun questions! a. Regarding the 2010 peak; I am not sure of the reasons for that, but a few quick guesses are saturation (in area and in topic), and guidelines that have admittedly gotten "stricter" around that time. The tighter guidelines may discourage some people from developing EarthCaches, while at the same time, reducing the number of submissions that actually get published. I wonder how much impact the changes on photo requirements had? Seems a lot of older EarthCaches relied heavily on the required photo, but since that was phased out, it became more difficult to create suitable logging tasks. Just thinking out loud. Also, since 2010, we've continued to add more and more reviewers, and I wonder if that has an impact as well. Back when there were fewer reviewers, maybe we were more inclined to say "good enough -- published!". But now, with more reviewers, each can take more time to ensure each cache fully meets the guidelines. Funny, I'd have thought more reviewers means more published caches, but I could see an argument for the opposite. But again this is total guesswork. Just "rationalizing"! Of course there is the saturation thing too. Although EarthCaching lacks the distance guidelines of traditional caches, there are limits on how many similar caches can appear in an area, so perhaps around 2010, we started reaching saturation of some types in some areas (erratics, waterfalls, springs, bogs, etc.). There's only so much geology to go around! I also wonder about the role of the Masters program. That program encourages people to develop their own caches. Maybe once so many people reached Masters status, they slowed down the rate at which they produced new EarthCaches? b. Regarding the EarthCaches that are older than Gary's, my guess is that they were published as some other cache type, then transitioned into an EarthCache type later on in their lives. I think I've seen a few other examples of these. I'm not sure if this is the explanation or not, but it's my initial guess. Aha, okay, saw this log for GC6D8B NC Geology #1: Paleo Pavement Earthcache, on 2/23/05: "Converted to an Earthcache" (by Geoaware) It looks like it started as a virtual, in which people learned a geology lesson and took geology readings to show they visited the location. Then later, after the official "EarthCache" type had been developed, this cache was converted to one. So, although we probably can't say it's the first (there are probably others out there too that were never converted), that cache looks like it's probably one of the first "proto-EarthCaches"! That's pretty awesome. For this cache: GCCE8D Tidal EarthCache, it looks like there was a log book as of 2005, but then eventually it was converted to an EarthCache, but I didn't see when, but by sometime in 2006. For the other one, GCGWVG Ancient Worm Trails, the CO logged this o 7/20/05: "The cache has been stolen. We are gogin to try and convert this cache to a virtual or maybe even an Earthcache. Stay tuned. In the mean time, if you want to log it, just post a picture of yourself or your gps by the rock." This is really interesting history --Matt

The fact that you are planning your EarthCaches now, before your trip begins, is a great start! It is very hard to arrive at a site, w/o advance prep, and make a great EarthCache out of it, especially so far from home, where a return visit is unlikely in the near future. I would recommend picking out some locations in advance, where you know you'll be visiting, and that do not already have EarthCaches, but do have some interesting geological feature. You may be able to turn a historical site or building into an EarthCache, but that's difficult. It'll be much easier to look for sites where geology is the focus, rather than trying to force geology into somewhere it's not that prominent. Learn a bit about the geological background of your locations before you go. That way, when you're at the site, you have a good idea of what you are looking at, and you'll be primed to create good logging tasks. The logging tasks are the hardest part. Develop at least a few, in case one or two do not work out; be prepared with a backup. Otherwise, if you just have 1-2 logging tasks, and the reviewer doesn't think they meet the guidelines, then creating another logging task after you've left the location can be VERY hard. So focus largely on the logging tasks. Take good notes and lots of photos, so if you need to re-work things afterward, you're prepared with the data. Also, don't try to do too much or too many EarthCaches. Focus on some key spots, and making high quality caches there, and knock them out of the park! Best of luck to you, Matt

Thanks to Blue Rajah for the nice historical overview, and thanks to all Geoawares for all their hard work reviewing and publishing EarthCaches! --Matt