Stroover

It's been a few years since I've last geocached. Back then, caches were no closer then about a kilometer each, and the cache sites had something significant there to see, whether it was natural beauty, some neat geological site, of historic significance, or some neat site only the locals know about. The year I stopped, caches were becoming too close together and with nothing significant at the site. Nowadays, caches seem to be only a few douzen yards apart, and for the most part there is nothing there interesting to see, just a micro stuck in a tree in the woods. What's the point of that? Now I see why I stopped. It's a shame too, because back then caches had real significance and geocaching itself was a lot of fun to do.

Hmm. the body of my thread didn't show up. Here it is again: Does anybody know if there is a way to put a map on Easy Gps? Mine is blank, and you just see the geocache waypoints kind of floating around in cyber space.

Exactly, and that would be part of my "etc.". It's all thanks to geocaching that I found terrific nature trails and family parks in a new-to-me area that we moved to three years ago. I guess I'm into geocaching for different reasons then most of you: I am not into "numbers" as you can tell with my something like 89 finds despite the fact that I've been doing this for about five years. I'm into it for finding neat and interesting places, whether it be in my neighbourhood or when I'm off on a trip somewhere in another part of the province, in another province, or country. I like the fact that quite often (at least this was the case when I first started geocaching) a cache reveals wonderful sites that the average tourist would never get to see if they relied entirely on tourist information booths, all thanks to locals who generously share their secret Shangry-La with fellow geocachers. I'm into it for the fishing holes, the hunting spots, the blueberry picking fields, the off-the-beaten-path beaches, the historic value, well, you get the idea. I pretty much like what Sol Seeker likes in a cache site. A lot of times I don't even find the cache, but you know what? It really doesn't matter when you end up at a spectacular waterfall you would normally only find on a post card. THOSE are the caches I'm interested in. I understand that there are tons of people who actually LIKE the micros on the guardrails and the lamp posts. And that's ok! I'm not dissing them! Like I said a few posts up, different strokes for different folks. But maybe if we could come up with a quick system to filter out the "noise" like somebody called it, that would be FANTASTIC!

The suggestion above about using the satellite views is an excellent one. At least it will help filter out spruce tree hides, bleacher hides, lampskirt hides, and stuff like that. Not perfect, but its a start. Next, look at the gallery (is there one?) and at least scan the logs. Unless its a new cache, you'll learn a lot that way. Remember, if you want the best food, don't just stop at the first restaraunt you come to... do some research first. I'm actually trying to avoid exactly what you're suggesting as it would be too time consuming. As far as reading posts, simply reading the hider's paragraph on the cache reveals whether it's just a cache for hiding a cache's sake, or if the site is significant in some way. The problem lies when one wants to download umpteen pages of waypoints to their gps: reading through the hundreds of caches would take far too long.

Sometimes it does seem like that doesn't it! Having replaced some of our caches 4-5 times because people didn't 'use stealth' and were muggled, the caches started to shrink in size and interest. One really cute cache we had became compromised and now it is a lame film container under said rock. The history is still there. The numbers are still there. But someone ran up and grabbed it right in front of others and now it cannot keep its place. Perhaps we should just archive it and forget it. But then - what would you prefer Lame cache or No cache? I'm sorry. Perhaps I should clarify exactly what I mean: It's not that the CACHE is lame, but rather the cache SITE which is lame. I don't necessarily mind treking through the woods to ultimately find a 35mm can, as long as the site is either way cool, or has some historical significance, etc. I gotta mention Red Witch again, as I LOVE going to her caches as they ALWAYS have either historical significance or some kind of natural beauty. I like the idea of creating some tool to sift through the caches. Maybe they could add another thing to click that would read something like: "Find: caches of historical significance, caches of geological significance, caches of natural beauty" etc.

OOps, I double posted and can't figure out how to delete this one. Sorry.

I guess different strokes for different folks. I had decided to pay closer attention to cache details to determine if it's some place I want to check out (I prefer the cache site over the cache itself), but then realized that my old clunker (Etrex Legend) simply shows me the waypoints on the screen, and if I happen to be in an area where I'm already using my gps and notice a waypoint along the way, I have no way of knowing if it's a decent site or not, unless I go back to ALL the caches I had downloaded, delete them all, go through them one by one and read about them, then deciding whether or not to select them or to skip them. Sounds like a meticoulous task. I should probably just get a new gps with all the cache details available in just one click... It irkes me when I go on Google Earth, and select the "geocaching" thingamawhut, and at about ten kilometers up the whole screen gets plastered with little green tupperware icons. And I KNOW that ninety percent of them are nothing more then a micro stuck in the nook of a tree a half mile off a trail, or are a half douzen or so along the same nature trail, etc. BUT, I do appreciate the other ten percent which are WAAAAY cool sites (Like the Midland Ice Cave for example) that keep me going back just to appreciate what the cacher had to share with the rest of us.

Hmmm. I see what you mean. I guess I could pay more attention to the cache details, and if they don't mention anything about the site itself, then that's probably be a red flag that it's a lame one with absolutely nothing interesting there whatsoever, and I would not bother looking for it. Thanks for the head's up.

Is it just me, or are caches getting lamer and lamer by the day? When I first got into this sport, what I found the most alluring was that each cache was placed where there was something very interesting about the spot, whether it was the view, some incredible geological formation, or some kind of neat history, etc. As a matter of fact, it's thanks to geocaching that I was able to find many of my now favorite fishing holes having moved to a new part of the country in which I was unfamiliar with. Nowadays, I find myself hiking through the woods just to find a film canister hidden under an average everyday tree with nothing interesting to see there whatsoever. I am under the impression that people are just putting out caches for their numbers, period. Too bad there wasn't a way to regulate this sort of thing, otherwise this sport may end up losing it's worth. Any thoughts?

Have a look at http://www.youtube.com/ibycus314/ . Don't trust anything you see in this thread more than about 2 pages back. A lot of it doesn't apply any more. You'll have to download the whole thing, I suggest you use BitTorrent to download (instructions in the YouTube video). Dale Whoa! Looks way over my head! Lol! I might just take a drive to Ontario for that geocache with the disk in it. Lol. Thanks.

Hi Ibycus, This sure is a long thread. Got two questions for ya: 1) For a new guy starting out and trying to find out what I need in this 17 page + thread, what's the condensed version as to how to get topo maps from your project onto my Garmin Etrex Legend? 2)Would I be able to just download the ones I need (New Brunswick), or would I have to download the whole nine yards? p.s.- I already have and use Mapsourse and Easy Gps to put maps on my gps. I should also add that I am not exactly computer savy, so if something like this exists it would be terrific: "step one, click here. Step 2, click here, etc.". Lol. Thanks!

It's a WAAS problem. You can either disable WAAS in your setup tab, or go to the Garmin website and download the web updater to your computer, then upload this to your gps. It'll fix it. Worked for me.

I went on a trip last summer (travelled 2000 miles) and did some geocaching when I got there. One was a bit of a hike with alligators along the way, and when I actually DID find the cache, there was no pencil or pen in it, nor did I have one on me. It was attached to a string, which dangled underneath a pier, and was broken. I repaired it (thus proving that I indeed found it, thus said the owner), however I was not able to claim it. Though I was dissapointed, I can understand why we should not be allowed to do it.

They're all a-symetrical? Man-made? designed by the same canadian architect?

I'm trying to see the corelation of this with navigation or whatever, and I'm only getting a brain fart.

Does it use batteries?

A magnetized needle, placed on a small piece of wood, and floating in a shallow bowl. The needle will point to the magnetic north pole, of course. Placing it on the floating piece of wood allows it to swing in azimuth [the horizontal plane] Howzat? Phil/ve1bvd That came much later after the olmec hematite. What you're describing is the pre-cursor to the actual compass.

Hey bud! I did install the 1.10 version and your right, it's rather confusing, but very interesting. Have you actually uploaded these maps to your GPS yet? No, not yet. I'm off work tomorrow, so I'll have time to kick around the house, so I might try just for s***s and giggles. Too bad one can't put both Ibycus's topo maps in conjunction with mapsource metroguide together on a gps. Then it wouldn't matter that the roads aren't there. Or can you?

Hey Gadget! Long time no see, buddy! Listen: don't install it yet. Wait until Ibycus uploads the newer 021 with the roads. He said it should be ready in a few weeks to a month. If you download it now, you won't get the roads and highways, and it can be confusing to use, but you can do it anyways just to see how it is, then download the good one later on.

Danoshimano is the closest. I was looking for the olmec hematite, which in fact did use a loadstone, and dates back to 1000 B.C. Take it away, Dano! Guess I thought 'shadows' might have been used to indicate directions before 1000 yr BC ! Oh Well, I'll try harder next time. Know what? I had never heard of the use of shaddows for direction. So, if y'all think he should get it, I'm easy. I'll let you folks decide.

Danoshimano is the closest. I was looking for the olmec hematite, which in fact did use a loadstone, and dates back to 1000 B.C. Take it away, Dano!

Oops! Sorry guys! I hadn't realized I won! This probably has been asked already, and if so I'll find another question: What was the earliest known form of a functionnal compass? (as in something mobile, not the North Star).

I have two Etrex Legends: one for work, and one for myself. They BOTH have had the vertical line thing happen. Both times, I shut it down and turned back on, and it cleared it. HOWEVER, on both of them I also have a compass problem in which the pointer is broken into three segments, with the middle segment off to one side. Anybody else have THAT problem?

I particularly don't like micros, period. Especially when the cacher fails to mark it as a micro on the website, and one hikes sometimes a great distance in the wilderness only to eventually find a micro. But even that is acceptable as long as the site is something to behold, but when you hike a mile or two only to come up to a fallen tree with a micro in it, with nothing around but woods, that's pretty lame in my opinion.

Noob time again: Assuming you meant 021 (New Brunswick), I re-installed http://www.ibycus.com/ibycustopo/TopoMaps.exe again, thinking 021 was now on there and would over-write what I already had. Well, it hasn't changed (still no roads), so obviously there's something else I have to do to get it right. Question: how do I now download the new 021? (would you mind copying and pasting the link so a noob like myself can have his/her life simplified without the need for a computer science degree?)