Driddy

I just made a bit of progress. I downloaded part of Maryland from http://download.bbbike.org/osm/ and their map includes the trails. Now I will check their coverage of other trails missing from some of the other distributions.

Thanks for the suggestion but the problem persists; I tested your suggestion and downloaded the relevant section of MD and unfortunately the trails are missing. That's odd, because when I download from there I see all the trails and unpaved roads I put on OpenStreetMap. Do you see the trails surrounding the cache in Maryland I referenced above?

Thanks for the suggestion but the problem persists; I tested your suggestion and downloaded the relevant section of MD and unfortunately the trails are missing.

I am impressed by the extensive coverage of trail on the OSM maps displayed on the GC.COM (at least for Central Maryland). I am very interested in being able to use OSM maps with the same level of detail on my Oregon 450. I have downloaded OSM .IMG files from several different sites and installed them on my GPSr but none of the maps have been as detailed as what's displayed online. For example, look at the area around GC1AW3X using the OSM map on GC.Com and you will see the cache is located near a trail and that other caches are on the same network of trails. These trails do not appear on any OSM-based IMG maps I have been able to download. Is anyone aware of OSM-derived .IMG files for the US that contain the level of detail as the OSM maps displayed on GC.COM? I download a Maryland .IMG file from Cloudmate and it lacked the detail, as did maps from osmmaps.com. I am really hoping to avoid delving into the apparent complexity of generating my own maps using mkgmap and it is not at all clear to me that doing so would solve the problem. Can anyone point me to a specific solution to this problem?

My 450 is the toughest piece of electronic gear I have ever owned EXCEPT for the screen. I echo the need for a screen protector and have been very favorably impressed by my ZAGG protector. I have dropped my unit many times on rocks.

Try switching your dashboard to "Geocaching - Nearest" Thanks! That fixed it. It isn't intuitive why "Geocaching - Active" (the setting I had) shouldn't also display the enhanced details but I am happy to have it working.

I didn't have any problem with the upgrade. Most features appear as described but the geocaching dashboard is the same as it has ever been. The documentation for the update shows a new geocaching dashboard that displays the cache details along with the compass. Is anyone else experiencing this discrepancy?

Is anyone aware of a multitool that includes scissors, tweezers and pliers?

I once had a situation with my 450 that was similar to what the OP described and the usual maneuvers mentioned above did not fix the problem. I wound up downloading and reinstalling the most recent Oregon software update and the problem went away.

My primary unit is an Oregon 450 but I just bought an eTrex Venture HC for my daughter. I am a premium member and a GSAK user. I load caches onto the HC via GSAK's "Send Waypoints" command and manage to convey pretty much info. In the Waypoint name field of the Send Waypoints dialog I use: %name %drop2 and in Waypoint Description field I use: %con1 %dif1a/%ter1a %last4 %drop2 The result is that the Waypoint names appear as they are written with truncation if they are too long: eg., "Splish Splash" and "Unfinished Hig" and the GC code also appears (without "GC") if the name is short enough. One could also display abbreviated names. A typical description field using the arguments I listed might be: R 2/A FFNF 202ZQ Meaning: Regular Container difficulty=2/terrain = 1.5 last four logs were found found DNF found GC code = GC202ZQ

Whenever I turn on my eTrex HC, the screen is dim until I manually increase the brightness. I would like the screen to be about 40% bright when turned on. Inside Display Setup I have Diplay Mode set to daytime and Backlight Timeout set to 1 minute and Backlight Level set to 40%. Is there some other setting I need to change?

I created a route in Google Maps that includes multiple destinations along the way. I then created a KML file by clicking "View in Google Earth". I then tried to upload that KML in to geocaching.com via the site's User Route upload feature. However the route refuses to load and I get the following error message "This route is incomplete, please rebuild the route and upload again. Make sure that your route includes both a starting point and finishing point that is greater than 10 feet.". What am I doing wrong?

There is a big problem with that solution, the paperless geocaching does not work with a POI-for example, when you are navigating to a POI you cannot access the description, logs, and hint. If you use corrected cords, paperless works normally. I also add a user note indicating it is a final and I change the cache type to a traditional so I know I have the final for it. Agreed -- corrected coords are probably the cleanest solution.

Has anyone recommended GSAK? Yes another option would be to use GSAK and enter the final coordinates as child waypoints (e.g., a Final Location). These would then show up under Where To-->Find Another--->Extras--->Final Location. There are even more possibilities (such as exporting POIs from GSAK that would contain the cache description, logs, etc.) GSAK: priceless

+1 I hadn't noticed this before -- good idea.

Another approach would be to create a pocket query, load it into GSAK (or similar) and edit the coordinates in GSAK and then have GSAK send the caches to the Oregon.

1. Select the Geocaches icon from the main screen and then select the geocache you wish to seek. 2. Press the "treasure box" icon on the geocaching screen (the one with the name of the cache, a map and the small compass) 3. Scroll down the list of actions to "Enter next stage" 4. Edit coordinates and click the checkmark.

I tried loading my daughter's Geomate based on a GPX generated by GSAK. I received error messages when I tried to load about 6000 caches, but succeeded with 500. Does anyone know if 500 is the limit? If so, that's unfortunate since the Geomate can hold many times that number of caches when the unit is loaded with data furnished by Apisphere.

I think I am confused about what defines ALR. A cache was recently published in which the CO indicated that one must present evidence of having previously found at least 100 "small" caches. They could be any 100, but one had to provide a list of the caches, a link to one's profile or other evidence of finding 100 smalls. Isn't that against the ALR rules?

Wiseguy: Thanks for educating me a bit about what the guidelines really say; I admit that I was trotting out an argument (cache confusion) that I've seen made by others. "The ultimate goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist" -- this is another reason I wish that reviewers were encouraged to exercise more discretion when approving caches. I, for one, would have to question whether LPCs placed 0.1 mile apart in the parking lot of a big box store or similar location are adhering to that spirit and perhaps reviewers should be allowed to deny them. And yes, I have one set of caches (not LPCs) in a small park that some might say are in violation of the spirit of the guideline.

I think the situation described by the OP is a great example of the need for gc.com to give reviewers more flexibility and discretion in implementing the saturation guidelines. As I understand it, the saturation guidelines were designed with three things in mind: 1) Preventing confusion among finders regarding which cache they have found. 2) Minimizing wear-and-tear to the landscape Looking at the map posted by the OP, its hard to see how allowing him to place his cache would be detrimental in terms of either consideration above. With respect to number #1, what is the likelihood that a seeker of one cache would find the other? Although there are buildings that would like impair GPS reception, there are no trees and I don't think I have ever had reception so poor that I would have been hundreds of feet off in the type of terrain pictured. In terms of #2, this is a parking lot and explicit permission has been obtained for the cache from the property owner. Feel free to point out what likely harm would result (in terms of consequences of the saturation exception) from allowing this particular cache to be placed in the desired location. I am not arguing that the Reviewer made the wrong call given the guidelines and the practice of rarely granting exceptions. Rather, I am arguing that reviewers should be permitted (and encouraged) to exercise more discretion.

I think it would be good to make it optional to display DNF count on one's profile. I was once reluctant to post DNFs but now I do so religiously. I think it is part of the fun of geocaching to share one's experiences openly so I see no shame in it. Indeed, I would like to get "credit" for being a good citizen (they help cache owners to spot potential problems) for logging my DNFs by having them appear in the profile.

It's not obvious to me that a 3rd T should be in there (lute-tenant).

3" diameter round solar calculators in bright colors attached to key chains for $0.50 at Office Depot.

There are many reasons but perhaps he just enjoys being a cache owner and goes online to read logs? Maybe he likes the forums. Yet another possibility is that he still finds geocaches but doesn't log his finds. There is a subset of geocachers who sign the log book but don't log their finds online.