denali7

This is the best news I've read here all day! Hopefully the owner will take to heart what you told him.

Something else about dog parks that may be useful to add here. I have been to dog parks several times and have encountered other dog owners who walk around with a pocket of treats. In all cases they have asked permission before giving my dog a treat, which I appreciate and is fine with me, but, needless to say, my dog quickly learned to check out other people as we walk along. There is no way for outsiders who visit a dog park to fully comprehend the "culture" of the place, which is a great reason for them to think twice before entering such a park to cache, particularly if they don't really like to be around dogs. A big dog running toward people can be very intimidating to non dog-lovers. For this reason, it seems pretty important that the CO include the nature of such a park in the cache description. It also seems pretty important that cachers who don't like dogs skip these caches when they arrive and see the park signs. Dog parks are always well-marked as such, so they have the freedom to choose, regardless of whether or not the cachepage stated it was a dog park. eta: Sissy, don't think there's much to be done about the slobber, but there are some good odor-neutralizing sprays around. Use them when brushing, between baths. Check out your local farm center or feed store. Another good trick for damp dog smell, like when he comes in from the rain, is to rub him down with a used dryer sheet after towel drying. Sounds like you found a pretty good dog, best wishes!

Those are great pictures! Where is that waterfall?

<raises hand> Although, it would be more like: ...at 10am in windproof fleece the rain/snow with my big, beautiful dog and spring-loaded scoop full of Nugget nuggets, and in the pet store spending $100 on high-protein, low-fat dog food, origionally formulated for Iditarod racing dogs. Sucker? You betcha!

Perfect! This would be a win-win situation for everyone. Non dog-lovers, like the cachers encountered by the OP, would know to avoid this park, and the rest of us could use it if we visited the area.

But it is pretty close to: ...umm, now I don't understand the "nuances of the issues" because I don't agree with you? You misunderstand a great deal if you assume those who disagree with you are less intelligent or perceptive. Your grammar indicates that you may, in fact, be the unarmed man in a battle of wits. BTW, splitting hairs is the classic strategy of those who are losing on the merit of their arguement. eta: With apologies to the OP, I'm finished with this discussion.

Since so many cachers refuse to post DNF logs, analyzing a single DNF on ANY cache is pointless, anyway. In most cases, where 1 DNF appears, more went unreported. Because of this, it stands to reason that there are caches out there that are a bit more difficult than all the sunshiney logs would lead one to believe, just as there are caches that are more difficult than the cachepage indicates. Still, not a sole reason for SBA.

Okay. Shall we explore the reasons that a 1/1 would not be found? No I'd love to heard them and see how this applies in this situation. ...but I'm sure the OP would like this thread to be about the caching community providing their input as to his question.

We all understand that this is your position. Where I, and some others, choose to disagree with you is in the assertion that a.) very easy caches will never have any DNF's, and b.) the wrong star on a cache is grounds to log an SBA. There are many caches that have less than ideal difficulty and/or terrain ratings, and other threads on this board have proven that there are regional variations, also. Yes, 1-star difficulty caches should be in plain sight, but that is up to the CO to decide. One recent cache that garnered a great deal of attention was hidden in absolute plain sight but listed as a 5/5 due to being placed in a difficult to access location. It was mentioned only in passing that this should have been posted as a 1 difficulty/5 terrain, according to the "plain sight" tenet, but no one would seriously consider an SBA needed. Why is that? Because it was recognized that the CO could label his cache as he sees fit. I think the owner of this cache we're discussing now deserves that same respect.

No, you never suggested the CO is lying. Sorry for the confusion, I should have quoted the line I was responding to:

But with the CO saying the caches are there, you're also betting that he's lying. I know nothing of the cache in question or the owner, but it seems a bit arrogant to have a mindset such as, "Well, if I can't find it, it must be missing." Experienced cachers occasionally miss finds, even easy ones. I have one exactly like that, and it's not a nano, either. I know I would never to presume that someone is lying simply because I couldn't find his cache...especially with a respected and well-known local hider, as the OP describes.

SBA because the difficulty rating is off?

Awesome!

You'll have to get in line!

I, too, have found that <xx xxxxxx> does not respond to e-mails, so I am certainly glad I never subscribed to this magazine. I would need to see a slightly different leadership before I forked over money. As much as I'd love to get involved with a project such as this, this is the same reason I didn't volunteer to help when the call went out earlier in this thread. I would have enjoyed being involved with a caching magazine.

Ummm...this has all the trappings of classic Kirk vs. Picard.

Icon Ho's the world over will be dancing in the streets!

So this is the plan: You get inside information to get an unfair advantage on your fellow hounds, and then you don't sign the logbook. Sounds great, have fun with that. Guess you'll be easy to spot at the next geo-event. eta:

Waypoint your vehicle.

Well-said, Wildchild! I might add that had the OP, IF serious, could have used a lesson in presentation from Pipanella. Also well-said. Pip!

And you think this has to do with geocaching...how? Please don't answer, really, you don't need another chance to offend all the women on the board again. Go out and cache...or take a cold shower.

<rant mode> Cachers who can't be bothered to answer PM's. Why ask for people to join you on cache expeditions if you have no intention of acknowledging their existence? ...or just say "No, Thanks," if you're not interested. <rant mode off>