Lostby7

It has been discussed at length in other threads in this section...look for all the closed topics most of them are on this subject. Basically the answer is cuz you are not allowed to. *Edit...looks like the new board format does not track topics beyond one page...do a search for EarthCache photos or photo requirements and you might come up with the topics.

Like I said, it can be done (and likely has been). If someone chooses dishonesty in regard to number 4 in the guidelines, there is little that can be done.

Can this be done...yes. However, the guidelines state that a recent visit to the site is required in order to verify that the coords are accurate and that the location is safe. 4. EarthCache sites can be a single site, or a multiple site. No items, box, or physical cache can be left at the site. You must have visited the site recently (within two months), checked that the site is safe and have taken multiple GPS readings to ensure accuracy of coordinates. You are responsible for disabling an EarthCache if conditions regarding access, safety or other issues, change.

+1 All politics of the program aside, many of the locations and much of the information is truly magnificent. I drove several hundred miles to get my Platinum status a few years ago...the drive was well worth it as was the location I was brought to. In the end I guess the EC and Masters program are what you make of it.

Could an ADMIN please close this thread...it has wondered off topic a few too many times. I do not wish to see it devolve.

I was not aware of this tidbit. Having looked at scores of ECs outside the US, I have seen only a couple which delete the English language after posting. Based on what I saw, I would have thought this action was not allowed. It's nice to see this is an option. I for one am very particular about the looks of my pages (for the most part) and this offers a bit more control over the page appearance. That said, leaving the additional language(s) on the page does allow more people to attempt (and enjoy) the EC. *Edit for spelling.

Again this thread is NOT about weather you (dis)agree with the rule change or weather you like your picture posted. This thread is asking EarthCache owners if there has been a change in the logging habits of people when it comes to uploading pictures. Please stay on topic.

I have read hundreds of listings and some are exceptional and some leave me scratching my head (how did this get approved?). Does the Masters program encourage folks to create ECs? Without question. I too have heard folks tell me that they have to develop one more so they can get their Platinum status. So, yes it does encourage folks to create...maybe at locations or levels of information which are less than ideal I will admit. I was encouraged to get my Platinum status and went on to help many other folks get interested in ECs. I have had my hand in the development of almost three dozen ECs in my state.....three dozen EarthCaches which without the Masters program would likely not exist. Are they all stellar, must see locations with awesome writeups? No. But for the most part they serve to get the message out that ECs can be fun, can be educational and can be at magical locations....just not all the time. We all know there have been ups and downs in the EC program....let's hope the new levels provide for us a little more excitement and perhaps draw in some new folks who know about that little, hidden location that none of us has seen before and the our visit to that place will leave us even more inspired by the Earth's beauty.

Good luck! I know.....I'm hoping for a batch of high road answers. I honestly want to see if logging habits have changed and what the result of the change has been....of the one person who did log a picture on my EC, it wasn't even the location of my EC so I guess even that doesn't really count. I guess I have 0 for 8 folks logging pics since the change was made.

I'm curious how many folks are choosing to upload pictures on your ECs since the change in the picture requirement took place? For those who do not know, pictures must now be optional except in rare cases (to be determined by the EC reviewers). This is NOT a thread to debate the photo requirement and as to weather it should have been changed or not. If the thread heads that way I ask now that an Admin please close the thread. Since the first of Jan when the photo requirement changed one of my caches has been found 8 times. One person has uploaded a photo. ...again not looking for debate about the policy change, just to see how / if the change has changed the way folks log your ECs.

A couple of years ago that would have been very exciting news...now, not so much.

Of the 5000 unclassified, are these current submissions? If they are still being tracked then I could see this as a worthy endeavor, otherwise we would be kinda spinning our wheels classifying data on only a portion of the pages... Going through these would be a great way to learn a huge amount about geology!

We just looked at it. What a fun cache! I think we could list them all. We wish we were closer! It looks like it is about 150 miles from Marge's sister who lives in Sturgeon Bay. Maybe next trip to see her? I think we could list them all. Are there honorary finds? lol Let's put it like this....I rarely check the paper logs. Another cacher asked to use the format...I think that cache might be in Alaska. When I placed this there were only a few ECs in Wisconsin so the challenge was more challenging...now it's not too hard to get a cross win. The full card is tougher because of the meteor req...there are only three meteor sites in WI and only one is public.

I have one as well...though not as difficult of a challenge. Mine is based on Tic-Tac-Toe. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=a24fd973-6584-4aec-86c7-b65b5d989328

My post was not simply a reiteration of stated opinion. My post was an entirely new take on the reason for the need for photos and the weakness of the submitted questions...that being the educational level we are required to write our submissions. Thanks for the moderation though. I'm done.

I can understand your side of this issue from a approval standpoint but to be honest geological formations are not normally changing rapidly enough to take a meaningful measurement....At my waterfall EC was I supposed to ask folks to, "Please email me the amount of retreat the waterfall has taken this year?" How are they going to measure that. I'm pretty much limited to "Hey take a pic and oh tell me how tall it is." The questions are the hardest part of developing an EC, most of us are not geologists and we are told to create the listing at a high school learning level. Can we expect folks to bring out their spectrometers or do microscopic analysis? No. Face it, the questions are vague because that is what is demanded by the guidelines based on the level of writing comprehension. The pictures serve (well served) many functions in addition to a proof of visit, they brought attention to the feature when folks clicked on the cache page, they serve to in many cases document the change in a feature over time, they do make a finder learn more about the feature. To learn about a feature is not to just skim the cache page until you see the questions that need to be answered, it is about seeing the formation and documenting what you have seen. I know the decision has been made and that's fine, I accept it. I just do not agree with it. I have developed 30 ECs (many written for others) and I will not develop another. I believe the photos are a vital part of the EC experience.

Without knowing the geology of the area it's hard to help...at least for me as I'm no geologist. It could be all kinds up things from a meteor strike and resulting upthrust to it's being the edge of a much larger escarpment...My recommendation is to look at the larger picture and get an idea what is going on in the area than try to make sense of the formation you are seeing. For me the Niagara Escarpment is responsible for much of the cool stuff in Wisconsin...that and Glacial Lake Wisconsin. Knowing about those two events here in Wisconsin goes a long way towards helping me to understand much more about the formation of the structures around me. Geology books are a great help as are Google searches. Googling vague terms such as "geology of (INSERT COUNTY NAME HERE)" may return surprising results.

I would argue that every* EC which shows a changing feature (erosion for example) should be allowed to REQUIRE a photo. I would also argue that ECs which require you to find a specific (non-obvious) feature like a fossil or rock type should be allowed to be mandatory as well. As a side note I looked at 6 random EC owners and every one of them still has the photo as a requirement...good luck with the new guidelines; I see a whole lot of arguing in the near future as folks duke out the rules.

Got a log last night...the guy backdated the find to last October...no picture (it was required then), no answers sent...eh it can stand though because the requirements seem to be more like suggestions...

The Wisconsin edition is also exceptional.

I don't check my physical logs either but their very existence is enough to keep most folks honest....

I believe the control freaks you refer to are the folks who were required by the guidelines to verify that EarthCaches were visited and that the answers demonstrated gained knowledge...those freaks right? There may have been a few folks out there who took their responsibility a bit too seriously but please do not make blanket statements condemning all EarthCache owners.

Name calling is not necessary or condusive to a friendly discourse.

Just wait until Virts come back...this will all come up again. Yeah, okay. So can we drop it until then? We can try...

Just wait until Virts come back...this will all come up again.