drewmm

Go get it if it's worth the risk to you (I don't know how expensive the container was.) If it's not worth the risk, let it go.

Without a specific policy by the parks department allowing geocaches, it wouldn't be difficult for the park police to (if they wanted to, which they see to) cite you under a littering ordinance for placing a geocache.

Source: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://w...5.pdf&pli=1 Looking at the Bucks County Park ordinances, you could possibly get fined. "No person shall: Discard, deposit, dump, litter or allow to blow away refuse of any kind or nature except by placing said refuse in containers provided for such purpose." "No person shall install equipment or make any alterations or adjustments to existing equipment or facilities without the specific approval in writing of the Director." And: "Any person who violates any provision of this Ordinance shall, for every such offense, upon conviction thereof, in a summary proceeding, be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than Twenty-Five Dollars ($25.00) or more than Three Hundred Dollars ($300.00) and/or to undergo imprisonment for a term of not more than thirty (30) days. All prosecutions shall be brought in the name of the County of Bucks, and all fines shall be paid to the County of Bucks."

I disagree. Boobytrapping can be fun, for some people. Just like multis, letterbox hybrids, puzzles, etc don't make this "some sort of crazy thing," boobytrapped caches also wouldn't. Some people will like them, some people will hate them. The trick, though, is making sure only people who will like it go hunting for it. Obviously there aren't as many attributes you can set on it to mark that it's boobytrapped, but you should include at least a general warning in your cache description. "Don't hunt this cache if you aren't fine with getting (scared/startled/whatever's appropriate for the specific surprise you're plotting)." You'll ruin the surprise to an extent, but not too much if you make the warning general. And you'll avoid any problems with people who are going to get mad at you hunting it. And if they go hunting it without reading the description first, it's their problem.

Isn't dumpster diving illegal? I'm pretty sure it is.

Nope, you had it right the first time, the trail safety portion. Not horrible, but a bit pedantic.

You forgot to edit out one reference to the town in the last paragraph. The second paragraph talks down to the reader a bit, if that's what you're asking.

This seems like good advice...if you approach forums as merely an FAQ bank. But if you view forums as a community, it makes for a pretty boring community. Only if you assume that the only topics for discussion are the ones that have been talked to death already. Some of the most interesting ones, maybe. If there was a discussion about cool caches on mountain peaks three years ago, it would be much more interesting for new players to either continue the old thread or start a new one than to just read the old topic. If the old players don't want to discuss it again, it's very easy to ignore the thread. You should.

Yes new guy. That is why I opened this forum! 10 tacks will each create a tiny hole. Upon removal of the tack, those holes will all disappear quickly. The tree doesn't heal one hole and then move on to the others. Also, no matter how many tacks you put in, you won't penetrate past the outer bark. One screw, on the other hand, creates a larger hole that takes a lot longer to heal and penetrates further into the tree. Will either kill a tree? Unlikely, unless you use a screw that's made of a metal that's poisonous to trees. But screws are uglier and more defacing of a tree. Tacks, on the other hand, are normal in woods, leave less of a mark, and aren't unusual.

Do you really even need this explained?

Correct me if I'm wrong, ashnikes, but isn't GC29RCB a micro in a stand of trees right outside a library?

So why do you look for those caches, if they're so lame?

I like that play and Canadian money are grouped together in one unit. That is all.

This seems like good advice...if you approach forums as merely an FAQ bank. But if you view forums as a community, it makes for a pretty boring community.

**disregard

+1

Why do people like to respond to threads they're not interested in? People reply to things that they have an opinion on even if their opinion is to say silly things. Even if their opinion is that the topic isn't worth having an opinion about?

Really? Really now? Have you tried that line at the movie theatre? Or the bowling alley? Or anywhere else?

I think objection to Facebook integration is more because of what it represents: the downhill slide that hit Facebook might be coming for geocaching. More and more useless features that take away from the beautiful simplicity and make it unenjoyable. Just saying.

It seems that the mistake the OP is making is assuming that MKHs and the like are the "default" micro size. Really, there is no default size. If you want to know what you're looking for, only search for caches that give you a better description of the cache container. You should be equally mad at 33mms that are only listed as "micro" with no further information as you are at bison tubes or blinkies. There're no defaults. Micro =/= film can. Regular =/= ammo can. Small =/= tupperware. Either enjoy the thrill of not knowing exactly what you're looking for, or only search for caches that tell you exactly what you're looking for.

Why do people like to respond to threads they're not interested in?

It's true. Perhaps Facebook will be the death touch for geocaching. Cue all the people telling me that I haven't been here long enough to have an opinion about this.

So you disagree with all the people who get upset when threads are bumped? Well if you are posting a new thread when the same topic is right there at the top maybe you should have at least perused a few of them first, eh? Posting and you edit: missing d Fair enough, but the "you should have looked at the other threads" issues are rarely when another thread is at the top. It's generally when the old thread is buried on page 13, but all the oldbies remember it because they were there for that discussion.

I don't know that unit, but so long as you can input coordinates into it I don't see why it wouldn't work Of course, a new unit would probably work better: more options for paperless caching, perhaps a more accurate antenna...but the best way to determine if it's still good enough is probably to go test it in the field. Give it a whirl and see if it still works for you, or if you'd rather pay more money for a newer unit.

The different opinions here seem to prove the point perfectly.