Sadie

I can't express how stupid I believe their position to be. Apparently, walking, jogging, biking, snowmobiling, etc are not considered 'recreational activities'. We sure wouldn't want someone to sunbathe. That is dangerous to the park. ..and camping, hiking, backpacking, horseback riding - all allowed in national parks. It is disturbing that NPS employees have such a skewed idea of funcion of national parks. The 1871 act that established the first national park, Yellowstone said in part "...is hereby reserved and withdrawn from settlement, occupancy, or sale under the laws of the United States, and dedicated and set apart as a public park or pleasuring-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people... The act that established the National Park Service states in part "...fundamental purposes of the said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations." The NPS's mission statement says in part "...The National park Service preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. The NPS website mentions "recreation" as the very first entry on their web page after their name. So for a NPS employee to say that the national parks are not for recreational activities is beyond ridiculious. Now, let's change the bold parts. ----------------- The 1871 act that established the first national park, Yellowstone said in part "...is hereby reserved and withdrawn from settlement, occupancy, or sale under the laws of the United States, and dedicated and set apart as a public park or pleasuring-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people... The act that established the National Park Service states in part "...fundamental purposes of the said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations." The NPS's mission statement says in part "...The National park Service preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. --------------- just playing devil's advocate.

I fail to see where hiking and all recreational activities have equal meaning. The idea of allowing ATV's and dirtbikes into a showcase doesn't even make sense. I am all for having geocaches in NPS property, but slamming the NPS for doing what they feel is right is not helping our position.

I couldn't agree more. Any cache placed with the thought of getting me out into the fresh air is good, regardless of size or contents. On the other hand, we can send our permission slip to a speacil committee to get thier blessing, include photos and such. If it doesn't meet thier criteria, then they can call us lazy, unimaginative, and whatever else we are because we don't meet thier standards.

And your answer is to insult people that don't think the way you do? I was hoping to read comments from people that were a bit more open minded.

Golly Gee... another whiny thread. I like micros. They are still better than spending all day in front of the TV set and not enough time for a hike.

The extreme end of that bell curve is not Wallyworld. It would be that one in the irrigation ditch with the stagnant standing water. It would be the one placed inside the deer carcass on the side of the highway. It would be the puzzle cache that is difficult to solve.

Yes, I feel you are whining.

So, you're saying that in order to be a distraction to daily life it has to be a lame cache? You can't get satisfaction from a decent cache? I must be missing something. A lame micro is a decent cache. Someone made thier best effort and put it there for people to find it. What makes you think it was their best effort? It could have been just the lack of caring or just wanting to put up numbers. Or it could be that people keep hunting them and therefore they think it's a good cache. El Diablo Folks seem pretty darned sure that it wasn't. I'm sure your childeren wrote perfect cursive and took pre algebra in 1st Grade. Not everyone is as perfect as that. If you are going to insult people and call thier efforts substandard, please don't do it here. There are a lot of good things going on in the forums and the whining is getting old. As far as I am concerned, this geocaching community is for everyone, not just those that meet "certain standards". Heck, if you looked, there are probably web sites that will give points for judging harshly.

So, you're saying that in order to be a distraction to daily life it has to be a lame cache? You can't get satisfaction from a decent cache? I must be missing something. A lame micro is a decent cache. Someone made thier best effort and put it there for people to find it.

I like lame micros. Even the wally world kind. If I have an extra 30-60 minutes I will go finds a couple lame micros as a distraction to daily life. I do not insult those that place them, they feel they are doing good things. I will not insult them by insinuating they aren't. I growl at those that fail to see the positive side of lame micros.

I don't think anyone should be peer pressured into placing a cache. At least not for the sake of placing a cache. Not a lame one, not a fair one, not a great one, or even a legendary one.

All seriousness aside, I heard that Groundspeak has an agreement with "a certain major GPSr manufacturer and communication satellite companies". GC will be streaming encoded GC ID's from certain satelaites with Coords and relevant info. (Decoding will only be available through a special chip purchased/subcribed to from Groundspeak.) The GPS will filter out the GC#### that are not within XX miles of your location. Caches in your "found it" list (stored on the GPS's SD card) will either display as found, or not shown (user selectable). Other features / setable options: Caches that do not have any "found it" logs will flash. Caches with SBA's or XX number of DNF's will be either gray or ignored.

That is a better question. That question can be addressed easier thant what was asked. I don't feel I need to certify, verify, and gurantee that I have permission for placing a ultra micro on the back of a stop sign. If someone doesn't think I do, they can post a note saying they were uncomfortable. They can also bring it up to the community. If they are that strong against it, an SBA log will bring it to the attention of the reviewers.

Woof!

That's a hoot! Thanks for the laugh! Doesn't the term "Members Only" define exclusivity? I my book, Yes, it is exclusive. Certain benifits for those willing to pay extra. Anyone can golf at the city golf course. If you want to golf at the big fancy golf course, you will pay extra. Nothing wrong with that. Just because a few folks don't like it does not make it wrong, it only means they don't like it. The site was based on the fact that anyone can find a cache without paying. You do have to create an account, but you can find most caches. Nobody say you have to be able to find every cache. It boils down to opinion. Yours is valid as an opinion, but most folks disagree.

Are you a Turtle?

Hey, I ressemble that remark!

Well, it's easy to prove that any one of us are only one or two steps away from any of the big number cachers or to folks that post in the forums a lot. So, how close are you to this guy? He has two finds and one hide. His account has been around for over two years and even loged in this month.

Yeah, and I bet the Mouse wouldn't allow hamster caching either... Maybe not, but the idea of "E Ticket" caches does sound good.

Please don't put music in your cache page. It's cute for about 5 seconds, then it gets really really really really old. If you must, put in a "play" button to make it optional. Do not force me to listen to anything. Thank you.

This thread is sounding like the arguement between the guy who wants peace and quiet while he sits in his home and the guy in the street with a loudspeaker saying he has the right to free speach. edit: clarification

As explained, the cache was reported by someone to be the property owner and archived because it they siad it was on thier land. If it's truely on public land, then the cache owner needs to take it up with the land manager. In the owner's e-mail, they admitted that they cannot control thier pets. In most places this is in violation of some sort of ordinance and again, the cache owner should taske it up with the authorites. IMO there is all kinds of wrong stuff happeniong and I don't think Groundspeak should get the brunt of it just because they are here.

Hey.. I was that guy. I got another bartending job and took enough coustomers with me that the guy replaacing me sat all night watching television by himself. So, if UtahAdmin becomes a reviewer with a competeing geocache listing site, most of the Utah and Wyoming cachers would list thier cachers there? Sounds a bit familiar.

42

Although they aren't pets, I do suspect that a couple of my hiking partners aren't exactly human.