Team Hugs

One thing I've seen around here ... for rest stops that already have a couple of traditional hides, the third cache is often a challenge cache of some sort. The ones I've seen tend to have a traveling theme --- appropriate for a cache found while traveling. Again, it wouldn't get as many visits, but it would certainly be different. It might be something else to consider.

I've seen a couple of exceptions to that general practice --- but the exceptions serve to prove the rule: Some of the big "events" around here feature new cache placements. Some of the prizes offered in the raffle are FTF opportunities on individual caches; basically, they get a 15 minute head start on the rest of the attendees, who are given the new cache information onsite. The caches themselves are pre-approved by the Groundspeak folks and are published the next day ... but for the first night, only the attendees are logging the caches as part of the event. The funniest story I've seen ... as part of a seasonal caching series, one of the local posts new caches every day (or thereabouts, depending on when they get approved) of winter, creating a nice series of caches to complete. I headed off to claim a FTF at a LPC just after it was published ... to discover that the cache had been signed three days before publication! Apparently, another geocacher had decided to place his own cache at that site, and coincidentally found the cache there when he went to scout the area, in the gap of time between original placement and publication. But, in general ... yeah, if you're watching the cache placed, it's a little odd to claim that you "found it" first.

I think those who are concerned are worried about the Groundspeak rule that says you can't place a cache on the grounds of a "school". Colleges and universities are "schools", but of a wholly different character than elementary and secondary schools. Since the term "school" isn't well defined ... it can lead to some confusion or concern.

Indeed. I visited GCY8EH some time ago; it's on the property of a middle school, run by one of the teachers. However, it's on the extreme corner of the property, adjacent to the street and as far away from the buildings as possible. Anyone trying to find the cache wouldn't come anywhere near a school building, and so wouldn't be seen as a threat to the school. (I couldn't find it when I visited ... it was unavailable at that time due to construction in the area.) And, yes, colleges are OK for caches. I own two caches on a local university campus --- after getting the appropriate permissions, of course. My reviewer knew it was on a university campus and had no problems with it being there.

I've seen one other exception to the "don't log your own cache" guideline which seems to work. Some of the local cachers here have put out a number of challenge caches. Sometimes, the owner will log their own cache after (re-)qualifying for the challenge ... in part, I suspect, because it's interesting to see how other people qualify for the challenge. (In some cases, the information can help others to qualify for the challenge later.) However, they only do this for challenge caches (not their regular caches), and only after quite a few other folks have already logged the cache, so as to not interfere with other's enjoyment of a new cache (e.g. FTF hunting). Of course, as with all things, your mileage may vary.

After reading three pages of this, I'm just curious ... If more and more reviewers are going to start asking submitters to verify that their cache satisfies the guidelines, even after the user clicked the box that says "This cache satisfies the guidelines", is there any point in having the checkbox anymore?

I've seen one incident of this ... but it's probably the exception that proves the rule. There was a cache locally that was logged a few days before its publication. The CO had placed the cache (it was an LPC, part of a winter-friendly series) several days earlier and submitted the cache for publication. Before it had been published, another local cacher stopped by the exact spot to place his own LPC, only to find that he'd been beaten to the spot. So, he claimed the FTF (he did find it, after all), and we all laughed when we saw the online listing later on.

We had an interesting situation similar to this recently ... though with a twist. A new traditional cache, from a very new cacher, was posted with explicitly "soft" coordinates, about 140' off. After two of the locals made the initial find --- with much justifiable complaining in the logs --- the listing was edited (I presume by a reviewer) so that the true coordinates appeared as an unencrypted hint, and as a visible waypoint. Makes me wonder if the true coordinates had been listed as an invisible waypoint all along, and the reviewer didn't notice the discrepancy the first time.

You know ... we could always assume that the finder and the cache owner are reasonable people, who could talk with each other through the logs to come to an agreement ... Here's a couple of stories from my relatively young career. 1) Dead of winter, I come out to work on an urban hide in a high-muggle area, so I attempt the find after midnight when there aren't muggles around. Description on the site says "you have to sign the log to get the smiley". Turns out to be a false utility plate on a lightpoll ... except that the magnets have fallen off, so I found the plate on the ground, covered in snow. It's a windy area, so the log is nowhere to be found. I posted a "Found" and a "Needs Maintenance", saying "I hope I get the smiley". The cache owner fixed it and cleared the maintenance tag, writing "yes, you definitely get the smiley". 2) Another urban hide a month ago. It's a challenge cache, and I qualify. It's not an area I frequent, so I made a point of coming over to find the cache. I get there, and all I find is a piece of paper stuck in a crevice with one log entry on it. Okay, that's weird, but I go ahead and sign the paper. When I get home that night to log the finds, it turns out the paper was left by a previous cacher as a throw-down earlier that day, after he spent "a lot of time" looking and not finding the cache. I went ahead and logged the find. A few days later, I get a note from the cache owner, telling me that the cache had been there all along, and I had obviously gotten discouraged from looking for it by the throw down. The cache owner asked me, nicely, to either delete my log or turn it into a note, since I hadn't really found the cache itself. But (s)he asked extremely nicely --- and, frankly, I wasn't comfortable with trying to argue for a find on a throwdown, so I was nappy to downgrade the find into a note. Both stories work, because I as the finder, and the cache owner in question, were able to talk together and come to consensus. And we didn't have to get any lawyers involved!

My wife's an avid birdwatcher ... and I'm learning. So, this weekend, we'll hit some parks and look for birds & caches together.

Same problem here ... regular maps don't show caches, but Pocket Query maps do. Happens both in Firefox 11 and IE 8 on a Win7 machine.

On the Menu select Settings Scroll down to Compass Select Calibrate Compass Then you rotate the unit in all 3 axes until it tell you that you are done. I don't have a menu item for Compass - help?

How do you calibrate the compass?

I'm using a Lowrance Out&Back, with the latest Endura upgrade (1.5.95881). Normally, I add caches to my Out&Back by creating a Pocket Query, and saving the GPX files generated by that query to the GPX directory on the unit. This seems to work reasonably well most of the time ... except that occasionally, the coordinates shown on the unit differ from the ones in the GPX file. The main difference I'm seeing is that, occasionally, the latitude and/or longitude coordinates are one digit smaller than the true coordinates. For example: if the coordinates in the GPX file are (N 12 34.567 / W 098 76.543), I'll see (N 12 34.566 W 098 76.542) or (N 12 34.567 / W 098 76.542) or (N 12 34.566 W 098 76.543). I realize that geocaching involves dealing with a certain amount of uncertainty --- both in terms of my GPSr and the GPSr used to record the cache's coordinates originally, but I'm seeing this happen often enough (with perplexing results to this novice cacher) that I'm wondering if something else is going on here. I've verified (using EasyGPS) that the coordinates in the GPX file downloaded from geocaching.com are, in fact, correct, so it seems like there's something going on in the transfer process. Any ideas what might be happening?

Or, perhaps, concede that the cache might be easier to find at different times of year. I found a tree cache recently in which the CO explicitly noted that the cache would be harder to find in summer than at other times. (Of course, it was also a micro in an apple tree about 15 feet off the ground, so it wasn't terribly obvious to begin with ...)

Heck if I know ... I'm new at this. But I think I've seen people posting notes on other puzzle caches in exactly that sort of situation.

aw, shucks ...

Ok. No worries. It's a puzzle cache, so I'm assuming that the watchers will eventually become solvers, then finders, and eventually loggers ... so I'll find out eventually. Like I said ... it's mainly out of curiosity more than anything. It's fun to watch the hunt for the FTF ...

A new puzzle cache of mine was just published, and I notice that there are a few users who are already watching the cache. Is there a way for me, as the cache owner, to see who is watching the cache? (I tried looking around in the knowledge books, but didn't see anything obviously about the topic.) I don't have a profound reason or need to know who is watching the cache. I'm just incredibly curious. (Ok, and a bit nosy. ) So ... if there's no way to do it, and/or there's a good reason for that, no big deal.

I'll confess ... this happened to me on my first hide. Frankly, I didn't realize how quickly caches could be reviewed, and I certainly didn't realize how serious the FTF hounds are. I had posted the cache description at 11pm one night, and planned on placing the cache on my way to work the next morning. As of 7am the next morning, no action had been taken. By the time I got to the cache site at 7:30am, the cache had been published and the first DNF was entered. Luckily, I sent the cacher a quick note, letting him know it was now in place, and he dashed back to get his well-earned FTF. Oh, well ... lesson learned. I just submitted my second cache description tonight ... after making sure the cache was in place first. See, some of us do learn eventually how this stuff works ...

I don't see a problem with that. In my area, for example, there are several government units that require permits for placing geocaches in their parks, and the permits require that the cache be removed after a year (in order to cut down on the effect of geotrails becoming permanent trails. It seems a reasonable compromise.

Disclaimer: I know absolutely nothing about how Groundspeak makes such decisions. But Groundspeak has to make all sorts of decisions like this all the time --- and most are much more contentious than this one. Every country border is a political judgment --- and if there's a cache near a disputed border, any decision by Groundspeak as to which border it chooses to "recognize" will offend someone.

of course they did, they in effect declaring St Pierre Miquelon a country Hurrah! Groundspeak has declared Independence Day for St. Pierre Miquelon! Free caches for everyone!

That's an interesting concept which I have been thinking about for some time. Have you not logged any finds and why? I log all my finds ... but some folks don't log them instantly. Some folks who have smartphones and appropriate apps log the finds immediately. For me, since I'm technology-poor, I have to wait until I get back to the office or home or someplace with free WiFi to log my finds. Which means, of course, that I might get distracted when I walk in the door with "real life", and may not get around to logging the finds for awhile. For me, the delay might be several hours. For others, the delay might be much longer. In short ... it's not malice or anything, it's just ... well, stuff happens.

One exception might be a cache placed by the school itself. I (sort-of) visited a cache which is maintained as a travel bug hotel by a teacher at the school, who uses the cache and the travel bugs that moved through as a means to teach --- something or other. (Geography, I'm guessing.) Even so, this might be the exception that proves the rule. The cache itself was located at the extreme corner of the school grounds, adjacent to public property, so that those visiting the cache wouldn't have to walk onto school property for more than a few feet. So it still maintained the spirit of the rule of avoiding the appearance of suspicious folks hiding objects near schools.