Mary&Dave

Agreed. It looks like the person who has your bug hasn't been caching in about a month. They're probably hanging onto it until they find a suitable cache. Have patience. Send a nice note if you wish (start by thanking them for moving your bug), but I certainly wouldn't give up hope.

P.S. Most of the threads containing those terms are pretty meaningless. Honestly -- I wouldn't bother.

Oh gosh... Don't ask. Micro-Spew is a term for low-quality (usually micro) caches placed in supermarket parking lots or equally boring spots. These are often out there not for bringing cachers to an interesting location, but just augmenting their find counts. Pocket Caches are caches that are brought to an event or a gathering of geocachers. Sometimes someone will have a clever cache design that they want to share with a lot of people, but not necessarily to hide. Other times, people want the ability to log a "find" on their friends or new people they meet. There is a lot of argument about this, as many people see it as just a way to boost your total find count. This will likely be the solution.

Sure -- at least I think you can do this without premium membership. Do a search for caches (by zip code, coordinates, whatever) and click "Map it". Click to access the beta Google maps, and you can scroll around to see caches in the area. If you decide to upgrade to a premium member, you can download a .kml file to display all this information in Google Earth. I've often loaded a track of a trail and traced it, locating caches along the way.

My cachemobile: Okay, so they need to be replaced every 600-700 miles, but gas is cheaper!

Let's not advocate stealing caches and travel bugs. Two wrongs don't make a right.

We have a Legend C and a Legend Cx. They both have the dedicated geocaching mode. It gives you the option to find geocache (the closest waypoint with a "geocache" icon). When you've found it, there's a button to click that says found. This changes the icon to a found geocache. It is handy to be able to search for found geocaches at the end of the day to have a list of which ones to log online. This feature, while sorta nice, isn't really necessary. It helps save a few extra clicks. The maps you get include major highways, large cities, and state lines. That's it. The mapping software gives you the rest of the detail. It's totally up to you, but I really like the ability of being able to search for a spot based upon address and have the GPS take me there. Garmin's topo maps are almost worthless. There is very little detail, and most trails are NOT shown. I bought them, and I wish I hadn't. The only thing they are good for is navigating very remote areas that have nothing else. They are certainly not a viable replacement for a good USGS 15' map. One plus is that they do display forest service logging roads (city select does not seem to show any dirt roads). This may or may not be beneficial depending on where you live, but in most parts of California, I find them basically useless. Some Garmin users have created their own custom maps of certain (very limited) areas which are published free on the Internet. I recently started using one of these instead, at least for local caching.

Just to confirm (I don't know all the bells & whistles of the web site), are you saying that once a waymark is approved, the category officers have no control over it? And category officers have no control over waymark visits? I would have thought that it would be like a geocache log, where the owner of the cache could delete if they wanted/needed to do so. If that's not the case, I agree, this is an issue. (And not one specific to this category.)

I think this is what you're looking for: Here's one online vendor, here's another, or you can check a local surplus store. Do be aware, however, that a locked ammo can tends to look more attractive to potential muggle thieves. If it's locked, it must contain something valuable.

I'm sorry for assuming (making an a** out of you and, er, actually just me) you had no permission. Actually, it sounds like everything was done right, and I just should keep my mouth shut about caches hundreds of miles away.

Peer review time!! Please cast your votes. http://www.Waymarking.com/groups/peer_review.aspx?f=-1

If permission was given for this placement, I'll appologize and take back everything I said.

You're absolutely right. Illegal is the wrong word. Placed in a dangerous location (probably) without permission would be more accurate. It's a gray area, really. If this same cache was placed out in the middle of the woods (still, mind you, on government owned land), I'd be just fine with it. However, it's downtown and on city property. It also doesn't appear to be an area where someone would generally go (were it not for a cache here). In this case, liability is a concern. You'll get no argument from me -- but sadly, that's not how it works in this country. When you do something stupid, the first thing you want is someone to blame. I don't think it's right, but you can thank the lawyers!

After reading the cache logs, I do understand your objections to it. It appears to have been hidden under a bridge in a fairly dangerous location without permission from the city. If someone were to fall and get injured, the city could potentially be liable. I can certainly see why they would not want to have it there. However, that's no reason to start a nasty thread on the forums. If you have a problem with a cache, contact the hider privately. If that fails, post a needs archived report to alert a reviewer. From what I can see on his cache page, Pablo Mac sounds like a reasonable guy.

If you believe these caches are illegally placed, log a "Needs Archived" log for them. This will send an email alerting both the cache hider and the local reviewer of the situation. Hopefully, the caches can then be moved to a legal location or archived.

Having to search for the correct (legal) access route to the cache site can most definitely be fun. But it's also nice to have a note on the cache page indicating that this route exists. Here's a note from a local cache: "The difficulty getting to this cache is due to an issue of accessibility. It is not necessary to trespass or climb fences or do any of those illegal, unethical sorts of things. Please, please, please; don't." That quick note eliminated a lot of frustration when the coordinates seemed to always point into private property.

Yes, absolutely! I'd suggest labelling them as a series of caches -- when you've found all 6, you can go and claim the big prize. And yes, mystery cache is correct for the final.

You still fail. That sentence shouldn't have a comma.

That would work, but I don't know that every beach has a sign. Is a photo requirement necessary? Here's what I have right now (I'm open to suggestions): "Due to the nature of this waymark, a photograph is not required. Photos of scenery or smiling faces are always appreciated, but please do not post any explicit pictures."

Woohoo! Now I don't have to be a wireless networking genius to record one. Thanks.

114. Toilet paper. Don't leave home without it.

That would be pretty cool - there are some really neat spots at airports. Like this guy at the baggage claim in Yellowknife, Northwest Terretories, Canada. Sadly, I doubt your suggestion would fly (no pun intended). Maybe a better answer would be to implement a way to log a travel bug's visit to a waymark? There's already an airport category in place there.

For what it's worth, you might want to email your reviewer ahead of time about the fact that it will be an indoor cache. The folks on these forums can be pretty harsh judges. Good luck with the cache! That Monkeybrad one looks very cool.

Oh come on - even the bubble gum flavor? You've got to draw the line somewhere...

One of the really cool parts of premium membership is that you can filter caches based upon difficulty or terrain ratings. You might want to look into it -- I think it might make your caching experience more enjoyable. Simply search for caches with a 2 or lower terrain rating. Cheers!