Jump to content

Bob Rich

+Charter Members
  • Posts

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bob Rich

  1. I can recommend the Can-Am very highly. Although I haven't tried the 2-seater (Max), I did use a 400 Outlander for a few years and recently upgraded to the 800. Fuel injection, auto-locking differentials, superb suspension, the instant-response AUTOMATIC transmission and overall quality were the reasons I chose Bombardier. Living near eastern Utah and the Moab area, there are perhaps 80 caches that are best reached by ATV. Since I usually cache alone, and travelling 10-30 miles away from my car, my first concern is reliability. I NEED TO BE ABLE TO MAKE IT BACK. I think the Can-Am Outlander MAX would be a good choice for a 2-seater. But I would highly recommend the 800cc model over anything less. Using the auto-transmission, you may never need all the power. In most cases you forget you have it. But in that one instant you might need it, it's there for you. And as previously mentioned, certainly make use of the FREE ATV safety riding course offerred by Bombardier. You learn/reinforce ATV safety, and they pay you $100 too!
  2. I started geocaching with a 76S almost 5 years ago. Over time, I tried other Garmin models and other Manufacturers. But always came back to the 76 series: 76CS, 76CSX. It's like the fact that YOUR mom's apple pie is often the standard to which all others will be judged. Yes, the screen is the same as the 60 series, and it is a little bit larger due to its rectangular size (for flotation?). But for me, the buttons on the top are more natural because when I hold it in my hand, my thumb is at the top also. That coupled with the overly sufficient capacity data card for maps, and the currently state-of-the-art programming for a handheld, have made this my choice. And my experience rates Garmin customer service extraordinary.
  3. Very good points. Many I hadn't thought of when starting this thread. Promoting geocaching in parks and at the same time educating land managers to the fact that normally geocaching is not as great an environmental threat as they might have originally thought. This appears to be a change for the better from "NO unless you can prove it to be beneficial" to perhaps "OK, let's give it a try." I'm all for that philosophy after giving up with the local BLM people here. Here's where I have a problem. I still feel the sense that even State Parks are operating commercially if they hide caches in order to bring people to their "business" with the intent to get them to spend more money for their goods and services. You may agree or disagree perhaps depending on whether you feel these particular services are worthwhile to you personally or not. But the quality of services should not be a criteria for allowing commercial placements. This is entirely different if Joe Cacher hides a cache in a State Park that requires a fee. The same Joe might hide a cache very close to a Starbucks, perhaps in a mall that requires a parking fee. But if Starbucks hid the same cache(s) near their store(s), that would be commercialism to me. Again my wife's correct, I should just let it go. But those are my feelings. I will hunt the cache soon, and pay the $5.00 fee (my federal and state annual permits don't apply to Utah). Maybe I'll feel different about this after I see the cache.
  4. I don't the issue is paying the usual park use fee, its that the people who put out the cache are the same ones collecting the fee (at least that's what I got from the first post). If a cache were set up just to collect visitor fees it would seem commerical. Of course it may difficult to know for certain someones intent for a given case (why was this cache here? did the owner really like the view from here? etc) From the OP: It seems there are a few schools of thought here. These forums are great. There can be many sides to all issues, and I've learned from many of your ideas that I have not thought of before. It seems that Utah State Parks are trying to increase visitation in their parks. And that is commendable I think. Why not? And why not then have those visitors (like all others) pay a day use fees for their enjoyment? OK so far. I would be happy with an ad that read "Come to this Utah State Park to enjoy Fishing, Hunting, swimming, hiking, and . . . geocaching." What bothers me is that Utah State Parks is using GeoCaching to entice us geocachers to find new caches AND PAY THEIR FEES for doing so, all the while proferring their other fee-based activities. Of course some may again argue "if we don't like it, don't do it." But that's a trite cop out. The principle at stake here, in my opinion, is the offering of caches to be found for a fee to the owner. These state park caches attempt to use the Geocaching.com web site cache reporting tool directly or indirectly (intentionally or non-intentionally) to solicit customers through a Geocaching.com listing to pay a fee to enter and find the cache, and also solicit future business. These are NOT permitted per the guidelines, but somehow were in this case. We've all been to caches on private/government property. If Utah, then there may be more states. If Emery County, then your county perhaps will charge a fee. The Utah State Parks is not an active GeoCacher. They have found NO caches themselves. They are doing this for one reason only: to increase their revenue by charging us fees. That's not (IMHO) in the spirit of this sport.
  5. From the OP again: Here's my take on the cache in question (GC10WZ2): 1. Help in a State-wide Geocache adventure to celebrate Utah's 50 years . . . (if you want to drive in, pay $5.00) 2. Find a cache we placed (to lure you here) - $5.00 day use fee. No trading, just sign log. Take a souvenir. 3. Stop back often (and pay more fees) and possibly receive more souvenirs, coupons, and special Geocoin 4. Learn about ($70.00) State Park Passes 5. Accept the challenge of . . . golf ($25.00 additional). To me, that's using Geocaching and Groundspeak solely to further their agenda which almost certainly requires collecting fees for their efforts. It is entirely different than a member placing a sole (or several) caches in state/federal lands that may require an access fee. My original post is/was intended to solicit opinions about caches that are intended primarily to provide fees to the owners in order to come onto their property and perhaps to additionally solicit more business. Personally I very much enjoy caches placed in State Parks, and will always pay fees associated with my visit. But I am opposed to the direction the above cache is taking in the government's solicitation offering a geocache for a fee. Should we allow these GeoPimps?
  6. Thanks to Uxorious, Renegade Knight and other recent replies. I am seeing some opinions that either agree somewhat or vary from mine. I acknowledge all points of view. I just want to reemphasize my original post that to me it seems inappropriate that a State of the Union is getting into the Geocaching game for a fee. I will probably rush out (100 miles) to find this cache, but I am still upset at the idea. I hope that Colorado doesn't catch on to this $5.00 per cache, then the city of Grand Junction at $5.00 per cache, then Mesa County at $5.00 per cache, then the Cemetary at $5.00 per cache, and Sears, and the Mall, etc.
  7. This is my first topic to start. My wife says I should just keep my mouth shut. She's (as usual) probably right, but I won't. I just received notification of a new cache nearby (100 miles): Green River State Park (GC10WZ2) by Utah State Parks. Rated 1/1, a no-trading cache. Just sign the log and take a small souvenir item (with a little catch): a State Park Fee is required to access this cache. The unspecified fee happens to be $5.00! AND, you are encouraged to learn more about their ($70.00) State Park Passes! How does this fit with "Caches perceived of a commercial nature will not be published?" It's apparently all in the perception. While I genuinely appreciate any State Park allowing and in fact supporting geocaching activity within the more picturesque areas of their state, I feel this is an affront to geocaching. I think perhaps they should have offered geocachers the chance to visit their State Parks while finding geocaches free of charge. Then, if that new visit was enjoyable, some might return to fully use the facilities and pay the appropriate fees. This is certainly different from the individual member leaving a cache in a State Park with a notation that a daily fee might/would be due to the park. The cache owner is not profiting from this at all. In this topic instance, Utah is advertising for people to come find their cache at a cost of $5.00. And I'm informed it's up to $9.00 at another park in Utah! What's next? City parks planting caches for a fee to lure you? Maybe private recreational areas like vacation trailer parks? Perhaps Walmart should demand payment for all those LPSs! I guess I'm just upset. The State of Utah is getting into the Geocaching BUSINESS. Want a new find? - Pay us $5.00 or more. What do you think? P.S. As an aside, I was recently asked to voluntarily plant a cache 200 miles away in a Utah State Park because "Utah State Parks" wanted a cache in every State Park. I thought that was a nice gesture of the Utah State Parks. Nowhere was it explained to me that Utah was going to develop a new revenue source: Geocachers. They could periodically plant new caches in all of their parks and charge $5.00 (or $9.00) for each find. Where does Groundspeak stand?
  8. Add 2 Garmin Rino 530s. I needed something to talk about.
  9. Maybe I've just been lucky. I've used the temporary adhesive disk with the Garmin dash mount on the relatively flat surface of my truck dashboard for over a year now with no problems. The truck sits out all the time - a fair amount of 4x4 travel searching for caches, 100+ degrees in the summer, a 1/4-mile dirt washboard driveway and a somewhat heavy GPSMAP 276C. I keep waiting for it to come loose, and even bought some extra adhesive disks just in case. Just wondering if I used the permanent one by mistake.
  10. OK - I'm finally willing to take a chance my wife doesn't read this forum, or otherwise read my posts. I guess I'll know if I'm wrong. In order of purchase, I still have Garmin: GPSMAP 76S (my first - "you always remember your first") Street Pilot III+ (for the caching vehicle) GPSMAP 60CS (wanted color and couldn't wait for 76) GPSMAP 76CS (my favorite, just like my first, only better) iQue 3600 (OK, but short battery and fragile) HOLUX GR-230 (bluetooth for sale CHEAP) GPSMAP 276C for 2nd vehicle (great car GPS) GPS 10 (much better than Holux) for wireless to laptop in car GPSMAP 76CSx (my new favorite, more mature and extremely sirf-y) Had brief fling just to compare after #1 above: Magellan Meridian Platinum (flashy, but didn't last)
  11. Had mine for about 2 weeks now. Tough learning curve (used iQUE 3600 previously). Cingular refers me to Palm for answers, and vice versa. But wireless internet/email/cachemate/pda features all rolled into one is phenominal. The only improvement I could ask for so far would be better cell coverage in the boonies. But that's not a fault of the Treo.
  12. I agree that the GCXXXX identifier should be part of the cache description, preferably near the top. But please not in the subject line. Some of the email forwarding software also truncates the subject line as well as the message length. For example: the subject line [GEO] Notify: SoCalAdmin published Ace is the Place (Traditional Cache) at 8/23/2005 is more than 80 characters already and at least on my setup is clipped almost in half. Any more added to the subject line would almost certainly just mean more lost data. There are several short lines in the description that could better accommodate adding the GC# (ie. GCXXXX Published). And as mentioned before, knowing the GC# allows use of the .wap search function.
  13. I'll second that - a very nice new tool to use. But as f&i said, if the notification is received on a cell phone or pda, there is no reference to the GC number needed to search the wap interface. And on at least my newer pda, the almost 90-digit url of the new cache webpage usually splits between two screens, making linking impossible because it is looking for that uninterrupted 32-digit guid number. I thought I had seen some reference to this problem in earlier threads but cannot find it now. I don't know if the "click here" referencing might solve the problem, rather than listing the lengthy url.
  14. Thanks to precise instructions from Cymbaline, I think I have some results: Windows GUID for interface 0 is \\?\usb#vid_091e&pid_0003#6&148be837&0&3#{2c9c45c2-8e7d-4c08-a12d-816bbae722c0} TX [12]:00 00 00 00 05 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ............(UNKNOWN ) RX [16]:00 00 00 00 06 00 00 00 04 00 00 00 52 e2 c9 b7 ............R...(ACK ) Serial 3083461202. Synced in 0 TX [12]:14 00 00 00 fe 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ............(PRDREQ ) RX [12]:00 00 00 00 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ............(UNKNOWN ) I don't have the slightest idea what this means. But I'm willing to do anything that someday might help transfering waypoints from GSAK via gpsbabel to the 276C. Thanks again to the forum helpers.
  15. I'd be happy to show you a 'gpsbabel -D9 -i garmin -f usb:' if I knew what one looked like, or where to find it. It's too bad Garmin keeps changing protocos, but hopefully it's for the best. The 276C with City Select and Topo USA is really far superior to my older Street Pilot III. Thanks for any help you can give.
  16. Hi Clyde, I just received a new Garmin GPSMap 276, and was trying to transfer waypoints to it from GSAK 5.6.0. After hitting the "send" icon, things seem to progress normally until I get a before-unseen progress window titled "Sending Waypoints" and the notation "Label1" and "0%". At this point, GSAK locks up. I can't get an error dump to send you. I resolve the problem by disconnecting the GPS, and then the GSAK responds with the connection lost message, then everything is back to normal. I saw somewhere that GSAK doesn't yet support the Garmin 2610. Does it not support the GPSMap 276 also? I can workaround by transfering waypoints first to Mapsourse, then to the 276. Thanks for your continued help.
  17. Having both the GPSMAP 276C and the GPSMAP 76CS, I would highly recommend the 276 for automotive use, especially if you include the "automotive kit" that provides among other things an external power source and a speaker for voice guidance. I also use an external antenna mounted inside the windshield. This is the best "auto" setup I've found so far. But I certainly wouldn't want to disconnect and carry it around for any serious geocaching. Too big and bulky - won't fit in your (normal sized) pocket very comfortably. And it isn't shaped for hand carrying. The GPSMAP 76C(S) is a very versatile hand-held with almost all the bells and whistles. The screen is relatively large, the resolution up there with the best, and superb software and map-handling ability. I think it's great for geocaching, although somewhat large. It doesn't have all the "automotive" capability of the 276C, but with the proper mount, mapping software and external 12-volt power cord, it can do a very good job of street navigation. The power cord is easier to remove than the power/data cable on the 276C. So in my opinion, the GPSMAP 76C(S) can do a great job doubling in the car, but the 276C would not be as good when taken in the field.
  18. Please put me down for 5. Thanks.
  19. Using your own words . . . "Aren't ya overreacting just a bit?"
  20. Nekkar, I still haven't had any success with the .wap website and mMode, but rereading the above posts pointed me to http://rtr.ca/geo, which I think is a private "portal" to geocaching.com. At any rate, this way works fine for my phone and cellphone browser.
  21. Using my Motorola T721 with AT&T mMode, I can search for and read cache pages fine. But I cannot "log in" in order to post finds or notes. When submiting name and password, I am asked "Fetch redirected URL?" Answering NO gives me "t.aspx?...redir=1 Page Cannot Be Displayed". Answering "YES" gives me "t.aspx?... redir...500 Internal server error." Then, Logged Out. One thing that comes to mind is that my user name on GC.com has both upper and lower case letters, but my phone (when inputting name and password to wap.geocaching.com) will only allow entering in lower case. Using only lower case on the regular GC.com website still works. Any help would be appreciated.
  22. C-gal: Was it a problem with shutting off unexpectantly or something else?
×
×
  • Create New...