grateful cacher

I found it on June 13th, 2010 as part of my cross country geo-vacation. I'd tried to find Arikee (GC31) earlier in the day, but it had rained so much that the road to it was pure mud and I didn't make that one. (BTW, the CO of Mingo is also the CO of Arikee, and it seems to be just fine). Just before I got to Mingo, it rained another couple of inches in 15-20 minutes, so much that I had to wait in the abandonded gas station that is just at the turn off for the county road. Wipers on high speed couldn't even touch it. According to the guidelines, what you described is a textbook example of what a buried cache is. Remember the whole, "If a shovel, trowel or other pointy object is used to dig or break ground, whether in order to hide or to find the cache," part? Mingo is clearly a buried cache. That's not really up for debate. The question I had was if the Reviewers would willingly ignore a guideline with no ambiguity in it, such as "Caches are never buried", if the cache was buried prior to that guideline being created. Brian answered that for me. Here's a clearer, and far more recent photo of the hide. For some reason, I remembered it as a steel pipe that the "6-inch PVC" sat in. May have been as I don't know when you were there (today perhaps? ) but for clarity, the pic CR posted is timestamped 5-10-2000, and the most recent one I found that actually showed the hide is from January 2011. Pictures can be very deceiving, especially dated ones. I found Mingo in 2008, and it sure looked like a 6-inch PVC pipe sitting in a much larger steel pipe to me.

My error on who can mark them missing, I admit. But without an NM log, how is anyone to know that there is a problem and that they are missing?? The original poster said they emailed the CO but didn't expect a response. How else would people know that there is something going on?? Incorrect. The trackable owners can mark them missing as well. And a Reviewer.

It may have been steel. It looked and felt like PVC when I was getting the cache out. It's also a lot drier there in your picture that when I was there. The entire area was under about 2-3 inches of water, and there was more of the pipe exposed. I can't post my pictures till later tonight since they're on my home computer. According to the guidelines, what you described is a textbook example of what a buried cache is. Remember the whole, "If a shovel, trowel or other pointy object is used to dig or break ground, whether in order to hide or to find the cache," part? Mingo is clearly a buried cache. That's not really up for debate. The question I had was if the Reviewers would willingly ignore a guideline with no ambiguity in it, such as "Caches are never buried", if the cache was buried prior to that guideline being created. Brian answered that for me. Here's a clearer, and far more recent photo of the hide. For some reason, I remembered it as a steel pipe that the "6-inch PVC" sat in.

How about the 20+ trackables that are now missing? Only the CO can mark them as missing by sending out message to the owners. That will change their status as well.

Actually, I have visited Mingo, about this time last year. The log that was there went back several years, the one that is there now is new. The container is new. There are now over 20 trackable items that are missing. Don't you think the owners would like to know what's up with them. Just because the an NM log is posted does not mean the cache will automatically be archived. I dont think it was your place to post a NM log. There is a cache and a log. What part needs to be maintained? I would never post a NM on a cache that I have never visited.

Why would you hate to be the fool who placed the needs maintenance log?? When is it appropriate (or not appropriate) to report a cache that has been muggled, and the CO appears to not be an active participant anymore?? BTW, I really don't like being called a fool in a public forum.......especially by someone who has never been to the cache in question.

The fence in question is really a fence in name only. If you've ever looked at the satellite photos of the area, you'll see that it separates nothing. It's between a dirt county road, a paved county road and Interstate 70, and ends about 10 feet from where the cache is actually placed. If you look at the log photos, it'll make more sense. There are no signs posting it as private property or no tresspassing. So, what if the Mingo was removed and replaced by the current land manager/owner? I honestly don't know what the actual location looks like, but the mention of "it's on the other side of a fence" earlier in the thread implies to me that one or both sides of the fence are private property. Is it possible that the land owner got tired of people stopping there to grab the cache and decide to remove it and filled the hole so that it wouldn't be replaced. Or, perhaps the road workere mentioned in recent logs pulled a NVDOT manoever and removed it as part of their road maintenance. Either way, if the land manager doesn't want it there, putting another cacher there after the hole was refilled (and digging out the dirt to do so) is not commendable as I see it, and could cause strife between the land manager and geocaching.

CO has not been online for at least 6 weeks, and has not found a cache in almost two years. If he has moved onto other activities, hopefully he will allow the cache to be adopted and maintained. That is allowable but only with the CO's approval. I placed a need maintenance log so that it would flag that it needs his attention/intervention. Replacing the cache is an admirable thing to do, but ultimately it is the CO's responsibility to determine the cache's final disposition, just like it was with the APE cache. He placed a throwdown and logged that. Been two new finds since then, too. I don't see any problem with that. He was aware of the exact location and it was definitely missing, so he hid a replica. It's not like 2 caches or a throwdown film can is there. Something wrong with just posting a DNF and letting the cache owner handle it? Many cache owners would welcome such a thing. The cache owner is also the one who decides whether his actions were OK, and is free to delete his log. Considering that it was a cache worth perpetuating, I'd say his actions were fine. Perhaps he should let the DNFs pile up and let it get archived? I can't speak for the cache owner, but neither can any of you.

The cache was not buried. It is/was in a piece of 6 inch PVC pipe that was sunk into the ground, and that pipe stuck up about 4-6 inches. The cache container was put into the pipe, and not covered in anyway. All you had to do was reach down and get it. The reason the PVC pipe was put there was most likely to keep the hole it was in open. When I found it last year, it had just rained about 2 inches in 15 minute, and I had to wade out to it, thinking it'd be soaked. But it was nice and dry. So the cache was not buried. Exactly, and I thought buried caches were illegal. Something like that would get archived (and rightfully so) as soon as it was learned about by our local reviewer. A cache is Location+Container+How it's Hidden. Changing any of these elements makes it a different cache. If MINGO was replace with a Nano on the other side of the fence, would it be the same cache? Either way, time to break out the tin-foil hats and get into geo-conspiracy mode. The buried part was grandfathered a long time ago. Even the very first cache was buried.

Here is an interesting link that I came across about the entire APE cache series. It's slightly outdated, but it does share some of the original thoughts about what motivated the series. One nice thing is that it links to each of the the original caches GC page on Groundspeak. So you can see what happened to them over time. I knew there was one about 3 miles from where I lived, but it only lasted a short time before being confiscated by the local fish and wildlife agency. http://www.markwell.us/projectape.htm

But the guidelines also say you must be able to place and retrieve the cache......as well as do maintenance to it....

You can't log anything on the APE cache, the log has been locked and it is not possible to add any more entries to it.

I don't have an issue with doing minor maintenance on caches that are obviously in need of a new log, or plastic bag, or some new duct tape. In fact I have a kit with that sort of stuff in my cache cab. I also appreciate it when finders of my cache reciprocate and add a log sheet or other minor items. If the log has been damaged or is unreadable, I remove it and email the CO what I've done and offer to send it to them, otherwise I just add a sheet. As for caches that are in need of maintenance and the CO is not playing the game anymore, it might be possible to have those caches adopted by someone if they are special to an area. The problem with that is TPTB only allow adoptions with the CO's approval, and if they're not around it would be impossible to arrange for that. Then the only sensible options are to archive and put another one in it's place.

I did some caching in that area last summer. The Civil War Museum is a great place to visit, and there are a couple of virtuals and a newer premium members traditional right outside the musuem. And if you get a chance, head over to Lake Lanier and get Lake Lanier GC21. It is one of three active caches from August 2000 left in the nation (the others are in Utah and Michigan). That is the hardest month for the Jasmer challenge, and it is a 1.0/1.5 rating so shouldn't be too difficult for the kiddos. If you get down to Atlanta, there is one virtual next to Turner Field that is the exact spot where Henry Aaron hit home run #715. There is also one next to it for the Olympic games from '96. There are also quite a few around and on Stone Mountain, virtual's, multi's, traditional. D/T ratings of all kinds there so you'd be better off looking for yourself.

Actually, there are three other caches between the tunnel exit and the APE cache that are still open for business. One of them (Iron Horse GC79) is from October 2000. I didn't know those were there when I went for the APE since I was on a limited time frame. But there worth going back for. What? There are no other caches that one could find that requires a walk through the tunnel to the same general areas as the old #9 location? If a cache is placed at the same exact spot, but with a standard icon, wouldn't you have the same experience? (And for full disclosure, I do not have the icon)

That is the recommended distance. But once the original stash was taken away (for whatever reason), the one that replaced it was the unoriginal stash (GC92). Groundspeak allowed the placement of a tribute cache at the location of the first cache and made it a standard traditional cache and waived the placement guidelines. If they were to do the same thing today, I would wager that there would be a special icon for it, just like there is for Groundspeak HQ, and for the APE cache. 70 feet? Roughly - yes. I didn't have tape measure with me but that sounds about right. I thought there had to be a minimum of 528 feet between caches.

If they were to close the flight paths in the approach to the airport here, that would shut down a good portion of the city..... I wonder if this piece is what actually caused the reviewer to deny your hide.

If you like the Twilight movies, there is a cacher in Portland OR that did a series of 5 mystery/puzzle caches that takes you to just about every filming location for the first film. It's nice series of caches and if you like the film, it will be extra nice.

I found a cache last weekend at the Portland (OR) International Airport that was attached to the chain link fence that separated the main runway from the public. But it was also in the parking lot for one of the major hotels that are next to the airport. There are quite a few caches around the airport here. Since it is located in the city, if they were to not allow caches in the approaches, it would eliminate a good portion of the suburbs for geocaching. I'm surprised that there hasn't been an incident similar to Denver's here, but maybe that's a trade-off for having an airport so close to the main city.

The original stash cache does have a cache container with a log book in it. It is highly muggled so folks are advised to not drop items there but just to dip them. I've been there 4-5 times, and it seems that the container has been moved just about every time. There is also another cache within 70 feet of it, just up the hill, called the un-original stash cache.

I haven't had any iPhone issues. Mine is an AT&T phone, what carrier is yours? Maybe it's a Verizon issue??

The land it is on is part of Snoqualmie National Forest. It is surrounded by various NFD Roads, such as 2236A and 5590. In order to park at the Annette Trailhead, you need to have a Northwest Forest Pass which is issued by the USDA/Forest Service. The Iron Horse Trail is part of the the state park system, which does go through the national forest land. When I went to the APE cache last year, it was not located on the trail, but about 50 feet north in a clump of some trees, which was not a part of the trail. Actually, as it has been pointed out, the APE cache was *NOT* on national forest land, it is on WASHINGTON STATE PARK land. The land it was hidden on was an old Milwaukee(?) rail road right of way that was deeded to the state for a rails to trail park. That is the reason for the existence of the nearby tunnel.

I created a PQ to show the top 100 favorite caches in the US. When I use the Beta Preview, it will only show favorite caches in Alaska, but it shows every other cache in the US and Canada. Sure, I can filter out the other caches that aren't in the PQ, but it still only shows caches in Alaska. When I select show old map view, it goes to some place in the midwest with max zoom, and a "?" where the number of caches is usually shown. But it shows no caches of any kind, even in Alaska. Pretty disappointed with this implementation, as it is a valuable tool to use in fine tuning PQs before you submit it to be emailed to you.

The original stash cache was granted an exception to the distance guidelines to be placed so close to the un-original stash. But that is on private property, not national forest land like the APE is/was. I don't think the issue would be with the actual plaque, but getting forest service apporval to place it there. Relations between TPTB and the forestry people have been strained in the past, especially after the tunnel was closed and some cachers decided to jump the fence and use it anyway.

The list is a little out of date. Since the APE cache has been archived, it doesn't show up on the PQ search. The Original Stash Cache is now numero uno. But I do have 4 of the top 5.......