Peconic Bay Sailors

briansnat's avatar...

There once was a girl from Nantucket... Who had a cache hidden in a bucket... When the townspeople heard where she had stuck it... She said... well you know...

Yes... True... but he only does caches with cow themes...

From our son jimmybojangles... 2002...

Actually... Most have the same diameter... 15/32"... but we have ones that range from 3/8" to 3/4" long (high?)... don't ask where I got the really long ones... I have no idea anymore... somewhere on the internet... It's pretty easy to find ones that are 5/8" long... The longer ones have room for logs that are easier for people to sign... I hate the logs in the 3/8" ones... My fingers are too fat for them... CLICK HERE... for the 5/8" long ones... $0.99 each and free shipping if you buy 10 or more... NOPE... it's not me... just where I got mine...

My sister, Av8trx, found Above the Clouds (GC8752)... which is near the summit of Killamanjaro, in Tanzania...

The Dalai Lama... his caching name is "Carol Channing"...

I do not use knowledge gained in the review process to my advantage when finding caches. Typically I will wait quite some time before seeking a cache I've published. By that time, I'll have forgotten any helpful details I studied during the review process. Do not worry about a reviewer running out and being FTF on your puzzle cache because you told them where the final cache is located. We don't do that. My puzzle cache find statistics will bear that out! I was just kidding... never meant it seriously...

Just an addendum to what Keystone has said... I have always found every reviewer easy to work with... You post a cache request... they post questions... Like keystone said... be as descriptive as possible, in a new "note to reviewer"... No one else ever sees those replies to reviewer... Give away spoilers... NP... I have even, in one case, sent a picture of the cache placement, due to a question... It never showed up in the final cache listing... It does give the reviewer a leg up on the rest of us though when they go to look for a cache!!! One of the perks to being a volunteer... of course that goes along with use of the corporate Learjet, satphone, all expenses paid at Hooters, etc... for personal geocaching trips... Reviewers are not there to dis-approve a cache... they want to see them published... just within the guidelines... Remember to make sure they are "clicked" as "enabled"... I had one sit for weeks, because it was a request that was "disabled"... Never got back into the queue... drove me nuts til I saw the problem...

GIDYYUP!!! and the BOOBY Prize!

#1) Upgrade to IE 7, it's free... (IE 6 maint. is frozen now except for security updates) There are some portions of Google Maps not supported by IE 6, and run fluky... #2) Norton has no problems with Google Maps... as long as you have a current version... You can't expect Norton 2002 to run correctly now... It too has been frozen for maint. I'm running the 2008 version of Norton SystemWorks Premier with no problems... IE 7 has been out for over a year and most bugs are worked out... Most existing IE 6 bugs will not be fixed, except for security holes...

Maybe some new people try geocaching... and simply don't like it???

Kind of like speedboats vs. sailboats... In a speedboat, it's all about the the destination... In a sailboat, it's all about the trip getting there...

We have used the "textured" spray Paints... Like Granite or sandstone, depending on woods/beach caches... They blend in well... or if you are going to brush on... just mix play sand in with the paint... Then a FLAT clearcoat over the top... so it does not shine... But the sparayon textured paints work well, as long as you lightly sand the ammo can first... the flat clearcoat just makes it more corrosion resistant... we have one placed in some pine trees that has even had some moss start growing on it...

The guidelines are there for the protection of Groundspeak & the individual cache owners ...

As Brian stated, there are rules the approvers have to follow to approve a cache... They are always willing to work with you... If you have not violated the rules, and can explain that you have not... Then your cache will be approved... If your cache is really in violation, then it should not be approved... The approvers are not there to bust your chops... They want more caches to get out there... If there were no rules, then Geocaching would certainly go away... for liability reasons, alone... We have only had one cache that was not approved, as it was placed on a dam... shortly after 9/11... it was a clear violation then... The approver was right and we were wrong... and the approver explained the reason why it was not approved, politely and clearly... We hold no animosity...

Now that's some serious corrosion prevention Joe! well done... good idea using the gas tank sealer... that might even work in salt water??? but the brass part would have to be replcaed with steel... otherwise you would produce an electrolite... maybe you could attach a zinc sacrificial lamb and that would stop the corrosion to the ammo can?

There's an underwater one in Northern NJ that has been there since 2001... It's an ammo can, submerged... I think the container has only been replaced once... and it has always stayed dry inside... I won't say which cache, cause this info could be a spoiler as it is not mentioned on the cache page... BUT most NNJ cachers will know the one I'm talking about... This one is in FRESH, flowing water... The seals hold up well... I would NOT recommend an ammo can for an underwater cache in SALT water... not without serious corrosion prevention modifications...

Found this guy in Watchung Reservation in NJ last October... about 4 foot long... The Dogs sniffed m out and barked at him, but wouldn't get witin 6-7 feet of him... (we have smart dogs)... He also had a buddy a few feet away... It was in the low 50's/high 40's and they were moving VERY slowly...

I don't have any problems with the current "rules"... They are there after years of experience, for Groundspeaks & our protection... I may not agree with all of them, but that's the way the game is played... I ave always found reviewers to be easy to work with... It may take a few e-mails to justify something, but usually because I have been too cryptic in my original request... if you want less restrictive rules, there is always that "other" caching game... I wouldn't mind seeing virtuals & reverse locationless go back to the way they were though...

duplicate post deleted

I offer you my most sincere condolences... Life as you know it will forever be changed...

The accuracy of posted coordinates are only as good as the conditions and accuracy of the unit the cache owner has to work with... when the cache was placed...

We have found some that are years old, and have had logs replaced many times... just a good maint. plan... Cheap containers are bad (Glad Containers, etc), but the new magneic nano's have come a long way... I just got a few with whole earth magnets, waterproof paper logs included... and have o-rings to prevent water intrusion... made from aluminum, so not a problem unless in a salt water envoronment... and DUH ... when you place a nano... place it protected from the weather... I know there are a lot of lousy ones out there... but if you read the logs, you can weed them out and only hit the quality ones...

For those that don't like nano's... they have the option of not doing them... That's entirely a personal preferance... For us it's the hunt that is our goal, the actual final container makes is inconsequential... I don't need to get a bunch of geoswag... we usually don't take anything from a cache anyway... Be it a film container or a 50 gallon oil drum... I have seen some that are years old...