Jomarac5

Tangles, I suspect that the term 'firestorm' means a fire that is being blown by wind. If so, our province is in a terrible state of emergency right now with over 800 of them right now, many of them are very, very big. This fire has burned an entire 98 hectare provincial park and is now going full force, completely uncontainable, towards Kelowna, the largest city in the Okanagan Valley, with a population of 96,000 people. Four hours ago on the 11:00 PM news it was reported that 30,000 people had been evacuated from their homes and houses were burning. Sure hope it rains. *****

quote: Dagg said,Hotwheels I'm with you on that one. They're the best toy car for the money. Good quality, they can take a kickin' from the kids, and they're great for collecting. We've put them in all of our caches and use them a lot for trade items. I find they tend to get picked up fairly quickly. In Vancouver, I've found the best place to get them is at Zellers (and sometimes at Walmart) for $1.19 each. We generally look for the special series versions -- some of those are very cool. I always take the kids when it's time to get some more of them and let them search through all the racks for all the cool ones -- it's a trip to the store that the kids really enjoy. *****

Hey Pharmadude, what caches are those? I'd be nice to read the cache descriptions. *****

I took this picture of a Great Blue Heron on a recent caching trip with Canadazuuk. We were about 6 meters (20 ft) away in the kayak when I snapped the shot. BTW: Fisur, that's an awesome shot of the Luna Moth. *****

Take Reconnaissance Photos I've found that using a camera is helpful when scoping out a potential cache location. I quite often take pictures of areas, including signs that have park information or trail and area maps. I can reference these later as I'm putting together my cache description (signs with park restrictions are quite useful) or use information such as a telephone numbers or a fact about the park to create puzzle or multi-caches. *****

quote: canadazuuk wrote:A simple goto cache, well hidden, in a nice place will suffice. quote: GeoFool wrote:When I place a cache I try to find an area that has something of interest for others to see. This is not always the case, but I try. I like finding caches that give a history lesson or show me places that I’ve never been to before. These two posts are both very important. Look around for a good location. But what makes a location good for placing a cache? *****

quote: Snoogans wrote:3 Parts Souza Hornitos Tequila 1 1/2 Parts Midori Melon Liqueur 5 Parts Margarita Mix 1 Table spoon of orange juice concentrate per quart. (That's the secret.) (Optional 1 part Gran Marnier or Cointreau. No crappy Triple Sec.) A few of them and you can go Jomarac5 on the forums with the best of 'em. HEY! How did you get *the* recipe? It is indeed what I drink every time before logging into the forums -- it's what gives me the *edge* You missed one small part that really makes the drink truly special -- add a splash of soda water immediately before serving. Now where's that reply button? *****

quote: Renegade Knight wrote:Like you said you don't have to ignore the current rules in place on this site to place a good cache. However if I actually lined out every rule I've seen proposed in the forums you probably would. Proposed rules are really a whole other discussion that we shouldn't get into here, but there is an aspect of this that is very relevant to this thread: Read the Cache Placement Guidelines Understanding ahead of time, what will and will not be approved can save you some frustration and will most likely help you avoid some of the common cache placement pitfalls. If you have a question about something that isn't covered in the guidelines or you think might be a problem with your placement, contact an approver. Approvers are very good at responding in a timely manner and if there is a problem with your submission, they may be offer alternate suggestions to help you get your cache approved. *****

SteelHead[bC], I haven't gone in from the top end so I asked a friend who has 4x4'd in from the Squamish side. Here's what he said: -- <snip> Yup, you can get there by 4x4 and on foot. It is a long haul. The drive in from Squamish is close to 2 hours unless you have a beefy truck or don't care about your suspension. You park at the old dry sort lot at Iron Bay, directly across from Wigwam Inn. Then you hike for about 1km of flat road/trail past some boat club piers. They have Private Property signs posted but I suspect the trail is not on their land. The trail then heads up a steep, section for another 1km. You reach a point where the trail starts to switchback and head east. Just before this point, there is a tiny sign that says Granite Falls/Beach or something like that. From here you head down, a very, very, steep trail, and pop out just north of the falls. All told, including hunting for the cache, it took us almost 10 hours, round trip. The hike from the base of the Falls to the top road/trail will be a major grunt with a pack on. I am sure it is faster to paddle there than drive. An alternative would be to take the water taxi from Deep Cove. No idea how much that would cost, but if some folks wanted to go for the day and were unable to paddle or drive, this would be a very pleasurable trip, I am sure. -- </snip> SteelHead, it would be really nice if you could join us for the camping. Hope this helps. *****

I also think that part of the experience is also how the cache itself has been prepared. I put together explanation sheets that are sized to fit the containers (I re-format the text in a word processor). I then print the info on both sides of paper and stop in at my local Staples store (office supply chain) and get them laminated. I get 2 or 3 sheets (depending on size) done at a time for a buck. Because the laminate protects it, I know the sheet won't get thrashed from people picking it up or getting it wet if it's raining -- as a cache owner, it's just a little detail that I don't have to worry about. *****

quote: Chris&Cindy wrote:Try and make it fun for a majority of the cachers instead of a few is a good start. Good point -- another aspect of this is that caches that are physically difficult to access will not likely get a lot of traffic -- as a first cache you definitely will enjoy it more if you are getting lots of logs on your cache page. Sometimes however, there are exceptions, when I placed this cache in an out of the way location that required a short but adventurous hike, I didn't expect that it would get more than a couple logs a year -- in 3 1/2 months it's had ten people log it. quote: umc wrote:So when you have these great caches its important to get people out to them. When you get others out to them and they like them I think they realize that its not really all about park and grabs. I've also worked on placing caches with others in my area and they've inspired others to place well thought out caches, its contagious (sp?) And that is very cool. Yes! We have a number of awesome caches in our area that obviously had a great deal of planning. Some of these caches absolutely inspired me -- and gave me more incentive to 'compete' a bit to create caches that will rival the good ones. Ties in a lot with the suggestion to check logs of local caches. The mini event is a great idea. It's a bit of effort to put an event together, so you might want to have a few placed caches under your belt before doing one. Incidentally, I've recently placed three caches in an inlet near Vancouver and have been organizing an overnight kayak trip in two weeks to pick up these and four other caches. quote: Renegade Knight wrote:Given that: in order to actually place a great cache you will have to ignore some or all of the rules. I don't agree. You can abide by all the current rules and still put out some exemplary caches. quote: Seneca wrote: A unique location that is "special" to the cache hider. The kind of place where the majority of locals will say "I've lived in this area all of my life, and never knew this neat place existed". Excellent point. Lot's of my logs have echoed exactly what you've said. Your Stepping Stones cache is a gem that is located in a park that I have driven past many times over the years. *****

Good stuff here. Could those that are straying off of the topic, please not do so? Thanks. I've thought of another thing: Survey the cache placement area Consider that cachers may not be coming to retreive the cache at the same time that you are placing it. It's important to also consider the appearance that someone will have when they are wandering around looking for a cache. In some situations the cacher can get clever and come up with a 'cover' (such as using your GPS as a phone, or pretending to be taking pictures of a stump beside the trail), but there are other places that, will most likely draw unwarranted attention. Schools are a good example -- a 40 year old man might draw attention to himself and end up having to answer embarrasing police questions. Under a bridge near an military base or an airfield could also (and has) created problems. There will be a wide variety of different types of people going to your cache, consider whether or not someone will look suspicous or out of place in the area -- if there is doubt, you may be better off looking for an alternate location for your cache. *****

I'll get the ball rolling with... Read cache logs. Before placing your first cache, read some local cache logs and visit caches that have really positive reviews. This will expose you to caches that are good examples, and chances are, have had considerable thought and effort put into area placement, hiding spot, container, and cache contents. *****

Over the last few days I've had a few conversations with a number of local cachers regarding finding a solution to increase the overall quality of the caches in our region. All of us have recently heard complaints, have personally noticed, and read cache logs that are implying that a number of the newer caches have been placed in less than stellar locations (school yards, playgrounds, below high tide areas in leaky containers, known crime areas, etc.). We've also noticed that the number of caches that have gone missing has increased in the last while, indicating that the caches may not have been hidden well enough to keep non-cachers from finding them (no cache pirate comments please). In many cases, the caches themselves had not been prepared very well (post-it notes for log books, leaky containers, lack of explanation sheet, etc). New cachers have placed most of these sub-standard caches, but a number are from people that have been caching for a while. We're of the mind that some educating might help out in getting some better cache experiences. It got me thinking of something that might benefit everyone -- let's put together a list of all the attributes that make for a really top-notch cache experience. When it's done, edit the thread to eliminate any clutter (redundancies, personal comments, etc.), and post the information in the Getting Started forum area. It'll take some time to compile this info but the effort will most likely produce some interesting and helpful results. This discussion should focus only on what makes a cache really good -- we all pretty much know what makes a cache bad, but that topic would be better suited for a separate thread of its own. What advice would you give a new cacher that wants to place their first cache? What we should be determining with this discussion are all the little details that make a cache experience run smoothly. So the question here is: How do you create a great cache experience? *****

quote: Seneca wrote:I'm not too sure what you were getting at, but I think we are in agreement as to why threads get locked. I agree as well. Things have settled down here a great deal. Let's not drudge this up over and over. I've said all I wanted to say, and it's my hope that I've been understood correctly. Anything you'd like to add, Seneca? *****

Maybe one reason that some threads get locked is because some people can't leave well enough alone and move along. Another reason might be that some people's posts are misunderstood because others don't read them carefully enough. Just a couple of guesses. *****

Great post! Those are words to live by. *****

Too bad. Perhaps we'll have opportunity to do some paddling together another time. Have a safe trip to Reid Island. .....

quote: Jeremy wrote:how someone venting about how the forums are unmoderated continues on a tangent even after several warnings. Warnings? From who? The Cheers crowd? I didn't get any warnings from you either, on the forums of by e-mail. This is a great forum here -- but it runs rampant quite a lot -- and that's whether I'm here or not. And with moderation, the results of good discussions could help caching advance greatly, and flaring tempers could be avoided. Consider this thread by Pantalaimon -- it also went off topic but by self-moderating the forum himself, he managed to keep the discussion on-topic and got a reasonable answer to his question from you. Moderation may not have got him that answer any quicker, but I'll bet that if these forums were better moderated, the purposefully off-topic posts would lessen greatly. As I've mentioned in a previous discussion, it's about respect, nearly everyone here, including yourself and myself, has engaged in petty exchanges -- and that makes it difficult to nurture respect in an environment that should be used pretty much exclusively for discussing ideas, concepts and problems to help to better the activity that we all enjoy. It's nearly impossible to carry on a serious discussion here because the norm of the day is to interupt and disrupt. I'm not denying that I don't engage in this any less than you or anyone else does -- sometimes it's easy to get caught up in it. I still stand behind the post that you quoted. It's easy for any honest person to see that these forums are not well moderated -- and to set something straight about that discussion -- I never suggested that the each forum post needs to be scrutinized before posting. That would be silly. Forum moderation is not censorship -- it's about keeping discussion going in a civil manner -- forum moderation is difficult -- heck, it's nearly an artform. Jeremy, I'd be happy to discuss what I know about it if you would like to do so privately. I doubt that we could have an uninterupted discussion about it in a public forum. There are a lot of powerful egos in these discussion forums and that's not necessarily a bad thing -- it spurns creative solutions to difficult problems. But it also brings a lot of "Your opinions don't mean squat" attitudes. All I'm asking for is for people in these forums to put that aside on the topics that are directed at serious concerns -- the ones that effect us all. How else can we make this activity better? If you'd prefer that I stop posting for a while, let me know and I'll be fine with that. But I think ignoring the moderation problems will only delay the advancements of this activity. *****

quote: Seneca wrote:Oh I get it now... Actually, if I may make a suggestion, I would recommend that you take an hour or so off this afternoon and enjoy a bit of quality contemplation time at this relaxing place that you took me to. It's a terrific place and it might help give you a different perspective on todays occurances. Things are not as bad as you make them out to be. BTW: Are you planning on joining us for the kayak event cache? (that is, if the parks are still open at that time). *****

quote: Cincinnati Bearcaches wrote:I dont want to invite Woodsters to start invading my e-mail... If you truly are as uptight about this as you seem -- and I don't mean this in an insulting way, take some time away from the forums doing something that you enjoy -- sometimes it really helps to relax and put things in their proper perspective. We've been plagued over the past few weeks with an atrocious and catastrophic forest fire problem in BC that has escalated in the past few days to levels never seen here before -- if things get much worse, we may not be placing caches in several areas for years to come. People are running for their lives and property is being destroyed at an alarming rate. I have many family members and friends who live in these fire areas and they're packing up what they can and heading into an unknown future -- and you think you've got problems? Cache pirates pale in comparison -- but they have also offered a little comic relief to our day. And Woodsters is not that bad. He's does have some bang on observations but is still carrying the discussion on a bit too far, but give him a break, he's getting better. (No offense intended Woodsters). *****

quote: Seneca wrote:Can you spell Hypocrite? Please see my reply here. *****

I agree with K-9CacheSeekers, it would be a good idea to post a reason when closing a thread. In actuality, that thread should have been locked when Jeremy posted on the first page. The best way to deal with those pirate characters was to ignore them as Jeremy stated. But in light of the recent grumbling over closing threads, I can appreciate why Jeremy didn't close the thread at that time. Seneca, don't misunderstand the *emphasis* discussion -- it took the thread off topic and subsequently led to its closing. And I think that you'll find that most people would agree that it wasn't a bad thing. The discussion just previous to my involvement was really doing exactly what the pirates had hoped for -- getting a rise out of people. Fueling the pirate thread with reactions that get people heated up to the point that they contact a police department over something so trivial is not positive for the public image of caching and was possibly an embarassment for the cacher who reported it (imagine what the desk sargeant was thinking when he received *that* call). Perhaps, in the developing story, it will be necessary to contact the authorites, but at this time, from a legal standpoint, I think you'd agree that there is not nearly enough evidence to engage the Cap'n in any sort of legal conflict. It was a discussion that was turning into, and was based on, complete conjecture. When I posted, I was attempting merely to distract from the pirates folly in a playful and non-confrontational manner. From what I observed, no one seemed to mind. You can come back with an argument of why my reasoning doesn't make perfect sense (I know I can think of a few good points that you could use), but realize first that I'm not looking to engage you in another silly heated confrontation, it's all in good fun. I think that thread is now one of my all-time favourite pirate stories -- but who knows, it may still end badly. I hope that you can appreciate my thinking on this one and not take any of my comments in that thread personally. Heck, nearly 4000 views in less than two days indicated that a lot of people were watching it -- you have to admit, that thread was pretty darned entertaining. *****

quote: Woodsters wrote:My complaint is when people post something and tell the admin to close it please so you can't rebut... Ya, that bugs me too. You've gotta be real quick to get your last licks in, especially once Hydee has given the *You've been warned* notification. ***** [This message was edited by Jomarac5 on August 21, 2003 at 01:19 PM.]

Hydee always gets the *best* last lines. quote: Hydee wrote:Looks as if this topic just took it's final step off the plank. Let's hope there are not any Croc's waiting. Personally, Hydee, I would have used more emphasis on the word *final*. But nonetheless, this one is probably my favourite last lines of all. *****