greg1701
-
Posts
46 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by greg1701
-
-
re: gas prices...
It has clearly reduced my caching... I just hide now primarily (and all within 2 miles of my home for easy and inexpensive maintenance when necessary..)
If I go hunting for Benchmarks or Caches, I now already have to be going to that area for something else.. I can't remember the last time I went on a trip Just To Cache....
I call it "Situational Geocaching"...
G
-
Yes, the coordinates for Traditionals should be as accurate as possible. Coordinates should not be intentionally posted incorrectly just to "increase the challenge".
I wasn't inferring that I was doing that... I try to make them as accurate as possible. But if a person logs on your cache "coords off 20 feet" as if this was a high crime it seems silly.. isn't 20 feet close enough? As the other person who posted above "to find a pile of sticks placed parallel over a cache"...
-
just wondering how others felt about this...
If your GPS takes you within 2 feet of the cache, is it then too easy?
My point I guess is, I enjoy being within 30 feet then figuring out the puzzle. Ones that take me right up to the container, whatever, are kinda boring.. I enjoy the hunt...
Thoughts?
-
thanks all for the advice.. didn't see the guidelines link... and I of course will not do anything near this area...
and as always, sarcasm is the grumpy man's wit...
Greg
-
Hi all..
Finally got around to placing some caches and I must say I've enjoyed it immensely... looking to expand my current area of placement. (I posted earlier about keeping them close to home and whether it was a good idea... a lot of people said no but I've run into many people looking for mine, and helped them along the way and made a few new friends.. so I'd say Yes to anyone who asks that same question again... but I babble.. anyway..)
There is a large interstate bridge near me where you can bicycle under it on a well marked path.. there are giant holes in the bridge that are perfect for a cache placement, but I was wondering in our post 9/11 world whether anyone would get in trouble rooting around a large public transporation structure...
Has anyone had any experience with this? Are caches near bridges and the like discouraged now?
Just wonderin' out loud...
thanks
Greg
-
yeah, Gas prices are a bummer...
I just placed my first one ever five minutes ago and it's 100 feet outside of my condo building..
What are your neighbors going to think about all the strange activity in front of their homes?
--it's far enough away that it won't be a problem... and as for "all that strange activity"... at least in Denver there isn't enough activity that it would seem odd...
-
yeah, Gas prices are a bummer...
I just placed my first one ever five minutes ago and it's 100 feet outside of my condo building..
What are your neighbors going to think about all the strange activity in front of their homes?
it's a condo building and it's far enough away that I don't think anyone will notice...
-
I've got a location that I could place 4 caches in because its just large enough.
BUT, I WON'T.
I plan on placing 2 unique caches, that you will have to drive between them. I thought about a multi, but this location just doesn't have the vibe of a good multi. So I will only place 2 unique caches and move on.
Sometimes its not about just putting out several cache.
Gas does play a roll for MANY cachers.
I've certainly noticed a downward trend in logging of late.
yeah, Gas prices are a bummer...
I just placed my first one ever five minutes ago and it's 100 feet outside of my condo building.. I'll place a few more around my nearby park and house before I venture out... I want to get my feet wet and I figure people will be able to park their car and bang out a few.. even though they'll have to walk over 0.10 miles between them.. I'll make them far enough apart so they won't be considered a power trail...
I'll hide a few near work next.. still trying to figure out places that can whether the elements well here...
thanks for the post...
-
As I just placed my very first Cache 5 minutes ago, I'll throw in my two cents..
I have 136 caches found.. I'd have more, but I've been seduced by Benchmarking and that has been my primary focus the last year... but I still felt bad about seeing that Zero Placed on my profile.. so I wanted to give back..
I heavily scouted my home area (easier to check on them if they are close.. dadgum gas prices..) and finally placed one.. and I'll be doing a few more in the next few days..
But I guess my point is this.. after finding many of them and seeing many of them in the forums talked about I had a better idea about everything.. I think experience does indeed help here..
But if you are a Geocaching Idiot Savant, by all means do it immediately... but I firmly believe hunting for them first is generally beneficial...
-
I think ultimately, you'll get very little support here in the forums for the five caches in the same park. This is not to say their aren't tons of geocachers who would like "5 quick grabs" in the same park. You probably just won't hear from them here.
I suppose it also depends on the park size. Does it have a nice trail system? Or pretty much a wide open park where they'd all be barely 528 feet apart?
it's not a big park. again, they would be placed not only in the park, but in blocks surrounding it.. but I'm rethinking the whole thing now anyway.. thanks for the post tho.
-
You might be violating the power trail guideline by doing so.
That said, I'd rather each cache stand on its own and bring me to someplace interesting, than get 5 quick cookie cutter smileys
I don't see what the price of gas has to do with anything. If the price goes down will you move them further apart?
Well, after reading the replies I'll move them further apart.. but as for the price of gas, I know a lot of people who are doing less geocaching just due to the cost of gas and driving around.. so I thought if they were somewhat nearby you could do several without restarting your car for each one... that's all...
-
Actually the guideline for saturation is a multipart guideline. Not only should caches be .1 mile apart but you shouldn't saturate a small area with a bunch of your caches "just because you can". Especially in a short period of time. While 5 is not a large number - I'd be willing to bet that your reviewer would suggest turning 5 all about 500 feet apart in a small park into a single multi-cache.
I thought about that.. not all of them are in the park though, just in blocks around the park... so hopefully they'll be approved as a non multi-cache.. with the number of muggles around, if one of the "parts" of the multi gets muggled then it's no fun for anyone...
We'll see..
I just thought with gas prices what they were that putting them a little closer to each other than I normally would might not be a bad thing.. -
hello all... I'm about to (finally) place some caches of my own as I was feeling guilty about my growing number of found caches (136) compared to my placed caches (0)....
I have a lovely park near my home which has no caches currently.. and with gas prices as high as they are (which keep me from all but "Destination Geocaching") nowadays I thought it would be nice to place 4 or 5 in and around the park (all over 512 feet apart, per the guidelines...)
Thus, people could park at the....er.. park... and have a number of caches (varying degrees of difficulty) to enjoy and save money on fuel at the same time..
That was my thought anyway.. then someone who also geocaches said they would rather place them all over rather than concentrate them...
So I thought I'd throw it out for discussion.. would you all appreciate a grouping of nearby caches (not multi, as I don't want one muggle to ruin all the caches by stealing one) or is it better for me to expand the radius...
Greg
-
Your GPSr's range is +/- 0.01 minutes in each coordinate (a range of 0.02), if I read your logs correctly. If both are off by 0.02 at the same time, then that is an error of over 150 feet. Even if only 1 coordinate is off by 0.01 minutes, then the error is about 50 feet. I think that is a sort of large amount of error for reporting coordinates. As I recall, mine moves around 0.002 minutes. Maybe it might be better if you found an averaging function in that GPSr, or average it yourself, or got a new GPSr, or even consider not reporting coordinates. Map scaling can be off by 600 feet or more, but I'm not so sure the average scaling error is worse than +/- 0.01 minutes. I think that reporting the variation observed is good and so, such a log gives sufficient information for judging the information you provide, but it might not be worth your reporting coordinates at all with that level of unaveraged variation. I really don't like being negative about this, but that is my conclusion from the data, and you did ask for a critique.I would really appreciate more help on how to report my GPS coordinates.
No. No. That is not being negative at all. That is exactly the kind of critique I was looking for. Thanks.
I was indeed worried about the accuracy of my reading and that is why I included the variation of the readings and the type of GPSr. Thanks for the explanation on how much distance (in feet) that variation really represents. In the future, I will just leave coordinates off of my logs.
--having said that, if the coordinates are wildly off as is often the case, I'd appreciate an "updated" set even if they are off by 50 feet... but that's just me... I thought your logs looked good... and I too fall into the camp of "No Boxes, Squares, Circles" on scenic photos.. but that's just a personal preference...
Enjoy!
Thanks.
-
thanks for all the info folks!
Greg
-
Hi, Greg,
Perhaps I can shed some light on the history of the disk. That stamping on the disk was 1934 (not 1954). The digits three and five are difficult to distinguish, after years of exposure to weather.
The mark was set in 1934. However, it was not entered in the NGS database until 1969, when its position was established to NGS standards. Notice in the data sheet below, that the MONUMENTED date is 35 years before the year it was "described by the US Geological Survey".
By the way, this is not uncommon. You will run across other marks with different monumented and described dates. It is similar to what you see in data sheets for very old water tanks: "First described in 1918...", etc.
-Paul-
LM0288_U.S. NATIONAL GRID SPATIAL ADDRESS: 13TCE4670773520(NAD 83)LM0288_MARKER: DB = BENCH MARK DISK
LM0288_SETTING: 7 = SET IN TOP OF CONCRETE MONUMENT
LM0288_SP_SET: CONCRETE POST
LM0288_STAMPING: C 45 1934
LM0288_MARK LOGO: CGS
LM0288_MAGNETIC: N = NO MAGNETIC MATERIAL
LM0288_STABILITY: C = MAY HOLD, BUT OF TYPE COMMONLY SUBJECT TO
LM0288+STABILITY: SURFACE MOTION
LM0288_SATELLITE: THE SITE LOCATION WAS REPORTED AS SUITABLE FOR
LM0288+SATELLITE: SATELLITE OBSERVATIONS - May 18, 1999
LM0288
LM0288 HISTORY - Date Condition Report By
LM0288 HISTORY - 1969 MONUMENTED CGS
LM0288 HISTORY - 1969 GOOD USGS
LM0288 HISTORY - 19910725 GOOD NGS
LM0288 HISTORY - 19960823 GOOD CODOT
LM0288 HISTORY - 19971007 GOOD CODOT
LM0288 HISTORY - 19990518 GOOD MSAM
LM0288 HISTORY - 20071020 GOOD INDIV
LM0288
LM0288 STATION DESCRIPTION
LM0288
LM0288 DESCRIBED BY US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1969
LM0288'6.8 MI S FROM STEAMBOAT SPRINGS.
LM0288'STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, 6.8 MILES S OF POST OFFICE ALONG US HWY. 40. 70 FT
LM0288'E AND 20 FT N OF CENTER OF HWY. 40 AND GRADED ROAD WEST. 1.7 FT W OF
LM0288'ROW FENCE.
LM0288
upon further review, yep.. '34 it is.. do you have a photo of it? How did you know that?
I just put my pic up on the site of that mark.. thanks for the info Paul!!
-
Found a BM yesterday (LM0288)... it is stamped 1954, but the log has it monumented in the 1960s... is this common? Could they have created the mark but then not placed it for 7 years? I'm certain I have the right one (coordinates are adjusted and description is dead on perfect for location...)
Just wondering...
Thanks
Greg
-
greg1701 -
Well, looking in Nevada - how about Pah Rah, a real 1878 mark? It looks like only a mile from the end of Rodero Road.
Pioche Peak Monument (1881) might be an interesting find. I don't understand what boundary it is.
Diamond Peak looks pretty remote but remains a nice 1881 find.
well great, but i'm in colorado now!!!
those are good ones though...
-
Thanks for the tips. I tried to use a liquid paper pen and it did not really work. The crayon, babypowder and spray paint sound like really good methods.
I was with someone the other day that had cornstarch and a whisk broom with them, and those pictures turned out absolutely terrific... highly recommend it...
greg
-
Wow, this thread is really impressive... loved seeing all the pics...
I'll add my find from the top of the Riviera Casino in Vegas last week.. this is the Reference Mark Number Two for the Benchmark "Rivieria 1956"....
Greg
Awesome! I've had my eye on RIVIERA for the next time I got into town, but probably would've not gotten up the nerve to ask - did they ask you if you were crazy?!
PS - I was walking into that place once & held the door open for Elvis! Seriously. Sure looked like him!
---it took me three years to get permission to get up to the roof and about a thousand emails.. and even then I almost didn't find them...
-
Wow, this thread is really impressive... loved seeing all the pics...
I'll add my find from the top of the Riviera Casino in Vegas last week.. this is the Reference Mark Number Two for the Benchmark "Rivieria 1956"....
Circus Circus is in the background...
Greg
-
Okay, let's see if this works...
Me in front of the Elevator Maintenance Building on top of the Riviera Hotel and Casino in Vegas...[/img]
Reference Mark Number Two with Circus Circus in the background...
Reference Mark Number One...
and our Benchmark...
best Benchmarking experience I've ever had.. what's next?? Is this the best I'll ever do?? Sigh.. I guess we'll find out... time to hit the database...
Greg
-
I did take a shot of the nail, albiet pretty blurry. Okay, I'll post my pics to snapfish, then put them here..
Yeah, that was clearly the best Benchmark find I'll ever locate I think... incredibly satisfying getting up on that roof and looking around Vegas from up there...
Greg
Wow Greg, great find!
Your perseverance definitely paid off! To post a photo, it has to already exist online somewhere with a URL. So to post one of yours, I simply copy the URL from the photo page, then paste it into the prompt box that you get when you click on the tree icon in the post page.
Did you get a shot of the nail? When the description says that the station can not be occupied, that's not the same as saying that it is inaccessible. It just means that you can't set up a tripod over the station marker itself, which is why they used the eccentric station, marked by the nail with a cross. The parapet offered a better site for a permanent marker location, but with limited access to survey instruments.
So, post some more photos if you have them!
-
Also, I can't find the "browse" button on the posting page to insert photos.. all I can see is an "Image" button which asks for a URL... can anyone help me out there?? I'd like to add some pics to this post.. thanks..
Greg
I just thought with gas prices what they were that putting them a little closer to each other than I normally would might not be a bad thing..
What all geocachers and gun owners have in common
in General geocaching topics
Posted
The only things I have in common with gun owners are.. er.. umm...
Actually, I have nothing in common with gun owners. Tying these two topics together seems like a stretch to me...