succotash

Fortunately for us, this handsome cache guardian was easily distracted by a breadcrumb (or was it the hens nearby)?

We have learned much from the forums. Most of it very positive. But sometimes it is amazing what upsets people. It never, ever occurred to us that someone would actually be offended if their cache needs maintenance and we post a needs maintenance log instead of sending them a personal email. If we have cache supplies with us we'll help a cache that needs help and have done so many times. But sometimes the owner really needs to take care of it. Moldy caches, caches with black soot and fungus, caches that are physically damaged, these situations deserve attention from the owner. We have never posted a needs maintenance for a logbook, but if someone did that to us we would not be offended, we would thank them and go replace the logbook.

I don't see where the guidelines (not rules) state you cannot place a cache in a wildlife preserve. The wording I see is that a cache may not be allowed if it is placed "on land managed by an agency that prohibits geocaches, such as the U.S. National Park Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges)." So if you have specific permission from the park owner (which is wonderful!) then there would not be any problem placing it within the guidelines in this regard. Good luck!

We also prefer a puzzle that brings us to the type of quality final location we seek with traditional caches (scenic, historical, away from muggles, non-micro container). We have done several puzzles we really enjoyed that brought us to let-down final locations, and the final locations are what kept us from adding those caches to our "favorites" list. Most of the puzzle caches on our favorites list brought us to excellent final locations. But we do also appreciate a final location that relates to the puzzle itself (which is the case with the one puzzle cache we own). And in the case of this cache,, the fact that the container was a micro actually made the find even more rewarding due to the nature of the puzzle! But in general - a scenic or historic location, privacy from muggles, and/or a final location or cache container that ties into the puzzle theme would be the most appreciated.

You may want to know, there is section of the forum under GPS-related topics devoted to benchmarks. This thread may get moved there, but you can check it out here in the meantime.

Thanks Larry.

I noticed it too and while it seems to be an inevitable part of online participation everywhere, I thought I would try Prime Suspect's recommendation. However, when I blocked the cookies in my browser I was instantly logged out of geocaching. When I tried to log back in, I couldn't. I realize cookies are needed for the site to "remember me," but this happened even for a one-time log in. So at least with this browser (Firefox) that doesn't seem to be an option. Anyway, it seems faster today and less noticeable, which is I'm sure how they prefer it to be! Bean (not very computer-savvy)

Keystone, your post reminds me of a favorite quote (I can't remember the author): "True power is knowing that you can... but you don't." Thanks for looking out for us. Bean

We find that the various tools already available are very effective in allowing us to customize our geocaching experience. We have had many full caching days that were a pleasure from start to finish. But then again, the most caches we've ever found in one day is 24. We're not into power caching, we are into having a great day caching. Since that's what the rating system discussion is all about, we want to share that in our opinion the tools already available allow us to do just that. We can give examples of one person's lousy cache being someone else's "creative hide." For this and several other reasons we don't support a rating system. The concept of recommending caches (enhancement of the favorites list idea) is a more positive way to go about improving what is already there. Bean

Good idea. Depending upon your area, be prepared for fewer finds. We have a cache on an island in a lake, published last July and found four times. Those who find it are positive and that is what we had expected and hoped for! jholly's point about difficulty versus terrain is important. Our feeling is that if someone is going to boat out to the island, we want them to find the cache so it is not intended to be difficult (just hidden from muggles). You may want a higher difficulty but either way it is important to separate the two ratings. You can do a pocket query. Or, for something quick, go to "Hide and Seek a Cache" and search on the keyword "island." Then look at the caches with a terrain of 5. You can get a sense of what people like from the log entries. (Our cache doesn't have the word "island" in it so you would not pick it up this way, and you pick up lots of non-island caches, but I think it's fun to search by keyword). Good luck! Bean

We just do what we think is the right thing. It usually works. For the most part, I replace caches I find exactly as I find them. If I think there might have been some cache drift, I'll shoot a note to the owner describing what I found and how I replaced it. On rare occasions, I'll find a cache I know is not where it's supposed to be. (I.e: Hint says "In a stump", yet the Lock & Lock is sitting at the base of a hollow stump) In those rare cases, I return it to where I believe it should be, again shooting a note to the owner. So far, (knocks on wooden head), I've been 100% successful in determining the intended placement location. If an owner were to ever tell me I guessed wrong, I'd go back and correct the error of my ways. Yes. The key is for the cache owner to understand that the last person to visit the cache may not be the person to get frustrated with, the last cachers may have made the best decision they could given the information they had (physical find and information on the cache page).

Briansnat and WeightMan have given good advice. Since you have small children and limited time to cache, one suggestion is to place your cache in a park suited for children. If you find a place you would be happy to return to even if there was no cache there, you and your children are more likely to enjoy any needed maintenance visits, or keeping the cache stocked with children's toys, or just looking to see how it is doing and what people have written in your logbook. Good luck!

A laminated card should be fine. Last year we picked up a TB exactly like that called Flat Steven and it looks like it's still traveling and doing fine. Good luck!

We're also not into FTFs and generally avoid going to new caches in our area. Most of the few we have happen by accident. But this recent one on a puzzle cache several hours from our house was nice. It was published February 28, we found it March 7, and no one has found it again yet although that will surely happen soon. (March 7th was also one of the first beautiful spring-like days here so everything we did that day had a special shine to it.) GC1N5CD

This cache in Ireland was placed last fall and has no finds: Unknown Cache Member-only cache (2.5/2) Size: Other 19 Nov 08 Do NOT find this cache by The Windsockers (GC1GCAC) Leinster I didn't click to find out more...

The fact that you want to keep the ALR hidden would deter me from seeking your cache. You say that it is my loss, but I'll take that risk (unless your cache is at a spectacularly beautiful location and I don't care if I get the smiley or not). Please consider that it may be your loss as well, by turning away many cachers who feel as I do. While these particular ALRs are not too burdensome, there are some ALRs that really are uncomfortable for many of us. Given a choice of caches to visit, I will select others (including traditional puzzle caches) before yours. You also may want to consider how you would react to a 25-word log entry that explains in detail why the cacher did not enjoy visiting your cache. Would you be okay with that? I do thank you for laying out the "rest" of your vision. It sounds like you are predicting an "end to geocaching as we know it" because beautiful locations are finite, and there must be a reason to bring people to "nondescript, not terribly exciting locations." Goodness, I hope not. Bean

One reason it is considered bad form to ask for specific puzzle help in these forums is that you do not have to find every cache. If you can't figure out a puzzle cache, try setting it aside for a few months. Plan on looking at it again after you have enjoyed finding more caches and learning more about the sport/game of geocaching in general. You will feel great when you solve it and find the cache!

The road sign below helps direct you to this cache in South Carolina (a fascinating true story).

In early 2007 we requested permission to place a cache in a Georgia WMA and were told that caching was not allowed. We continue to visit this particular WMA for other reasons and there are still no caches there. However, we have visited several caches placed in different Georgia WMAs and are aware of caches placed in still more locations we haven't yet visited. Unless stated on the cache page, we don't know whether the hiders got permission for these caches. We hope so, since this is generally the type of cache we look forward to seeking.

Actually, the OP said the area was amongst dense "fur" trees. I thought that was a funny typo for a dog park! Bean

Thanks for sharing something positive, with your daughter and with us!

We found out from the log entry of the cachers who picked this one up after us that the tag is original, but the jeep is a replacement.

Yes!!! We found this yellow jeep TB in Georgia in early January. We placed it in a cache in South Carolina on January 18th. It's still there!

When we went to visit this cache, the swag we left was a working 19"color tv (with remote ). Our daughter solved the puzzle on a visit home from college and it was great fun to drive to the cache with the tv in the back of the truck. (This is one case where the "unknown size" really applies and you'll miss it if you filter them out because most are nanos! If we say more it will give too much away... )

This thread might have faded away after just two pages if Ice Cream Man's avatar were a cute bunny or perhaps a sea kitten, instead of a scary masked man and his scary masked friend who look like they were caught in the act of dispatching a non-premium member who chanced upon a PMOC...