Corfman Clan

How fitting

All this means is that an application shouldn't break with new values, however the application will not be able to take full advantage of the new values because the meanings are unknown. It's difficult to make intelligent choices about something if there is no information about what it is.

Wow, the servers times drifted several minutes apart. Better turn that clock synchronization on. Thanks for getting this resolved!

The LonelyCache web application is seeing this issue too. I have fairly detailed logs of when all the transactions occur. Here's a summary (times are EDT) of SearchForGeocaches requests: First call made after 05/07/14 04:59:18.858, but before 05/07/14 04:59:19.716 30th call made after 05/07/14 05:00:08.827, but before 05/07/14 05:00:09.732 31st call made after 05/07/14 05:00:20.013, but before 05/07/14 05:00:20.200 with Status 140 The number of calls allowed for this Method has been exceeded 32nd call made after 05/07/14 05:01:30.309, but before 05/07/14 05:01:30.512 with Status 140 33rd call made after 05/07/14 05:02:40.621, but before 05/07/14 05:02:40.808 with Status 140 34th call made after 05/07/14 05:03:50.917, but before 05/07/14 05:03:51.104 with Status 140 35th call made after 05/07/14 05:05:01.229, but before 05/07/14 05:05:01.416 with Status 140 36th call made after 05/07/14 05:06:11.541, but before 05/07/14 05:06:11.759 with Status 140 37th call made after 05/07/14 05:07:21.868, but before 05/07/14 05:07:22.960 with Status 0, success. Basically, the 31st call was made about 60.5 seconds after the first call. From there, the call was retried about 70 seconds later six times before success, or just over 8 minutes from the first call. This behavior doesn't occur all the time. I have not looked to see how frequently it occurs.

Or children come to the cache, take the knife, and wreak some sort of havoc with it. In my opinion, these two scenarios are so contrived they aren't even worth considering. Knives are important and essential tools that most everyone, even children, need to know how to properly handle. I have no qualms whatsoever with knives used as trade items.

What's the problem with knives? I can understand a fixed blade knife that is not sheathed as someone might cut themselves on it. But what is wrong with a folding knife or a knive with the blade sheathed?

Why would anyone want an odd PQ generator? I would think two normal PQ generators would be best. Question, how can you tell whether a PQ is odd or not?

I really wouldn't walk to far from my home to find a cache. Maybe five miles roundtrip. I'd probably ride my bicycle instead. I will go on long hikes for caches but the hike is usually after a drive. I think I did about an 18 mile hike with lots of elevation gain for five caches earlier this year. I've gone on multi-day backback trips solely to find a geocache or several. Probably the most extreme was a three day back pack into Grand Canyon along the Tanner/Beamer trails to find three virtuals. We even packed down an inflatable kayak to get one across the river. Yeah, my walking distance has increased over the years.

You obviously no not what you are talking about. Arizona is an absolutely fantastic place to geocache and to live. The state is incredibly diverse from the deserts to the forests. It is an outdoorsman's paradise. There is world class trout fishing in the mountains to bass fishing in large reservoirs. One can hunt deer, elk, antelope, black beer, javelina, mountain lion, bighorn sheep, bison, turkey, dove, qual, and so on. The four wheeling here is exceptional. There's lots of old roads to ghost towns and old mines that would take a life time to explore. I stumble upon Indian ruins and petroglyphs several times a year out hiking around. They are all over the place. Look at my gallery, it is filled with pictures of ruins I have passed by while geocaching. I could easily continue but instead I'll end with this: Arizona is anything but a horrible place.

A hunter here and there, walking the lonely desert at his own pace and path, and hundreds of geocachers taking the exact same path, from geocache to geocache, trashing the environment, driving across the desert, and many of which did so WITHOUT a permit ...are two VERY different things. Sorry. If you live and have cached in the Az desert then you KNOW this is true. I have yet to meet a fellow Arizonan with an Az trust permit. None of my entire family tree who lives there does. Generations who have lived there.. We've used trust lands extensively for geocaching, jeeping, hiking, mountain biking. Of all the activities I've participated in that were on trust land...nothing rank as high in environmental damage as geocaching. Nothing. Biking, jeeping, hiking....we stay on trails. Have you tried mountain biking off trail?? Like, really? Leisurely geocaching on easy desert terrain is not even on trail, let alone caches used to force some kind of 'art'. Cammo is used with whatever 'dead' tree or cactus is nearby. People shove their boots into creosote and smash it into the ground looking for that ever elusive Tupperware container. I've found caches shoved INSIDE saguaro cactus (in freshly dug out holes!). Dug into the earth and covered with broken off brush. With freshly broken paloverde branches used for cammo. The holes that once housed bunnies or snakes now used for caches. Etc, etc Do cachers everywhere do this? Yeah, probably. Is this perhaps a regional thing? Maybe so...but that region is the exact region we are talking about. If I were a person, evaluating the use of geocaching on Az trust lands, and I saw what I've seen...I would never, ever allow it. Never. Az geocachers dug their own graves on this one. Power trails, geo-'art'...congrats. . Not sure where to start here. For some perspective, 4412 geocaches were just archived because they were on AZ state trust land. Some have been unarchived, but not many. Of those 4412 geocaches, I had found close to 1400 of them. That's close to one third of the caches archived for being on AZ state trust land. So I have spent many many hours geocaching on AZ state trust land. I can guarantee you, from my experience, geocachers have very little negative impact on the environment compared to others. I really won't get into the game of blaming this group or that group, because the real damage is caused by individuals, not groups. Some people dump stuff here, others shoot and leave a mess, others ride their ATVs where they're not supposed to. But these aren't groups, they are irresponsible individuals. Also, I have had several recreational permits for trust land and I know many geocachers that have too. Hunting and fishing licenses are also a permit for accessing trust lands for those activities. So I'm sorry, but I cannot begin to agree with the above statement as it does not match my experience at all and I suspect my experience on AZ state trust land is at least an order of magnitude greater than JesandTodd's.

Really? Cite? See my last ramble where I mentioned the enviromental damage from hikers cutting their own trails. Why would they bother to build hiking trails, say "You have to stay on established trails", and then let you walk off-trail without mentioning it. And I can ask the same thing of you. At any rate, your proposition is not practicle. For example would a hunter be required to stay on a road or trail while on foot? Of course not and hunting is a valid and approved activity on much of the state trust lands. Actually, what I said was based on what it says now (and reading the relevant part of the enabling act). And don't say "But it wasn't that when they placed it", it's the responsibility of CO to maintain his cache. If you want to know what the rules used to be (this is from 2007, actually), it helps to read things people link. http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=173626&view=findpost&p=3083118 That was exactly my point. Using the current wording for what it was years ago doesn't make sense. Also, the cited post is by a past Arizona reviewer and it states that a note on the cache listing stating it is on trust land is needed. There's nothing there about caching not being allowed on state trust lands. The only requirement mentioned for placing a cache on trust lands is the disclaimer. No mention of contacting the department is mentioned like there is for caches on BLM lands. Last year this was news to everyone because it was a change of policy. From then, no new caches on state trust land were published, however, there was no requirement or request to remove existing caches. Some cachers met with the AZ Land Dept. Nothing came of it but to wait until a decision was made. Evidently the decision was recently made but there was no notice to the geocaching community until the caches started to be archived. The cacher mentioned didn't need to remove the caches at that time, it was his reaction. So I really don't appreciate you saying we didn't police ourselves or it was because of bad behavior or whatever. You really don't know the back story to all this, yet you are being quite judgemental. Tsk, tsk.

I believe you are making a lot of bad assumptions. For example, staying on established roads and trails is not pertinent to hikers. It is to keep vehicles like cars, jeeps and ATVs from going cross country. Here, trails is meant as jeep/ATV trails not hiking trails. Also, the wording of the Trust land recreational use permit has changed over the years so to cite it as what was several years ago is really not valid. As I mentioned before, people come and go and policies change. For many years geocaching was fine on AZ state trust land. Now it's not. Just because it's not now doesn't mean all or most of the caches that were just archived didn't have permission or shouldn't have been placed. That is just not the case.

This may be the case for some of the caches that were archived, but not for all of them. There was an agreement made between the state land dept. and geocachers. It was made in the early days of geocaching. As time progresses, people come and go and policies change. So what used to be isn't what is now, but stating that none had permission is just not true.

This looks fun and I'm interested in going. My big questions are about logistics. What's the plan to get back from the event site to the carpool site? Will the paddle continue Sunday to Yuma West Wetlands park? Then I figure there will be a trip from there to the launch site so those who drove to the launch site can get their vehicles? Is my assumption that everyone will need to bring their camping gear along on the paddle correct? Thanks.

Yep, that's quite the bump! I've always called it geocycling.

Well, not quite. The 24 hour time limit starts when you retrieve the first cache, not when you retrieve the 10,000th cache.

Well, I would hope the circles are bigger than .1 miles. Perhaps you got the radius mixed up with the diameter...

I've been seeing this a lot too. Pages get stuck loading, etc.

This really isn't the case at all. Yes, it retrieves the list of caches, but only a list of 20 at a time and at that, just a few details of each of those 20 caches. It does not create the GPX file and save it off, etc, etc.

My better side... Yes, it was a windy day...

Silly me, I thought every date is unique.

You can add 5000 Days of Geocaching in Arizona to the list.

Slap Forehead! I normally don't use an ignore list but am working on adding a new feature for a Live API enabled web site that will use a cacher's ignore list. I hope this didn't take up much of your time to figure out. Thanks

When looking at the list of caches hidden by the owner of cache Ssptv 8pf 1 Lpa44 k 0536 y4 8219Pk, it does not show up. Also, when I look at the caches found by the one finder of the cache, it again doesn't show up. My guess, is that this has something to do with this cache being marked as a premium cache, but the cache owner is no longer a premium member.

How about a hint on where and when? Lower Colorado covers a lot of distance. I'd be interested and if this is published in CA then I might easily miss it since I live in AZ.