Sileny Jizda

Naaa, must be velcro.

That about sums up what I was thinking about their thread. I think the term to use is 'elitists.'

I've got three Magellan's. A GPS315, a 200, and a 400. We like the 400 and were able to pick it up at Wal-Mart for $150 with the discounted MapSend software. I love the thing and don't leave home without it. As for the Garmin vs Magellan bit that seems to happen here I have my thoughts on it. I used a Garmin in Survey class in '95 and didn't much care for it. I liken it to a PC vs Mac debate. They both have their plus sides and both have their negatives. I like a large screen which Magellan has. I like a lower price which Magellan has. I like the feature to price ratio that Magellan has against it's competitive version of Garmin. Will I talk bs about Garmin? Nope, never owned one and don't plan to do so. Will I buy another Magellan. You betcha. My GPS315 and 200 still work great. Nothing is stripped out. Both the 315 and the 400 transfer waypoints flawlessly. As for stripping out the connection on the back... don't tighten it like a gorilla and it'll treat you good. Abuse the equipment you have no one but yourself to blame. Different strokes for different folks but all of our Magellan GPS units work, work well, and get the same job done as a Garmin.

Got our Jeep in Holmes County, Ohio.

I don't see a problem with it either. As I mentioned though we normally leave for someone else to enjoy and move along. Normally, a bug doesn't stay long in our box, usually a week at best. We, ourselves, only cache when we can. With conflicting schedules, (wife is a nurse, I work in a B&B as everything from the cleaner to the website builder/tech) we have about a day at best we can get out and actually cache. We have two bugs out at the moment and would love the goals to be met however, if they sit it's part of the chance you take. As for stats, I wouldn't lose any sleep at all if they were gone. We don't care one way or the other, otherwise we'd probably have higher numbers than we do both in finding and placing. Typically, even when we just 'discover' a bug we take a photo for our scrapbook. I wish I had a camera every time someone opened one of our caches. The reactions are truly unique to each one but well worth it. Right now I'm kicking myself from missing our local judge finding the one where I work.

Perfectly acceptable. Travel bugs are meant to travel and if you can assist it towards its goal, do it. The Discover option? Not sure why you would want to make a special trip out to your cache just to get a stat count for a bug you didn't help move along. Move them bugs! We only have 4 caches to our name. One is at my place of employment. One is at our local library where we visit at least once a week, on the way to work (We read alot). One is in another city nearby (visit once a month or two.). The other will most likely be visited 4 times a year (Every 3 months) because it's one heck of a hike for us anyway. The first two I mentioned are normally the ones we discover bugs in.

Makes me no nevermind one way or the other. I assume when placing my hand in anything that anything could be in or on where I'm putting it. Once I had to retrieve a cache AFTER a muggle walked her dog and it leaked on the bush I need to retrieve it from. It's safe to assume even if I hadn't seen that at some point in time anther pet did the same thing. Try wet naps.

I usually just 'discover' them and leave them for other cachers to enjoy.

We don't do ad's. We use Firefox with the appropriate extensions. Cheers.

I don't do ads. I have Mozilla Firefox with Adblocker and the other bits that get rid of them.

The way some people think you'd easily assume we were living in Israel or the Gaza strip.

We did a few Waymarking types. We had no idea what it was until the wife looked it up. We also had no idea there were any in our area. Two of our cache hides is right off a parking lot. With what some say here they would avoid it like the plague because of that. Of the ones that have found it thus far there have been no complaints and a heap that seemed amused by them. Those that don't want to visit don't make m lose any sleep. One I specifically wanted it to be handicapped accessible. You like the gung ho, rambo, tromp through the middle of the woods ammo cans no worries. We haven't seen a cache we don't like and it's not for the fact of smilies or clearing an area. We just like doing it. It sure as heck beats watching a carppy rerun on tv. It's also something my wife and I can go out and do together in a county where it's like Disneyland every tourist season. My logic, you don't like emm don't do emm. We've found actually using the size guide on the page helps alot. If you see it's a tiny dot... keep on moving, chances are it's just a mint tin or film cannister.

We recently picked up a new old cache. It was reported for maintenance then never repaired. Ironically enough the cache container itself was intact. The interior had something to be desired though. Someone had placed some Off bug repellent packets and apparently broke open and went nuts inside. In addition some water made it in as well. The combination was a funk that'd make James Brown frown. We intended to replace the container with a like size but it ended up being archived. We replaced and resubmitted it for the same location. There is another local cache about a mile from our home in the same shape. It looks like the placer comes back once a year or so for maintenance. It's still listed as needing maintenance but is active and folks are keeping it up in the original placers stead..

The reason for the wood restrictions in Ohio is because of a bug.

I'll give a hint to a low cache finder if they ask about one of mine. If it's someone else's cache though it's not my place to do so.

A cache is a cache to me. Gets me out of the house and off the computer for a while it's fine with me. However if it's in a lamp post a decent place to eat is better than another Wally World.

We only have a few caches to our name. One is at my place of employment. I typically check it once a week. Another is placed at our local library. We check that one typically once a week. One other cache we have is in a nearby city park. We usually check it out about every two months. A bit obsessive I know but I like to stay on top of things. Being our first set of caches, the types of containers/hides, and the frequency of muggles sets my mind at ease to check on occassion.

found this poking around.... This is a question that generates a lot of comment and confusion on the newsgroup, but few people have the necessary experience to give an answer based on reasoned engineering experience. Here are my answers and comments. 1) GPS Receivers are known to radiate RF energy from the oscillators and computer logic circuits inside the GPS. Won't this possibly interfere with the navigation equipment on airplanes? Answer: Every electronic device with a computer or oscillator inside radiates *some* radio frequency energy. The key word is *some*. A cellular telephone, ham radio transmitter, business band radio transmitter, CB radio or similar transmitting device is DESIGNED to radiate significant amounts of RF energy. They *DO* have the potential to interfere with various Avionics equipment and SHOULD NEVER be used on board an aircraft during flight. Many airlines prohibit their use at all times while on board a commercial airliner. With other electronic devices, such as laptop computers, electronic games, AM and FM Radio receivers, and the like, the answers are not so black and white. There are documented cases of AM/FM radios causing interference with Avionic systems and as a result, AM/FM radio receivers are generally prohibited. Most electronic games are cheaply built and do not have the same FCC mandated requirements for shielding as do other electronic systems such as computers and GPS receivers.. Even though these game devices are low power, they have been accused of interference with Avionics during the terminal navigation phase and so are prohibited except during cruise (typically above 10,000 feet). Laptop computers are now in widespread use by passengers in airplanes. While these devices are relatively high overall power consumption (in the 10 watt range) they are generally well designed, with adequate shielding. As a result, laptop computers are allowed to be used during the cruise portions of virtually all passenger airline flights. Well then, What about GPS Receivers? GPS receivers are very low power devices. The typical TOTAL energy used is less than a one watt rate. If all of this power were converted to RF, then there WOULD be a problem. However, the fact is that a) only a very tiny part of this energy is capable of being converted to power that *might* generate RFI and the designers of GPS receivers are required to consider RFI during the design so that the finished product passes FCC Part 15 Class B (residential) EMI (Electro Magnetic Interference) tests. (Note: Contrary to some people's intuition, Class B (residential) EMI testing is considerably more stringent than Class A (Industrial/Commercial) EMI tests. This is because in residential situations, a neighbor may be just 10 feet away whereas in industrial environments, neighbors are usually further away.) c) By design, (or happy accident), the "spurs" generated by a GPS generally fall outside the communications frequencies used by Aircraft and so have not been a problem even though a few "spurs" exist. (If no one is listening on a frequency where a potential RFI signal exists, then there is no interference.) What is the TRACK RECORD of GPS receivers in so far as EMI is concerned? Garmin and Magellan tell us that there has never been a REPORT of any problem caused to any avionics system as a result of the use of a GPS on an aircraft. No pilot or engineer on the GPS newsgroup has ever reported a GPS receiver causing interference to an avionics system on an aircraft. About 80% of the airlines in our survey permit the use of handheld GPS receivers by passengers. I believe it is safe to say, "If EMI from a handheld GPS were a problem *somebody* would have noticed it by now". My conclusion therefore is that the use of a low power GPS receiver on an aircraft is substantially less likely than a laptop computer to generate significant amounts of EMI and since laptop computers are judged "safe" then GPS receivers are "safer". 2) But SOME airlines do not permit the use of GPS receivers. Why is that if they are "safe"? Answer: Some safety officials are more cautious than others. Some are less technically competent than others. If there is a "potential hazard", no matter how insignificant, it is always easier to say "no" if you have no basis for a decision. In the case at hand, to say, "yes, it is safe to use a GPS on board an aircraft" requires a substantial amount of technical knowledge and expertise in a complex field. To say "no" you cannot use a GPS on board an aircraft requires no such skills and is "safe" in many contexts.. (Note: One aviation industry EMI expert who reviewed this material suggests that my reasoning above is overly harsh. He states that *some* safety experts are fearful that some FUTURE Avionics equipment may incur harmful interference from a GPS and once the GPS "barn door" is open, it will be difficult to close it.) 3) If a GPS is safe, why can't I use it on an airplane anyway, even if the pilot says NO? Answer: This would be a) unwise, illegal and c) dangerous. Never presume that you have more authority than the Captain of a ship! He is responsible for the lives of his passengers and likely has knowledge and experience about his aircraft and/or equipment and/or this particular flight that no one else has.. The use of a GPS by a passenger is NOT worth a confrontation and a possible visitation from the police or FBI when you land.. 4) I have used my GPS during takeoff and landing and nothing happened. Why can't I keep doing it? Answer: Takeoff and landings are the most dangerous parts of a flight. Even though the likelihood of an EMI problem from a GPS receiver is low, there is no reason to take a chance on interference with a critical system during a critical moment during takeoff and landings. The life you save could be mine (and yours). 5) You are WRONG! I put my GPS a foot or two from my scanner and I can hear "spurs" at several frequencies. Therefore, the GPS CAN cause EMI problems. Answer: Yes, you can hear a "spur" at some discrete points with a wideband scanner. However, these "spurs" are very low power and the typical scanner receiver is not well shielded. The energy thus radiated can only be DETECTED a few feet away and a) such signals will not normally cause problems with communications receivers since the signal energy dissipates as the SQUARE of the distance between the radiator and the receiver. Probably the main reason why these "potential" RFI signals have not been a problem is that these "spurs" have not been found to fall on frequencies used for aircraft navigation and communications. Such "spurs" have the "potential" to cause problems, but due to the small signal levels and the frequency of the GPS receiver spurs, they have SO FAR not been a source of interference to Avionics systems. (Again: If they HAD been a problem, someone would have noticed.) The BOTTOM LINE (According to Joe) The interference potential of handheld GPS receivers is minimal. However, no passenger should EVER operate a GPS receiver on board an aircraft except in strict accord with the directives of the flight crew.

Just what I was thinking. It's different from all the other tree stump cache containers how? It's not. It's a dadgum good hide as long as the person finding it puts it back the right way.

How do you know if you will receive one or not? Just curious.

Ya sure some drunk hunter or drunk high schooler didn't shoot it? Not knowing much about the fake duck but it would sink right?

I just recently found out a local judge is a geocacher in our town. I hope with that the local authorities are more in tune with what a geocache is and what it entails. I know for one I'm not going to sweat the photo lab folks anymore since they'll end up going to the judge in the first place for a search warrant. I could just see the judges reaction to the photographic evidence for the reason to search.... "dadgum, I've been looking for that cache for three days and here they are with a picture of it. Wonder if they can help me find it." LOL I do agree though, the pipes gotta go. Post 9-11 paranoia is alive and well and the next 'famous circuit city guy on the news' mentality will bring out those that want their fifteen minutes on the nightly news. Granted, in some cases it's a good thing but be realistic there isn't a terrorist under every rock in this country like some politicians would have us believe.

We haven't found a cache yet that has really bothered us one way or the other. Then again there are not many in our area. The only exception was a cache at a rest stop we prayed the dog didn't whiz on. The gps was taking us towards a bush another road tripper was walking their dog by when he took a leak. When we got to it sure enough it was the same bush. Luckily though the little varmint missed.

It's been posted and such now so the cache is active again. Since it's in a ammo can it shouldn't leak anymore either. lol Now I need to ready my next cache container.

From what we've seen of both wipes and bottles I would say steer clear of it.