PutnamEco

for context see Log

I give up. Can't decipher kjhb. google is not my friend. Whats it mean????

How about GPXchange.com

I asked a similar question recently. See decent reasonable swag

I love to bang my head against the wall, because it feels so good when I stop.

I absolutely hate underrated caches I just started out caching and was looking for easy local ones to get a feeling for the game, And to find out if geocaching would be something I might enjoy, Went out, looked for an hour DNF. The HINT "You will see three palm trees in a row. The cache is next to the middle palm tree." This was in the middle of a patch of just about nothing but palm trees. and the coordinates placed me in front of what I thought where the correct three in a row. Not. So, I wait a few days thinking maybe it was "muggled" and I found out not. waited a bit more to let a trail build around it. (I'm familiar with tracking) thinking I'll find it by following others tracks, I get out there and the whole area is covered in tracks and scrapes and things turned over. Spent about two hours searching, totally expecting a smacked head "doh" there it is, experience, It is an 1 1/2 star rated cache after all. NO joy. The hint was very ambiguous considering that the coordinates where not entirely correct. The TIP Luckily for me some one took pity on my plight and emailed me a little more of a hint, about that it was in a depression covered with leaf litter. So Now I'm possessed, I'm going to find this cache. Part of my job description involves finding plants and animals by GPS coords. So there is no way I'm letting an ammo can get the best of me! I go out there and mark my coordinates with a piece of survey tape and work a six inch grid pattern with my poking stick. Three hours later. bingo. The Aftermath A long and drawn out debate on Groundspeak.

GIYF - faux rocks concretenetwork gardenwebs forums if you've questions rockandwater for the book and DVD

How thouroughly are caches reviewed? Does a reviewer actually go on site, and make sure the cache will not have a negative impact on the area where it is placed?

Now I'm confused. Which thing is it that you don't like? Is it (1) the appropriateness of the location that was chosen for the cache hide in question, or (2) the choice of hiding style? (1) is an issue for the reviewers; (2) is merely a matter of taste. If you're simply frustrated with the hiding style, then you simply need to learn a little more geo-skill and geo-patience. Or find a more enjoyable pastime. No shame in giving up a hobby you don't like. You said so yourself when you mentioned golf (and I’m with you about not liking golf). Given your options, I would have to say "hiding style". If people have to resort to "poking" out a cache in a relatively large area, with a stick as I did, and it appeared to me, at the cache site, that I was not the only one to do this. Then something may be amiss. It is my OPINION that this is acceptable in the roadside ditch that this cache was located in. It is MY OPINION that this would not be acceptable on public lands that are maintained as natural areas. It is MY OPINION, if the "hint" was a small bit more descriptive, the impact to the area would be greatly reduced. I do feel strongly about this. How ever I have felt strongly about things that I was wrong about before, Some would say that I should drop it, some resort to inferring that I'm being obsessive about the issue. And some confuse me further by being ambiguous. If I had a cache and someone had a gripe with it, and was unsure whether they had a legitimate gripe or not, with it, I would hope that they would research the legitimacy of their gripe, before they bothered me about it. I'm not directly managing any lands, I am however involved with several land management agencies. SJRWMD has more resources than most of the agencies combined in this area.Not many agencies can afford to devote the resources that the WMD does, to recreational activities. Most of the agencies rely heavily on volunteers and their ability to self police themselves, to ensure the viability of their programs. I would be interested in finding more information about the vetting process that caches receive, before they are listed. I will post this under another heading. Thank you for the links I'm actively persuing groups to use an underutilised area in the hopes that if enough people show interest in the area, for appropriate uses, it will receive the funding it deserves.This area currently has very one sided (equestrian) support. Besides any group that would pick up litter, is desperately needed in this county.

IF you read through the thread, you would have known that I really did expect to be treated like a lame noob, although most have not treated me that way.... You're expecting me to go out and to have found 20 caches in less than a day?? What advice have I not complied with? Please DO NOT take this the wrong way I really am trying to learn. Did you every stop to consider that some people may have a lot more to loose, by recommending something, that may not work out well, than you? People just keep coming back with things I feel I should reply to. What would you have me do???

I see that was appropriately rated.

My concern is, how does Geocaching respond to public criticisms of caches on public land? The consensus here seems to be for me to drop the complaint I had. That works for the area of the cache that I had questions about. No harm done. In some situations this will NOT be an acceptable option. People can and do lose jobs and or have their reputations tarnished over public criticisms coming at them from oblique angles. Better to nip it in the bud, than to have it become a problem. I'm already on thin ice over recommending, what in my opinion is a good thing,"cough cough,Freecycle, cough cough" (where the problem of not having a complaint resolution system in place, has been resolved, by volunteers, I may add.) that some of my peers had a bad experience with.

This Posting has turned me into a troll and you guys keep feeding me. I did not ask for micromanagement, I asked for was ACCURATE ratings. and DECENT hints,{edit} so that people do not not over search an area, and thereby damage the area.{/edit} I do KNOW for a fact that amateurs are capable of achieving a workable peer review systems. Look at sites like Slashdot, Digg, Wikipedia, Epinions,Freecycle, or any of the other sites along those lines. All these are very similar to this site. Pro hosted, amateur driven. Remember. I'm newbie here, and it is not my intention to troll Have you all tried to "get rid of them"? OR are you just resigned to accepting it? I was not entirely sure of the guidelines, That is why I'm asking questions here. To me the referenced cache was buried, the consensus here was that it was not. Ok, my interpretion was off, I can live with that. No need to bother the cache owner. (Or, is there?) I did not want to confront the owner of the cache over something I was not sure of, that's why I posted here. I thought that this would be an appropriate place to ask. Was I wrong on this also? Do you all usually go to the cache owners with your problems first?

Sorry I just can't resist. To easy Who Is this new monkey, the one who is trying to get the monkeys on the steps towards the bananas???? And who are the the old monkeys refusing to change and sitting there all wet ???? I hope that your not imploring me to break out the hose. Imagine, accurate ratings, reliable hints, just because you haven't achieved it, doesn't mean it can't be done. The Open Source Movement has been working on this for quite a few years now and have the wisdom you seek, just look. I would recommend the Debian constition as a good starting point. followed by further studies of Wikipedia followed by intence study of Slashdot and their whole karma system. I'll also toss in seven lessonsto further you understanding. of some of the dynamics involved. probably better discussed in a philosophy forum or moved into off topic, now. I want to shut up now. DON"T FEED THE TROLLS.

Actually, I was expecting, SFTU n00b U R s000000000000000000000000000000000000000 l4m3 lollol n00bs r sTpd l00zr n00b g0 h0m3 Maybe it might be time for a "policy" on hints?? Previously stated. I've worked in a professional capacity finding things in the woods with a GPSr, I've spent more time in the woods than I'd care to admit, both for fun and profit. Including not setting foot indoors for more than a year, not so long ago. Thank you for the introductions No, no matter how much I despise something( Not that I despise geocacheing).I would not deny others the pleasure to seek their own bliss. As long as It does not affect others. I'm trying to decide whether I'll promote geocaching in my circle of influence. I still have a bad taste in my mouth from another unrelated group that I recommended, that for a while was managed very poorly (dictatorially), and who where not sensitive to the people they where serving. I had recommended them to some very influential people,the kind of people who can make or break a career.(if you know about FL., you know about the good old boys and how you don't want to get on there bad side, especially if you are an outsider.) who the group had know idea who they where. and half of them got banned from the group for VERY minor infractions. Three years later I'm still dealing with the repercussions. Yes, but my question is more along the opposite, how do you work with government agency and the public? especially newbies with concerns? and newbies with self important attitudes, like say, politicos? So far I'm amazed at most of the kind and patient answers, I know a lot of forums where this type of dialog would not have ended well. It does appear that I'm starting to wear some peoples patience quite thin. The consenses seems to be for me to let it drop. That is what I'll do. I would like to leave you all with this thought, though. How much geo-experience does someone involved with land management need, to say, not on the land I manage?

TPTB only replied on the buried or not issue, Not the rating or hint issue. Stated previously, this was NOT an obvious cache. even cachers with over 2000 finds where commenting that it was a tough find. Your criticism would be debated at our general meeting, if it was justifiable and a legitimate complaint it would be taken very seriously, moved to be voted on by the board, reviewed by our board then by our team of lawyers, then voted and acted on. We have already made several changes in both mission statement and operating procedures from criticisms and suggestions made by "outsiders" Sometimes a fresh perspective can shed a whole new light on things that even groups can sometimes fail to see. a parable Start with a cage containing five monkeys. Inside the cage, hang a banana on a string and place a set of stairs under it. Before long, a monkey will go to the stairs and start to climb towards the banana. As soon as he touches the stairs, all of the other monkeys are sprayed with cold water. After a while, another monkey makes an attempt with the same result, and all the other monkeys are sprayed with cold water. Pretty soon the monkeys will try to prevent it. Now, put away the cold water. Remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one. The new monkey sees the banana and wants to climb the stairs. To his surprise and horror, all the other monkeys attack him. After another attempt and attack, he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs he will be attacked. Next, remove another of the original five monkeys and replace it with a new one. The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked. The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment with enthusiasm! Likewise, replace a third original monkey with a new one, then a fourth, then the fifth. Every time the newest monkey takes to the stairs, he is attacked. Most of the monkeys that are beating him have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs or why they are participating in the beating of the newest monkey. After replacing all the original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys have ever been sprayed with cold water. Nevertheless, no monkey ever again approaches the stairs to try for the banana. Why not? Because as far as they know, that’s the way it’s always been done around there. Maybe a peer review rating system for caches? Every time some one logs a cache they get to cast a vote on the rating.

Well, Here is what I think I should do. I'm going to email the owner and request that they reconsider the rating and the clue/hint. I'm going to suggest that it be uprated to a 2 star on the difficulty and or failing that that they should clarify the hint by either telling people which size, type or location of the said palm trees. I'll offer my coordinates, although I do believe that 30-40 ft accuracy could be sufficient if the hints where updated. my question is now, Is this an appropriate responce? Am I overstepping my bounds? Should I have done this in my logs? ( I did make a passing remark or two in the logs) I would prefer to leave my logs as they stand, but I would like to see what the consensus is. If you all suggest that I go back and edit my logs, I will . Or do I drop it all together, which would mean I would have no confidence in geocaching and would not be promoting it through the channels that I have available, and would not be recommending geocaching to the land managers that have asked my advice. Although personally I'll still be trying a few more caches, for my own entertainment. (I still have a TB that needs a cache) before I totally write off caching, after all It was only one cache that I have a problem with. If I do find many more caches with what I feel are underrated ratings or insufficient hints, I will be finding a different hobby. Please don't take this the wrong way, people have many different interests. DO NOT take my leaving as an attack on YOUR hobby. After all I know that a lot of you would have zero interest is some of my other hobbies, and some may even go so far as to be opposed to what I do for fun. The Logs indicate that the owner visits regularly, within the last week, in fact.

There are over 2,000 caches in your region and you're obsessing over a single cache that appears to be rated wrong. I don't get it. Maybe you should find another hobby. Just don't try golf. I'm not obsessing, I'm spending a rainy day pursuing one of my hobbies,internet forums. I'm also trying to decide if geocacheing is a hobby I wish to take part in. And if geocachers are people I would like to invite to use an underutilezed area of my county. I'm also involved with a wilderness navigation course, and am wondering if geocaching should be a part of it. I'm an environmentalist, I don't like the impact that golf courses have on the planet, therefore I don't support golf(extreme croquet is a lot more fun anyhow). I don't feel that this is an appropriate forum to discus the whole golf course thing. So I won't.

The method of camouflage employed by this cache would have been effective, in the right parking lot (I hope I'm not giving you all any ideas ) if it was in the parking lot the hint given would have been along the lines of " it is next to a flat spot" See above quoted logs for some of the more experienced cachers opinions. Even they where calling it "tough" and "well camo'ed" If I'm going to have to continue to turn cache areas into something resembling swiss cheese, to try and find a covered hole by systematically poking the ground in a six inch grid pattern, for a 1.5 rated cache. I think I'm looking for another hobby. In my OPINION it should have been given either the extra star rating or a little better hint. Something along the lines of what kind of or size of, three palms in a row it was near, or a better location of the palms, like three palms in a row near the canal.(remember there are a lot of palms in the area). If it did have a higher difficulty rating I would not have searched for it until I had gained more experience, If the hint was of a higher quality( more specific) I would have needed considerablely less time to find it.

Sorry if I "pushed anyones buttons" it was NOT my intent Ok, It does seem to be the consensus that the cache is acceptable, I now know another hiding style of caches that I can look for and is acceptable. I'm still on the fence if I will continue with this hobby, If I have to spend 5-6 hours searching for something that is rated a slightly harder than easy. Could it be that maybe this cache is misrated?? Some of the logs of some people with a lot more experience finding caches would seem to concur. I would also really appreciate some feed back on the "hint" for this cache. This cache was placed in an area with predominately palm trees. the Hint said it was there where multiples of three palm trees in a row in this patch of palms. it was not at all clear. the coordinates led me to the wrong three palms in a row and I did spend considerable time searching in the wrong area. If the clue was a little more specific as to the location or type of palm trees that it was near, I would have suffered a lot less. If the cacher had stated it was WELL camouflaged or hidden, I would not have hunted it, just yet. I went out of my way seeking easier caches, trying to get a feel for the game, before I moved on to more challenging caches. Please be patient with the newbie, I'm trying to work out whether I have the problem or some part of the cache is the problem. If it is me, and I'm going to be spending 5-6 hours searching for "easier" caches this is probably not a hobby I will be spending much more time with. If it is not me, I would like to help rectify the situation, so other don't befall the same fate as I.

I am relaxing, this is fun isn't it? I like to fix things, I had a bad experience, I don't want others to share. I'm trying to determine if this cache is broken, how badly if it is, what can be done to fix it, if I can be influential in its repair, whether it is worth my time, if anyone else cares, and to see how the community reacts, especially to a noob, to see if I want to continue with the hobby.and if geocaching is worth it for me to promote.

If you hide a cache and cover it with leaves, sticks, bark or stones, technically its buried, but it is perfectly fine. If however you were to dig a hole, set the cache in it and fill it in leaving only the lid showing, technically it is not buried, but it would not be allowed. The rule should really state "no digging". No digging in dirt or leaves?? the cache is in a hole completely covered with leaves- nothing showing, whether the hole is natural or not I'll disregard for now, the only way I can see to find it is by digging through and or poking through the leaves with a pointy stick This is not by any stretch of the imagination an environmentally sensitive area.It may have been at on time, being wetlands, but with all the human encroachment. litter, and hobo encampments, and nearby highway. I do doubt it makes any difference any how. However,if this had been in an environmentally sensitive area, I would have went ballistic, and I would have brought it to the attention of the proper authorities. I am involved with most major land management agencies in the area, in one way or another. As is, I'm happy to hash it out here, as to it's proper disposition. I'm partly venting my frustration at having to search for this cache for so long. when I would have expected both a higher difficulty rating and or more details in the hint. A better hint would have considerably lessend the impact I had on the area. (spend 5-6 hours in any 50 square yard area searching and see if you don't have an impact, multiply this by the number of people that hunt and you'll begin to grasp the impact this is having on the area.) No, that description does not fit this hole, this hole has about 2 inches of clearance all around.

Every word is important - the one you ignore here is 'dig'. Emphasis added. That doesn't say that you can't use a pointy stick - it says you can't use one to DIG either to hide or find the cache. Surely you can see the difference between covering a cache with limbs and leaves and burying it such that an implement is needed to DIG it up, right? Do you really want to argue semantics? (Don't take this the wrong way, put a smile on your face laugh a little, humour the troll) informally covering: to heap upon bury: to place in the ground and cover dig: to remove the covering of something buried Formally dictionary.com / dig pay attention to 6, 7, and 8 True an implement was not "needed" to dig it out. but it would have been foolish to dig out its location without a tool. I dare you to go find this cache without digging around in the leaves (what no "soup nazi smilie??) No tools for you! Do you really want me to go out and get the hypo out of the trash, photograph it, find someplace to host the photo, and post it to this forum??

If this cache was in a state park and had as much traffic as the area around the area of the cache, and park management knew of the cache, caches would be banned in that park. I had seen disturbed flora all around the cache area .I added to the disturbance by searching as thoroughly as I did. This concerns me. I'm relatively new at this, and I am at a loss for how to procede. Should I bring it up to the cache owners? Do I give them my coordinates?(which may or may not be more accurate) Do I complain to geocaching management? Do I post spoilers in my log? Do I bite my tongue, and shut up? Do I go to the newspapers and proclaim geocachers as environmentally insensitive. Do I quit geocaching, in frustration? If it was JUST covered with leaves I wouldn't have said a thing. This cache was what I would call buried by leaves. If I knew that it was in a hole, I would not have said anything. In my opinion being in a hole covered by leaves = buried

The cache page does spell out the correct coords. Those coords are 37 feet from the posted coords. So I agree this should be listed as a puzzle, not a traditional. A traditional should be findable with just a GPS. Unless the depression the cache was in was dug with a shovel, this one does not sound like it runs afoul of the "not buried" rule. Buried would mean covered with dirt. Leaves and rocks doth not a buried cache make. I had both the "outdated" and the "current" coordinates entered in my GPSr and BOTH SETS are off. (for me at least) I have used a GPSr professionally and am well aware of the accuracy of my unit. My chief complaint was not with the coordinates, but was with the fact that it was NOT mentioned that the cache was not "just" sitting on the ground but was below and completely covered. I had read the rules quoted above and it was NOT what I expected, or was looking for. I kind of enjoyed looking for it. had it not been so near a highway, and was not in an area with litter and broken glass, I would have loved it. The depression that it was in was suspiciously square, I could not say whether it was dug or not.