Wet Pancake Touring Club

My quick answer, No. It's really how its perceived by the next person along. They may believe the tree was alive when the nail was added, and thereby think that nailing geocaches to trees is allowed. So, they go and nail a cache to a tree, and on it goes.

To me, having a toggle would be the best alternative. That way, you can see the cache where found, or where listed. If it is only where found, then that will mess up GeoArt. (And everyone knows we can't have that! )

I don't worry about the one and done. I don't make any of the 4-Hers create accounts. We go out and find a few caches, as part of the project. Its a Geospatial project, not a Geocaching project. I use Geocaching as an example, and rather than create my own set of private geocaches, I use already existing ones. The kids get to sign the log and trade swag. If they want to continue Geocaching outside of the 4-H project, that is a discussion between the kids and their parents. I explain what it would take to get an account setup, how to log, tradeoffs and costs, GPSr versus app, etc. My job is to show them what Geocaching can be, but not be a future babysitter.

Yes, I will introduce the hobby to others. The circumstances will dictate the approach. I am a 4-H leader, and teach the GeoSpatial project, which can include Geocaching. In this case, I have people that are interesting in learning more. The kids have to sign up. I also require their parents to come along and help out, for a variety of reasons. As a 4-H leader, I have access to over a dozen GPSr units through the program. I usually pre-fill them with specific caches, ones that I know are 'good' quality caches with swag. So, I try to make their exposure to Geocaching a memorable one. I might go to general 4-H meetings and explain Geocaching, giving them a high level overview. I limit those to just a couple of minutes. I only do this if asked. I've also had muggles that were interesting in knowing why I was wandering about in the woods holding a couple of GPSr units. I will explain Geocaching, and ask them if they want to help me search for it. I will even loan them my GPSr, especially if they have kids. I drove a van full of people to my brothers wedding (it was in Yosemite, and we wanted to limit the number of vehicles), and they asked me lots of questions about geocaching. I wear a hat with lots of geocaching trackables sewn to it. If people ask about it, I will answer. Again, a short description, and let them pursue with more questions. So, I would say that I am an ambassador for Geocaching, and my style is to make myself approachable, but not preachy.

I can't think of a reason to dis-allow a NM by the CO of a cache. What does it hurt? And, as pointed out above, it can be useful for some CO's in managing their caches. In addition to the reasons above to allow it, here's another one. A number of GeoTours require the use of a stamp. Sometimes the stamp goes missing. It is noted in the Found It logs, but no one posted a NM. Why not let the CO do that? On a couple of GeoTour caches where the stamp was missing, the CO would temp disable the listing. But the cache was still there, and in perfect shape, except for the stamp. Temp disable seems like overkill, as it makes it less likely that people not interested in the GeoTour will attempt the cache. A NM log would be more appropriate.

How much you leave is up to you. If a kid-friendly cache is running low, I will leave several items. Depends on what I have on hand. IMO, Did Not Find means I looked for the cache, and I did not find it. I don't care if that bothers the cache owner. That said, I usually include the amount of time that I spent looking for the cache, and other pertinent facts (like it was raining cats and dogs). This may help others, including the cache owner.

Here's a T1 cache on a gorgeous ADA compliant gravel trail. https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC3QFYD_wastatepks100-rockport While the map on the cache page doesn't show it, there is a large map at the parking lot that rates portions of the trail, showing the slope of the trail in various places. The total elevation change was around 125 feet. So, a wheelchair bound person could plan their route accordingly. The cache is located right at the edge of the trail, about waist high. Easy to access in a wheelchair. The distance to the cache from the parking lot is a bit over the 0.5 mile (one-way) guideline.

Welcome to the hobby. Are wet, soggy caches the norm? Not in my experience. Yes, I do run across them on occasion, and if you do, you should post a NM log, and if there are several prior unacknowledged NM logs, post a NA log. If a cache owner performs maintenance, they are supposed to post an OM (Owner Maintenance) log. When you do find 'good' (good meaning the kind that you like) caches, look to see if that cache owner has other caches in the area. They may be better at maintaining, or using containers appropriate to the climate, than others. You may want to consider going to an event cache. There, you can meet others that can point out caches that you may like. Regarding your trackables, you may want to send out a proxy, instead of the actual travel bug.

How about putting out a puzzle cache that can only be solved by battleshipping? I did one puzzle that had a number of right answers. I had to use the checker to determine which one was right.

A little off-topic, but Spokane, WA had a GeoTour titled 'Filmed in Spokane'. WIthin it, there were a series of lab caches at locations around town that were used in the film 'Benny and Joon'.

I would love to watch an autonomous car try to drive to the Hembre Ridge GCA5 cache. Man, I lost fillings on that drive, the road was extremely wash-boarded.

I'm OK with the idea of something that actively assists in working with the actual finder being able to claim a find. Safety first. For example, if someone helps (belaying, spotting, guiding), I'm OK with them logging the find without actually touching the cache. To me, they are a critical part of the search for the cache. Let's look at this from the other side. Would you log a find on a cache that someone brought to you unsolicited? I can see embarrassment for both parties if someone shows up on a doorstep unannounced with a cache in hand for logging. In this particular situation, I would suggest contacting the other cachers, and see if there is a way that they can participate or work with your group in finding (and logging) the cache with you.

The reviewer included a coords link to an example cache listing that met the GPS requirement. My only thought is that the example cache included the following wording, "if you prefer to use coordinates at the final, use http://twcc.fr/# and select What3Words to convert". While What3Words.com can produce a set of coordinates that can be used in your GPS, it is not obvious on their web site. Adding a link to a conversion site, or adding a hint that lets you know how to get the coordinates from What3Words.com might satisfy the review process. Just a guess on my part, YMMV.

We had one CO in my area that would embed messages or hiNts in the cache description. He did it by using uppercAse letters in the description. The descriptioNs were usually a stOry about a what particular relative of his did in the area.

Never seen a problem with my username. Maybe three spaces is lucky?

While it's true that I would use such an attribute to filter out power trail caches, I'm going to filter them regardless. They won't make it onto my GPSr. So, by adding the power trail attribute, they will be elevated in my eyes, because they are being thoughtful and respectful of cachers that don't care about power trails.

What I was trying to do was come up with generic differentiators for the cache types. A Wherigo requires a very specific application, something that has to be downloaded, and an Intercache only requires what generally comes builtin to every smartphone. Yes, Intercache requires the intercache web site. So, to answer the OP question, a new cache type for any physical cache that requires a smart phone with gps+web access would be a candidate for a new cache type. Its just that they never really took off.

I don't think a toggle feature would be very difficult. This assumes that a new challenge cache type were created, and used going forward. Currently, the logic for determining what icon to display is something like: If the cache type is toggled off, don't display anything and exit The icon is the icon for the cache type If the cache has corrected coordinates, the icon is the puzzle piece If the cacher has posted a DNF, the icon is the frowny If the cacher has found the cache, the icon is the smiley Display the last icon We change that to: The icon is the icon for the cache type If the cache is a puzzle, and has the word "Challenge" in the title, the icon is the challenge cache icon If the icon is toggled off, don't display anything and exit If the cache has corrected coordinates, the icon is the puzzle piece If the cacher has posted a DNF, the icon is the frowny If the cacher has posted a DNF, the icon is the smiley Display the last icon Oh please, anything but 'challange stars'. Really, I'll be good, anything but them.

I would propose that one of the main arguments for adding cache types is for visual identification on maps and listings. With GC.com, we have the one cache equals one icon on the map rule. However, there are some cases where the same cache type shows as different icons on the map. Found caches are smilies. Caches with corrected coordinates are a puzzle icon. Let's take the separation of the map icon and the cache type a step further. I think that expanding the list of icons on the map would be an acceptable alternative to adding new cache types. Take the discussion of Challenge caches as an example. If there were a new icon for Mystery+"Challenge" caches, that would take care of a fair sized subset of the existing challenge caches. (Yes, I know, it is not perfect, but I am not going for perfect. An alternative that catches a majority is a step in the right direction.) That said, I do think that Challenge Caches should have their own cache type, for any new caches. I think that the icon change for existing caches, plus the new cache type going forward would address most of the problems outlined elsewhere, and be the easiest to implement. Back to the OP's question, what other new cache type should there be? IMO, caches fall into three categories. Caches with a physical container and log book. (Trad, Multi, Mystery, etc.) Caches with a short duration logbook only. (Events, etc.) Caches with no physical container, and therefore no log book. (Virtuals, Webcams, Earthcaches, etc.) So, what new cache types that have a physical container and log book should we ask for? Breaking down the cache types, what differentiates the existing types of caches? Traditional - Your basic geocache. Multi - A basic geocache with multiple stages. Letterbox - A basic geocache with a stamp for letterboxing. Puzzle/Mystery - A basic geocache that... Might have an ALR's. Might require solution of a puzzle in the field. Might require solution of a puzzle somewhere other than in the field. Might have multiple stages. Could have any or all of these. Wherigo - A basic geocache with multiple stages, and requires special equipment (a specific application on a smartphone or a specific model of GPSr). Project APE - A basic geocache, used to promote a third party. HQ - A basic geocache at the headquarters of a company. With a Challenge Cache, the difference is that a Challenge Cache is a basic geocache with an ALR. We are already required to differentiate Challenge Caches by putting the word Challenge into the title. Let's continue the differentiation by making them their own cache type. An Intercache is a basic geocache with multiple stages, and requires special equipment (a smartphone with GPS and web access). That might be a new cache type. However, there doesn't appear to be many Intercaches, and I don't know how well the software is being supported. But maybe a new cache type to cover all cases where there is a basic geocaches, that may have multiple stages, and requires a smart phone with GPS and web access would be appropriate. That would cover Intercaches, and allow for others to create their own experience. Are there any new kinds of events that should be broken out into their own cache type? We already have three event cache types based on size. We also had the Block Party, and other one of a kind events. Again, I don't see anyone clamoring for any new kinds of events. That leaves the third category, which is caches without a physical container. As GS has actively eliminated one of these cache types (Locationless) and doesn't allow several others (WebCams, Virtuals) from being created by the geocaching community at large, I don't see them adding any new cache types that don't have a container, or at least a log sheet.

I agree that to be useful, the icon for the new challenge cache type would need to changed for the existing CC's. However, this does not necessarily mean that we need to update the cache type on the listing. We only have to make it appear to have changed in some key areas. Specifically, search lists and the map. So, let's create a new cache type for challenges. Going forward, all CC's would be this new type. And, for the existing CC's, we alter the icon on the map based on the Puzzle+"Challenge" rule. This would give the appearance that I believe most cachers are looking for, without all of the hassle of retroactively altering any existing cache listings. Is it perfect? No, because Puzzle+"Challenge" is not perfect. But it would cover a large number of the existing CC's.

I have seen some that were handmade. Search for Metal Stamping Kit on the Googles. The ones that I saw were stamped on aluminum. The aluminum was about 3"x5", and was used to denote the next waypoint for a multi-cache. In addition to the coordinates, it had the name and code for the cache, and the geocaching.com URL.

It may vary depending on where you are. Fairly young attendees at most events in town, but then, I'm in Moscow, ID, home to the University of Idaho, and less than 10 miles from Washington State University. The U of I even offers a geocaching/orienteering class. For events in other areas, either young families, and/or retired people.

<tangent> This thread has given me an idea for an evil hide. Build a fake birdhouse (painted circle instead of a hole). Mount it on a 4x4 post. Drill a long hole into the end of the 4x4 to accept a metal post. Glue a magnet to a 35mm film can. For the metal post, build a cavity in one end to hold the 35mm film can. Put the metal post into the ground, log book end up. Slip the 4x4 over the metal post. And the hint would be: Magnetic. <\tangent>

I think the intent for availability has to do with hours of operation, versus problems with availability due to weather, nature, etc. A cache in a park only open Tuesday, Thursday and Friday from noon until 3:00 PM would not be allowed because of it availability. On the other hand, a cache only available 4 months of the year, because of weather would be allowed, if there are no other time restrictions. I know of several caches that are only available at low tide. But, they are on public land open 24/7. These should not run afoul of the availability clause. I guess what I am trying to say is that if the availability is controlled by humans, there could be a problem. If it is because of nature, it is OK.

The guidelines need to be as clear as possible for two reasons. The first is the one we have spent a lot of time discussing, and that is how the reviewer interprets the guidelines when deciding whether or not to publish a cache. But the second one is how another cacher interprets the guidelines. What if that cacher places a NA on a cache because of their interpretation of the guidelines. In the latter case, the reviewer may have to take their time explaining why the cache meets the guidelines. To me, unclear guidelines imposes a double duty on the reviewer.