Search the Community

Looks like the cache has frequent visitors in a relatively dense urban area, and it was probably the quick succession of 3 DNF's (with one Find in between) over the past couple of weeks or so that probably triggered the "...stupid Health score algorithm...". Judging from the Find logs, it sounds like a pretty tricky hide. Many people talk about finding the cache on their second visit, having to read previous logs to get some clues, and PAF in order to make the Find. It's your cache of course, but I would probably consider bumping the Difficulty up from the current 1.5 Stars to something a bit more "logical".

Some of these -- based on ownership, based on specific caches, not based on geocaching -- seem clear cut. What problems do they cause? Is there anything more to it than the reviewer makes a simple, unassailable decision that the CO argues about and appeals? When get get to judging them for clarity and coherence, we're sliding into a quality issue. Sure, I'd like to see COs submitting challenges to get help with clarity, but I'm wondering if once improvements have been suggested, it shouldn't be up to the CO to publish, anyway. Reviewers don't, after all, reject traditional caches because they're bad hides. I feel similarly when we talk about whether the challenges are appealing and even when we talk about whether they're achievable. How many unachievable challenge caches will one CO want to publish? Verification is an important aspect of challenges, but I have to admit I'm having a hard time imagining why it would be a problem +x20. I can't remember if a verification statement is now required in the challenge description, but if not, it should be. For 95% of the challenges, "list the appropriate caches" should cover it, and for most of the others, geocaching.com statistics would do the trick, obviously allowing a screen shot for those that don't want to open their statistics to everyone. So what verifications are left to cause reviewers problems? Can't we allow those 98% to be rubber stamped, then force the 2% that want to do something fancy for verification submit their idea to some kind of Challenge Czar?

I'm going to sound like an old fogy driving a Model T here, but I like the old style of geocaching better than the way it is now. When I started in 2002 there was no such thing as a smart phone, a nano cache, or GoogleEarth. GPS units like my original yellow eTrex often had little or no satellite reception and normally had only 50 - 100 feet of accuracy. Geocaches were almost always nice large ammo boxes or similar hiding styles in the remote woods or other non-urban areas. They almost always contained logbooks (not log sheets) and people wrote interesting notes in them. Many had those disposable cameras in them and finders would take a "selfie" (although that word wasn't invented then) and when the camera was full the CO would retrieve it, get the film developed, and post the pictures. FTF prizes were often good swag, like T-shirts or $10 bills. There was something fun to read in the log book at the site. Going geocaching was an excursion that took planning. You had to look at printed maps or download USGS photos of the area to figure out a good route. You needed to write down, print out, or memorize the cache information and maybe draw yourself a map or load various guide waypoints into your GPSr to tell you the route and the critical turns. When you got to the cache, it was often hard to find because the coordinates were so dicey and your accuracy bad, too, but the cache rarely had hard camo on it. The challenge was in the planning, navigation, and physical effort to get there. When you found it, you felt like you accomplished something, and the number of geocachers was small due to the effort involved. You felt like you were part of an exclusive group of similarly accomplished people. You wrote a nice long, good log. I knew most of the regular geocachers within 50 miles and made many friends or at events, many of whom are still good friends. You often met other geocachers at a cache because the placing of a new cache was a big event that drew many of the local cachers for the FTF. Nowadays it seems everyone expects all the information on a cache to be at their fingertips on their smart phone. If they have trouble finding a cache, they call for a lifeline. Most hides are urban and contain nothing more than a log sheet, or occasionally some geo-trash trinkets for the kiddies. People log TFTC from their phones and that's it. Hiding a cache brings little or no benefit to the CO. The caches are usually bison tubes in a bush, a magnet under a lamp post skirt, nanos, or something equally uninteresting. If they're challenging it's just because of good camo that serves no purpose other than to make it hard, unpleasant, and frustrating to look for. I never meet other cachers at the cache sites now. There are just too many caches out there. When I go to events most other cachers have not found the same caches I have so we have little in common to talk about. Even when we have found some of the same, the caches are so unmemorable that they don't even recall them - they all blend together. Too many just talk about numbers and powertrails. Their hardware and software is so different from mine it feels like they have an entirely different hobby. There are still ammo cans out in the woods to find, but it just isn't the same kind of accomplishment. It's sort of like a mountain climber who struggles up a high peak for the view only to find a parking lot full of luxury SUVs there. Why bother to climb? By becoming so accessible, geocaching has become less rewarding. So there's my take. Let's hear some other views.

So my own two cents; I love Earth Caches. I love placing them and finding them. Part of my love for them started when I realized that as someone who frequently moves, theses are the only types of caches that I can hide AND expect to maintain longer than two to three years. Naturally as I started hiding and finding more I started enjoying them more. Then add in the fact that many locations in the US don't ALLOW physical cache placement... you're left with two options A multi-cache with virtual stages Earth caches! Additionally what you describe as "complicated (and often very subjective) questions" is unfortunately a natural manifestation of the evolving Earth Cache guidelines which require a lesson to be specific to a location, shouldn't be "google-able" and pertaining to a unique geologic feature. Combine all these together and you start getting into the realm of difficult and convoluted questions. That being said a good Earthcache is one that if you read the entire description and you stand at GZ, you should have no problem answering the questions. Ideally the cache page should explain all of the geologic information and ask you to make observations and deductions based on your reading. The general rule of thumb is that the information presented should be that which an average 14 year old can understand. While it may be more time consuming than a P&G I find it infinitely more rewarding. There is no comparison for me when you talk 98% of traditional caches compared to ECs. Feel free to join us over in the EC specific thread if you have questions or you want to try and design your own!

You're not incorrect. But this is technology. It changes. Quickly. Standards change, and if you are unwilling to keep with the standards - if you insist on using older and often outdated technology to serve your needs, any problems you run into are your personal problems, not a problem with the general system. Hardware and software makers can only support older models of their product for so long before it becomes unsustainable to do so. You can't blame Microsoft if features of Windows XP stop working when they are now 4 OS generations beyond and a decade past support. If you choose to continue using XP instead of 7, 8 , or 10, you do so at your own responsibility. In this case, GPSrs that support GPX files and direct loading with mass storage have been around for over a decade. The Communicator plugin was somewhat necessary to move data between websites and the GPS in earlier models that relied on using Garmin's proprietary serial interface to talk to the computer. But these new fangled fancy GPS models communicate over a standard USB interface, one that allows for mass storage. Transferring data is no different than uploading/downloading files from your hard drive. So when it became known that the platform that the communicator plugin was built upon provided vulnerabilities to end users, browser makers began removing support for those classes of plugins. Garmin decided it wasn't worth their effort to create a new, more secure communicator plugin because you can just download data directly to folders on modern GPSrs. Groundspeak took their time, but finally recognized that keeping the "send to GPS" function that relied on these defunct plugins was causing more confusion than functionality (or worse yet, encouraging people to keep their systems vulnerable to attack by using outdated browsers just to keep the feature working). So, "Send to my GPS" is dead. Getting geocaches to those old GPS models is now a convoluted process. You either accept that, or use modern solutions that made geocaching easier in general. Paperless caching. Direct GPX file interaction. Mass storage. Phones that do everything a GPS does including store data for offline use. You don't have to be a power cacher to take advantage of these features. You don't have to find 20+ caches a day to justify using them. Of course you are welcome to cache however you want and with whatever equipment you want. You can make the process as simple or complex as you desire. But if you choose to use legacy hardware and methods, it is not the fault of Geocaching.com or Garmin that some legacy functions get retired, causing you to change up your workflow. We at the forums are always happy to help. But when we come up with solutions that don't even require you to buy new hardware, and you reply with "well we just don't do it that way," forgive us for losing sympathy that you are experiencing troubles that are simply caused by your stubbornness.

Exactly. So how is it relevant to this discussion? It's only relevant to your reviewer. It is not a universal mandate of all reviewers. It's a once-off decision made by your reviewer. Or maybe a regular process for your reviewer. I don't know. So again, it's between you and your reviewer, and/or appeals. That's as far as that situation goes. If you're trying to understand your reviewer's judgment by discussing it in the forum, then that's different, and we can only provide so much input before the discussion will be fruitless. And you should talk to your reviewer.

At first thought, you would think there shouldn't be a problem with geocaching in "public" parks. After all, they're areas that set up to provide recreational opportunities for the general public and are usually supported by that public's tax dollars. It almost seems as though we shouldn't even have to ask for permission. What happens sometimes is that there is a cache placed and then follow up caches are placed with the notion that the first was probably placed with permission and that any newer ones should be fine. You did do the right thing by asking for permission. I myself would go downtown and talk to someone in person about it. It's just easier for me to go in person and talk about what geocaching is and is not. I've had great luck doing this with almost all our placements.

Caches get placed inside and outside businesses at times. The key is to talk to your reviewer. Explain your intent and the situation with the business. The reviewer may even want to contact said business. Most reviewers will work with you to make sure what you intend to do will fall within the guidelines. Personally I don't like going into anything other than a library to find a geocache. Have had some negative experiences before, but also some good ones. Talk to your reviewer, and good luck.

For first time geocachers, it's enough to show them the beginning of a geocache listing. You can talk about the difficulty, terrain, and size ratings. Pass around a few containers as examples of different sizes. Talk about the fact that there are different cache types, recommend that they stick with traditional caches at first (the container is at the given coordinates), but briefly describe other types (multi-caches, puzzle caches, events). That should be plenty for first time geocachers. Maybe show how to find the Play > Find Trackables page when you're discussing geocoins and travel bugs, but you really don't need to go into all the details about how the site works, about searches and pocket queries and everything else. Spend time outdoors, somewhere near your classroom, where you've hidden a bunch of geocache containers. Let them get a taste for geocaching by taking turns spotting the hidden containers. There's no need to teach them about GPS yet: just take them to the location you've chosen and let them look for the hidden containers. Even on the longer classes where we give students pre-programmed GPS receivers and spend a couple hours finding actual geocaches, we don't spend any more time explaining the web site than that.

cruise ship Were you forced to travel alone or was this your choice? There are several thousand travelers with you on this cruise ship to talk to and having fun with. Why not just enjoying the beauty of such a journey?

Welcome to the game! You can start by emailing your local Reviewer to introduce yourself, and let them know about your plans for a hide. The local Reviewer should know the local policies for cache placements in your area, and can guide you on who to contact. It looks like your local Reviewer might be Mongo? For a city park, I'd recommend calling the city clerk to ask who you should talk to. It might be someone with a title like "Parks and Recreation Director" or something similar. That's who would have to give permission, if not someone higher up. Best bet is to start with the Reviewer, but you should also check with the city to know who to talk to for certain. I wouldn't worry about having a cache page written up at the time of discussion. You're only asking about permission, so the first question to ask is if they've heard of Geocaching. If the answer is no, then you should start with directing them toward the website (geocaching.com) and the Land Manager information (geocaching.com/parksandpolice/). If the answer is "yes", then you can proceed with the discussion about what you're planning on doing. For a museum cache, you're looking at some grey area between the black and white. In that case, I'd be sure to work with your Reviewer to see if it is allowed, how to make it work, and how to go about getting the required permission to hide a cache in that manner.

I was trying to do bitwise ORs so the player had to talk to three characters before proceeding. Returning to a character a second time would be ignored So, talking to the charaters would OR 1, 2 , 4 Probably a bit excessive for this project so I've used three flags instead now Thanks

My first thought is it sounds like a training issue. If the Land Manager doesn't have the time or inclination to properly train their seasonal staff on their responsibilities, then maybe the seasonal workers shouldn't be put in a situation where this sort of thing might happen. The alternative is to have a clear policy on geocaching posted on the website for the area, or in public areas. Doesn't leave much room for guessing if there's adequate communication. For Federal agencies (as far as I can tell), there is really nothing to "train" on for geocaching. Other than at specific stations (offices, parks, refuges, etc.), there isn't any talk at the top about geocaching as a priority, so it isn't a "training issue" at all. It all depends on how it is presented to the person they are talking to. How is the cacher presenting their case to the person they are talking to? Are they being forthright and clear about what they are asking? Are they casually leaving out details about what geocaching is? You see, it is all about how it is presented for how someone will respond. Generally people have not asked at all at my specific station if they can hide caches--they've just assumed they can because it is "public land". However, I then had to go back and sweep up caches published on Refuge lands across Alaska with the help of our current, local Reviewer. Now the Reviewer knows exactly what needs to be in place for permission at USFWS lands in Alaska (and elsewhere in the country), and also has access to the most current overlays of federal properties including USFWS Refuges. Does every Reviewer have that information? No. Should they? Yes! Groundspeak should really work with Reviewers to be sure that those Reviewers have the tools they need to make a decision about geocaching on certain lands. The assumption all too often becomes, "If I don't know about a policy, there must be no reason stopping a cache publication...", when in fact the opposite is true. And I'll admit that it is very confusing to know which USFWS Refuges allow geocaches and which do not. Some do! (But they have geocaching addressed in their Refuge CCP as a compatible use, and also likely have a local Friends group, staff member(s), or other volunteers who help monitor and maintain the listings...) The bottom line is that Reviewers have a lot to pay attention to, and they really need to know--specifically for USFWS and other DOI agencies--who "permission" must be granted by for a geocache placement. Local geocaching organizations can also be proactive by approaching their local USFWS Refuges and asking about a Special Use Permit, or if Geocaching could be found as a compatible use under the CCP for that specific station. The Refuge Manager or Project Lead for that station makes that call about whether or not a geocache or geocache event is something that can happen there. The overall stance on geocaching for the USFWS is that it is not a compatible use: But, do Reviewers ask geocachers for the Special Use Permit from the Refuge if that cacher says, "I have permission from the Refuge to place this geocache"? I'd guess that most do not. That geocacher could have received "permission" from someone who is not at all aware of the CFR, CCP, or other issues regarding geocache placement. The person geocachers must talk to is the Refuge Manager, but I'll guess that the Reviewer isn't going to know or check most of the time when they are told via a cache submission that the cache placer "has permission". This goes the same for HOAs, city, county, borough, regional, state, and other federal land managers. Do geocachers know who to ask for permission on the ladder for each land manager? Likely not. Do Reviewers? Likely not. But this doesn't change the fact that we play a really abstract, covert, small-potatoes game that really doesn't register as a priority for most land managers until they realize there is a trespass or property damage issue. And, as geocachers, we shouldn't ever think that we can place a cache somewhere and let it go "until there's an issue". That's backwards. And wrong. And in most cases illegal. Sorry, but not buying into the argument that failed training of policies relevant to performing ones job is not the issue here, and that under some perverse leap of logic that Reviewers and Grounspeak are somehow to blame. Truly unbelievable! To blame? Not at all what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that we are playing a game that is not even on 99% of Refuge Manager's radars. To them it is a new issue which isn't even a consideration for a compatible activity or use for the lands they manage. To that end, without we the players of our obscure game taking the time to be thorough and working to obtain proper, elevated permissions, we're set up for failure. It isn't in the job description of the visitor center docent or seasonal Park Ranger (this isn't a gun-toting, Law Enforcement Officer Park Ranger, mind you. Those are altogether different, and would be more familiar with CFR and other legal/regulatory processes for something like geocaching...but still aren't the right person to get permission from!) to know what geocaching is, or what the policies are for geocaching. It is their job to know how to interpret the resource, how to help people engage in the education and outreach of the site, etc. Those types of public engagement folks are not going to be well-versed or even knowledgeable at any level (especially in their job requirements or description) about who or how to grant or deny permission for geocaching. And some of them may know or be trained to say, 'I'll have to direct you to our Project Leader...", but others may hear the idea for what geocaching is from a geocacher and think it sounds harmless enough. That employee might not know that something as 'harmless' as a geocache actually needs to be approved at high levels. That employee may only be a low-level public contact person with a patch and name badge, but to the geocacher suffices as "an employee told me it was fine..." (See the example of Target cashier versus asking the actual Store Manager for a serious inquiry.) This also has more applications than just the USFWS and Department of Interior (DOI--includes USFWS, National Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management, e.g.) examples I have given. The bottom line is that we have the onus to get permission from the appropriate levels of land management, and that Reviewers should also be acutely aware--as Maingray states above they are in his experience--of the levels of permission one must obtain from an neighborhood HOA, city, borough, county, state, or federal land manager. I can tell you that seasonal, temporary workers at a visitor center desk (let alone volunteers) really don't have a firm grasp of the policies and requirements to give permission for playing this abstract, obscure game. Depending on how the geocacher presents the question, it would be very, very easy for a seasonal Park Ranger to think that it is harmless enough. Even then, there are cases where employees may not be familiar enough with the management policies, regulations, and laws which would apply to allowing a geocache on their lands. So yes, I'll give you the fact that all employees of any business, nonprofit, or agency should know the protocols for land or property use. But you can't train and expect that they will apply their lesson learned when approached by a geocacher asking about an obscure game who might not be honest or forthright with how they describe the process. You get a naiive person or someone who isn't clear on protocols, and suddenly we have a problem. Again, the onus is on all of us to get permission at the proper levels for cache placements. And I'm telling you to tell your friends that this means a Special Use Permit or Compatible Use ruling against an existing CCP for all USFWS, many NPS, and some BLM lands from the Manager or Project Leader for the site they have in mind--not a Park Ranger, Biologist, or Visitor Center worker.

My first thought is it sounds like a training issue. If the Land Manager doesn't have the time or inclination to properly train their seasonal staff on their responsibilities, then maybe the seasonal workers shouldn't be put in a situation where this sort of thing might happen. The alternative is to have a clear policy on geocaching posted on the website for the area, or in public areas. Doesn't leave much room for guessing if there's adequate communication. For Federal agencies (as far as I can tell), there is really nothing to "train" on for geocaching. Other than at specific stations (offices, parks, refuges, etc.), there isn't any talk at the top about geocaching as a priority, so it isn't a "training issue" at all. It all depends on how it is presented to the person they are talking to. How is the cacher presenting their case to the person they are talking to? Are they being forthright and clear about what they are asking? Are they casually leaving out details about what geocaching is? You see, it is all about how it is presented for how someone will respond. Generally people have not asked at all at my specific station if they can hide caches--they've just assumed they can because it is "public land". However, I then had to go back and sweep up caches published on Refuge lands across Alaska with the help of our current, local Reviewer. Now the Reviewer knows exactly what needs to be in place for permission at USFWS lands in Alaska (and elsewhere in the country), and also has access to the most current overlays of federal properties including USFWS Refuges. Does every Reviewer have that information? No. Should they? Yes! Groundspeak should really work with Reviewers to be sure that those Reviewers have the tools they need to make a decision about geocaching on certain lands. The assumption all too often becomes, "If I don't know about a policy, there must be no reason stopping a cache publication...", when in fact the opposite is true. And I'll admit that it is very confusing to know which USFWS Refuges allow geocaches and which do not. Some do! (But they have geocaching addressed in their Refuge CCP as a compatible use, and also likely have a local Friends group, staff member(s), or other volunteers who help monitor and maintain the listings...) The bottom line is that Reviewers have a lot to pay attention to, and they really need to know--specifically for USFWS and other DOI agencies--who "permission" must be granted by for a geocache placement. Local geocaching organizations can also be proactive by approaching their local USFWS Refuges and asking about a Special Use Permit, or if Geocaching could be found as a compatible use under the CCP for that specific station. The Refuge Manager or Project Lead for that station makes that call about whether or not a geocache or geocache event is something that can happen there. The overall stance on geocaching for the USFWS is that it is not a compatible use: But, do Reviewers ask geocachers for the Special Use Permit from the Refuge if that cacher says, "I have permission from the Refuge to place this geocache"? I'd guess that most do not. That geocacher could have received "permission" from someone who is not at all aware of the CFR, CCP, or other issues regarding geocache placement. The person geocachers must talk to is the Refuge Manager, but I'll guess that the Reviewer isn't going to know or check most of the time when they are told via a cache submission that the cache placer "has permission". This goes the same for HOAs, city, county, borough, regional, state, and other federal land managers. Do geocachers know who to ask for permission on the ladder for each land manager? Likely not. Do Reviewers? Likely not. But this doesn't change the fact that we play a really abstract, covert, small-potatoes game that really doesn't register as a priority for most land managers until they realize there is a trespass or property damage issue. And, as geocachers, we shouldn't ever think that we can place a cache somewhere and let it go "until there's an issue". That's backwards. And wrong. And in most cases illegal. Sorry, but not buying into the argument that failed training of policies relevant to performing ones job is not the issue here, and that under some perverse leap of logic that Reviewers and Grounspeak are somehow to blame. Truly unbelievable!

My first thought is it sounds like a training issue. If the Land Manager doesn't have the time or inclination to properly train their seasonal staff on their responsibilities, then maybe the seasonal workers shouldn't be put in a situation where this sort of thing might happen. The alternative is to have a clear policy on geocaching posted on the website for the area, or in public areas. Doesn't leave much room for guessing if there's adequate communication. For Federal agencies (as far as I can tell), there is really nothing to "train" on for geocaching. Other than at specific stations (offices, parks, refuges, etc.), there isn't any talk at the top about geocaching as a priority, so it isn't a "training issue" at all. It all depends on how it is presented to the person they are talking to. How is the cacher presenting their case to the person they are talking to? Are they being forthright and clear about what they are asking? Are they casually leaving out details about what geocaching is? You see, it is all about how it is presented for how someone will respond. Generally people have not asked at all at my specific station if they can hide caches--they've just assumed they can because it is "public land". However, I then had to go back and sweep up caches published on Refuge lands across Alaska with the help of our current, local Reviewer. Now the Reviewer knows exactly what needs to be in place for permission at USFWS lands in Alaska (and elsewhere in the country), and also has access to the most current overlays of federal properties including USFWS Refuges. Does every Reviewer have that information? No. Should they? Yes! Groundspeak should really work with Reviewers to be sure that those Reviewers have the tools they need to make a decision about geocaching on certain lands. The assumption all too often becomes, "If I don't know about a policy, there must be no reason stopping a cache publication...", when in fact the opposite is true. And I'll admit that it is very confusing to know which USFWS Refuges allow geocaches and which do not. Some do! (But they have geocaching addressed in their Refuge CCP as a compatible use, and also likely have a local Friends group, staff member(s), or other volunteers who help monitor and maintain the listings...) The bottom line is that Reviewers have a lot to pay attention to, and they really need to know--specifically for USFWS and other DOI agencies--who "permission" must be granted by for a geocache placement. Local geocaching organizations can also be proactive by approaching their local USFWS Refuges and asking about a Special Use Permit, or if Geocaching could be found as a compatible use under the CCP for that specific station. The Refuge Manager or Project Lead for that station makes that call about whether or not a geocache or geocache event is something that can happen there. The overall stance on geocaching for the USFWS is that it is not a compatible use: But, do Reviewers ask geocachers for the Special Use Permit from the Refuge if that cacher says, "I have permission from the Refuge to place this geocache"? I'd guess that most do not. That geocacher could have received "permission" from someone who is not at all aware of the CFR, CCP, or other issues regarding geocache placement. The person geocachers must talk to is the Refuge Manager, but I'll guess that the Reviewer isn't going to know or check most of the time when they are told via a cache submission that the cache placer "has permission". This goes the same for HOAs, city, county, borough, regional, state, and other federal land managers. Do geocachers know who to ask for permission on the ladder for each land manager? Likely not. Do Reviewers? Likely not. But this doesn't change the fact that we play a really abstract, covert, small-potatoes game that really doesn't register as a priority for most land managers until they realize there is a trespass or property damage issue. And, as geocachers, we shouldn't ever think that we can place a cache somewhere and let it go "until there's an issue". That's backwards. And wrong. And in most cases illegal.

I have to disagree with this. Yes, I'm sure without looking that the guidelines talk only about what it takes to find the cache and sign the log, but that's only because the guidelines aren't expecting a significant reset task that's even harder than what it took to sign the log. Saying that the difficulty rating doesn't include the reset effort implies that resetting the puzzle is optional. (Now that I've written that, I'm starting to worry that it's not responsive. I'm taking for granted you don't really mean "Reassembling the cache is not required PERIOD", so you must mean reassembly is not required in order to sign the log[/]. But correct me if I'm wrong.)

I honestly can't remember what started me geocaching. Apparently I created my account in 2010, but I have no memory of how I heard of it or even of coming to the site. I think eventually in 2012 I was on the Google Play store and the c:geo app showed up as a recommendation. Now, I know I'm not supposed to talk about that, but in all fairness, it's THAT app that got me into geocaching. So I was on a lunch break, sitting in a Chipotle and I downloaded the app, figured out how to log in to the account I'd created...and when I opened it up I saw that there was a marker pointing to a spot only about 200 from where I was sitting right then. When I finished my lunch, I walked over and looked around for a bit and actually managed to find a very well concealed cache. That hooked me.

https://www.geocaching.com/blog/2019/01/one-map-endless-inspiration/ Dear Groundspeak, This must be the worst sentence I have read in a very long while. Everyone I talk to fears losing the old map, and many of us depend on that map to plan our geocaching outings. It's fast. It's (almost) dependable. It shows way more than 1000 caches. It works with several different map tiles. This has nothing to do with not liking change. This has to do with not wanting to lose one of the best features of geocaching.com. The new map is great for mapping PQs, searches and lists. But it's nowhere near being able to replace the old map. Please don't take away the most valuable feature you have.

HQ can’t stop the User from logging your Listing(s) per se, but they can have a talk with them, and take the opportunity to refresh their memory on the Terms of Use that they agreed to when they established their account. Depending on how the conversation goes, more drastic measures can be put to use. Assuming they have have some sort of proof, HQ also has the ability to reinstate their log entry and lock it from further deletion.

No, i was beginning to think that existing saved tracks could not be reloaded as i could not find a way to do this either looking through the manual or going through the menus on the unit. But i think i got it figured out after i learned how to talk to the menus. HIGHLIGHT SAVED TRACK/ENTER... HIGHLIGHT OK/ENTER.

It would be an interesting twist to a multi if you could use existing caches though. Talk about potential confusion! I agree with the thoughts regarding the listing as a ? cache, based on what the OP has offered up as their potential plan.

Yes, it has been quiet. I can only speak for myself, but I think the sentiment is close to the same. Groundspeak speaks like they're eager to recognize the project, but their actions say the opposite. As far as I can tell, geocaches mentioning any of our work aren't supposed to be published. Over the years, I have gotten a few draft partnership agreements. The last few took nine months of waiting before getting some minor word changes. I finally wondered if Groundspeak even cared, so I went silent for more than a year to see if anyone would contact me. Nope. They do talk like they're excited to do something, but the action feels like one of apathy. So for me personally, I'm just exhausted. It has taken about a decade for my self-generated drive and energy to thin out. Short of a group of people miraculously appearing and supporting me, egging me on, I imagine it'll take a couple years for me to replenish all that motivation. Apathy does tend to be destructive towards your volunteer base. So, why do I care so much about Groundspeak's involvement? It's like this: the builders and players we have are the main things keeping Wherigo afloat. Pretty great, right? But those who want to thank you in their cache listings can't because the company your work is benefiting doesn't want your work to be mentioned. So is what you've done welcome or not? Should you continue putting effort into it? Why help when you don't know if it's appreciated? And you really want to innovate, but you can't because the site that lists the cartridges won't be able to compile any of the new things you want to add. You'd really need to control the compiler on the listing site in order to do anything fun, hence the Wherigo Foundation's listing service. So the Wherigo Foundation site was created so we can have our own compiler so we have the ability to innovate. However, the site would need to become the de facto listing service so the new stuff can compile. And that's where the wall was hit. The reviewer rule as stated to me is caches aren't going to be published if they're listed on anything but the official listing service. If it doesn't look like Groundspeak is going to allow it, how can you justify spending a lot of time working on something that might not see the light of day? I've considered making major updates to the Wherigo Foundation site and Kit, but that's going to take several hundred hours of my life (the site, API, Invaders, spec improvements, streaming service, multiplayer, owner HUD: the project would take several years of my time when what we need would be a team of people, plus an eager community to keep everyone's motivation high). For the Wherigo Foundation site, that just feels like a losing gamble, creating something that can't be used. I've considered giving it one last hurrah, with the intent of a hostile takeover. But if Groundspeak could legally force me to take down something I create (or have their reviewers refuse to publish caches), and if I manage to create something people would want to use regardless of that, I fear that situation might cause the destruction of the very thing I meant to save. Or perhaps I'm just overstating everyone's importance and Wherigo would have gone along all right without us. You never can tell.

I'm not being severe, I'm just advocating common courtesy. Common courtesy is a moving target. Sign the log. Make sure your written log is long enough. But make sure it doesn't take up too much space. Make sure it has a date. Better still, add a time, in case there's some sort of dispute about who got there 156th or 157th. Use a stamp to save space, but don't use a stamp for more than one person in a team. Make sure your log is in the correct place on the paper. Make sure you fold the paper up just right. Make sure the cache isn't open very long in the rain or snow while you're making sure your log has all the required information and is in the correct place and is the correct size. Make sure your swag is good. It should simultaneously be a toy, not a toy, plastic, not plastic, new in the package, and recycled. Log your find online quickly, but don't do it from the field with an app. Make sure your online log is long, but doesn't have anything boring in it. Talk about your adventure but don't talk about it too much. Everyone hates short logs and nobody wants to scroll through long logs. Be sure to thank the cache owner profusely, but don't use any acronyms to do so. Anything less, and you are a lazy, discourteous, disrespectful cheater. And anthing more, and you are a selfish, discourteous, disrespectful cheater. As has been said, any way you cache is wrong.

I'm not being severe, I'm just advocating common courtesy. Common courtesy is a moving target. Sign the log. Make sure your written log is long enough. But make sure it doesn't take up too much space. Make sure it has a date. Better still, add a time, in case there's some sort of dispute about who got there 156th or 157th. Use a stamp to save space, but don't use a stamp for more than one person in a team. Make sure your log is in the correct place on the paper. Make sure you fold the paper up just right. Make sure the cache isn't open very long in the rain or snow while you're making sure your log has all the required information and is in the correct place and is the correct size. Make sure your swag is good. It should simultaneously be a toy, not a toy, plastic, not plastic, new in the package, and recycled. Log your find online quickly, but don't do it from the field with an app. Make sure your online log is long, but doesn't have anything boring in it. Talk about your adventure but don't talk about it too much. Everyone hates short logs and nobody wants to scroll through long logs. Be sure to thank the cache owner profusely, but don't use any acronyms to do so. Anything less, and you are a lazy, discourteous, disrespectful cheater.

Hello all, Success! I have come up with 2 methods to load individual caches onto older Garmin GPS's Note: I have edited Method 2 since my original post after JimJinks pointed me to a utility that will convert a batch file to an executable .exe file. I left a posting on the original Release Notes thread a while ago where I explained how this change affected my parents and their ability to selectively load caches in their older GPSMap 60 series GPS s. The post is here: Over the last few months I have been loading their GPS s with GSAK for them but I have been meaning to get back to this issue to see if there was a solution that would allow them to regain the ability to load a cache, one at a time. This weekend I knuckled down and came up with two methods depending on your version of Windows. Method 1 with EasyGPS you can do it in 5 clicks per cache Method 2 and GPSBabel (using a slight variation of above technique) you can load a cache in 2 clicks! I use Windows 10 at home and worked out the first system but could only get it down to 5 mouse clicks. I went to my parents who use Windows 7 but could not get the first method to work on their machine. I tried variations of the batch file technique from @JimJinks and got it to work and it is more streamlined than any version I have seen so far. Method 1, Windows 7, 8, or 10 and EasyGPS program Do once to set it up: Install the Free version of EasyGPS. Download it here https://www.easygps.com/download.asp Run the downloaded installer program to install the application. Follow the prompts and use the default location for installation. Run the EasyGPS program and under the "Edit" window choose "Preferences" and Add your GPS Make and model so it knows how to talk to it. This will also associate GPX files with the EasyGPS program To load caches with the GPS connected and turned on : On the cache page click on “Download GPX” near the top of the page below the coordinates, or from the pop up window on the map page when you click on a cache. Make sure “Open with” is selected and EasyGPS is next to it. Click on “OK” When the EasyGPS program opens: Click “Send” button near the top of window Click "OK" on Send to GPS popup window Click the “X” in the top Right corner of the EasyGPS window to close it. Go to the next cache and repeat Method 2, Windows 7, 8, or 10 and GPSBabel program. Do once to set it up. It seems like a lot but it is a detailed step by step and only needs to be done once: Install free GPSbabel program. Download it from here: https://www.gpsbabel.org/download.html Run the downloaded installer program to install the application. Follow the prompts and use the default location for installation. Create a batch file in a folder on your computer. Here is the step by step: Note a click on something uses the normal Left button on the mouse and Right click uses the other button on the right side, that you usually don't use. I have put a copy of this batch file on my Google drive and the link below will allow you to download it. You can preview it to see what it contains. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_unRSYD9cDiOSxSQbBCqM5Pux63mzNBY/view?usp=sharing The above section with the line through it will only work on Windows 7. A better solution now is this next section which will work with all versions of Windows. I created a tiny program called SendToGarmin.exe which replicates the actions of the batch file JimJinks created. You can actually put it anywhere on your hard drive. My instructions below specify a new folder step by step. Feel free to put it somewhere else if you are comfortable with Windows. Here is a link to it. https://drive.google.com/file/d/19xkd_wXWTD7F59XFF9C7lVwucF4ZF8-h/view?usp=sharing Right click on the line above and select "Open in new tab" on the popup window. Go to that tab and choose "Download" to save it to your computer. When prompted click on "Save File" In the new window where it prompts you where to put it, scroll up or down on the left pane of the window to find your the "C Drive" and select it by clicking on it. Click on the "New folder" button near the top of the window. Type LoadGPS to name it and press the Enter key to name it. Double click in this new LoadGPS folder to open it. Click the "Save" button to save it there. This is what is in the batch file / executable: If you or someone you know wants to, you can create your own batch file by copying these commands into a text file and renaming it to a bat file. It is essentially the same as the command in the top post except I removed the quotes around %1 in the first line and added a second line to delete the downloaded GPX file after it gets sent to your GPS. "c:\Program Files (x86)\GPSBabel\gpsbabel.exe" -i gpx -f %1 -o garmin -F usb: del %1 Setup continued... Click on the windows icon on the bottom Left corner of your monitor and type "internet" on the keyboard. It will pull up a list of programs and commands that start with Internet. Click on "Internet Options" under the heading Control Panel Click on the "Programs" Tab Click on the "Set Programs" button Click on the line "Associate a File Type or Protocol with a Program" Scroll down the list until your see ".gpx" on the left and click on that line to select it Click on the button on the top right called "Change Program" Click on the "Browse..." button to bring up a selection window In the box near the bottom next to File name type in C:/LoadGPS/Sendtogarmin.bat Or alternatively you can navigate to this file using the folder and file lists windows Click on the "Open" button to set the batch file as the program associated with gpx files Close the windows to get back to the desktop. You are done the one time setup! To load caches with the GPS connected and turned on : On the cache page click on “Download GPX” near the top of the page below the coordinates, or from the pop up window on the map page when you click on a cache A small window will appear at the bottom of the screen prompting you to open the gpx file. Click "Open" The file is converted and sent to the GPS by GPSBabel. That's it. 2 clicks! Method 1 is an easier setup but more steps to load each cache. Method 2 it is more complicated to set up but it is as easy to load as it was before. The only thing keeping Windows 10 from being able to use the second method is that you can not associate a file type to a batch file, as far as I can tell. Only .com and .exe files. If someone can find a way it would allow you to use the second method. We have to use a batch file to allow us to pass command line arguments to GPSBabel. I tried to use a shortcut to the program and add the arguments to it's properties but that did not work. Fixed now that I created an exe file. The first method would work better if repeated downloads of .gpx files would load into an already open instance of EasyGPS. You could download a bunch and send them all to the GPS at once. Unfortunately each time you download a .gpx it opens a new copy of EasyGPS with that single cache in it. You have to send the cache to the GPS and close each window. If anyone finds a better method or a tweak for one of these please let me know or comment in this thread. If you need more details for some of these steps, I or others on the forums will be glad to help. Thanks @JimJinksfor the batch file. My Mother is very happy that she has the ability to load caches again like she used to. Lee Go Play Outside