Search the Community

Actually, yes they do. I was asked by the BLM to Archive 3 of my EC's due to concerns regarding foot traffic to geologically sensitive areas (I was allowed to keep three others in less sensitive areas). These were EC's I had permission to place by the previous Resource Ranger, but was subsequently revoked due to impact concerns. It's there land to manage, so I grudgingly complied (courteously of course). My original point is that the EC Reviewers were merely complying with stated polices that are readily available in links I provided. If you have a problem with the policy, talk with the Land Manager to change it. There's nothing in their public facing document that addresses EC's or Virtual caches, so I can't blame the local and EC Reviewers of taking the default position that regulates physical caches. In other words, I would not presume. But as barefootjeff stated, maybe I'm just misunderstanding the situation.

This is not an announcement of a fix. This is just about what I believe is the cause. In technical terms, Groundspeak discontinued their WCF service earlier this year, replacing it with a REST API. Developers had a year's advance notice to update their applications. In non-technical terms, Groundspeak updated the way applications talk to their services; the Wherigo application, which is not maintained directly by Groundspeak, was not updated. When using the app, I've always just downloaded cartridges via a browser instead of directly through the app. I can also download them from the WF site or through my NAS (think like Dropbox or Google Drive, but with about 36TB currently at my control and room to double it). Either spstanley will update the app or the entire Wherigo developer community will wait to see if Groundspeak wants us to do anything with Wherigo.

Another thing to consider, winter sun in snowy areas has almost twice the UV as snow reflects almost 95% (talk to some mountaineer's that have gotten sunburn on the roof of the mouth from panting on a snow/glacier climb or up the nostrils).

Nope, I still doubt it. He's claiming the FTF because he sees himself as the FTF, just like 1400+ times before. That doesn't mean that one FTF is important to him, it's just a fact. Even if he said, "HAHAHA, another precious FTF to add to my prized collection," I'd still think that was just how he logs FTFs, not that FTFs are so important he'd go to the trouble of carrying spare containers all the time just to be sure he gets one more. I just think the image of the halo over his head is a much bigger motivation than the +1 that no one will notice. So if you talk to him, sure, go ahead and rib him about being a numbers fiend, but if you want to stop him from dropping throwdowns, talk him him about why throwdowns are not a good idea. He won't listen if you say it's just because it makes him look like a numbers fiend.

That's a definite "maybe"! Anyway, if it's a general question about possibilities, I can tell you that I tried setting the Waze and Geocaching Apps in split screen on my Samsung tablet, and it looks about right! I don't know which modern "tablets" have split screen. This is a Samsung Galaxy Tab S2. It actually is more promising than I expected. I first set up Waze as the default navigation App. Next, with both Apps running, I used Geocaching to select Navigate by car to a cache, and Waze picked up the route in its own screen! So the Apps talk to each other and get along. There's a funky landscape view going on, but I'm guessing I can get them both in portrait side-by-side by holding the tablet just right and starting the Apps with care. But I didn't fully test this setup. I don't have a great spot to mount a tablet in my car for navigation. I barely have a spot for a phone. And I don't mess with "Apps" while I'm driving, so having two Apps to mess with while I'm driving is out of the question. With someone else navigating, "split screen" would be overkill because people can switch between running Apps. So there's a very particular niche where this could even apply. I didn't test how well both Apps get along with using the compass simultaneously. It's a whole new ballgame. But initial tests seem... OK!

Yep I've tried Overcast and a couple of others. I couldn't quite get the same experience as the old podcasts app. (and there were a lot of complaints about their updates to that app in iOS11) As for GS, oh there are loads of differences. Part of it is workflow, part just mentality, but there are features that were around since its beginning that I vastly preferred. But it's way too late to talk about them now and I'm already changing my workflow habits. Other apps just developed from different directions and processes. It's not that I don't like any other app, right now it's just mainly that I have my entire caching career in there, and it's frustrating that there's been no way to easily transfer it, or just allow the app to work on 64-bit. If Geosphere comes back, we'll see how it works. But it's unlikely. So I'm moving on. As a side note, I also regularly experience that my 6S+ seems to be more accurate (precise/speed/something) than my 8+, but I haven't diagnosed whether it's the app, the hardware, or my case on the 8+ (mainly because it's insignificant enough a difference not to truly bug me or affect my caching) But yes now I'm pretty much caching all with Cachly, and a bit with the official app, and reworking my workflow to use the website more than the offline database as GS was so excellent at.

Couple o' points. First, there are rules regarding how far a Cache Owner may move their own cache through an "Update Coordinates" log, which is how it's done. If it's too far for an "UC" log, see Point Two below. Second, if you move your cache, are you retaining the identity and experience of the original placement? Let's say I found your cache last week. I had a wonderful time seeking it in its location and defeating its camouflage, and thoroughly enjoyed the mountain vista I could see from Ground Zero, which of course was why you brought me here in the first place. Next week, you move it to a different place five hundred feet away, hidden in a different style, and the surroundings provide an entirely different experience. Is it the same cache, even if it's the same container? Anyone who found it in its ORIGINAL placement will not be able to log it in it's new location; you can't log the same cache as 'Found' twice. You may want to simply archive the old cache and establish a new cache in it's new situ. Talk about the original cache on the new cache's page, drawing a connection between them to acknowledge the history. Thirdly, you own 24 caches. To answer your original question, the process would be the same one you followed to make sure all the others were 'legally' placed. Finally, as coachstahly said, your Reviewer is your friend. Work with him or her. Bring a bone and a ball to throw.

Personally, I like puzzles. I enjoy the extra dimension they bring to the game , and that they give me a bit of mental, cache related exercise on days when the hours of light are few, and the weather is, well, the reason us Brits talk about the weather so much, so I can't get out finding. I've made some excellent caching friends (both virtual and real world) through therm contacting me about my puzzles, or me contacting them about theirs. People with enthusiasm for puzzle solving seem to me to be interesting individuals with inquiring minds who enjoy a challenge, I love that attitude and it is fun for me to try to produce puzzles for them to try, and for me to work on puzzles they set. A proper, varied, convoluted, involved set of interlinked puzzle caches can be a thing of beauty, and an absolute joy to pursue. Along with a couple of good (met through puzzles) friends I've worked on a series of 66 puzzles over the last couple of years, each visit involved us in an 80 mile round trip and a lot of rural walking, many multi stage puzzles, field puzzles, and proper big boxes. The series is linked in a way which would no longer be allowed (a pyramid arranged as biblical 'books' , half a dozen or so first level caches each with part of a clue in , leading to a final cache for that 'book' which in turn has parts for one of two cumulative bonus puzzles, and when you find both of those ...you guessed it, they have information for the final puzzle. I can't even guess how many hours I've spent at home working on those puzzles, researching relevant (and turned out to be irrelevant, but still interesting ) topics, learning things about the bible, Inspector Morse, children's TV programs, Disney cartoons, chemistry, the Industrial revolution, the history of Birmingham and various games ... Those 'aha !' moments when the clues fell into place were joyful, and getting to the end of the series was exactly like reading a great book, you want to find out what happens in the end, but are conflicted about turning those last few pages because you don't really want it to be over. So yes, puzzles can be a joy.for those of us who want to invest the time and effort, but they are not exactly popular : in the course of finding those 66 caches, 7 of them were resuscitation caches, not having been found for a year or more (one of them for over two years) , but every single one was in good condition because they had been hidden with the same kind of care and thought as the C.O. gave to the puzzles. Working through and finding the series was a peak in caching for me, However, caching has many tribes within it, and it appears that the tribe with the most members at the moment is the numbers tribe, and specifically the app based numbers tribe. I don't know to what extent app based users who have started caching solely via their 'phones (rather than via the website ) ever look at cache pages on a computer : judging from the times I've looked to see if a cacher is still active, checked their profile, and seen they've never visited the website but they have recent finds , a lot of newish cachers never visit the site on a bigger screen. It's no surprise then when they don't do puzzles, many of which would be so much harder on a small screen, so those cachers have an extra barrier to puzzles even if they want to spend the time and effort on them. There do seem to be quite a lot of very simple puzzles, and straightforward single stage multis being used for the popular 'Church Micro' series over here, and I suspect the cache type with extra tasks has been chosen with the specific intention of having the cache ignored by folk who do not want to make any extra effort above a fast easy find. I guess having less frequent finds cuts down on the chances of muggles noticing less than stealthy cachers, as well as maintenance for full logs , especially if the cache is a tiny one with a tiny log ! Honestly this sort of easy ,make-work puzzle , set either as a simple hoop to jump through for whatever reason, is less interesting to me than the puzzle set by a C.O.who enjoys the puzzling process first, and the urge to set a cache comes second. I see a similar division in earthcaches, where some older ones are uninspiring in the extreme ( "See this weathered and undistinguished boulder ? What colour is it ?How big is it? What rock type do you think it might be ? " ) and just there for the smiley, not the geology. I'm happy that no more earthcaches of low quality will get past the reviewers with the updated rules. Some puzzles are there for the smiley, great puzzles are there for the puzzle. people who like these cache types * , either to set or find , really enjoy them, just look at the favourite points (that series of 66 have accrued over 1500 fp between them) or the found it logs. It doesn't bother me that so many newer cachers don't do puzzles: maybe they will one day, if they discover there is more to caching than trad.s, but I don't care if my puzzles get found once in a blue moon as long as the finders enjoy the puzzle solving and the cache find. I'll keep on setting caches I'd like to find, *Wherigos could be included here tooI think.

I don't think that this is true. Often when I talk with geocachers about Waymarking, they have no idea what it is. And after explaining it to them, they usually ask questions like "is there an app for it?", "can I create pocket queries?" etc. And after all the "No" answers I have to give them, only few of them will even start looking at Waymarking.com. The design and bugs of the website will deter more people from starting to publish waymarks. So, my theory is: If Groundspeak would invest as much in Waymarking as it does with geocaching, it would be much easier to find new waymarkers. Just imagine how wonderful Waymarking could be, if the website would have a modern design, (almost) no bugs and features like pocket queries, a Waymarking app, a Waymarking blog, souvenirs for visiting waymarks in a certain country, better options for filtering waymarks, the opportunity to organize Waymarking events .... and the list goes on and on. If all this was there, people would love to be part of it.

My family is 10 (highly supportive) and 0 (ABSOLUTELY refuses to participate). They do nice things like let me talk about the hobby to them and others, support my geocaching YouTube channel, and help me host my big GIFF event in a movie theater each year (they attend and run the entry table while I'm greeting everyone). So, they're awesome and supportive. But they do not enjoy finding geocaches.

The title of the thread is the pertinent topic here, not the subjective quality of the caches that are being placed. If you're going to talk about "numbers", then you need, well, numbers, not subjective determinations about the quality of new caches. No one is asking if the number of new quality caches is decreasing and there's absolutely no way that this could be determined, as what makes a quality cache is so subjective to likes and dislikes of individual cachers. Apparently you didn't read the title of this thread. Tell this to @barefootjeff (or any other cacher in an area with not many caches and not much hiding activity), who finds that the number of caches available for them to find is finite and will cause them to either travel extensively to find more caches or hope that someone discovers geocaching in their area and starts placing more caches or someone new moves in and starts placing caches. When there are a limited amount of caches in an area and that number continues to decline, it absolutely affects caching, regardless of whether or not it's all about the numbers. Those experiences you hope that people can enjoy won't be there for them to enjoy or will be very limited in scope.

Sure, talk it over with them. Maybe they think it makes sense. Maybe mom planted the cache and the kid really did run out and find it as soon as it was published. I think it would be fun to find out and an easy way to meet them. They aren't adversaries or opponents, just people you're playing a game with. If you decide the FTF was invalid, then just ignore it. I'd try to make my FTF claim lighthearted. Maybe say "first to find after members of the CO's family" in the log. You get to decide if you're FTF. The CO doesn't have to approve your claim.

Oh we've had instances of proxy-maintenance being noticed by reviewers and being dealt with. It gets to the point that people won't mention in find logs that the cache was missing and so a replacement was set in place (whether knowing beforehand or not, with permission or not). It happens. And when it happens regularly, and the CO continues to allow it as if it's the norm, then reviewers will take action. At least around here. Now, I suppose it depends on what style of 'maintenance' is happening -- replacement caches (throwdowns or condoned) will likely get quicker action than other people merely replacing wet/full logs. But the underlying point remains - if a CO repeatedly allows others to 'maintain' their caches, they could face repercussive action by reviewers. But my thinking is it's one of those things that can be discussed since it's really a matter of CO reasoning and judgments, how bad the situation is, how it affects the community, and well, whether that cacher is in the reviewers' good books or not (how they've demonstrated their cache ownership ethics in the past). The base point is - you're the cache owner, YOU do the maintenance. There can be exceptions to that rule, and it may be possible to set a different approved maintenance plan in place, but that basic responsibility exists - the cache owner does cache maintenance. Stray from that and you risk repercussions. Always, the best course of action otherwise is to talk to your local reviewer. Positively and respectfully. It goes a long way.

More to the point, what do you call the people who you think are geocaching but when you talk to them you realise they're actually just shuffling around near a cache on their smartphone?

This discussion came up yesterday, but unfortunately the thread was closed. I also would like to talk about false or odd ratings. For reference: Discussing false ratings in a forum post is absolutely up for discussion, and has been discussed many times. Without getting into details, that's not all that was happening with that particular discussion, which is why that particular thread was closed.

This discussion came up yesterday, but unfortunately the thread was closed. I also would like to talk about false or odd ratings. For reference:

How do you know that before you talk to them? Besides, even if you do already know that, all you're saying is that there's another, even bigger reason to talk to these people and try to fix your broken community instead of putting up with people that are intentionally irritating.

Good time to consider what you mean by "it". If you mean the "problem" of poorly chosen ratings, I deny it's a problem. If you mean those specific examples of badly rated caches, what you should do about it is talk to the CO and other members of your community that support badly rated caches. Make your arguments for accurate ratings to them and try to talk them out of rating caches arbitrarily. Among other things, remind them that challenges based on ratings are based on ratings because the ratings reflect the challenge of the caches, so their bogus ratings aren't really helping people meet those challenges, they're just giving them a way to lie about whether they've met them in spirit.

It looks fine to me. My only reaction is that any one of those requirements would make a good challenge cache, so putting them all together seems like overkill. If I knew you better, I'd try to talk you into doing 5 different wonderful challenge caches about those attributes instead of just the one. But if you're going to do just the one, and you really think the final location is good enough for that challenge, I think it sounds great. I doubt I'd satisfy the requirements, but I might be closer if I lived in your neck of the woods.

Furthermore, it creates problems with challenge-caches especially those covering number of countries covered. Note these states number of 'countries'. So I'd expect Northen Ireland would count toward this, however Project GC still shows my finds in Northern Ireland as part of another _country_... There is no talk in the challenge caches about 'political territories' or anything else. While I agree upon the ease relating to PQ's, searches and such. That has absolutely no bearing to souvenirs nor countries in the relation to challenges...

I'd bet there's a couple times Reviewers have been able to hit a cache FTF, simply not grabbed by others yet. - That's how I get some now. Most a day or two after published. I doubt a rogue Reviewer is fake-logging caches... We had one similar to yours years ago. A kid. Maybe they figured that if FTF was already "taken" online, they'd have more time to head out. - We notice that still ... caches often sitting for days unfound after a FTF. We see that in other areas too. One time the CO called to meet me as I opened the container, figured the field puzzle, and FTF a blank sheet. Now they knew for sure. Here, just talk at events (word spreads quick), and a mention of a fake FTF on the cache page got the kid to knock it off. - He depended on rides sometimes from an adult (who was at an event when it was discussed). I bet that helped too. Sometimes you have that kook that just likes to disrupt things. Possible that simply disregarding them is enough for them to stop. The "real" FTF could just log it, with no mention of the faker at all. Not getting the attention they need, maybe they'll move to something else. Can't hurt to give that a try...

I would be calling Garmin customer support direct. Talk through the problem with them. I had a problem after 6-8 weeks and the unit was replaced. That was 9 months ago Since then all OK I guess you have a12 month warranty anyway

Yeah, that's another thing. My phone's generally OK, but I lose phone service in various parts around town, some entire boondock villages, too. People say it shouldn't happen, their phone is fine. So evidently, I have a terrible phone company (Prepaid Straight Talk Wireless, and about their cheapest plan). Come to think of it, maybe I don't even care. I shall ponder this.

My phone doesn't have service in various parts of town. Iphone 8, and the same phone chip I took out of my 'droid phone that had similar issues. I think it's my prepaid phone service (Straight Talk Wireless). Anyway, I couldn't log if I wanted to. Which I tend to not want to, until I return to my PC and can type proper logs. But I hardly ever “claim FTF” anymore*. I sign a blank log, and my online log says that I found it, and I include the time I found it. People can figure it out. * An eye-opener was as a newb Geocaching, I made a log about how some cache was the first one I found that day. And it began to seem in the ensuing logs by FTF hounds, that they were intent to bite my head off, because THEY WERE FIRST, THEY WERE FTF, not me. Um. Just wow. Eventually, I pretty much decided to be a lot more careful with the word “first” in my logs. And I pretty much don't “claim FTF”, for any reason.

Well, it might be easier to talk it over with the CO. If the OP's intent is to "confront" before he's heard the CO's side of it , I can see why he'd want to go through a 3rd party.