Jump to content

Your Coordinates Are Off!


Frodo13

Recommended Posts

I was recently looking over some caches near my home coordinates to find a few that looked interesting and I came across some posts that got me thinking and reviewing my own hides. I saw several posts from folks who found a cache and posted a not telling the owner their posted coordinates were way off, and then posted the "correct" coords to help future cachers locate the hide. There were also a few DNFs that had a similar theme.

 

I have had a few comments, mostly private emails, asking me to check coordinates and I was quick to return to make sure. In almost every case the coordinates my reciever returned were the same as the ones posted. (This is not to say CORRECT, only that my GPS and cache page are in agreement). I have been caching with friends and as we did the "Circle Dance" our GPS units were returning very differents coordinates.

 

Since the weather was not coorperating (95 degrees and 90% humidity, I had some time to kill instead of caching) I did a little sneaky research on one post and determined (by going through the posted photo galleries) that the commentor was using a XXX brand reciever that has a list price of around $100 and the cache hider/ owner had ZZZ brand reciever that retails for $500 plus. Understand I am not a technical reviewer of GPS unit's accuracy as it relates to cost, but...

 

It also seems a point of pride with many of the cacher I have met that determining cache coordinates for a hide should be accurate, and taking multiple reading, sometimes on multiple days, is not uncommon. I won't even get into coordinate averaging

 

So, the long and short of it. How sure do you have to be in your GPS to post a public note to a cache owner that their coordinates are off? Have you ever done it? Have you posted a cache with coordinates that were "soft" just to make it more difficult?

Link to comment

The coordinates would have to be at least 50 feet off before I'd even make mention of it in my log. Even $500 GPS units have "bad days" when the satellite constellation is not favorable and the tree cover is heavy. A hider with a Garmin Gecko, but with the advantages of a wintertime hide with an ideal satellite array, could easily get more accurate coordinates.

Link to comment

When I started caching I was told that 40' of accuracy was as good as some GPSrs may have even when they're indicating 20' of accuracy (for multiple reasons). So I always figured that if the hider was 40' off, and I was 40' off, then I could be as far as 80' from the cache even when I show 20' of accuracy.

 

If the cache is actually 100' off the posted coords, I don't report it on the cache page because I won't know it. Those are probably my DNFs. :D

Link to comment

yes, I also have horror stories of GPSr's haveing a bad day. 15 ft error, can't find the cache, only to return 2 days later and walk right up to it 50 feet away. (No, I didn't refresh the data in my GPSr either)

 

Another thing to look for is an error between the coordinates that are internal and the displayed coordinates. I had a Magellan that was .32 miles off and currently my friend has a Garmin with a 70 ft error. To check this, jot down the displayed coordinates, then mark your coordinates and check the default numbewr that come up for differences. Next, enter the coordinates from the display and then see where you are at. When I had this error, I uploaded the firmware and the error was greatly reduced. Another upload reduced the error significantly. I believe I uploaded the firmware 4 times before the error was eliminated. Note: this only works under some circumstances. Your mileage may vary.

Link to comment

Different brands and models have different quirks than demand a bit more of a learning curve than simply turning the unit on.

 

I've zeroed out on caches placed by an owner with a yellow Garmin. With a particular technique I know my Magellan gets 0.001+/- repeatability--approximately a 6' radius. Getting down below a certain radius requires an operator than knows what he's doing.

Link to comment

If you found the cache the coords were good enough, and if you didn't, you don't know.

 

I have posted on occasion something like, "found cache somewhat south of posted coords today", but the cache would need to be 60 feet or more from the coords, and I would have to be having a 'good' satellite day. When I post that, I'm as much alerting the owner that the cache may have shifted as that the coords may be wonky - that's my intent anyway.

Link to comment

Whenever I post about 'bad' coordinates, I always try to couch it in terms of my GPSr having a bad day, not teh cache hiders. I know from experience that caches I visit one day can be dead on with my GPSr, and when I go back to the same another day (to drop off a TB or something) my GPSr is WAAAAAY off. The cache didn't move, but the satellites changed position, tree cover may have changed, etc. etc.

 

I don't think I have EVER found one where the cache hider was at fault for having bad coordinates.

Edited by New England n00b
Link to comment

I will post my coor as a "try these" if there are a lot of DNFs for the cache. We all write numbers down incorrectly from time to time. When future cachers say they found the cache using my coor, obviously there was a problem somewhere.

I have no problems if someone posts alternate coor for my caches -- goodness knows I have reversed numbers enough times to know that I am not fool proof!

Link to comment

I probably wouldn't mention anything less than around 60 feet in my log and no, I would never purposefully put bad coordinates on my cache pages.

 

I did have one cache not long ago where the finder complained my coords were over 100 feet off. I went back the next day and my GPS read 10 feet standing at the cache. I'm guessing he was having a bad GPS day.

Link to comment

I will post my own coords if I think the coords are off enough to cause other searchers difficulty finding the cache. I have posted coords when mine were only 25 feet away for a well hidden cache, and I have had easy finds where the coords were off 90 feet, and I did not post coords. If I have been at the location more than an hour and I have been able to take multiple readings over time with an EPE less than 18 feet, then I am pretty sure my coords are within a few feet of the actual position.

 

Many places here in northern Georgia are subject to terrain induced signal reflections and if the cache owner takes readings at a bad time, coords can be off 60 to 80 feet although the indicated EPE may be less than 20 feet. The interesting thing about these caches is that some searchers get lucky and get the same signal bounce as the owner and will report the numbers were right on the mark, and the next 5 searchers will report an 80 foot error.

 

IMHO, if the cache is well hidden or otherwise "tricky", the coords should be good.

Link to comment

Sure, I've found caches more than a few feet from ground zero but I never make mention of it. My GPSr could be having a bad day or they did, 50-50. I'm not that arrogant to think my coordinates are any better than anyone else's. Some people do make comments about this cache or that cache and some will post their 'found coordinates'. I ignore 'em.

Link to comment

So, the long and short of it. How sure do you have to be in your GPS to post a public note to a cache owner that their coordinates are off? Have you ever done it? Have you posted a cache with coordinates that were "soft" just to make it more difficult?

 

I'll allow thirty feet for your GPS, and thirty feet for mine. When half the finders tell you that your coordinates are seventy feet off, in the middle of the street, something is wrong. Everybody's out of step but Kelly.

Posted a log on one that the coords were 173 feet off, and in the middle of the river. Most other posters wondered about the accuracy. My log got deleted.

My QC department would never permit that, but it seems that some people deliberately post wrong coordinates. I stop looking for their caches.

Link to comment

I know the cache that Harry speaks of, the coordinates got revised after many months . It was a 4 or 5 part multi with each stage being off to some degree, until the final where it was off by that distance. There was a recent new hide in this area, 2 dnf right off questioned coordinates, owner disabled and checked mistake was about 1 mile, corrected and now it is active.

Link to comment

Terrain can wreak havoc with satellite reception . I used to have a multi, with the first stage being on a hillside, about 10 feet into the woods from a clearcut for overhanging power lines (the big metal towers). The first few finders (within a few days or so of placement) were amazed atthe accuracy. Whenever I was in the area I'd stop by and record new coordinates, always with an accuracy <25 feet, keeping track of them in a spreadsheet, and updating the ones on the site with the average once in a while (after throwing out lowest and highest of each coordinate).

 

Then one day after an email from someone who searched for hours covering everything within 100 feet of the listed coords I found them to be over 400 feet off, putting you on a different trail from the one you needed to be on. Took new coordinates, 21 foot accuracy, letting the GPS sit for 5 minutes to get a good average. Came back an hour later to find out that the last set of coordinates, only an hour old, were over 100 feet off.

 

Removed that and the second stage, and relisted the final as a regular cache.

 

I have never seen, or even heard of, reception problems that bad.

 

There used to be another cache in the area, also located on a hillside, that had coordinates off by up to 90 feet in different directions, depending on what day you visited.

 

Despite what is said, experience tells me overhead power lines do mess with reception. Hillsides are even worse, and my guess is the GPS might be picking up signals reflected off the hillside.

 

I do not usually post my coordinates on caches I find, or email the owner, unless I have good reception, and show at least 60 feet off.

Link to comment

Since purchasing one of those higher end models and upgrading the software, I have been finding it harder and harder to find most of my caches now. Some I still walk right up to, but most involve more of a hunt than I think they should. It is especially frustrating when I can't find 1/1 or 2/2 caches quickly. Of course, maybe its just me :D:D

Link to comment

 

It also seems a point of pride with many of the cacher I have met that determining cache coordinates for a hide should be accurate, and taking multiple reading, sometimes on multiple days, is not uncommon. I won't even get into coordinate averaging

 

 

okay.. here is a question. if I read it right, you can expect your GPS to be off by 15 feet or more, say it's claiming a 12 ft accuracy etc etc.. that's a big search circle. So here you have a cache, says no hints because

" None, coordinates are right on. "

 

How can one be so sure that the coordinates are "right on" and that everyone elses will be also?

 

And what do you mean by "soft"? off? and if so, would you tell someone on the cache page?

Link to comment
if I read it right, you can expect your GPS to be off by 15 feet or more, say it's claiming a 12 ft accuracy etc etc.. that's a big search circle

 

its more like 15 to 30 feet and yes it is a big search circle

 

 

How can one be so sure that the coordinates are "right on" and that everyone elses will be also?

 

You can't. Sometimes the worst coordinates I run into are where the owner says on the page that he averaged

the coordinates for 20 minutes, or took 30 readings and averaged them. There are just way too many variables to be so certain your coords are right on.

 

The only way to do it is use a $4,000+ Trimble commercial grade unit and make sure all the searchers have one too. Until then we'll have to deal with the limitations of consumer grade units.

Link to comment

Since purchasing one of those higher end models and upgrading the software, I have been finding it harder and harder to find most of my caches now. Some I still walk right up to, but most involve more of a hunt than I think they should. It is especially frustrating when I can't find 1/1 or 2/2 caches quickly. Of course, maybe its just me :D:)

 

I know exactly what you mean. I think I had a lot more luck with my yellow eTrex than I do with my GPSMap 60c. I think perhaps when caches are hidden using lower-end receivers, they will be tougher to find with higher-end receivers because of the accuracy differential.

Link to comment

I have posted about inaccurate coordinates a couple times but I try to make it clear that it's either my GPSr, tree cover or my clumsiness that's caused it. Plus, my Magellan something-or-other doesn't seem to want to cooperate around bodies of water. :D

 

My point in doing so is to point out the difficulty of the find which, to me, is actually beneficial to the adventure; it makes the find that much more rewarding.

 

Naturally, I still curse and stomp my feet in frustration when it happens, but that's just me. :)

Link to comment

If you found the cache the coords were good enough, and if you didn't, you don't know.

 

I have posted on occasion something like, "found cache somewhat south of posted coords today", but the cache would need to be 60 feet or more from the coords, and I would have to be having a 'good' satellite day. When I post that, I'm as much alerting the owner that the cache may have shifted as that the coords may be wonky - that's my intent anyway.

Not necessarily - we found a cache that was over a tenth of a mile off the listed coordinates. (And no, it wasn't a "puzzle" or an "offset" - it was just an inexperienced cacher with a bad-coverage day.) We found it based on the hint and using our Cache-Fu. We posted our coordinates in our cache log and several people "avenged" their DNFs on the cache using our coordinates. The hider went back shortly afterward to check the coords, and found that he did get numbers agreeing more with our coords than his originals, so he changed the cache coords on the page.

Link to comment

I've done quite a few of your caches now, and have been quite impressed that your coords were -- in all but one case -- spot-on accurate. Just because there is nothing nearby that LOOKS like it could be a cache, doesn't mean there isn't a cache right under your nose!

 

I believe you and I cache with the same "Brand ZZZ" GPS. I've noticed that with mine the batteries do seem to last forever, but when I get down to one bar of battery life, my accuracy goes down the toilet! Change of batteries, and we're a'ready to go again!

 

Keep up those great hides, Frodo!

Link to comment

I do like it when another finder posts their coordinates. Sometimes I find hides much easier using the alternate coordinates posted - and sometimes not. It's not an insult to the cache owner. But blatantly stating "your coordinates are way off" is not tactful, could be completely incorrect & is in bad taste. A private email is much better. I cache with a Map70CS & a friend of mine caches with the latest Map70CSX and the differences between our accuracy/pointer position is sometimes extreme! It's always good to "play nice" - there's no point in being extremely gruff in this game.

Link to comment

I'm another that may mention my difficulty in finding a cache where what I find as ground zero is well away from the listed coordinates, but I wouldn't ever suggest that my coordinates are the best. I have seen far too many reasons why I come up with different results than the hider. Once cache in particular I remember that about the time I was passing the cache on the trail, my GPSr was telling me it was still about 300 feet away... in the opposite direction from the cache. I stayed on the trail, which had many switchbacks as it climbed the mountain, and watched as the numbers constantly changed, going up and down, but never dropping below 150 feet away and never pointing in the direction of the cache which was getting farther and farther away behind me. Finally, the arrow switched directions and listed the cache as 0.3 MILES away - over 1500 feet off at this point. I turned off the GPSr and walked well back down the trail and used the hint to figure out where the cache was. I found the cache and for kicks turned the GPSr back on. When it settled down it said the cache was 6 feet away.

 

Additionally, I have seen some finders complain that coordinates are well off on some of the caches we have hidden - in one case a finder even MOVED our cache over 100 feet away to where they thought the cache met their coordinates better. Yet I consistantly find our cache is at accurate coordinates for our GPSr unit (I am one of those that take readings several times over a period of a few days to be sure I get consistant results) and other cachers do post that they get dead on accuracy in finding the caches.

 

With all of that seen in the past, I don't feel justified in saying the coordinates for a cache are in fact poor - even when I find the cache over 150 feet away from where my GPSr tells me it should be. Instead I usually pass the blame off to my own user error and let there be a record that at least I did have some problem. More than half the time the cache will be found by the next finder "with ease" anyway.

Link to comment

I do like it when another finder posts their coordinates. Sometimes I find hides much easier using the alternate coordinates posted - and sometimes not. It's not an insult to the cache owner. But blatantly stating "your coordinates are way off" is not tactful, could be completely incorrect & is in bad taste. A private email is much better. I cache with a Map70CS & a friend of mine caches with the latest Map70CSX and the differences between our accuracy/pointer position is sometimes extreme! It's always good to "play nice" - there's no point in being extremely gruff in this game.

 

So true... this kicked off a bit of nastiness here with one of my hides. It is extremely tactless and rude to go on a rant in a log about coords putting you in the middle of nowhere, especially after the previous finders said the coords put them literally on top of it at 0'.

 

I personally like to contact the hider before saying anything in public. We have a new cacher here locally, and his coords so far have been pretty awful, but he is a nice guy, so a phone call or email usually resolves this asap. :D

 

Anything more than 40' off in the clear, and 70' in heavy cover is about the dividing line between me chalking it up to my GPS having a bad hair day, and the hider verifying coords at midnight with his eyes closed, then sending him a communication. :)

 

Just my $.02

Link to comment

I am glad with the positive responses - It seems these logs seem to be the exception, not the rule. I guess the exceptions tend to get more attention, and not with geocaching. There seems to be a real common thread. We all (or maybe should) recognize their is some "fuzz" that is part of the GPS system and Geocaching. I am very glad to see so many folks are taking that into consideration before logging a post.

 

JoeFrog is right about batteries, that point seems to slip by folks. After I have put in a fresh set of batteries I am surprised how quick and strong the signal are. I experienced first hand another way to get a stronger signal -I recently bought an external mag mount antenna for my unit (ebay <$20) to use while driving and was blown away with its performance. I maxed out every sat in under 30 seconds. I have never had that strong a signal even in a parking lot after leaving the unit on to do some shopping.

 

For those who asked about "soft" coordinates - I have gotten several emails from cache hiders that they "pushed" the distance on the coordinates to make the hide a bit more difficult. Hmmm...I think a better way is to simply make the hide more difficult through conceilment, or wardrobe. If there is a hint that posted coordinates are not accurate, excluding puzzles or mystery caches, I will tread lightly while searching.

 

A final note, are most cachers loading coordinates aand heading out without reading the logs? Some of the best info, aside from the description, are the logs from other cachers. Not to get off track.

Link to comment

I found a cache where the listed coordinates were well over 100 feet off - closer to 110 feet - and down a steep hill in the middle of a patch of poison oak. I was FTF on this cache and spent a looooong time looking for it. I had actually given up and climbed back up to the trail and then found it about 10 yards along the trail on my way back. It was right next to the trail. I let the cache owner know and he posted my new coordinates and then went back out to the cache site and verified them. It saved a lot of folks a lot of trouble.

 

I also posted that I found a cache approximately 40 feet from where the listed coordinates put it. Again, the cache owner checked the coordinates and found that I was correct.

 

For small discrepencies I just figure it's normal variance but for something of greater magnitude I let the cache owner know. I leave it up to them to fix the coordinates.

Link to comment

I can only comment from a finder, not a hider perspective.

 

In most cases, my GPSr got me to the cache and I was usually able to find the item. Some I haven't been able to find, either due to my lack of success, wasn't quite close enough, or the cache was missing.

 

There were a few caches in which my GPS pointed me to a different location, usually 30-40 feet away. I was successful in the find, because of how these caches were hidden. (basically the wrong location was in the middle of a road/open field).

 

In a couple of rare occasions, other cachers had posted in the logs corrected coords. I found that those coords got me spot on the location, which indicated that the hider had some problem getting good coords. (I can say that in those situations, using the 'official' coords would NOT have found me the cache. In those cases, I confirmed the suggested coords.

 

This is one of the reasons I will check the logs of caches I plan to look for...

Link to comment

We've only posted once on coordinates that were way, WAY off and only after we noticed dozens of previous logs mentioning the same thing at the cache itself. So not too bad so far. We have noticed that the people who mention coordinates problems in logs near us tend to log these issues A LOT and OFTEN B) So it might not be just you. We're proud to say we're just about the worst GPS users around our area (figured out how to use the "input a waypoint and follow the arrow method" only after doing the first 50 or 60 caches :) ) and we're doing all right so I wouldn't worry overly much as long as you do your best when placing your own caches to be careful and take multiple readings.

Link to comment

I have never seen, or even heard of, reception problems that bad.

My Cache is located in an area with the worst reception I have ever seen. When I went back to check on it, I found the first stage with my GPSr listing 70' accuracy (and jumping around). The reception was so bad for the second stage I couldn't even find my own cache (placed a few weeks before) for 20 minutes. Standing in one spot, I would watch my GPsr jumping:

20' N

80' SW

60' E

.13 mi N

120' E

...

 

Most of the finders have complained about bad accuracy too, altough one was 7' off. I haven't found another location that has such problems.

Link to comment

What you're asking reminds me of one of my favorite cache posts. "Coords put me in middle of parking lot. Owner better check" Okay.. I'll check... the sewer grate in the parking lot where the cache is stuck. ten to one the cacher parked in the spot with the grate and couldn't find it because they were on it.

 

Another time I've had coords posted "yours were off... " and it turns out I had fat fingered a number and it caused my cache to be shown in the middle of the interstate instead of at Cracker Barrell. I was glad he pointed it out, and I used his to fix my cache page.

Link to comment

For those who asked about "soft" coordinates - I have gotten several emails from cache hiders that they "pushed" the distance on the coordinates to make the hide a bit more difficult. Hmmm...I think a better way is to simply make the hide more difficult through conceilment, or wardrobe. If there is a hint that posted coordinates are not accurate, excluding puzzles or mystery caches, I will tread lightly while searching.

 

IMHO "soft coords" or whatever you want to call them are not a part of the game. If you want to add a few stars to the cache rating, do it with a clever container or a well hidden cache. From my perspective, when you post cache coords you are saying that these are the best you can provide ... any error is unintentional. If I found that a cache placer was intentionally "softening" coords, I would skip those caches.

Link to comment
If I found that a cache placer was intentionally "softening" coords, I would skip those caches.

So would I, but better yet -- I might even be tempted to just sign the nearest lamppost micro and log it as a find on the 'softener's' cache page. How am I supposed to know exactly how big his intentional error is? :)

Link to comment

When this happened to my cache I decided to use spray painted X's. I didn't want anyone wasting their time looking in the wrong spot. So far I seem to be the only one in the area to do this. Still, I received negative comments about this(nothing ecological).

Link to comment

Depending on cloud cover, Leaf cover, Mood, alignment of palnets, Gravetational pull, and what you had to eat that day, your co-ords could be off a little. lets face it, our are not as accurate as they claim to be. But they are good enough that you could find your way out of the woods or on the ocean, but to put you direclty on top of an exact point on the Earth everytime..dream on

Link to comment

It only takes a few minutes to take a look on Google Earth to see how accurate your coords appear, expecially in urban areas with a lot of landmarks in the view.

Google Earth is OK in some areas and awful in others. They must not do much field checking of their data. I have found Topozone aerial photos (not the USGS topos, but the photos) to be accurate to the point that when they disagree with the posted coordinates I assume the posted coordinates are wrong. The problem with some USGS sheets must be that the cartographer couldn't read the photo. Last week I had one 50 Meters off by USGS and only 5 meters off by the photo. But the idea of checking your coordinates with a good map is exactly what should be done. The photo is a result of thousands (millions??) of datapoints and the GPS only a few. The GPS can be useful in areas where there is little detail visible from the air, but for most caches the aerial photo wins.

Link to comment

If anyone really wants to know if their GPSr is working properly, being accurate or precise, they could go the route of finding a stable benchmark that has data that includes a GPS coordinate. That takes some research. To save a lot of time in that area I once posted a description of how to do it. Here is the post.

 

Where I live I am friends with the guy that runs Aerial Services so I have access to GPS coordinated markers they have placed all over the area. I even hid a cache inside the tube that covers one, with his permission of course. I tell people what the true coords are so that while there they can check their GPS units.

 

I strongly recommend making your GPSr stationary, antennae up or down, whichever works best, and letting it average for 10 minutes. That is a proven way to increase the accuracy which can be defended. In another forum I started the topic: How to Test GPS Accuracy.

 

I think that most people don’t realize that the error of a GPSr is compounded when they come to find the cache. It’s error upon error. Either way, I rarely have anybody tell me my coordinates are off, anymore. I built a holder that holds my GPSr upright while it does it's thing. I added an access hole to make the waypoint without moving the unit.

 

Here is mentioned a program that is very interesting as far as watching the wanderings of your GPS data goes.

 

-it

Link to comment

It only takes a few minutes to take a look on Google Earth to see how accurate your coords appear, expecially in urban areas with a lot of landmarks in the view.

Google Earth is OK in some areas and awful in others. They must not do much field checking of their data. I have found Topozone aerial photos (not the USGS topos, but the photos) to be accurate to the point that when they disagree with the posted coordinates I assume the posted coordinates are wrong. The problem with some USGS sheets must be that the cartographer couldn't read the photo. Last week I had one 50 Meters off by USGS and only 5 meters off by the photo. But the idea of checking your coordinates with a good map is exactly what should be done. The photo is a result of thousands (millions??) of datapoints and the GPS only a few. The GPS can be useful in areas where there is little detail visible from the air, but for most caches the aerial photo wins.

 

I use USA Photomaps (freeware from www.jdmcox.com) and I've found it to be extremely accurate -- often much more go than Google Earth. In fact, I've gotten in the habit of checking out new caches with it before I ever leave the house... in some cases, I've been able to find caches with it alone, no GPS. (and yes, for ME that is a novelty :lol: )

 

I use USA PM to verify the coords for my hides too... if it's pointing me to the wrong spot, I screwed up with the GPS. It's always been dead on. If I find a cache but the coords seemed off, I'll check them with USA PM. It's not hard to convince someone their coords are off if you can show them a picture of the area with their posted coords and the true cache location easily visible.

Link to comment

I have found Topozone aerial photos (not the USGS topos, but the photos) to be accurate to the point that when they disagree with the posted coordinates I assume the posted coordinates are wrong.

Thanks for the compliment! We try extremely hard to maintain the highest level of accuracy in all our data sets, and it's nice when someone notices.

 

Different data sets do have different inherent levels of accuracy. The USGS actually documents the average estimated position error for every DOQQ aerial photo. Your note made me realize that that might be helpful information, so I added it to the photo info display on TopoZone. When you're viewing a map or photo you can click on the "Map / Photo Info" button on the left to get details about the data at that location. I added a new field at the end of the metadata for each DOQQ showing the "Relative Accuracy" (the USGS's term) for that photo as meters RMS. You will typically see relative accuracies of 1 - 2 meters RMS for USGS DOQQs.

 

Ed

(TopoZone Map Guy)

Link to comment

I may be on the pickier side of folks... I will post if someone's coords are off by more than .005, but I generally mention it in passing like... found the cache, my coords were a little east. Or something similar. I figure if everyone did that, it'd be an easy way to get the best average coordinates. Heck, if it were me, I'd put a spot on the log to allow finders to enter their coordinates, or the difference, and publish those as well. Maybe I'm just anal and like good data. I figure the better it is, the more successful finds there will be, and the better for everyone the sport is.

 

I love hiding and finding caches, and try to take the time to appreciate the area of a cache and the journey it takes to get there. Posting purposely bad coordinates seems in bad taste unless you tell people. If people like that, we could make a new cache type "Approximate cache"

Link to comment

I was going to add an aerial photo to show the scatter of GPS data submitted in the logs of a single cache, but the photo is not being accepted. Go to http://www.geocaching.com/profile/Default....bd-846f28ddcb36 and click on the photo of 10.30.2005 to see it.

 

This is an example of why posting alternative coordinates is a good thing it you are confident the posted ones are off. In this photo of a cache, that still exists, the published coordinates are shown by the northwestern most dot. The other dots are coordinates suggested in the logs of finders. The cache is actually located about 7 meters west of the southernmost dot in the cluster of three dots. The total distance covered by the spread from east to west is over 300 feet. The published coordinates are at the top of a cliff, the rest are scattered around the rocks at the bottom and the foot of a brushy steep bank beyond. Without the suggested alternate coordinates this one is a shot in the dark. ... but if the guy that suggested that lonely dot way over to the east was the only one who expressed his findings, I'd never have found it.

Edited by edscott
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...