Google Earth Caching

[lamprizzle]

Here's a geomoral question for those interested in mulling it over.

 

I was at work and I was about to ride my bike home, when I decided to see if there were any caches on the way back that I could pick up. There was, but the problem was I did not have my GPS with me at work.

 

So here's what I did (I hope you're sitting down). I downloaded the .loc file, opened it in Google Earth, zoomed way in to the local area, grabbed a screenshot, and printed it out. On my way home, I was able to find the cache quite easily with nothing but a marked satellite image in my hand.

 

You see the problem here. I didn't use my GPS! Isn't that the whole point of geocaching? Is this wrong? Search the bowels of your feelings and annals of your knowledge. In fact, I could argue that if the Google Earth image resolution is high enough and there are enough landmarks in the area, my printout could even get me closer to the cache than if I were to blindly follow the directions of my GPS, especially in an area with poor satellite reception.

 

Would love to hear some thoughts. Should I feel guilty?

 

Of course, this is really only possible in urban/suburban areas, where visual landmarks abound.

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

All I know is I have a cache in a creek here. Terraserver show it in the creek, though you can't zoom in enough to pinpoint it. Google earth shows it in the ditch beside the road about 100 feet away.

I wouldn't trust googles accuracy very far, it's hit and miss at best.

[+mtn-man]

I forgot my GPS one day at home. (I know, how can that be!) I decided to try to see if I could find a cache doing exactly what you are talking about. I found the cache in about 10 minutes in a heavily wooded area. There are folks that geocache without a GPS. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it. If anything, it is more challenging since your error is much higher.

[+DocDiTTo]

I use aerial photos all the time. Even with a GPSr, they help me visualize where I'll be hunting. And, unlike Google, they're very accurate all the time. Once on the way home from work I went after a FTF opportunity using nothing but aerial photos and topo maps off the internet (GPSr was at home). I would have found the cache, unfortunately it was muggled before it was ever found. But the photos got me to the right place nonetheless. I don't consider it cheating at all -- just another way to play the game.

[+Totem Clan]

Did you find the cache at the coordinates? Did you sign the log? Did you log your find?

 

What are the rules in Geocaching?

 

Geocaching is a relatively new phenomenon. Therefore, the rules are very simple:

 

1. Take something from the cache

 

2. Leave something in the cache

 

3. Write about it in the logbook

 

Where you place a cache is up to you.

 

 

Sounds like a find to me.

 

I often use Google Earth to help in my hunts if I'm not all familiar with the area around the cache. On at least one cache, when I drove to the cache area, I knew where the cache had to be based solely on the satellite picture. In fact the GPSr was leading me some 40' away do to the tree cover and the pavilion.

[+Lighteye]

I've ummm actually done that as well. I wanted to check for one on the way home, and forget to bring my GPS to work. DOH! Keyed in coords in GE, printed the map, and had the cache in hand after a short search. IMHO, FINDING is the goal, and if there is scenery of interest on the way, so much the better!

[+HarleyPiper]

Here's a geomoral question for those interested in mulling it over.

 

I was at work and I was about to ride my bike home, when I decided to see if there were any caches on the way back that I could pick up. There was, but the problem was I did not have my GPS with me at work.

 

So here's what I did (I hope you're sitting down). I downloaded the .loc file, opened it in Google Earth, zoomed way in to the local area, grabbed a screenshot, and printed it out. On my way home, I was able to find the cache quite easily with nothing but a marked satellite image in my hand.

 

You see the problem here. I didn't use my GPS! Isn't that the whole point of geocaching? Is this wrong? Search the bowels of your feelings and annals of your knowledge. In fact, I could argue that if the Google Earth image resolution is high enough and there are enough landmarks in the area, my printout could even get me closer to the cache than if I were to blindly follow the directions of my GPS, especially in an area with poor satellite reception.

 

Would love to hear some thoughts. Should I feel guilty?

 

Of course, this is really only possible in urban/suburban areas, where visual landmarks abound.

 

I would think that on a good day, a GPS would be more accurate that you could be using an online map. No harm, no foul the way I see it. Have fun!

[+Renegade Knight]

.... I didn't use my GPS! Isn't that the whole point of geocaching? ...

 

The appeal of geocaching has nothing whatsoever to do with a GPS. The GPS is nothing more than a tool. One of many for finding a cache.

 

The root of this activity is the cache. The tools we use to find a cache just part of the means and methods.

[+Smokeyg]

Lamprizzle, I respect your integrity. I think as long as you do what feels right to you, then it is right for you. Personally, I would never, NEVER, geocache without a GPS'r, but that's just me. It doesn't feel right to me, so it's not right for me. For you though, it may feel right, and if it does feel right, you should do it. No harm no foul indeed. Happy caching soldier.

[+WaldenRun]

All I know is I have a cache in a creek here. Terraserver show it in the creek, though you can't zoom in enough to pinpoint it. Google earth shows it in the ditch beside the road about 100 feet away.

I wouldn't trust googles accuracy very far, it's hit and miss at best.

 

I have heard these tales about GoogleEarth before, but haven't been able to verify one yet. Is this the cache you are talking about?:

 

 

It looks about right to me.

 

-WR

[+Bad_CRC]

you know you can use google maps right on the cache page and use hybrid view to do the same thing much more quickly and easily.

 

I've done it plenty of times. nothing wrong with it. sometimes the coordinates are WAY off in google maps though, so you probably don't want to rely on it.

[Clan Riffster]

Been there, done that..... (didn't get a T-shirt)

You found the cache, that's what matters. So long as I signed the log, I would log a find if I used Google Earth, topo maps, or just stumbled upon the cache whilst out wandering the woods. You done good, Brother! Don't sweat the small stuff.

[lamprizzle]

I had no idea I'd get these kinds of responses. I guess it is all about the find and not the GPS unit! That's hard to swallow for a geek like me.

 

A few have mentioned that Google Earth is not going to be as accurate, but I'm not sure what that means. The Lat/Long in the .loc file that I download from the cache page has just as many significant digits in it as Google Earth is able to display and is the exact same number I would be punching into my GPS. Maybe people mean that the satellite image overlay isn't precise enough.

 

I have, however, seen innaccuracies in the placement of caches using the new Google Earth browser kml (GeocachingNetworkKML) that streams cache locations, but that's probably just because it's designed to stream fast.

[+StarBrand]

Some of the areas near here have the hi-res images but everything is shifted by somewhere between 20 and 10 feet. I don't trust them. The rest of the area has such old low-res images that they are useless for anything other than a broad overview of where to go.

 

I use my GPS just because it is more fun.

[+Miragee]

I had four DNFs today with my GPSr . . .

 

Guess I should be using Google Earth instead . . .

[+GSVNoFixedAbode]

I'd think along the lines of "Hide a cache using a GPSr, use the supplied coordinates and description to find the cache". The most common - and for me most fun - tool for the job is a GPSr, but other tools are available with varying levels of accuracy. No foul in my book to use Google!

 

Depending on the location, Google Maps/Earth coordinate display can be pinpoint accurate or up to a good 100 metres or so out. It all depends on the accuracy of the geo-referencing of the supplied photos. For overall accuracy and reliability (and out-and-out fun) I'd stick with my little magic Garmin unit.

[vtmtnman]

I'd agree with everyone and say this is more than OK.I always use google earth to 'recon' areas the cache is in before doing any hunting.Gives me a heads up on where I'm going and what the terrain will be,how the drive might be,and so on.Before hand knowledge of the unknown is always a good thing.I'm not one of those people that likes to go into things blind.

[Suscrofa]

With Google, you did use satellites, didn't you ? So, no cheating !

 

It is a game, not a competition ! Cheating is irrelevant. You had fun, it is all that matters.

BTW as said, Google can mislead you as in some places the error is really important, I have seen more than 50meters offset !

This is geocaching so any geographical tools may be used.

If it was called GPScaching that would be a lot different.

[+Penny Pumpkin]

vtmtnman - I'd agree, but one of the most finds we've had so far (we're newbies) was one where we didn't use Google Earth. We were finding "Goby in the woods" after attending the Goby Festival in St. Sebastian Buffer Preserve, FL. We took off for the cache from the festival. GPSr said .4 mi to the NE. First part was on a trail, then bushwacking thru wild hog country and palmetto thicket. When we found the cache, it was right next to a fire road that led straight S to another entrance to the preserve. If we had Goggle Earthed the find, we'd had a much more boring walk to the cache. It's a tough call.

[+Penny Pumpkin]

previous post should read "most fun finds"

[+GEO JEM'S Family]

you know you can use google maps right on the cache page and use hybrid view to do the same thing much more quickly and easily.

 

I've done it plenty of times. nothing wrong with it. sometimes the coordinates are WAY off in google maps though, so you probably don't want to rely on it.

 

thank you, thank you, thank you!

i was just trying to figure out how to use google earth , when i saw this!!!

[vtmtnman]

vtmtnman - I'd agree, but one of the most finds we've had so far (we're newbies) was one where we didn't use Google Earth. We were finding "Goby in the woods" after attending the Goby Festival in St. Sebastian Buffer Preserve, FL. We took off for the cache from the festival. GPSr said .4 mi to the NE. First part was on a trail, then bushwacking thru wild hog country and palmetto thicket. When we found the cache, it was right next to a fire road that led straight S to another entrance to the preserve. If we had Goggle Earthed the find, we'd had a much more boring walk to the cache. It's a tough call.

 

Well,I'm more reffering to planned caching.Spontaneous caching is cool too.I'm still in the newbie phase myself (Only because I can't get out to find more caches just yet),but I'm a big proponent of going prepared.Anything I can use to put the odds in my favor for anything including caching I try to utilize.

[Clan Riffster]

sometimes the coordinates are WAY off in google maps though, so you probably don't want to rely on it.

When I first did the geocaching .kml thing in Google Earth, I was amazed to see the icons bounce from location to location as I zoomed in. I thought that it must be some built in inaccuracy issue created to keep the hunt directed toward using GPSr's. Sometimes the icon would jump more than 200' from its original location. Once I started inputting my own coords as waypoints onto Google Earth, the inaccuracies stopped altogether. Using a few known landmarks, (vehicles in mine and family member's driveways), I'm back to about 15' of accuracy.

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

All I know is I have a cache in a creek here. Terraserver show it in the creek, though you can't zoom in enough to pinpoint it. Google earth shows it in the ditch beside the road about 100 feet away.

I wouldn't trust googles accuracy very far, it's hit and miss at best.

 

I have heard these tales about GoogleEarth before, but haven't been able to verify one yet. Is this the cache you are talking about?:

 

 

It looks about right to me.

 

-WR

 

That is close but it looks like a Google Map image to me, not Google Earth. Google Map does get you pretty close but I just tried it in Google Earth and the first view had it about 100 yards east of the road. Second view had it on the west side of the road but about 50 yards north. Third view had it about 100 feet west, which woulod have it on top of an almost verticle hill. Fourth view finally had it in the creek pretty close to where Google Maps show it.

The OP did say he used Google Earth but I suspect now he also used Google Map.

[+Cpt.Blackbeard]

 

I have, however, seen innaccuracies in the placement of caches using the new Google Earth browser kml (GeocachingNetworkKML) that streams cache locations, but that's probably just because it's designed to stream fast.

 

Yes, that is what I thought you were using, and it is very inconsistent, thus my statement not to trust it to far.