# Why do people like to "correct" coordinates?

## Recommended Posts

This is just a personal beef.

I've noticed lately that people that find a cache like to put in their "correct" coords of the cache for the owner. I looked at one tonight and figured out that the finder thought the coords should be 31 meters further north and .9 meters to the east at the time that he found the cache. When using my GPS I have found there are times my accuracy is 3 meters and the next time it is up to 30 meters. Also when hiding a cache I do not have a GPS that does averaging so I have to do it myself. I shut the GPS on and off 12 times, kick out the high and low and do the math and come up with the coords, so far people have found all the caches that we have hidden. It is amazing how far the high and low can be off of the average. For me both coords of the finder and the owner are correct at the time that the people were at the cache site. There are a lot of variables that have to be taken into account for the differences of each time people attend the cache. You could arrive at the cache with 2-3 differnet GPSs and they would all have different readings but they all got you to the cache. Why don't we just enjoy the fun instead of saying others don't know what they are doing and putting in "correct" coords for them?

This is just a personal beef.

I've noticed lately that people that find a cache like to put in their "correct" coords of the cache for the owner. I looked at one tonight and figured out that the finder thought the coords should be 31 meters further north and .9 meters to the east at the time that he found the cache. When using my GPS I have found there are times my accuracy is 3 meters and the next time it is up to 30 meters. Also when hiding a cache I do not have a GPS that does averaging so I have to do it myself. I shut the GPS on and off 12 times, kick out the high and low and do the math and come up with the coords, so far people have found all the caches that we have hidden. It is amazing how far the high and low can be off of the average. For me both coords of the finder and the owner are correct at the time that the people were at the cache site. There are a lot of variables that have to be taken into account for the differences of each time people attend the cache. You could arrive at the cache with 2-3 differnet GPSs and they would all have different readings but they all got you to the cache. Why don't we just enjoy the fun instead of saying others don't know what they are doing and putting in "correct" coords for them?

I never post coords unless the posted coords are way off. I do it to help future cachers who may read my log while paperless caching. Instead of turning your GPS on and off 12 times, you'd be better off to set it down and let it settle for a good 5 minutes. Then take a reading.

I appreciate it when a cacher before me has posted their coordinates and it helps me find the cache, which is quite often. My experience has been that the only ones who do it are experienced cachers with very accurate units. I have also never noticed any comments saying the placer didn't know what they were doing. Rather, they say something along the lines of "here are the coordinates I got." I've done it myself a couple of times. The other thing I notice is that the placers who get corrected coordinates being posted are thankful and say so via a note log. At least that's the experience around here.

Therefore, my answer to the question would be: Because they want to help, and because when they do people (the placer and future seekers) seem to appreciate it.

I actually like the extra co-ordinates. I think of them as alternate co-ords - if the posted ones don't work for me, I try the other ones.

They are especially useful for micros in the woods, which are so dependant on good co-ords.

- hamgran

sometimes the owner just gets it wrong!

If there are enough complaints about the coords being off I completely disregard the owners coords and go with the ones posted by the finders.

If however the coords are good enough a grande majority of finders dont complain, then the owner coords are good enough.

It's a polite way of telling them "I disagree, so here is what i got". Take it with a grain of salt though.

I don't know how one thinks that coordinates are off. Older GPSr's have an accuracy with up to 10m discrepency while the newer ones are supposedly 3m. That means the coords could vary from 6m-20m. Ther is a benchmark at the corner of my block that I use to check my GPSr accuracy.... from bang on to 11m in discrepency. I guess I should contect the Government and let them know that their brass cap keeps moving.

I'll post the coordinates I get at a cache if I am standing at the cache site and my gizmo shows I am a good bit outside of my EPE or Accuracy Proximity. For instance, if I am standing at the cache, my Accuracy is at 15 ft., but my gizmo says I am still 25 ft away, I'll post new coords. Others can use them or not as they choose and the owner can always ask me to remove the coords from my log if they wish. Of course, I will not post updated coords on a multi or puzzle, but will instead notify the owner of my results so they can make adjustments if they feel it is necessary.

That is not to say that I think I am a better coord shooter than anyone else,I just got different results on that day and th einfo may be of use to someone else. Anyone and everyone's else's mileage may (and probably will) vary.

And yes, I'll make use of other's posted coords if I seem to be stuck. It never hurts to have additional info in a pinch and they have bailed me out more than once!

After three trips to find a cache and several DNF by other cachers (we could tell by the debris we were all searching in the same spot), finally found the Cache, way off from the original coordinates. Posted our coor. Cache started being found. Owner got mad, sent a nasty email saying with our coor people could walk up to the cache. DUH! Deleted our logs.

Then a couple of days later they post -- apparently there are two sets of coors for this cache and added ours. After a while, their original coor disappeared and ours appeared. Hmmmmm

Sometimes everyone makes an error, transposes a number (or doesn't know how to use a GPS).

I never mind a correction on my caches, and sometimes those coor posted by finders make a big difference!

I don't know how one thinks that coordinates are off.

My guess would be that they understand the accuracy of their unit and compare that with the reading they get at the cache site. The only corrected coordinates I have seen are a minimum of 20 m off, and often in the 25-40m range. I have never seen a corrected coordinate for an 11m difference.

I guess I should contect the Government and let them know that their brass cap keeps moving.

You've got to remember we are playing with civilian GPSs and their accuracy is determined whomever sets the defaults for the satellites that we use. We are no way as accurate as the military or surveyors which can be within inches of where they want to be. We are at the whims and wishes of the owners of the satellites, remember when 9/11 happened our accuracy was a whole lot less then it is now.

I don't post the coords that I get in the log, rather U email the owner of the cache and say "these are the numbers that i got at your cache, and if you get any complaints or DNFs, try them." So far I have had people ignore/not answer me, or answer and thank me. It seems to work for me as was said, my coords could be wrong to.

I have found numerous caches where the coordinates posted by other cachers have helped me find the cache. I have posted my version of coordinates when they appear to be quite different from the owners as well.

My pet peeve is the opposite: People post comments such as "Found the cache about 20m from where I zeroed out." but then don't say what their coordinates were.

Or, people who say "I used so-and-so's coordinates" and then don't mention what they are. For people doing paperless caching they may only have the last five logs so if there is a better set of coordinates available they should do what they can to help keep them near the top of the cache page.

Just my opinion, of course.

Why correct co-ordinates?

Well there are people that don't take good readings. Take the individual that used Google Earth satellite maps to mark the cache location - this sent people searching a construction site 600 metres from the actual cache.

Then there is the fellow that placed a cache in a ravine on a rainy night - his co-ordinates were 120 metres off, and this was mentioned by over 30 cachers that sought the treasure. The owner certainly didn't update his co-ordinates. Thankfully other people posted co-ordinates with their log entry.

While most of us take a lot of time, and multiple readings with our brand new GPS units based on SirF III chipsets, there are those people out there that seem to toss the cache out of a moving vehicle while taking a reading with a 15 year old GPS stuffed in a foil lined lunchpail.

11 Metres off is just par for the course, and not something I would 'correct'. Most caches are placed within a 20 metre circle of error just due to environmental factors and the lack of a benchmark to calibrate the unit with.

I think most people are trying to help.

Some people might be trying to express displeasure at the bad coordinates used by the cache placer.

There are cachers who do not know how to get accurate coordinates.

Placing a waypoint in a log is an attempt to be helpful.

If the cache owner has used bad coordinates on purpose they can get quite upset.

If cachers are using units that are comparable and have a clear view of the sky the seeker and the hider can often get accuracy that is astonishing. (inches, not feet)

I am not sure why anyone would complain about any waypoint left in a log.

A lot of people complain loudly when coords are wrong so the waypoints left in logs are actually helpful.

I like good coords and have no reservations about adding a waypoint to a log.

I am not sure why you think adding a waypoint is detracting from the fun?

For me both coords of the finder and the owner are correct at the time that the people were at the cache site.

So if I read that correctly then I am not sure why you would object to both sets of "correct" coordinates being present on the cache page? I totally agree with you that comments deriding the cache owner have no place in geocaching or on the cache page.

We found a cache in Newfoundland that was off by 400 m. Seems the cacher entered a number wrong while submitting it. We posted our coords and sent an email to the owner. A reviewer corrected them a month later.

There are a couple of caches in my area that are off...one cache is about 100 m away from the actual cache and another is 2 k away...I have offered to send them to the cache owner and have been totally ignored...therefore when they do not correct their co-ordinates I feel quite justified in posting them....

My guess would be that they understand the accuracy of their unit and compare that with the reading they get at the cache site. The only corrected coordinates I have seen are a minimum of 20 m off, and often in the 25-40m range. I have never seen a corrected coordinate for an 11m difference.

Hee hee! I just had one of mine corrected for a discrepancy of less than 5 meters. The cache happens to be placed away from a bridge, and the majority of the placements in this area near a bridge, are under the nearest bridge. I love it, actually, because it shows how people can become so accustomed to the norm that they fail to think outside the box.

Nothing ticks me off then coords that are more than 35m away from the cache. Thats what a OFFSET cache is for. So if you don`t want the correct coords on a cache make it an OFFSET.

I totally agree with you that comments deriding the cache owner have no place in geocaching or on the cache page.

Well put wavector. I have no problem with people placing alternate coordinates in their logs. Even though I try to get them very accurate, some locations are very difficult to do so due to trees, signal reflection off rocks etc. So an alternate set can be helpful, even on my own caches. In one case, I took 18 readings over 7 trips, averaging to the best point before publishing. There was considerable variability so people finding them off was expected and alternate coords were helpful to folks. No problem on my part.

What I do object to is when someone implies that I was sloppy when they have no idea how much effort I put into the coordinates. So, I agree: alternate coordinates yes, derisive comments no.

JD

More to the point, why do people assume their co-ords are correct!!

More to the point, why do people assume their co-ords are correct!!

Are you talking hiders or finders? The question could apply to either.

Because, for example, when the cords they are following take them right in the middle of a busy street, they're "probably" off a little, don't you think? In a case such as this, I for one appreciate the "correct" coordinates. =-)

Because, for example, when the cords they are following take them right in the middle of a busy street, they're "probably" off a little, don't you think? In a case such as this, I for one appreciate the "correct" coordinates. =-)

Why is it automatically the hider is the one that has the wrong coords. Could the finder not be the one that has the less accurate gpsr?

I have a couple of caches listed on another site and everytime time I go to check on it, I get a different reading using the same gpsr. There are too many factors involved. If anyone is heading out to fnd a cache with full expectations that the cache is located at the exact coords posted will be in for a long day.

Because, for example, when the cords they are following take them right in the middle of a busy street, they're "probably" off a little, don't you think? In a case such as this, I for one appreciate the "correct" coordinates. =-)

Why is it automatically the hider is the one that has the wrong coords. Could the finder not be the one that has the less accurate gpsr?

I have a couple of caches listed on another site and everytime time I go to check on it, I get a different reading using the same gpsr. There are too many factors involved. If anyone is heading out to fnd a cache with full expectations that the cache is located at the exact coords posted will be in for a long day.

In the case of the coordinates taking us in the middle of the street, we were three geocachers with each our own gps. Coincidence? I think not.

Why is it automatically the hider is the one that has the wrong coords.

It isn't.

I also look at the age of the cache, if it's a 4 year old cache, with dozens of finds, and no one has posted corrected co-ordinates, I'm a lot more apt to think that I'm getting a stray reading that day/time for whatever reason.

If it's a new cache, and I find the co-ords are off, then I might post them. Had one this year that was only out 12 metres, but the listed co-ords put the cache onto private property, instead of the public property where it was located. Part of our responsibility is to show property owners that we can respect them and their land in a case like this. The cache owner checked them again a day or so later, and found their original listings was off, the new reading was quite close to what I had posted.

I recently did a woodland cache which was under tree canopy AND in a dip. The GPS was bouncing about quite a lot but when I found the cache my GPS was telling me I was a good 30 metres from the coordinates.

Somebody else has just done the same cache with two GPS units and they reported that one said they were spot-on and the other one said they were 30 metres off.

Perhaps different GPS units give different results when the "accuracy" drops? Having a second set of coordinates under those conditions would actually be quite useful.

I also recently did another woodland cache where several people had posted their coordinates and then somebody worked out the average of them all and posted that. I found the cache straight away using the averaged coordinates.

I recently did a woodland cache which was under tree canopy AND in a dip. The GPS was bouncing about quite a lot but when I found the cache my GPS was telling me I was a good 30 metres from the coordinates.

Somebody else has just done the same cache with two GPS units and they reported that one said they were spot-on and the other one said they were 30 metres off.

Perhaps different GPS units give different results when the "accuracy" drops? Having a second set of coordinates under those conditions would actually be quite useful.

I also recently did another woodland cache where several people had posted their coordinates and then somebody worked out the average of them all and posted that. I found the cache straight away using the averaged coordinates.

A similiar thing happened recently when I was out with a fellow local cacher. During our morning of caching, I mentioned having 'problems' with a certain series of caches. He mentioned that that particular user was not using a garmin & that I would have to give an extra margin to my search area.

Another cache had plagued me on two trips till I went back far enough in the logs to find another set of coords - they turned out to be spot on so for me personally, I don't mind seeing another set of coords.

One doesn't work out, go with the backup set

Nothing irks me more than a geocache with dozens of finds, and no coordinate corrections mentioned in the logs.....that is over 40 feet off. We searched and searched for almost the entire 7 minutes. After we logged a DNF, another finder e-mailed us a note, telling us the coords are over 40 feet off !!!

We normally say something in our logs that gives future hunters a clue that the coords may be inaccurate.... such as " after expanding our search area we found this one".

If the coords are over 50 feet off, we may mention it.... but we probably wouldn't find it anyways.

Seven minutes, if we have trouble I've been known to look for over a hour trying to loacte some caches with my wife and boys going "when are we giving up?" I've been known to spend almost 2 hours looking for a cache be finally giving up an then the next time find the cache within minutes of arrival.

When I started this tread what got me was people that have to correct to .001 or .010 of the seconds. I've read all the reponses and the one line I liked the most "whose coords are wrong the hider or the finder of the cache?" This was put in my own words.

I've gone caching with others and no two GPSs agree even when placed within inches of each other.

As a hider of caches, I am ok with corrected coordinates being posted.

Sometimes my coords are poor.

If the corrected coords are then wrong, the next couple of finders will figure it out.

When hunting, I usually create an additional waypoint with the corrected coords....just in case.

Last week I found a cache out by 70 meters. The only reason I found the cache was because of the hint and some common sense. I was 100% confident that I was right in this case so I posted up my coordinates.

A while back I had looked for a cache where both my GPSr (garmin) and my friend's (Magellan) brought us to rougly the same location. Turns out it was, give or take, 75m off from the actual cache location. Many other a cacher had reported the coordinates to have been off and had posted theirs but the owner refused to change the posted ones saying his were correct (via email to me). Eventually he did but I think they were still out. Had I read the logs I would have used the coordinates from other cachers and probably would have found it that first day. I will say that the location was a challenging place to obtain a signal, it was in a ravine but refusing to believe that maybe your posted coordinates are wrong is wrong itself.

One other thing is I think that good coordinates help reduce the damage to the location. They help minimize the search in the wrong place and the overall foorprint on the area. My personal opinion is that if you are saying the cache is at the posted coordinates you should try to get the most accurate ones possible.

Last week I found a cache out by 70 meters. The only reason I found the cache was because of the hint and some common sense. I was 100% confident that I was right in this case so I posted up my coordinates.

A while back I had looked for a cache where both my GPSr (garmin) and my friend's (Magellan) brought us to rougly the same location. Turns out it was, give or take, 75m off from the actual cache location. Many other a cacher had reported the coordinates to have been off and had posted theirs but the owner refused to change the posted ones saying his were correct (via email to me). Eventually he did but I think they were still out. Had I read the logs I would have used the coordinates from other cachers and probably would have found it that first day. I will say that the location was a challenging place to obtain a signal, it was in a ravine but refusing to believe that maybe your posted coordinates are wrong is wrong itself.

One other thing is I think that good coordinates help reduce the damage to the location. They help minimize the search in the wrong place and the overall foorprint on the area. My personal opinion is that if you are saying the cache is at the posted coordinates you should try to get the most accurate ones possible.

What the deuce? X is back on the forums?!

Welcome back stranger!

People post coordinates because they think the owner has bad ones..... I wish more people would do it.

If I find coordinates that are more than 150% more than my EPE, I post new ones.

IME, if you take the time to take good coordinates, nobody will be posting corrections.

When I started this tread what got me was people that have to correct to .001 or .010 of the seconds.

I've read all the reponses and the one line I liked the most "whose coords are wrong the hider or the finder of the cache?"

I'd agree that a change of .001 is meaningless, but then again I've never actually seen a correction this small.

A change of .010 could be as much as 18 metres off. I'd say this is worth a correction.

My experience is that if several people are providing similar corrected coordinates, then the hider is wrong.

i love it when someone corrects my cords when they are off infact i wish more people would because it saves me a trip out to th cache to get them myself

If my coordinates are way off (which is quite possible with my e-Trex legend...) I certainly appreciate it when someone updates them. The problem I have is with those folks who make rude comments to cache owners about their coordinates. I have not personally had this problem but know a few cachers who have. Sometimes the comments can get downright nasty and that is just uncalled for. Isn't it the fun of the hunt that we all love? So what if the coordinates are a few meters off? I know that I've had to search high and low for some caches and I will say so, but there's no need to get testy is there??? It is a bit disheartening to get to a cache site and ground zero is in a field of flowers when you're looking for a tree!!! But hey, it just might be MY GPS so I just keep hunting!

...Why don't we just enjoy the fun instead of saying others don't know what they are doing and putting in "correct" coords for them?

The part in bold is the crux. Just do it.

The rest is your own personal beef and takes away from the fun because you have chosen for it to be that way. Coords are off at times. Both finders and owners can screw it up. Life happens. Have fun anyway.

i love it when someone corrects my cords when they are off infact i wish more people would because it saves me a trip out to th cache to get them myself

Dirty Filthy Stinking Fun Loving Pragmatist.

The problem I have is with those folks who make rude comments to cache owners about their coordinates.

Around here some cachers develop a reputation for constantly having poor coordinates. And, sometimes frustrations boil over and comments are made in logs that shouldn't be there. I'll even admit to logging something along the lines of "Admit it, the posted coordinates were taken from your car as you threw this micro into the bush while driving by, weren't they?"

And, sometimes, people are just jerks.

I try to take the terrain in to account when deciding to add corrected coords in my log. Rule of thumb is 10m before I even think about adding that info to my post. Ravines and heavy tree cover add to my tolerance We too have a few hiders that frequently shalll we say, miss the mark significantly and of those, a few even go so far as to post that they won't correct the coordinaters until they've confirmed them even if several cachers have made reference to corrected coords in another finders log.

I suspect that in the case of multiple 100m errors that numbers in the coords get switched while entering into the cache submission page, to bad we can't input coords directly from our GPS's via their map programs.

Edited by stickman756
Ill even admit to logging something along the lines of "Admit it, the posted coordinates were taken from your car as you threw this micro into the bush while driving by, weren't they?"

Hey DanOCan, if you ever put that on one of my cache pages I would laugh myself silly!!! I guess it's just the folks that make personal comments when they are complaining about coordinates. Heck, I've got a Garmin e-Trex that is iffy at best but I do MY best to get coordinates that are at least close... so far so good mostly.

One thing I've noticed is that, over time, cache containers tend to migrate. I recently corrected one of my cache containers that had moved about 15m from its initial hide over the 3 years it has been out there.

One thing I've noticed is that, over time, cache containers tend to migrate. I recently corrected one of my cache containers that had moved about 15m from its initial hide over the 3 years it has been out there.

Yes, I too have noticed that geoSquid. My sister-in-law is constantly replacing one of her caches because no one seems to take notice of the exact way it was placed and if it's not replaced just right, it's not hidden well.

Several factors come into play with latitude/longitude coordinates. While the receiver (GPS Unit) is a factor it is only a part of the puzzle. The number of channels on the receiver or how the receiver processes the satellite signal comes into play. Also of importance is the number of satellites visible to the receiver. Tree cover, large (tall) buildings, steep valleys, etc. all can come into play. On occasion even the satellites themselves can cause poor readings. The satellites are part of a navigational system in place by the U.S. Department of Defense. Navigation is done using angles. If satellites are not in a good position then the 'cut' of the angle can result in positional or greater positional errors. Also, the accuracy of the signals may be altered by the DOD. Terms such as HDOP (horizontal dilution of position) can be determined on some receivers. The number will have a relevance to accuracy of the position. Other receivers may show an EPE (estimated positional error). These terms can be used as a guide. It is very important and has previously been suggested to wait about 5 to 10 to 15 minutes to allow the receiver to settle before taking the position in order to increase accuracy. As an aside, when doing survey work to determine the site of something like a radio tower one will often take a position on each of 4 sides of the tower from a known position, then calculate the location. Again, as an aside, I once had to stop a survey for a harbour for two hours because in the satellite map page all satellites were in a straight line, thus no angle suitable for cut to determine an accurate position, resulting in poor HDOP.

To conclude, positions may be variable for a number of reasons and the position may change throughout a given day without even moving the receiver.

Who is right or wrong? I shall leave that one to you to decide.

## 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.

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

Only 75 emoji are allowed.