I hid a cache but lost the coords

July 3, 2008

I hid a cahce today and when I went home to log it the coords where not on my gps. Is there any way I could get a pretty gps close coords without having to go back to the site. As the suburb is a hassle to get to.

Edited July 3, 2008 by Elizabeth Carter

2.3k · July 3, 2008

no

July 3, 2008

I've done the same thing before.

You HAVE to go back and get accurate coords. (Only fair to the people seeking your cache). Since that happened, I always write them down also now.

1.3k · July 3, 2008

If it's a hassle to get there... I assume that making a maintenance visit is also a pain.

July 3, 2008

If it's a hassle to get there... I assume that making a maintenance visit is also a pain.

You bring up a great point... I you are not willing to do maintenance runs on your cache, It shouldn't be hid in the first place. I have a 5 terrain hid but am both willing and able to check on it. If you can't don't hide it!

7.3k · July 3, 2008

You as the owner of the cache must visit the site and obtain the coordinates with a GPS

First sentence, second paragraph of the Guidelines that Apply to all Cache Types

.

July 3, 2008

I can't imagine how popular a hider would be if all of their coords were done via the "guesstimate" method.

Oy.

July 3, 2008

If it's a hassle to get there... I assume that making a maintenance visit is also a pain.

I have to agree wtih this statement. If it is a haslle for you the placer, why in the H - E Double Hockey stick should a geocacher go visit it? Geocaching is about having fun, not being hassled.

July 3, 2008

One possibility of finding your new cache location fairly accurately is to check the 'track' information on your GPS. If your GPS leaves the electronic trail of 'breadcrumbs' (my 60CSx does), you can check where you've been by following this track. I'd assume that where you placed the cache there will be lots of lines where you stayed in that one spot while you collected info, hid the container, etc..

I have use this method a couple of times when I forgot to log a cache I visited and it works quite well. As long as you haven't erased the track information or traveled far enough to overwrite the track info for that point, you should be all set. You'll still have to go to the site to get exact coordinates though. Hope this helps.

3.5k · July 3, 2008

One possibility of finding your new cache location fairly accurately is to check the 'track' information on your GPS. If your GPS leaves the electronic trail of 'breadcrumbs' (my 60CSx does), you can check where you've been by following this track. I'd assume that where you placed the cache there will be lots of lines where you stayed in that one spot while you collected info, hid the container, etc..

I have use this method a couple of times when I forgot to log a cache I visited and it works quite well. As long as you haven't erased the track information or traveled far enough to overwrite the track info for that point, you should be all set. You'll still have to go to the site to get exact coordinates though. Hope this helps.

That might work if they had the tracklog turned on, but if they forgot to mark the waypoint to begin with...

24.7k · July 3, 2008

If it's a hassle to get there... I assume that making a maintenance visit is also a pain.

I have to agree wtih this statement. If it is a haslle for you the placer, why in the H - E Double Hockey stick should a geocacher go visit it? Geocaching is about having fun, not being hassled.

That would be because you find that finding a cache isn't a hassle. If it were, nobody would find any caches anywhere.

24.7k · July 3, 2008

I hid a cahce today and when I went home to log it the coords where not on my gps. Is there any way I could get a pretty gps close coords without having to go back to the site. As the suburb is a hassle to get to.

Life happens. Next time you are in the area going about your normal life, stop by and pick up the coods to list the cache. Simple.

Some folks have no clue that geocaching dovetails well with life and that a cache seldom rises to the level of a crisis. However folks having a panic attack over someone elses cache does appear to be common.

Edited July 3, 2008 by Renegade Knight

24.7k · July 3, 2008

I can't imagine how popular a hider would be if all of their coords were done via the "guesstimate" method.

Oy.

I can nail a cache close enough to find a half dozen different ways all without a GPS. There is always another way. The GPS is itself a guestimate of location or it would be more accurate than 20'.

18.9k · July 3, 2008

I did that once. Next time I was in the area (3 or 4 weeks later) - I grabbed the coords and got it going.

July 3, 2008

I did that once. Next time I was in the area (3 or 4 weeks later) - I grabbed the coords and got it going.

Keeping a notebook with all your cache info in it will save you time and energy.

I keep detailed notes of placement and then I use the old fashion pace method to locate the actual spot.

This way if I have to add more clue to it, I can.

July 3, 2008

I can't imagine how popular a hider would be if all of their coords were done via the "guesstimate" method.

Oy.

I can nail a cache close enough to find a half dozen different ways all without a GPS. There is always another way. The GPS is itself a guestimate of location or it would be more accurate than 20'.

A gps is a guesstimate? I guess that's one opinion. Seems like much less of a guess than what the OP was suggesting. Congrats on your half dozen ways of geocaching without a gps tho - terrific stuff. I guess I'll stick with my guesstimating technology both when finding and particularly when hiding.

July 3, 2008

9Key-"That might work if they had the tracklog turned on, but if they forgot to mark the waypoint to begin with..."

Yes, the track log has to be on for this to work (mine is always on) but that has nothing to do with whether a waypoint was marked or not- those are entirely seperate. Here is a track log that shows me searching at a location but there is no waypoint involved. If I picked a spot right in the middle I'd be off about 40 feet, too much for marking a cache.

July 3, 2008

I can't imagine how popular a hider would be if all of their coords were done via the "guesstimate" method.

Oy.

I can nail a cache close enough to find a half dozen different ways all without a GPS. There is always another way. The GPS is itself a guestimate of location or it would be more accurate than 20'.

A gps is a guesstimate? I guess that's one opinion. Seems like much less of a guess than what the OP was suggesting. Congrats on your half dozen ways of geocaching without a gps tho - terrific stuff. I guess I'll stick with my guesstimating technology both when finding and particularly when hiding.

I have in the past used Google earth to check the accuracy of my GPS co-ords and have found it to work quite well. I knew the park very well and knew exactly which tree I had hidden it under. If your hide is like mine and you can verify the exact place from an aerial map, I see nothing wrong with getting the co-ords from google earth. I actually found that one of my co-ords was out by 20 feet when I checked in on google earth and changed it to the google earth co-ords. People have since commented how accurate my co-ords have been. All that said, in summary, if you know exactly (and I mean EXACTLY) where you place the cache try google earth, if you don't, don't.

J

Additional edit: Make sure you change the google earth GPS settings to match those on your GPS i.e. to match the ones stated on Geocaching.com. I thought all of my first cache GPS co-ords where miles away and thought I'd broke my Garmin. Then realised!

Edited July 3, 2008 by JayPercival

July 3, 2008

The fact that you can sometimes get close enough using google earth, mapsource or other tools, isn't a substitute for using your gps when hiding a cache. If some people start doing that to hide caches, I'm going to jump on the bandwagon for an "Ignore Hider" feature request.

To the OP, as others have already said just get the coordinates next time you're in the area and submit the cache then. But do keep in mind that you'll probably have to return for future maintenance visits so only hide caches where you think you can return in a reasonable amount of time if/when the need arrises.

2.5k · July 3, 2008

Are you sure they aren't still in your gps?

You are probably set for "nearest" and so only the nearest 50 caches will show up. Have you looked for them by "name" ? And under both waypoints and geocaches.

If you didn't rename them, they will probably be there under a number---something like 1, 2, 3 or 001, 002, etc

Edited July 3, 2008 by Neos2

July 3, 2008

The fact that you can sometimes get close enough using google earth, mapsource or other tools, isn't a substitute for using your gps when hiding a cache. If some people start doing that to hide caches, I'm going to jump on the bandwagon for an "Ignore Hider" feature request.

I concur with that statement. Caches need to be placed with a real GPS at GZ.

But the irony is, in many areas, you can often get much BETTER coords using google earth/maps - it's incredibly accurate sometimes. Only if the object it's hidden on is obvious in google earth, of course.

In other areas, other times, google earth/maps is way off.

24.7k · July 3, 2008

...A gps is a guesstimate?...

It really depends on how accurate you want to be. If you can be as accurate or better without a GPS than with one I'm not sure there is a problem. The comment on accuracy isn't an opinion. Opinion kicks in when I'm speculating on if my reviewer would let me use my "guestimated coords" based on my saying they are as good as or better than a GPS.

24.7k · July 3, 2008

The fact that you can sometimes get close enough using google earth, mapsource or other tools, isn't a substitute for using your gps when hiding a cache. If some people start doing that to hide caches, I'm going to jump on the bandwagon for an "Ignore Hider" feature request....

You are lumping together several things and a few assumptions.

The real issue you are getting at is that you don't trust Joe Cacher to do a better job without a GPS than he can do with one. The fact that some cachers can do just that when most probably would have the issues you are thinking of isn't worth the risk to you or the bother for the reviewers to sort them out.

It changes nothing about the fact that it can be done and done well. For example I have access to ortho rectified arial photographs that are far higher resolution than what you can get in Google Earth. Even without those if you know how to adjust for the systematic map errors you can do the job with Google Earth. I would not expect Joe Reviewer to know how to do this, but then I don't need to know how my mechanic does his thing. I only need to know he can.

Edited July 3, 2008 by Renegade Knight

July 3, 2008

I can't imagine how popular a hider would be if all of their coords were done via the "guesstimate" method.

Oy.

I can nail a cache close enough to find a half dozen different ways all without a GPS. There is always another way. The GPS is itself a guestimate of location or it would be more accurate than 20'.

A gps is a guesstimate? I guess that's one opinion. Seems like much less of a guess than what the OP was suggesting. Congrats on your half dozen ways of geocaching without a gps tho - terrific stuff. I guess I'll stick with my guesstimating technology both when finding and particularly when hiding.

I have in the past used Google earth to check the accuracy of my GPS co-ords and have found it to work quite well. I knew the park very well and knew exactly which tree I had hidden it under. If your hide is like mine and you can verify the exact place from an aerial map, I see nothing wrong with getting the co-ords from google earth. I actually found that one of my co-ords was out by 20 feet when I checked in on google earth and changed it to the google earth co-ords. People have since commented how accurate my co-ords have been. All that said, in summary, if you know exactly (and I mean EXACTLY) where you place the cache try google earth, if you don't, don't.

J

Additional edit: Make sure you change the google earth GPS settings to match those on your GPS i.e. to match the ones stated on Geocaching.com. I thought all of my first cache GPS co-ords where miles away and thought I'd broke my Garmin. Then realised!

By this post I am in no way advocating that people should post caches without visiting the site with a handheld GPS. Just in a special case (of a cache miles away from your home which you forgot to get the GPS co-ords, but could remember the exact location of) you could possibly get away with using Google Earth. But I accept that the proper co-ords would probably be more accurate.

J

24.7k · July 3, 2008

... I accept that the proper co-ords would probably be more accurate.

J

It's also the simplest. Hit "mark" and you are done. Using a GPS sure seems to work well enough. It's ironic though that folks forget tha we knew how to make maps and mark X on the spot, long before we ever launched a satallite.

1.3k · July 3, 2008

...A gps is a guesstimate?...

Yes. A GPS reading is the most accurate guesstimate you can take.

July 3, 2008

... I accept that the proper co-ords would probably be more accurate.

J

It's also the simplest.....

True.

J

2.3k · July 3, 2008

I hid a cahce today and when I went home to log it the coords where not on my gps. Is there any way I could get a pretty gps close coords without having to go back to the site. As the suburb is a hassle to get to.

no.

4.4k · July 3, 2008

Do not rely on Google Earth to be accurate for this purpose. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. I've seen cases where it's absurdly inaccurate. A GPS used properly (by averaging readings) is always more accurate than Google Earth.

If you're using a Garmin, try going Find / Recent Find. If you did mark a waypoint it should show up there, even if it's no longer among the nearest to your current location.

10.1k · July 3, 2008

[it's also the simplest. Hit "mark" and you are done. Using a GPS sure seems to work well enough. It's ironic though that folks forget tha we knew how to make maps and mark X on the spot, long before we ever launched a satallite.

Yes. I have searched for quite a number of benchmarks the coordinates of which were extrapolated from the "X" on the map. A few hunded feet off is not unuaual.

To OP: I would not submit the cache until such time as I could go back to get GPS readings. As per the guidelines.

July 3, 2008

to the OP - yep I know the feeling!! It was kind of annoying, but not too much so that I couldn't wait a couple of months until next in the area.

Little Cache Lost

Like we did - just wait until you are going back that way, and get the co-ordinates again. You can write up the cache page using the approximate co-ordinates (just make sure you untick the box that gets it reviewed) and then as soon as you get the good co-ordinates, you will be good to go!

Annie

1.7k · July 4, 2008

I have started to look at our caches on Google Earth and found out that Google places ALL of them about 100-150 feet to the North East of their actual placements. I would never use that to place a cache. And, yes, I know our coords are accurate because we get great feedback via found logs about how accurate we are.

July 4, 2008

I have started to look at our caches on Google Earth and found out that Google places ALL of them about 100-150 feet to the North East of their actual placements. I would never use that to place a cache. And, yes, I know our coords are accurate because we get great feedback via found logs about how accurate we are.

Google Earth has that error built in on purpose. They don't want you to be able to zero in on caches using just Google Earth.

Yes it is possible to get a good set of coordinates from Google Earth and I suppose once in a while you may get a better set that with a gpsr. But to get good coordinates consistently, a gpsr is the way to go.

7.9k · July 4, 2008

Per the guidelines, you must use a GPSr to obtain the cache co-ordinates.

If it's 'too much of a hassle', perhaps you should re-think the location?

Like any tool, the accuracy of Google Earth depends on the skill and technique of the user! That being said, there ARE areas where the closest view looks like a fishbowl.

If you are relying on the Geocaching.com .kml file...forget it! The 'cache location' will dance around every time the view refreshes. If you 'upload' co-ordinates via a .gpx file, I have found the results to be quite accurate. And as well, if I can see a certain known feature that I know hosts a cache, I can get rather accurate numbers.

3.2k · July 4, 2008

[it's also the simplest. Hit "mark" and you are done. Using a GPS sure seems to work well enough. It's ironic though that folks forget tha we knew how to make maps and mark X on the spot, long before we ever launched a satallite.

Yes. I have searched for quite a number of benchmarks the coordinates of which were extrapolated from the "X" on the map. A few hunded feet off is not unuaual.

To OP: I would not submit the cache until such time as I could go back to get GPS readings. As per the guidelines.

That might point more to the skill of the "extraoplater" than the mapper.... and remember those Xs might have been placed on a 1920 version of the topo at 1:62500 and re-extrapolated several more times by others over the years as the map was revised and rescaled without collecting additional data on the ground. I would never attempt to place with a USGS topo, but a good aerial photo, as mentioned by others above, is at least as accurate as a GPS and much less tempermental.

3.2k · July 4, 2008

I have started to look at our caches on Google Earth and found out that Google places ALL of them about 100-150 feet to the North East of their actual placements. I would never use that to place a cache. And, yes, I know our coords are accurate because we get great feedback via found logs about how accurate we are.

In some areas the Google map and the Google satellite image are out of registration. When this happens the pointer stays with the map layer which will be the incorrect location. To correct the error find a spot on the map which can also be seen on the satellite image. Measure the distance and direction between those two points and use that data to calculate the cache position in relation to the pointer. You have essentially done that and estimated the difference. If you take a few more minutes to calculate it exactly, you can pinpoint a set of coordinates on the map as accurately as with a GPS.

There are other problems with Google images that pop up in certain locations. I've seen some with excessive cloud cover which makes them all but useless. Some photos are from mid winter which is great, but lots of them are with full leaf cover which makes things more difficult. A few are so out of focus that they become a blur at 1:10,000 or even 1:25000. That's when I must go really old school and use a USGS.

2.7k · July 4, 2008

Elizabeth Carter Posted on: Today, 06:10 AM

I hid a geocahce in Bundeena, Sydney NSW. When I came home to log the cache I could not find the coords on my GPS. As I won't be going back to this suburb (as it is a hassle to get to ) I was wondering if anybody that lives at Bundeena could help me out. Or is there any other way to get my gps reference whithout having to go back to the site.

I have cached with Ed and found several of his no GPS hides so I know I can trust his skill with an aerial photo. I do have a problem with Elizabeth's post in the Australia Forum though (see above). It has a little more info than she has shared here. She is not going back. What she needs is somebody to clean up the litter. She never had any intention of maintaining this.

July 4, 2008

The fact that you can sometimes get close enough using google earth, mapsource or other tools, isn't a substitute for using your gps when hiding a cache. If some people start doing that to hide caches, I'm going to jump on the bandwagon for an "Ignore Hider" feature request....

You are lumping together several things and a few assumptions.

The real issue you are getting at is that you don't trust Joe Cacher to do a better job without a GPS than he can do with one. The fact that some cachers can do just that when most probably would have the issues you are thinking of isn't worth the risk to you or the bother for the reviewers to sort them out.

It changes nothing about the fact that it can be done and done well. For example I have access to ortho rectified arial photographs that are far higher resolution than what you can get in Google Earth. Even without those if you know how to adjust for the systematic map errors you can do the job with Google Earth. I would not expect Joe Reviewer to know how to do this, but then I don't need to know how my mechanic does his thing. I only need to know he can.

Well, I didn't mean to lump things together, just to say that I believe people should use a GPS to obtain coordinates to caches that they hide and publish.

I acknowledged (in so many words) that it's possible to get perfectly good coordinates using software. I doubt most cachers have access to the tools you do.

Some locations support this better than others. I've seen the images of a tree in the middle of the field, or the lampost in the corner of the parking lot. In locations like that, once on site it's often obvious to the searcher where the cache must be especially if it's low difficulty. Coordinates that are less accurate, or perfect, don't matter as much. In the woods or in a cluttered urban area with many possible hiding locations, it's another story.

You've nailed the real issue on the head. It's not that I don't trust Joe Cacher, it's that I don't really want to waste time discovering that I don't trust Joe Cacher's coordinates. While it's possible to get even better coordinates using the right software, I hope it doesn't become a trend because while your coordinates might be great doing it this way, I believe that most people would not do as good a job as you.

3.2k · July 4, 2008

The fact that you can sometimes get close enough using google earth, mapsource or other tools, isn't a substitute for using your gps when hiding a cache. If some people start doing that to hide caches, I'm going to jump on the bandwagon for an "Ignore Hider" feature request....

You are lumping together several things and a few assumptions.

The real issue you are getting at is that you don't trust Joe Cacher to do a better job without a GPS than he can do with one. The fact that some cachers can do just that when most probably would have the issues you are thinking of isn't worth the risk to you or the bother for the reviewers to sort them out.

It changes nothing about the fact that it can be done and done well. For example I have access to ortho rectified arial photographs that are far higher resolution than what you can get in Google Earth. Even without those if you know how to adjust for the systematic map errors you can do the job with Google Earth. I would not expect Joe Reviewer to know how to do this, but then I don't need to know how my mechanic does his thing. I only need to know he can.

Well, I didn't mean to lump things together, just to say that I believe people should use a GPS to obtain coordinates to caches that they hide and publish.

I acknowledged (in so many words) that it's possible to get perfectly good coordinates using software. I doubt most cachers have access to the tools you do.

Some locations support this better than others. I've seen the images of a tree in the middle of the field, or the lampost in the corner of the parking lot. In locations like that, once on site it's often obvious to the searcher where the cache must be especially if it's low difficulty. Coordinates that are less accurate, or perfect, don't matter as much. In the woods or in a cluttered urban area with many possible hiding locations, it's another story.

You've nailed the real issue on the head. It's not that I don't trust Joe Cacher, it's that I don't really want to waste time discovering that I don't trust Joe Cacher's coordinates. While it's possible to get even better coordinates using the right software, I hope it doesn't become a trend because while your coordinates might be great doing it this way, I believe that most people would not do as good a job as you.

Agree. I don't want to spend time hunting for a cache that does not have good coordinates regardless of how those coordinates were obtained. If a person knows how to read the subtile details of a good aerial photo those coordinates will be just as accurate as those obtained by a GPS under perfect conditions. Even in the woods there are usually things that stand out from the air that can be used to pinpoint a location. Poor photos and poor GPS reception give poor coordinates.

3.2k · July 4, 2008

Do not rely on Google Earth to be accurate for this purpose. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. I've seen cases where it's absurdly inaccurate. A GPS used properly (by averaging readings) is always more accurate than Google Earth.

If you're using a Garmin, try going Find / Recent Find. If you did mark a waypoint it should show up there, even if it's no longer among the nearest to your current location.

"always" and "never" are usually wrong.

July 4, 2008

Maybe it has already been said but here is an idea.

If there is a local cacher you don't mind rewarding with a FTF you could get a general idea from google earth and send them the cords through an email. Then exchange cell phone numbers so that while the other cacher is a the site you can give him directions as they look at the site. Then they can get the actual cords for you.

I hid a cache and on the way home (only a few miles) a cacher in our caching group called me for an "Phone A Friend" about one of my other caches. I wanted to talk to him and the other cacher that was with him so I told him I would stop by because it was on the way home. While we were talking they said they were there to clear out my town by finding all of the caches that they had not found. I said well there is a new one so I gave them the cords so that they could find it too. When the were there the cords put then in a grassy area and I had told them it was in the woods so they gave me another call. I told them that I placed it with three little girls that wanted to play on the play ground so I did not get to test the cords like I normally do. I gave them enough clues to find the cache and they got up dated cors for me. They both have a garmin 60 csx and I have a etrex camo with out averaging. The result was theat they got an FTF and an easy find on a level 4 diff. cache and I got the needed cords.

7.2k · July 4, 2008

I hid a cahce today and when I went home to log it the coords where not on my gps. Is there any way I could get a pretty gps close coords without having to go back to the site. As the suburb is a hassle to get to.

Ask a trusted friend that's closer than you if you're too far away.

As for using Google Earth, I don't trust it. Far too many places don't match up with coordinates. Coordinates taken at my dining room table GE shows in my neighbor's backyard.

Look at N 33° 34.724' W 79° 49.500' A whole town duplicated 6 miles from the actual location to the north.

Look at where the tiles come together. Far too many times the edges don't align. How would you know which tiles to trust?

Nah, I can see why the guidelines say to use a real, on-site GPS reading for coordinates.

Additionally, taking a GPS coordinates isn't about accuracy--it's about repeatability. If the person is going to be finding the cache using a GPS then the same technology should be used to place it. Using the same technology will get you closer to what the placer experienced when placing it. If the idea was to find the cache using Google Earth, then you should be using Google Earth to hide the cache. It's because the two don't mesh you don't want to mix them.

3.2k · July 4, 2008

........Look at N 33° 34.724' W 79° 49.500' A whole town duplicated 6 miles from the actual location to the north.

Look at where the tiles come together. Far too many times the edges don't align. How would you know which tiles to trust? ........

....

I looked at the maps. That's about as bad a job as I've seen Google do in the US, but there are probably worse. Looks like they are calling up the wrong tiles altogether, it's not just an alignment problem. If I knew the area I might be able to work around it, but if ever I go through that area on a caching trip I'll have to resort to the USGS or just keep on driving. In my experience when Topozone existed, their aerials could be trusted all over the US. Three months with Google have, at the very least, taught me to be more flexible in my thinking when attacking a cache location

July 5, 2008

One possibility of finding your new cache location fairly accurately is to check the 'track' information on your GPS. If your GPS leaves the electronic trail of 'breadcrumbs' (my 60CSx does), you can check where you've been by following this track. I'd assume that where you placed the cache there will be lots of lines where you stayed in that one spot while you collected info, hid the container, etc..

I have use this method a couple of times when I forgot to log a cache I visited and it works quite well. As long as you haven't erased the track information or traveled far enough to overwrite the track info for that point, you should be all set. You'll still have to go to the site to get exact coordinates though. Hope this helps.

I've used EasyGPS to extract track, waypoint, and other info out of the fleet of GPSrs I have, and savede said, the resulting out to a .GPX file.. the gpx file is easily read like a text file, and the location/time of the track should give a fairly accurate spot (though, in decimal degrees, You'll have to convert back to degrees, decimal minutes.)

It still seems odd, as others have said, If it's a hassle to go back to the site, maintaining the cache would also be a hassle.. Why place it there in the 1st place?

I admit, myself, I've let a few caches go unmaintained.. One, I really need to go after because it's become infested with yellow jackets. (LPC.. Luckily, there's a WalMart near it, so picking up bug spray won't be a big hassle. Just the time needed to get there.)

Abandoned Caches are a bit of a scourge.. and usually end-up giving other geocachers a bad name.. no better than littering.

Stephen (gelfling6) (Now, heading out to call RAID!)

July 6, 2008

... I accept that the proper co-ords would probably be more accurate.

J

It's ironic though that folks forget tha we knew how to make maps and mark X on the spot, long before we ever launched a satallite.

So who put out all those benchmarks? Someone who was ON THE SPOT....just like the OP should be.

1.1k · July 6, 2008

put it in as a puzzle cache.

go past the tree, and past the fallen log across the river, then climb the hill and it's under the big rock.

oh wait, no. you have to go back.

wouldn't hurt to go back a second time as well to get accurate coords. I've always gone back a couple times when hiding for additional readings to make sure my coords are as accurate as possible.

24.7k · July 9, 2008

... I accept that the proper co-ords would probably be more accurate.

J

It's ironic though that folks forget tha we knew how to make maps and mark X on the spot, long before we ever launched a satallite.

So who put out all those benchmarks? Someone who was ON THE SPOT....just like the OP should be.

The vast majority of benchmarks were set long before GPS was even possible. Proving that on the spot is entirly possible.

24.7k · July 9, 2008

You've nailed the real issue on the head. It's not that I don't trust Joe Cacher, it's that I don't really want to waste time discovering that I don't trust Joe Cacher's coordinates. While it's possible to get even better coordinates using the right software, I hope it doesn't become a trend because while your coordinates might be great doing it this way, I believe that most people would not do as good a job as you.

We have had more than a few cachers who couldn't get coords right even using a GPS.

That said the biggest pissing match I've ever gotten into with an owner (I just posted coords in my log since the cache was 250' off and the owner took exception) was with an engineer. A person who should both know how to do the job right and who should understand mistakes happen. It was very entertaining to see the drama play out. Eventually after chewing me out for being stupid and seeing half a dozen other logs all saying the coords were off he revised his coords.

At least the OP asked. Some folks...wouldn't.

3.2k · July 9, 2008

Gotta say that over the years when the GPS and Map coordinates disagree, it is far more often that the GPS that is eventually proven wrong. Also when a cache has bad published coordinates I'll end up in the same spot as the GPS users.

1k · July 9, 2008

>>I hid a cache but lost the coords

Ummmm, isn't that the same as saying an ammo can fell out of my pack while I was hiking?

If there are landmarks you could identify you can get pretty close with Google Earth. In fact I've checked on cache locational coords with GE when I couldn't get a good reading and found that the coords I got from my flaking out GPSr put me on the wrong side of a fence or something like that and then I tweaked the coords by marking a new spot with GE (and never got a complaint and got many finds).

I hid a cache but lost the coords

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment