Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
POLE POSITION

Why are pictures needed?

Recommended Posts

Why do so many earthcaches need to have a picture as a requirment? I don't have an efficient way of getting pictures onto my computer. This problem has kept me from looking for several earthcache, and from getting my bronze ec master. For me, making a picture an ec requirment is the equivelant of making and that ec pm only. There are a few owners who have had pity on me, but not most. Any cheap (as in $$$) suggestions on how to get over this? I understand a picture as an occaisonal requirment, but for 99% of ecs? Why?

Share this post


Link to post

Was the question resolved in that thread? If so, it should be pinned to the top of this forum. If not, then it's still a valid question. I have no problem posting my photo (can be pretty bad if I'm caching by myself.) But it does seem to be an ALR.

My brother did an EarthCache in Germany. He had all the answers. But his camera malfunctioned. He did not have the required ALR photo. And thus, he did not log it.

I've heard the arguments, but Ive not heard a valid reason for the requirement, outisde of 'because I can require it'.

Share this post


Link to post

As mentioned, this thread has brought up a question similar to this one. (I didn't see the link before)

 

From what I got from that discussion, it is the perogative of the owner to require them or not. Geoaware has stated that his opinion is that the lack of a picture shouldn't disqualify a log.

 

I also saw that many of the posters would waive the photo requirement provided it was explained prior to the log. Have you requested logging without the picture, explaining why, and gotten a denial or just not even tried logging because of the picture requirement?

 

Edit:

You will find that while mine may require a photo, provided you answer the questions and provide a reasonable explaination and convince me (or now the person that adoped it) you were there you will get the log. That would account for about 4% of the EarthCaches.

Edited by TerryDad2

Share this post


Link to post

As mentioned, this thread has brought up a question similar to this one. (I didn't see the link before)

 

From what I got from that discussion, it is the perogative of the owner to require them or not. Geoaware has stated that his opinion is that the lack of a picture shouldn't disqualify a log.

 

I also saw that many of the posters would waive the photo requirement provided it was explained prior to the log. Have you requested logging without the picture, explaining why, and gotten a denial or just not even tried logging because of the picture requirement?

 

Edit:

You will find that while mine may require a photo, provided you answer the questions and provide a reasonable explaination and convince me (or now the person that adoped it) you were there you will get the log. That would account for about 4% of the EarthCaches.

Yes, I did explain to the owner, and he said "Sorry, no picture, no find."!!!! :):):) pity, oh well! :P

Share this post


Link to post

 

Yes, I did explain to the owner, and he said "Sorry, no picture, no find."!!!! :):):) pity, oh well! :P

IMO that is not the intent of the program. I hope you don't give up as I hope that does not represent the attitude of the typical EC owner.

Share this post


Link to post

Pole position, your profile states that you’re a high school student so I can understand you probably do not have the resources available for a digital camera and since It is not likely that the majority of EC owners will change their mind regarding photo’s, we need to explore low cost alternatives for you.

Probably the best solution for you at this point in time is to visit EarthCaches with another cacher or friend who has a camera. Your school may offer photography courses and have loaner cameras available for students to use. It is possible to find inexpensive lower resolution cameras , they could be saved for or requested as a birthday or Christmas gift. Digital is definitely the least expensive way to go as you don’t have the developing costs that you do with film cameras. If you do use film cameras most, developers offer a CD of the pics, often at no additional cost.

Keep in mind too that the photos you take won’t only be logging EarthCaches but you will also be preserving memories as well. Even if photo’s were not required, personally, I would still, both take and post them to the cache pages.

Share this post


Link to post
Any cheap (as in $$$) suggestions on how to get over this?

The disposable cameras... can you also get the photos on a CD when delevoped? (Anyone know?)

If so, that may be the cheapest way to go.

Share this post


Link to post

Pole position, your profile states that you’re a high school student so I can understand you probably do not have the resources available for a digital camera and since It is not likely that the majority of EC owners will change their mind regarding photo’s, we need to explore low cost alternatives for you.

Probably the best solution for you at this point in time is to visit EarthCaches with another cacher or friend who has a camera. Your school may offer photography courses and have loaner cameras available for students to use. It is possible to find inexpensive lower resolution cameras , they could be saved for or requested as a birthday or Christmas gift. Digital is definitely the least expensive way to go as you don’t have the developing costs that you do with film cameras. If you do use film cameras most, developers offer a CD of the pics, often at no additional cost.

Keep in mind too that the photos you take won’t only be logging EarthCaches but you will also be preserving memories as well. Even if photo’s were not required, personally, I would still, both take and post them to the cache pages.

catsnfish,

Why do you always ruin the mood of threads with your kindness and logic? You set a terrible example for the rest of us! lol :blink:

P.S. I have a tee shirt for you. It's a dead mule instead of a horse!

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

Most high school kids have cell phones and they text all the time. Where am I going here? Once I went caching and came upon a earthcache that required a photo next to the boulder but I forgot my camera but I did have my cell phone. I took a picture with my phone and texted it to my email address. Easy as pie and I had the required picture.

Share this post


Link to post

Try Googling something like "cheap digital camera". Within a few moments, I was able to find several low-end digital cameras for under $20 and some for under $10. They will not take a photo that I would want to blow up to 5 x 7 and frame, but there are cameras that can be used during caching runs without problems.

 

Anyone can find someone that needs something done for which they are willing to pay $20. Just ask around.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Yes, I did explain to the owner, and he said "Sorry, no picture, no find."!!!! :):):mad: pity, oh well! :blink:

IMO that is not the intent of the program. I hope you don't give up as I hope that does not represent the attitude of the typical EC owner.

I don't plan on giving up any time soon! An even bigger problem for me is that there are only 3 ecs withing driving distance of me! (rats) I go after one any time I get the chance!

Share this post


Link to post

Most high school kids have cell phones and they text all the time. Where am I going here? Once I went caching and came upon a earthcache that required a photo next to the boulder but I forgot my camera but I did have my cell phone. I took a picture with my phone and texted it to my email address. Easy as pie and I had the required picture.

Well I do have a phone, buuut, a problem that is not cheap is we didn't get texting with our plan, sooo, to do it your way isn't to bad, buuut, it's just reaeaeallllly expensive ( 20 cents per text).

Share this post


Link to post

Pole position, your profile states that you’re a high school student so I can understand you probably do not have the resources available for a digital camera and since It is not likely that the majority of EC owners will change their mind regarding photo’s, we need to explore low cost alternatives for you.

Probably the best solution for you at this point in time is to visit EarthCaches with another cacher or friend who has a camera. Your school may offer photography courses and have loaner cameras available for students to use. It is possible to find inexpensive lower resolution cameras , they could be saved for or requested as a birthday or Christmas gift. Digital is definitely the least expensive way to go as you don’t have the developing costs that you do with film cameras. If you do use film cameras most, developers offer a CD of the pics, often at no additional cost.

Keep in mind too that the photos you take won’t only be logging EarthCaches but you will also be preserving memories as well. Even if photo’s were not required, personally, I would still, both take and post them to the cache pages.

I like the idea of taking a school photography class. However, I homeschool, so, I'd really love to take a course, but it just doesn't work that way. And oh, I forgot to mention I live out in the stick (and caches, there are several really active cachers in the area), so the local high school doesn't offer a course.

 

Btw, I want to say thanks to everyone for there suggestions, keep em' comin.

Share this post


Link to post

Try Googling something like "cheap digital camera". Within a few moments, I was able to find several low-end digital cameras for under $20 and some for under $10. They will not take a photo that I would want to blow up to 5 x 7 and frame, but there are cameras that can be used during caching runs without problems.

 

Anyone can find someone that needs something done for which they are willing to pay $20. Just ask around.

Could you give me a specific link? My parents use a really inefficient computer filter (I guess that's good, if you want to know how really bad and inefficient it is, contact my friend: PorscheSpyder), so surfing isn't real easy for me, knowing a specific link helps a lot.

Share this post


Link to post

Most high school kids have cell phones and they text all the time. Where am I going here? Once I went caching and came upon a earthcache that required a photo next to the boulder but I forgot my camera but I did have my cell phone. I took a picture with my phone and texted it to my email address. Easy as pie and I had the required picture.

Well I do have a phone, buuut, a problem that is not cheap is we didn't get texting with our plan, sooo, to do it your way isn't to bad, buuut, it's just reaeaeallllly expensive ( 20 cents per text).

 

20 cents is a small price to pay to log a earthcache.

Share this post


Link to post

Pole position, your profile states that you’re a high school student so I can understand you probably do not have the resources available for a digital camera and since It is not likely that the majority of EC owners will change their mind regarding photo’s, we need to explore low cost alternatives for you.

Probably the best solution for you at this point in time is to visit EarthCaches with another cacher or friend who has a camera. Your school may offer photography courses and have loaner cameras available for students to use. It is possible to find inexpensive lower resolution cameras , they could be saved for or requested as a birthday or Christmas gift. Digital is definitely the least expensive way to go as you don’t have the developing costs that you do with film cameras. If you do use film cameras most, developers offer a CD of the pics, often at no additional cost.

Keep in mind too that the photos you take won’t only be logging EarthCaches but you will also be preserving memories as well. Even if photo’s were not required, personally, I would still, both take and post them to the cache pages.

catsnfish,

Why do you always ruin the mood of threads with your kindness and logic? You set a terrible example for the rest of us! lol :blink:

P.S. I have a tee shirt for you. It's a dead mule instead of a horse!

 

oh quirt it!! :) I'm not always kind! Do you have the shirt in XXL? Back in my cavalry days the horses would groan when they saw me walk up with a saddle, a mule wouldn't do that! :)

Edited by catsnfish

Share this post


Link to post

Most high school kids have cell phones and they text all the time. Where am I going here? Once I went caching and came upon a earthcache that required a photo next to the boulder but I forgot my camera but I did have my cell phone. I took a picture with my phone and texted it to my email address. Easy as pie and I had the required picture.

Well I do have a phone, buuut, a problem that is not cheap is we didn't get texting with our plan, sooo, to do it your way isn't to bad, buuut, it's just reaeaeallllly expensive ( 20 cents per text).

 

20 cents is a small price to pay to log a earthcache.

Do most computers have a bluetooth capability? If so, I could do it that way.

Share this post


Link to post

Depends on the computer.

 

or maybe you can bluetooth it to a friend who does have unlimited email/texting?

Share this post


Link to post

Depends on the computer.

 

or maybe you can bluetooth it to a friend who does have unlimited email/texting?

Great idea!!! I think I'll try it!

Keep the ideas comin'!!!

Share this post


Link to post

It's really simple, any cache that requires an unnecessary picture of myself and my GPS I just don't do. The amount of information you have to furnish to log an EC should be enough to prove you were there.

Share this post


Link to post

IMHO deleting peoples logs or not accepting their logs because they do not have a photograph is against the spirit of EC.

 

We are considering changing the guidelines to stop the practice of demanding photographs - especially those demands of photograph content (must show face etc etc). If and when the guidelines are changed, all EC that have such a requirement will be archived.

 

We are very tired of dealing with cachers complaints that they have had their log deleted over a photograph issue.

 

If you have a photograph requirement, I strongly suggest you change it to be more flexible. If your EC logging requirements are such that you can't 'prove' an person visited your site without a photograph, then your logging requirements are sub-standard and you need to redevelop your EC or risk it also being archived.

Edited by geoaware

Share this post


Link to post

Here's my two cents. Please dont take offense and I apologize in adavnce if anyone takes this wrong.

 

My concern is why are we reinventing the wheel? The caches are owned by the people who created the earthcache listing. Its their responsibilty to keep and maintain the logs of each individual who visits their EC site. A photo is like a signature in a traditional cache log book.

 

Dealing with complaints is part of being a moderator for EarthCaching. I dont bow to all of the complaints I hear daily at work. People always complain about something but it won't make me lesson up on standards I maintain for my workplace.

 

I dont like the fact I have to get permission for a EC listing at a National Park. Its OUR parks anyway, so why do I have to ask permisssion to list something that is already on the information board or viewable from a trail in the parks? National Parks belong to "us" the citizens of this Nation. The Rangers will tell you the same thing that its silly we have to get permission to list somethng that only requires a photo... For some reason I think this rule will stay regardless of how many times someone complains.

 

My concern, and I am sure many others are thinking this; Is this a pre warning that you will archive everyones EC listing who requires a photo? Looks like 90 percent of listed ECs in America will be archived if you follow through with this and we will only be left with a few earthcaches to find.

 

I hope there is consideration before you take action. Remember the creators of these ECs have driven many miles and spent countless hours developing the cache site for all to find. It would be a shame if the listings was archived without warning or a chance to correct and react to another earthcaching policy.

 

Each one of my earthcaching listings require a picture of the finders at the site, but I am flexable with my logging requirements and VERY flexable with the question portion. Each EC listing states that if your camera goes on the blink or you are unable to post a picture to contact me first. I have allowed many, many, many finds without a photo. The logs I dont allow are the ones who fail to answer the questions and fail to post a photo at the site without contacting me first.

 

I know for a fact that Geoaware has "very" strict guidelines for earthcaching which I feel should go hand in hand with the photo requirements.

 

Tell us Geoaware what is the intent here? Are you telling us now to remove the picture requirements or else? Do we have a vote in this matter? Seems like the folks not satisfied with taking a picture get a vote.

 

If its decided that we are to remove the photo requirements then please give us a chance to react...

 

Please let us know :anibad:

 

IMHO deleting peoples logs or not accepting their logs because they do not have a photograph is against the spirit of EC.

 

We are considering changing the guidelines to stop the practice of demanding photographs - especially those demands of photograph content (must show face etc etc). If and when the guidelines are changed, all EC that have such a requirement will be archived.

 

We are very tired of dealing with cachers complaints that they have had their log deleted over a photograph issue.

 

If you have a photograph requirement, I strongly suggest you change it to be more flexible. If your EC logging requirements are such that you can't 'prove' an person visited your site without a photograph, then your logging requirements are sub-standard and you need to redevelop your EC or risk it also being archived.

Edited by Cav Scout

Share this post


Link to post

My concern on this and why I require the photo is that the answers tend to be passed on between cachers. I have noticed where it appears that the verbiage is identical between emails sent as confirmation for visits for some cachers. They "visited" the EC days apart and never post a photo. Now, I'm left with a decision to make. They never emailed me indicating an issue with their camera. I'm flexible. I've even had cachers run into me in the field after finding one of my EC's and verbally give me the answers. Why have them email them to me then? I think we all are flexible if we would get an explanation from the cacher. A find posted months later and when reminded about the photo requirement the response was I'll have to look. I'm still waiting for the posted photo 3 weeks later. The photos to me, are really the only true proof we have that they were truly at the EC. Just my $0.02 or what's left of it now. Now, to go caching then to the lake.

Share this post


Link to post

I think geoaware's intention is very clear.

 

The picture is optional. If the only thing that you required for the EC to be logged was the picture, then you need to add some task/research/information that they need to do or get on site that you can't get from the internet.

 

I want a picture at my earth caches, BUT the picture does NOT have to be of them. And honestly, if they don't have a camera, but can still answer the questions, that's fine for me, as long as I can tell that it's not a cnp.

 

I'm a teacher. Getting the information understood is much more important to me than some silly picture.

 

One smiley isn't that big of a deal to fight over.

Share this post


Link to post

Here's my two cents. Please dont take offense and I apologize in adavnce if anyone takes this wrong.

 

My concern is why are we reinventing the wheel? The caches are owned by the people who created the earthcache listing. Its their responsibilty to keep and maintain the logs of each individual who visits their EC site. A photo is like a signature in a traditional cache log book.

 

Dealing with complaints is part of being a moderator for EarthCaching. I dont bow to all of the complaints I hear daily at work. People always complain about something but it won't make me lesson up on standards I maintain for my workplace.

 

I dont like the fact I have to get permission for a EC listing at a National Park. Its OUR parks anyway, so why do I have to ask permisssion to list something that is already on the information board or viewable from a trail in the parks? National Parks belong to "us" the citizens of this Nation. The Rangers will tell you the same thing that its silly we have to get permission to list somethng that only requires a photo... For some reason I think this rule will stay regardless of how many times someone complains.

 

My concern, and I am sure many others are thinking this; Is this a pre warning that you will archive everyones EC listing who requires a photo? Looks like 90 percent of listed ECs in America will be archived if you follow through with this and we will only be left with a few earthcaches to find.

 

I hope there is consideration before you take action. Remember the creators of these ECs have driven many miles and spent countless hours developing the cache site for all to find. It would be a shame if the listings was archived without warning or a chance to correct and react to another earthcaching policy.

 

Each one of my earthcaching listings require a picture of the finders at the site, but I am flexable with my logging requirements and VERY flexable with the question portion. Each EC listing states that if your camera goes on the blink or you are unable to post a picture to contact me first. I have allowed many, many, many finds without a photo. The logs I dont allow are the ones who fail to answer the questions and fail to post a photo at the site without contacting me first.

 

I know for a fact that Geoaware has "very" strict guidelines for earthcaching which I feel should go hand in hand with the photo requirements.

 

Tell us Geoaware what is the intent here? Are you telling us now to remove the picture requirements or else? Do we have a vote in this matter? Seems like the folks not satisfied with taking a picture get a vote.

 

If its decided that we are to remove the photo requirements then please give us a chance to react...

 

Please let us know ;)

 

IMHO deleting peoples logs or not accepting their logs because they do not have a photograph is against the spirit of EC.

 

We are considering changing the guidelines to stop the practice of demanding photographs - especially those demands of photograph content (must show face etc etc). If and when the guidelines are changed, all EC that have such a requirement will be archived.

 

We are very tired of dealing with cachers complaints that they have had their log deleted over a photograph issue.

 

If you have a photograph requirement, I strongly suggest you change it to be more flexible. If your EC logging requirements are such that you can't 'prove' an person visited your site without a photograph, then your logging requirements are sub-standard and you need to redevelop your EC or risk it also being archived.

Cav scout, I understand your feelings exactly.

I hope every ec owner has a fair chance at realizing that their ec could be archived if they don't take off the photo requirment list.

As for getting permission for an ec in a national park, a carelessly placed earthcache is the equivelant of littering. Part of the job of the Park service is to preserve it for our posterity. Getting permission from the park service is just the easiest way of monitering caches, and therefore preserving the park.

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with all that Cav Scout has to say here.

Here's my two cents. Please dont take offense and I apologize in adavnce if anyone takes this wrong.

 

My concern is why are we reinventing the wheel? The caches are owned by the people who created the earthcache listing. Its their responsibilty to keep and maintain the logs of each individual who visits their EC site. A photo is like a signature in a traditional cache log book.

 

Dealing with complaints is part of being a moderator for EarthCaching. I dont bow to all of the complaints I hear daily at work. People always complain about something but it won't make me lesson up on standards I maintain for my workplace.

 

I dont like the fact I have to get permission for a EC listing at a National Park. Its OUR parks anyway, so why do I have to ask permisssion to list something that is already on the information board or viewable from a trail in the parks? National Parks belong to "us" the citizens of this Nation. The Rangers will tell you the same thing that its silly we have to get permission to list somethng that only requires a photo... For some reason I think this rule will stay regardless of how many times someone complains.

 

My concern, and I am sure many others are thinking this; Is this a pre warning that you will archive everyones EC listing who requires a photo? Looks like 90 percent of listed ECs in America will be archived if you follow through with this and we will only be left with a few earthcaches to find.

 

I hope there is consideration before you take action. Remember the creators of these ECs have driven many miles and spent countless hours developing the cache site for all to find. It would be a shame if the listings was archived without warning or a chance to correct and react to another earthcaching policy.

 

Each one of my earthcaching listings require a picture of the finders at the site, but I am flexable with my logging requirements and VERY flexable with the question portion. Each EC listing states that if your camera goes on the blink or you are unable to post a picture to contact me first. I have allowed many, many, many finds without a photo. The logs I dont allow are the ones who fail to answer the questions and fail to post a photo at the site without contacting me first.

 

I know for a fact that Geoaware has "very" strict guidelines for earthcaching which I feel should go hand in hand with the photo requirements.

 

Tell us Geoaware what is the intent here? Are you telling us now to remove the picture requirements or else? Do we have a vote in this matter? Seems like the folks not satisfied with taking a picture get a vote.

 

If its decided that we are to remove the photo requirements then please give us a chance to react...

 

Please let us know ;)

 

IMHO deleting peoples logs or not accepting their logs because they do not have a photograph is against the spirit of EC.

 

We are considering changing the guidelines to stop the practice of demanding photographs - especially those demands of photograph content (must show face etc etc). If and when the guidelines are changed, all EC that have such a requirement will be archived.

 

We are very tired of dealing with cachers complaints that they have had their log deleted over a photograph issue.

 

If you have a photograph requirement, I strongly suggest you change it to be more flexible. If your EC logging requirements are such that you can't 'prove' an person visited your site without a photograph, then your logging requirements are sub-standard and you need to redevelop your EC or risk it also being archived.

I would like to look at this from a community point of view. What I am seeing are some very "vocal" opinions that are in my mind at least, focused on the agenda of the individual instead of the community, "I don't have a camera, so all EarthCaches should accommodate me and drop photo requirements", "My posting a photo of myself is an attack on my privacy", "I will cause all Earthcaches requiring photo’s to be archived!", "ALR's are no longer allowed for geocaches, EarthCaches cannot allow them either!", "I can't list a new virtual except as a waymark, EarthCaches should only be available through Waymarking.com", "Geological education is an agenda and agendas are not allowed!"

The quotes above are not specific to any individuals but the thoughts have all been expressed in the forums. These squeaky wheel, firebrand, wrath of god viewpoints coming from people who have developed few if any EarthCaches and in many cases have only logged less than a handful, demand the rest of the community rework all of the existing EC’s? For the benefit of some individuals who make a lot of noise, developers such as TerryDad2 and Cav Scout, who between the two of them have given us several hundred quality EarthCaches would have to rewrite, possibly traveling back to many of the sites at personal time and expense or face archiving of the whole lot.

Much of this "photo fuss" has been directly influenced by the change of guidelines concerning ALR's on traditional caches. By definition EarthCaches can only be logged by ALR's whether that is a photo or not. Remember EarthCaches are a unique GPS related activity that requires them to be educational, mindful of visitor impact to the site, adheres to a higher standard of permissions and is approved for publication on the listing site (geocaching.com) by professionals. Require a container and a logbook, as traditionals do and much fewer sites would be permitted to be developed.

While I feel developers should have a bit of flexibility, everyone who logs an EarthCache should be aware of the logging requirements before they visit the site. If someone cannot or will not fulfill the requirements they are not entitled to the smiley.

If the guidelines need to change, I would hope it would be for what serves EarthCaching best and not just to quiet squeaky wheels.

Share this post


Link to post

I own 8 earthcaches, found 62 earthcaches plus that makes me a platinum level earthcache master. Am I a expert on earthcaching? By no means. Do I require pictures at my earthcaches? Yes I do. Do I have questions that need answered? Yes. Are earthcaches themselves ALR caches? Yes they are cause there are no log books to sign. As a cache owner of a ALR cache, do I have the right to require a photo? By all means I do. I remember when earthcaching didn't have its own spot on the forums and I was one of the many fighting on here to get it its own topic area. We had to put up with much verbal abuse just to get it. I just get tired of all the loop holes to get a earthcache published anymore. Now this threat to shut down earthcaches that what a photo to prove that you was there. I don't earthcache as much as I use to just because of stuff like this. Why support someone who don't really support the owners of the earthcaches?

Share this post


Link to post

 

Yes, I did explain to the owner, and he said "Sorry, no picture, no find."!!!! :laughing::laughing::D pity, oh well! :laughing:

IMO that is not the intent of the program. I hope you don't give up as I hope that does not represent the attitude of the typical EC owner.

I don't plan on giving up any time soon! An even bigger problem for me is that there are only 3 ecs withing driving distance of me! (rats) I go after one any time I get the chance!

 

I wouldn't mind if you used my camera to get the necessary pictures for the ECs. Only thing is that I would prefer it if you took me along with you! :laughing::D:D Then you could log it from my computer (thereby avoiding the filters). :D

Share this post


Link to post

We have been out camping and just now returned. I can't believe this argument persists.

I totally agree with Cav Scout's position.

Geoaware, I don't believe it is constructive to threaten archiving or whatever you intend if photo requirements remain! Face facts, 90 plus percent of Earthcache owners require some sort of photo. As a matter of fact, I believe some of your (Geoaware's) ECs have a photo requirement so what's the big deal? Does not the FIRST EC require a photo? Maybe that set the standard?

I am sick and tired of all of this c___! Who first set a photo as a requirement? I really don't know but I believe it is a valid requirement. Frankly, I believe photos beget photos. What do I mean by that? When a cacher visits cache pages and sees the collection of photos of the EC, interest is stimulated to go for it not run away from an EC! Heck, people tell me all the time that they don't do ECs because of all the questions and required answers. Should we then remove the required questions because some cachers do not like them? Also, a lot of cachers complain that there is just too, too much to read in order to find an EC. Should we limit the page write ups to 500 words or less because some folks don't like to read?

I also don't think it is very nice and/or constructive to pronounce that those of us who have photo requirements, have "logging requirements that are sub-standard." Just what is the standard? Again, it is the owners responsibility to maintain visitation integrity! Do you mean that 90% of the EC owners have "sub-standard logging requirements"? If so, that is a very severe criticism of MOST EC owners and of ECs that have been approved! I don't ever recall adding photo requirements after approval. I dare say, I don't believe other EC owners have added photo requirements AFTER approval either.

According to Groundspeak, it is the cache owners responsibility to maintain the integrity of THEIR geocache and EarthCaches are but one kind of geocache. Groundspeak, rightfully or wrongfully, refuses to get into disagreements over log deletions and that is the overriding standard which should be adhered to!

Yes, I believe in flexibility with logging requirements and Marge and I have only deleted one log due to the lack of a photo and that cacher happened to state he visited the area years ago and was not a recent visitor and had no idea of the answers to the required questions.

Folks, lets all pull back and don't ruin a very good thing by demonstrating a lack of flexibility (with photos)and let's not throw the baby out with the bath water by changing the guidelines and/or archiving ECs with a photo requirement.

P.S. I sincerely hope that all of the above is taken as constructive comment and there are no future repercussions. Frankly, it would be kind of nice to get some support as EC owners because if it wasn't for us, there would be no EarthCaching! :laughing:

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with all that Cav Scout has to say here.

Here's my two cents. Please dont take offense and I apologize in adavnce if anyone takes this wrong.

 

My concern is why are we reinventing the wheel? The caches are owned by the people who created the earthcache listing. Its their responsibilty to keep and maintain the logs of each individual who visits their EC site. A photo is like a signature in a traditional cache log book.

 

Dealing with complaints is part of being a moderator for EarthCaching. I dont bow to all of the complaints I hear daily at work. People always complain about something but it won't make me lesson up on standards I maintain for my workplace.

 

I dont like the fact I have to get permission for a EC listing at a National Park. Its OUR parks anyway, so why do I have to ask permisssion to list something that is already on the information board or viewable from a trail in the parks? National Parks belong to "us" the citizens of this Nation. The Rangers will tell you the same thing that its silly we have to get permission to list somethng that only requires a photo... For some reason I think this rule will stay regardless of how many times someone complains.

 

My concern, and I am sure many others are thinking this; Is this a pre warning that you will archive everyones EC listing who requires a photo? Looks like 90 percent of listed ECs in America will be archived if you follow through with this and we will only be left with a few earthcaches to find.

 

I hope there is consideration before you take action. Remember the creators of these ECs have driven many miles and spent countless hours developing the cache site for all to find. It would be a shame if the listings was archived without warning or a chance to correct and react to another earthcaching policy.

 

Each one of my earthcaching listings require a picture of the finders at the site, but I am flexable with my logging requirements and VERY flexable with the question portion. Each EC listing states that if your camera goes on the blink or you are unable to post a picture to contact me first. I have allowed many, many, many finds without a photo. The logs I dont allow are the ones who fail to answer the questions and fail to post a photo at the site without contacting me first.

 

I know for a fact that Geoaware has "very" strict guidelines for earthcaching which I feel should go hand in hand with the photo requirements.

 

Tell us Geoaware what is the intent here? Are you telling us now to remove the picture requirements or else? Do we have a vote in this matter? Seems like the folks not satisfied with taking a picture get a vote.

 

If its decided that we are to remove the photo requirements then please give us a chance to react...

 

Please let us know :laughing:

 

IMHO deleting peoples logs or not accepting their logs because they do not have a photograph is against the spirit of EC.

 

We are considering changing the guidelines to stop the practice of demanding photographs - especially those demands of photograph content (must show face etc etc). If and when the guidelines are changed, all EC that have such a requirement will be archived.

 

We are very tired of dealing with cachers complaints that they have had their log deleted over a photograph issue.

 

If you have a photograph requirement, I strongly suggest you change it to be more flexible. If your EC logging requirements are such that you can't 'prove' an person visited your site without a photograph, then your logging requirements are sub-standard and you need to redevelop your EC or risk it also being archived.

I would like to look at this from a community point of view. What I am seeing are some very "vocal" opinions that are in my mind at least, focused on the agenda of the individual instead of the community, "I don't have a camera, so all EarthCaches should accommodate me and drop photo requirements", "My posting a photo of myself is an attack on my privacy", "I will cause all Earthcaches requiring photo’s to be archived!", "ALR's are no longer allowed for geocaches, EarthCaches cannot allow them either!", "I can't list a new virtual except as a waymark, EarthCaches should only be available through Waymarking.com", "Geological education is an agenda and agendas are not allowed!"

The quotes above are not specific to any individuals but the thoughts have all been expressed in the forums. These squeaky wheel, firebrand, wrath of god viewpoints coming from people who have developed few if any EarthCaches and in many cases have only logged less than a handful, demand the rest of the community rework all of the existing EC’s? For the benefit of some individuals who make a lot of noise, developers such as TerryDad2 and Cav Scout, who between the two of them have given us several hundred quality EarthCaches would have to rewrite, possibly traveling back to many of the sites at personal time and expense or face archiving of the whole lot.

Much of this "photo fuss" has been directly influenced by the change of guidelines concerning ALR's on traditional caches. By definition EarthCaches can only be logged by ALR's whether that is a photo or not. Remember EarthCaches are a unique GPS related activity that requires them to be educational, mindful of visitor impact to the site, adheres to a higher standard of permissions and is approved for publication on the listing site (geocaching.com) by professionals. Require a container and a logbook, as traditionals do and much fewer sites would be permitted to be developed.

While I feel developers should have a bit of flexibility, everyone who logs an EarthCache should be aware of the logging requirements before they visit the site. If someone cannot or will not fulfill the requirements they are not entitled to the smiley.

If the guidelines need to change, I would hope it would be for what serves EarthCaching best and not just to quiet squeaky wheels.

 

I would also like to thank catsnfish for offering his wisdom. As usual, he hits the nail on the head! :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

I will agree with catsnfish that, when I hunt for a cache, I am generally familiar with what will be required of me. If I need to climb a tree and am unable to, I will ignore that cache. If I need a kayak, I will avoid that cache. And I'm not going to climb the water tower. No way! The same is true of photo required. If a webcam photo is required, I would not presume to log a cache without one. I generally line up three or four people willing to capture that photo for me. If I am required to read the sign to get to the final of the multi, I will read the sign. If I forget my glasses, that is my problem. The same is true of photo requirement for Earthcaches. ALRs still exist for Virtual Caches, Webcam Caches and EarthCaches. That is the way it is set up. Live with it or ignore them.

As to why they are required, I sometimes think the answer is because they can be required. I detect the scent of insecurity. Someone might Google the info! Yes, cheaters exist. And this is a good way to filter out the cheaters. If the cache owner uses this tool routinely. Too many do not seem to follow their own requirement. I read above where some people 'require' photos but do not delete 'finds' without the photo. Then why bother?

I did one yesterday that required two photos. One at the site, and one at the state park visitors' center. Not sure what the second one proves. Especially when logs without the photos are permitted to stand. Oh, well.

I've logged twenty-six EarthCaches in nine states. Konnarock Kid & Marge has my photo. As do Terry's Dad and Pink Dolphin. And many other EarthCache owners (notably NorthWoods Explorer). I'm not bashful.

But, the point, as I see it, is that many, if not most, EarthCaches require photos (for whatever reason). If I do not, cannot, or am unable to fulfill the requirements for a cache, whether it be a photo, a webcam photo, climbing a tree, or a twenty-mile backpacking trip, then I do not log that cache. While I do not necessarily understand the reason for some requirements, they are required.

Share this post


Link to post

Most high school kids have cell phones and they text all the time. Where am I going here? Once I went caching and came upon a earthcache that required a photo next to the boulder but I forgot my camera but I did have my cell phone. I took a picture with my phone and texted it to my email address. Easy as pie and I had the required picture.

Well I do have a phone, buuut, a problem that is not cheap is we didn't get texting with our plan, sooo, to do it your way isn't to bad, buuut, it's just reaeaeallllly expensive ( 20 cents per text).

 

Depending on the phone, most phones these days, even ones that are a few years old, can be hooked up to a computer. And they usually come with the cable to do so. So you can also just hook the camera up, pull the picture file off the camera, and go from there.

 

Wait.

 

Isn't requiring a photo to log the cache considered an ALR?

 

..and aren't ALRs now unenforceable?

 

The guideline change for ALR's didn't apply to Earthcaches. That was one of the things originally brought up when the change occurred and they made that one clear.

 

Personally, if someone e-mails me and told me they had a problem getting a photo, but they've provided in the other requisite information, I'll allow the log. I do not agree with the supposed threatening of archiving EC over a photo requirement, if that was actually done like it seems someone said. With the pluthra of digital cameras in consumers hands these days, especially with the advent of camera phones, taking a photo shouldn't be such an issue.

 

Now granted, CO's need to be considerate of the fact that not everyone has a digital camera on hand, in any form, and deletion of a log over that without finding out why a photo wasn't posted is a bit extreme. I've seen some cases where the photos are a week late because the cacher forgot about it or hadn't gone through the photos yet.

 

That's my two cents.

Share this post


Link to post

Most high school kids have cell phones and they text all the time. Where am I going here? Once I went caching and came upon a earthcache that required a photo next to the boulder but I forgot my camera but I did have my cell phone. I took a picture with my phone and texted it to my email address. Easy as pie and I had the required picture.

Well I do have a phone, buuut, a problem that is not cheap is we didn't get texting with our plan, sooo, to do it your way isn't to bad, buuut, it's just reaeaeallllly expensive ( 20 cents per text).

 

Depending on the phone, most phones these days, even ones that are a few years old, can be hooked up to a computer. And they usually come with the cable to do so. So you can also just hook the camera up, pull the picture file off the camera, and go from there.

 

Wait.

 

Isn't requiring a photo to log the cache considered an ALR?

 

..and aren't ALRs now unenforceable?

 

The guideline change for ALR's didn't apply to Earthcaches. That was one of the things originally brought up when the change occurred and they made that one clear.

 

Personally, if someone e-mails me and told me they had a problem getting a photo, but they've provided in the other requisite information, I'll allow the log. I do not agree with the supposed threatening of archiving EC over a photo requirement, if that was actually done like it seems someone said. With the pluthra of digital cameras in consumers hands these days, especially with the advent of camera phones, taking a photo shouldn't be such an issue.

 

Now granted, CO's need to be considerate of the fact that not everyone has a digital camera on hand, in any form, and deletion of a log over that without finding out why a photo wasn't posted is a bit extreme. I've seen some cases where the photos are a week late because the cacher forgot about it or hadn't gone through the photos yet.

 

That's my two cents.

Well, I tried that, but it didn't exactly work. It's a very modern phone (it came out in '09) and requires a lot of other things besides plugging it in to get it to download pictures.

Share this post


Link to post

Two of my four ECs require a picture. I see it as a positive thing. The requirement is there to prove that a cacher showed up. This is in lieu of asking irrelevant questions like "Identify the tree you are standing next to." These types of questions having little to nothing to do with the EC. While ECs are often considered virtuals, there are similarities to Wherigo caches. Those caches require specific/extra equipment. Some cachers can not do Wherigos due to lack of equipment.

 

I do agree with Geoaware about developing ECs with more lesson planning [my term, not his]. Many, if not most, ECs ask three or less questions. Asking more questions, both site specific and referenced to the write-up, make it harder to dirty cache and typically a better developed lesson.

 

As an English teacher, I often bite my tongue... very, very hard. There are many ECs out there that wouldn't or shouldn't pass muster at the middle school level (the level in which I teach). But as a teacher who is biting his tongue, sometimes a EC owner must do the same. There are circumstances that arise and an EC owner should take into consideration. Things happen. It's the EC owners who are not willing to be flexible that I would find problematic. Fortunately, in all the ECs I have found, which is a fair amount, I have not had a problem.

 

FYI: The technical problems I have run into as of late are all you long winded writers/copiers whose requirements are at the end of the write-up and have a description that is too long to fit on an Oregon or Colorado. :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

Two of my four ECs require a picture. I see it as a positive thing. The requirement is there to prove that a cacher showed up. This is in lieu of asking irrelevant questions like "Identify the tree you are standing next to." These types of questions having little to nothing to do with the EC. While ECs are often considered virtuals, there are similarities to Wherigo caches. Those caches require specific/extra equipment. Some cachers can not do Wherigos due to lack of equipment.

 

I do agree with Geoaware about developing ECs with more lesson planning [my term, not his]. Many, if not most, ECs ask three or less questions. Asking more questions, both site specific and referenced to the write-up, make it harder to dirty cache and typically a better developed lesson.

 

As an English teacher, I often bite my tongue... very, very hard. There are many ECs out there that wouldn't or shouldn't pass muster at the middle school level (the level in which I teach). But as a teacher who is biting his tongue, sometimes a EC owner must do the same. There are circumstances that arise and an EC owner should take into consideration. Things happen. It's the EC owners who are not willing to be flexible that I would find problematic. Fortunately, in all the ECs I have found, which is a fair amount, I have not had a problem.

 

FYI: The technical problems I have run into as of late are all you long winded writers/copiers whose requirements are at the end of the write-up and have a description that is too long to fit on an Oregon or Colorado. :grin:

 

Well put. The more I think about it the more I agree that most EC write-ups are too, too long. Where did that begin?

Look, let's examine the 'real' purpose of an EC.

Is it for geologists at the PhD level to display their geological expertise and writing skills? Is it for someone who has no geological training and/or knowledge to change their ignorance of geology and have an educational experience? Is it for the enjoyment of outdoor types to find something that is geologically interesting? Is it for all geocachers...........I can answer that one, NO!

Frankly, it could be a little bit of all of most all of above without going to extremes in any direction. No matter what end of the spectrum you may find yourself, the write-ups are too long and there is nothing wrong with some sort of photo requirements.

 

Also to answer POLE POSITIONS comments: "Cav scout, I understand your feelings exactly.

I hope every ec owner has a fair chance at realizing that their ec could be archived if they don't take off the photo requirment list.

As for getting permission for an ec in a national park, a carelessly placed earthcache is the equivelant of littering. Part of the job of the Park service is to preserve it for our posterity. Getting permission from the park service is just the easiest way of monitering caches, and therefore preserving the park."

 

As to your first point, nothing should be archived because 90% of the ECs out there have some sort of a photo requirement! Where would EarthCaching be if 90% of the EarthCache are archived? :laughing:

 

As to your second point, we do not place ECs! They are already there. There is no littering involved. Either you can take a trail in the park or you cannot. Either you are allowed to go off trail in the park or you cannot. What is to monitor? As we know, the EC (the particular feature) is already there and available for public viewing. As long as ANY park visitor obeys park rules why should it be different for the EC developer and/or the EC finder?

When you think about it, if visitors are permitted in OUR National Parks, just why do we need permission to invite someone to visit a place where the Park allows the public to visit? A geocacher or a non-geocacher can visit the park within the allowed hours of visit and most parks advertise to encourage visitation then why is any permission needed for what the parks want in the first place? EarthCaches are free publicity that help our National Parks gain more recognition therefore more visitors! Just who started this permission requirement for something that parks want and pay OUR taxpayer money to advertise? Does any one think it would be illegal to develop an EC in OUR public Parks with or WITHOUT permission? I recently talked with one of our local congressmen and he said, "let me know if any park (National) denies permission and they will hear from me!" He went on to say, "Roy, it's your money that went to buy the Parks and to maintain them so they (the Parks) better not deny your rights, after all you paid for those rights!" Think about it. :)

P.S. Folks, I just had another thought about the above. There are endless internet sites where people post pictures of their hikes or visits to our National Parks. Did they need permission to do that? I don't think so!

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

Two of my four ECs require a picture. I see it as a positive thing. The requirement is there to prove that a cacher showed up. This is in lieu of asking irrelevant questions like "Identify the tree you are standing next to." These types of questions having little to nothing to do with the EC. While ECs are often considered virtuals, there are similarities to Wherigo caches. Those caches require specific/extra equipment. Some cachers can not do Wherigos due to lack of equipment.

 

I do agree with Geoaware about developing ECs with more lesson planning [my term, not his]. Many, if not most, ECs ask three or less questions. Asking more questions, both site specific and referenced to the write-up, make it harder to dirty cache and typically a better developed lesson.

 

As an English teacher, I often bite my tongue... very, very hard. There are many ECs out there that wouldn't or shouldn't pass muster at the middle school level (the level in which I teach). But as a teacher who is biting his tongue, sometimes a EC owner must do the same. There are circumstances that arise and an EC owner should take into consideration. Things happen. It's the EC owners who are not willing to be flexible that I would find problematic. Fortunately, in all the ECs I have found, which is a fair amount, I have not had a problem.

 

FYI: The technical problems I have run into as of late are all you long winded writers/copiers whose requirements are at the end of the write-up and have a description that is too long to fit on an Oregon or Colorado. :grin:

 

Well put. The more I think about it the more I agree that most EC write-ups are too, too long. Where did that begin?

Look, let's examine the 'real' purpose of an EC.

Is it for geologists at the PhD level to display their geological expertise and writing skills? Is it for someone who has no geological training and/or knowledge to change their ignorance of geology and have an educational experience? Is it for the enjoyment of outdoor types to find something that is geologically interesting? Is it for all geocachers...........I can answer that one, NO!

Frankly, it could be a little bit of all of most all of above without going to extremes in any direction. No matter what end of the spectrum you may find yourself, the write-ups are too long and there is nothing wrong with some sort of photo requirements.

 

Also to answer POLE POSITIONS comments: "Cav scout, I understand your feelings exactly.

I hope every ec owner has a fair chance at realizing that their ec could be archived if they don't take off the photo requirment list.

As for getting permission for an ec in a national park, a carelessly placed earthcache is the equivelant of littering. Part of the job of the Park service is to preserve it for our posterity. Getting permission from the park service is just the easiest way of monitering caches, and therefore preserving the park."

 

As to your first point, nothing should be archived because 90% of the ECs out there have some sort of a photo requirement! Where would EarthCaching be if 90% of the EarthCache are archived? :laughing:

 

As to your second point, we do not place ECs! They are already there. There is no littering involved. Either you can take a trail in the park or you cannot. Either you are allowed to go off trail in the park or you cannot. What is to monitor? As we know, the EC (the particular feature) is already there and available for public viewing. As long as ANY park visitor obeys park rules why should it be different for the EC developer and/or the EC finder?

When you think about it, if visitors are permitted in OUR National Parks, just why do we need permission to invite someone to visit a place where the Park allows the public to visit? A geocacher or a non-geocacher can visit the park within the allowed hours of visit and most parks advertise to encourage visitation then why is any permission needed for what the parks want in the first place? EarthCaches are free publicity that help our National Parks gain more recognition therefore more visitors! Just who started this permission requirement for something that parks want and pay OUR taxpayer money to advertise? Does any one think it would be illegal to develop an EC in OUR public Parks with or WITHOUT permission? I recently talked with one of our local congressmen and he said, "let me know if any park (National) denies permission and they will hear from me!" He went on to say, "Roy, it's your money that went to buy the Parks and to maintain them so they (the Parks) better not deny your rights, after all you paid for those rights!" Think about it. :)

P.S. Folks, I just had another thought about the above. There are endless internet sites where people post pictures of their hikes or visits to our National Parks. Did they need permission to do that? I don't think so!

 

I want to clarify a few points here. 1. Geologist who do make Earthcaches tend to make them at a level for the general public. For instance look at one of the many earthcaches TerryDad has created. Have those caches been written at a PhD level? The problem I found with earthcaches is cachers who have "copy and paste" sections of a geologic report or thesis and called that good enough (those are not geologist who do that).

 

Secondly and more importantly is the discussion on the permission deal. You need to ask permission because some areas contain sensitive ecosystems, small endangered or threatened species, delicate archealogical or historical site, or could hold hazards to the general public. These sites are not always given out as public information. though there is no physical cache at these sites you would be amazed at the soil compaction and erosion that a few but constant flow of people can do on an area.

 

So by asking permission to the park manager who would know of these areas it allows for the park service to avoid potential safety hazards as well conservation of our natural resources that we pay our taxes for to protect. (Sometimes the best protection is minimal or no human contact).

 

Also keep in mind not all Earthcache are on public land.

Share this post


Link to post

 

I want to clarify a few points here. 1. Geologist who do make Earthcaches tend to make them at a level for the general public. For instance look at one of the many earthcaches TerryDad has created. Have those caches been written at a PhD level? The problem I found with earthcaches is cachers who have "copy and paste" sections of a geologic report or thesis and called that good enough (those are not geologist who do that).

 

Secondly and more importantly is the discussion on the permission deal. You need to ask permission because some areas contain sensitive ecosystems, small endangered or threatened species, delicate archealogical or historical site, or could hold hazards to the general public. These sites are not always given out as public information. though there is no physical cache at these sites you would be amazed at the soil compaction and erosion that a few but constant flow of people can do on an area.

 

So by asking permission to the park manager who would know of these areas it allows for the park service to avoid potential safety hazards as well conservation of our natural resources that we pay our taxes for to protect. (Sometimes the best protection is minimal or no human contact).

 

Also keep in mind not all Earthcache are on public land.

 

Did I step on some sensitive toes?

 

I certainly didn't mean too? What I said was, "Look, let's examine the 'real' purpose of an EC.

Is it for geologists at the PhD level to display their geological expertise and writing skills, etc. etc. I posed that question among several others. I didn't say geologists actually fluffed their geological feathers to show off! Some do, but most don't. My question process is for us (Geoaware and the EC owners) to deside what is the purpose of an EC. I don't believe it is consistantly understood much less applied! Someone earlier mentioned the "earthcaching community". Well, if there really is one then we should have equal input. This applies to geologists, non-geologists, high school kids (as been demonstrated within this thread), BAs, MAs, MSs, MDs of course, PhDs!

 

On the second point:

 

"When you think about it, if visitors are permitted in OUR National Parks, just why do we need permission to invite someone to visit a place where the Park allows us to visit ? "

Note I mentioned "where the Park allows us to visit not where we illegally wonder off to commit eco-murder! Between signs, maps, brochures, etc., the Park always lets you know where you can or cannot visit! The rules apply to geocachers as well as non-geocachers. If you are worried about Park ecology, hazards, conservation or sensitive ecosystems don't because you cannot go there in the first place!

Edited by Konnarock Kid & Marge

Share this post


Link to post

POLEPOSITION Does your phone have a MicroSD card? If so you can pick up a MicroSD card reader for around $10. Then just pull the card and download the pictures with the card reader. I have an 8gig card in my phone and this is the way I upload/download pics, music, and everything else I don't really need on a phone.

Hope this helps. Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post

I have photo requirements for my ECs to prevent armchair logs. I am pretty lenient - if someone logs without a photo and explains why, I'll usually give them the benefit of the doubt. If they don't explain, or are vague, I will even write to ask about it. Recently I deleted a log from someone who didn't post a picture, had vague responses to the other logging requirements, and didn't respond to my email.

 

If you're really interested in Earthcaching, then figure out a way to get pictures. If you don't want to, then just avoid Earthcaches. Not all caches are for all people.

Share this post


Link to post

I have photo requirements for my ECs to prevent armchair logs. I am pretty lenient - if someone logs without a photo and explains why, I'll usually give them the benefit of the doubt. If they don't explain, or are vague, I will even write to ask about it. Recently I deleted a log from someone who didn't post a picture, had vague responses to the other logging requirements, and didn't respond to my email.

 

If you're really interested in Earthcaching, then figure out a way to get pictures. If you don't want to, then just avoid Earthcaches. Not all caches are for all people.

 

Narcissa, extremely well said!

 

Now folks, let's pledge to follow Narcissa's lead and her use of photos and put this thing to bed! No more finger pointing, no more more threats, no more rants, no more categorical nos and yeses, no more greasing squeaky wheels and above all, no more on this photo subject! Mr. Kodak is rolling in his grave and 200 million year old volcanoes are erupting!

Maybe new EarthCaches? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post

POLEPOSITION Does your phone have a MicroSD card? If so you can pick up a MicroSD card reader for around $10. Then just pull the card and download the pictures with the card reader. I have an 8gig card in my phone and this is the way I upload/download pics, music, and everything else I don't really need on a phone.

Hope this helps. Good luck.

No. My phone requires a special kind of microsd card that costs about $40.

Share this post


Link to post

 

On the second point:

 

"When you think about it, if visitors are permitted in OUR National Parks, just why do we need permission to invite someone to visit a place where the Park allows us to visit ? "

Note I mentioned "where the Park allows us to visit not where we illegally wonder off to commit eco-murder! Between signs, maps, brochures, etc., the Park always lets you know where you can or cannot visit! The rules apply to geocachers as well as non-geocachers. If you are worried about Park ecology, hazards, conservation or sensitive ecosystems don't because you cannot go there in the first place!

 

You know if we are going to go back and forth on this permission deal perhaps you should raise this as a different topic considering this is about photo requirements. But saying such on the permission topic.

 

Point One, you are taking a lot of faith that people are all rule and law biding citizens and if a place is marked people won't go there. Come on seriously? People get bored with trails and walked off or they go take a "short cut".

 

Second Point, Not all places that are sensitive are marked on your park maps and brochures. Why one may ask? So that people won't go there and disturb these sites. You would be surprised how quickly a rare plant will mysteriously grow legs and walk away if somebody thinks that would be a fine specimen in their garden. Or lets look at a archaeological site which may have several dozen artifacts which to the right collector may be worth a small fortune. Sometimes the best defense for an area is having the general public think that its not there at all.

 

The fact is yes the majority of the population obey the laws and set by our parks and governments but there is always a few that ruin it. That is why permission is needed. Its to help make the Park aware of the caches and where they are being placed. The bigger question that needs to be asked is whats the big deal about asking permission?

 

Finally not all Earthcaches are on National Park Land. I've found caches in State Parks, Road Cuts, Strip Mines, and private property (not owned by the EC owner). So its better to just cover all your bases and require permission from all. Again I do not understand how making a phone call and asking if you can place an Earthcache is such a big deal?

Share this post


Link to post

I have photo requirements for my ECs to prevent armchair logs. I am pretty lenient - if someone logs without a photo and explains why, I'll usually give them the benefit of the doubt. If they don't explain, or are vague, I will even write to ask about it. Recently I deleted a log from someone who didn't post a picture, had vague responses to the other logging requirements, and didn't respond to my email.

 

If you're really interested in Earthcaching, then figure out a way to get pictures. If you don't want to, then just avoid Earthcaches. Not all caches are for all people.

 

Narcissa, extremely well said!

 

Now folks, let's pledge to follow Narcissa's lead and her use of photos and put this thing to bed! No more finger pointing, no more more threats, no more rants, no more categorical nos and yeses, no more greasing squeaky wheels and above all, no more on this photo subject! Mr. Kodak is rolling in his grave and 200 million year old volcanoes are erupting!

Maybe new EarthCaches? :)

 

 

On this topic I agree completely with the way Narcissa handles the photo requirement and in general that is how I've ran the two ECs that I've created.

 

As with Konnarock Kid & Marge I also agree its time to move on.

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

×
×
  • Create New...