How about a cache published this month with 600+ finds

[+DragonsWest]

Looking back at some finds and was stunned (though I shouldn't be, I was one of the horde) to see how many finds on this cache, which was published on the 1st of July. Well, the Going Ape Event certainly contributed a few finds.

 

GC2ATM6 - The Iron Horse Express

 

I'll say one thing for ammo cans, they hold up well with a lot of visits.

Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. etc.

[jholly]

Looking back at some finds and was stunned (though I shouldn't be, I was one of the horde) to see how many finds on this cache, which was published on the 1st of July. Well, the Going Ape Event certainly contributed a few finds.

 

GC2ATM6 - The Iron Horse Express

 

I'll say one thing for ammo cans, they hold up well with a lot of visits.

Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. etc.

 

Unfortunately it is now disabled.

[+hydnsek]

Looking back at some finds and was stunned (though I shouldn't be, I was one of the horde) to see how many finds on this cache, which was published on the 1st of July. Well, the Going Ape Event certainly contributed a few finds.

 

GC2ATM6 - The Iron Horse Express

 

I'll say one thing for ammo cans, they hold up well with a lot of visits.

Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. etc.

 

Unfortunately it is now disabled.

Those pesky state park permissions....

[+Too Tall John]

It occurs to me that while the cache owner waits for the required State Park Permit they might add the required notice mentioned in both the State Parks' Website and the Reviewer's 'Disable' Note. To do any less may look bad to park personnel who may take a look at the cache page.

[+t4e]

It occurs to me that while the cache owner waits for the required State Park Permit they might add the required notice mentioned in both the State Parks' Website and the Reviewer's 'Disable' Note. To do any less may look bad to park personnel who may take a look at the cache page.

 

even more disturbing is the fact that 27 people (some with finds in excess of 5000 which should know better, one would hope) went for this cache after it was disabled....to me, that alone does more "damage" to geocaching than the lack of a note from the CO in the description

Edited July 29, 2010 by t4e

[+DragonsWest]

It occurs to me that while the cache owner waits for the required State Park Permit they might add the required notice mentioned in both the State Parks' Website and the Reviewer's 'Disable' Note. To do any less may look bad to park personnel who may take a look at the cache page.

 

even more disturbing is the fact that 27 people (some with finds in excess of 5000 which should know better, one would hope) went for this cache after it was disabled....to me, that alone does more "damage" to geocaching than the lack of a note from the CO in the description

 

Including a poster in this thread.

 

Sometimes people have a pocket query loaded and don't know it's disabled, unless their query excludes disabled caches.

 

I often include them because now and then they are disabled for inactivity or because they haven't been found and have a string of DNFs. I've found a couple, reversing the disabled flag. It's just an on/off switch and if you don't have the log from Wizard of Ooze, you know not why.

 

Lots of them appear to be from an event after Going APE - Putting a lid on the APE. Good to see things back to normal.

 

Hope the person(s) responsible for the theft return it.

[+roziecakes]

We found that cache, but had no idea that they didn't have permission. Too bad... it's a cool cache. Hope they do end up getting permission for it.

[+wimseyguy]

dadgum, we were up there early in the morning the day it got published. Probably walked right past it. Not likely to return either.

[+Team Cotati]

We found that cache, but had no idea that they didn't have permission. Too bad... it's a cool cache. Hope they do end up getting permission for it.

 

I have often wondered if there were caches in similar locations that possibly might have been placed without the hider having obtained proper permission.

 

There seems to be one. I find this to be very disturbing.

[+roziecakes]

We found that cache, but had no idea that they didn't have permission. Too bad... it's a cool cache. Hope they do end up getting permission for it.

 

I have often wondered if there were caches in similar locations that possibly might have been placed without the hider having obtained proper permission.

 

There seems to be one. I find this to be very disturbing.

 

I trust that you're being sarcastic...

[+briansnat]

It occurs to me that while the cache owner waits for the required State Park Permit they might add the required notice mentioned in both the State Parks' Website and the Reviewer's 'Disable' Note. To do any less may look bad to park personnel who may take a look at the cache page.

 

even more disturbing is the fact that 27 people (some with finds in excess of 5000 which should know better, one would hope) went for this cache after it was disabled....to me, that alone does more "damage" to geocaching than the lack of a note from the CO in the description

 

It is quite possible that they were using a PQ that was generated before it was disabled.

[+SwineFlew]

Looking back at some finds and was stunned (though I shouldn't be, I was one of the horde) to see how many finds on this cache, which was published on the 1st of July. Well, the Going Ape Event certainly contributed a few finds.

 

GC2ATM6 - The Iron Horse Express

 

I'll say one thing for ammo cans, they hold up well with a lot of visits.

Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. etc.

 

I always wonder about this cache that was placed at last min before the Going APE Event. To me its like a kid wanna attention even you need to bend the rules a bit.

[+DragonsWest]

Looking back at some finds and was stunned (though I shouldn't be, I was one of the horde) to see how many finds on this cache, which was published on the 1st of July. Well, the Going Ape Event certainly contributed a few finds.

 

GC2ATM6 - The Iron Horse Express

 

I'll say one thing for ammo cans, they hold up well with a lot of visits.

Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. Open. Close. etc.

 

I always wonder about this cache that was placed at last min before the Going APE Event. To me its like a kid wanna attention even you need to bend the rules a bit.

 

Dint even need it in my GPSr, there was a queue at the beginning of the 6 foot geotrail.

 

The violation margin, in distance, must be very small. But rules be rules.

[+pppingme]

even more disturbing is the fact that 27 people (some with finds in excess of 5000 which should know better, one would hope) went for this cache after it was disabled....to me, that alone does more "damage" to geocaching than the lack of a note from the CO in the description

Even more so, is a gc employee found it 6 days after it was disabled. The very people that preach against using old data and offline databases.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

It occurs to me that while the cache owner waits for the required State Park Permit they might add the required notice mentioned in both the State Parks' Website and the Reviewer's 'Disable' Note. To do any less may look bad to park personnel who may take a look at the cache page.

 

even more disturbing is the fact that 27 people (some with finds in excess of 5000 which should know better, one would hope) went for this cache after it was disabled....to me, that alone does more "damage" to geocaching than the lack of a note from the CO in the description

 

It is quite possible that they were using a PQ that was generated before it was disabled.

 

I think this is the answer......on long summer trips I use PQ's that are almost two months old.

I've really had no problem using the older PQ's regarding a higher incidence of no-finds.

[+Too Tall John]

It occurs to me that while the cache owner waits for the required State Park Permit they might add the required notice mentioned in both the State Parks' Website and the Reviewer's 'Disable' Note. To do any less may look bad to park personnel who may take a look at the cache page.

even more disturbing is the fact that 27 people (some with finds in excess of 5000 which should know better, one would hope) went for this cache after it was disabled....to me, that alone does more "damage" to geocaching than the lack of a note from the CO in the description

It is quite possible that they were using a PQ that was generated before it was disabled.

I think this is the answer......on long summer trips I use PQ's that are almost two months old.

I've really had no problem using the older PQ's regarding a higher incidence of no-finds.

Regardless of how many cachers are using "stale" PQ's, the cache owner has the most up-to-date info on what the parks require, and they still haven't added the required notice to the cache page.

[+Team Luvbassn]

We found that cache, but had no idea that they didn't have permission. Too bad... it's a cool cache. Hope they do end up getting permission for it.

 

I have often wondered if there were caches in similar locations that possibly might have been placed without the hider having obtained proper permission.

 

There seems to be one. I find this to be very disturbing.

 

Why is this disturbing? Think about all the LPCs in shopping centers and any parking lot. Does everyone that hides LPC get permission? I doubt it. But they are still fun to find.

[+DragonsWest]

We found that cache, but had no idea that they didn't have permission. Too bad... it's a cool cache. Hope they do end up getting permission for it.

 

I have often wondered if there were caches in similar locations that possibly might have been placed without the hider having obtained proper permission.

 

There seems to be one. I find this to be very disturbing.

 

Why is this disturbing? Think about all the LPCs in shopping centers and any parking lot. Does everyone that hides LPC get permission? I doubt it. But they are still fun to find.

 

I'm uneasy about hiding on private property. I was approached, while pursuing a small cache, just off a large parking area, by the property manager, asking what I was doing there. Though the cache was outside their lot, their lot was about the only place to park. I'm not at all comfortable fabricating some tale in the face of such a person, so I explained I was looking for a small game piece container. The manager drove away, and I was gone shortly after. I have to say these types of caches are among my least favorite because I doubt very much they were granted permission and entanglements are possible.

 

Much happier finding caches in parks or on other public lands.