Jump to content

We can finally see Alien Head from space!


addisonbr
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

I can't tell you how excited I am that Google has finally updated the satellite imagery for Rachel, Nevada! You are probably familiar with the Alien Head power trail - it's near the ET Highway, but far off the road, with notices posted on each of the cache pages that say things like "Please don't drive to these caches" and "tread lightly and walk to the landing sites"...

 

Walk? When we're on a numbers run?

 

I was worried that all of the logs mentioning an increasingly obvious automotive geotrail were exaggerating, because whenever I looked at the imagery I could see nothing but unmolested desert. But then the maps were updated with the first shots taken since 2010 (March '11), and happily I was wrong - WE DID IT! We've marked up the area with off-roading tire tracks so well that it can be seen from space! And that's after only nine months or so - I can't wait to see how much better this thing looks moving forward!

 

The next time someone tells you that geocachers can't make a difference, you tell them right back that oh yes we can!

 

Click to enlarge:

 

alienhead.th.jpg

Link to comment

I'm with you Addisonbr, isn't it so cool when our impact on the environment is visible from space? It's going to do great things for our sport. Imagine the possibilities! The numbers hounds should be very proud. Please, more power trails so we can continue to make our mark on the planet!

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Perhaps our Reviewers could start enforcing the particular guideline created to reduce such things? :unsure:

Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. The two main goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist, and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area, especially by the same hider. Groundspeak may further restrict cache listings in areas where cache saturation becomes a concern.

I won't hold my breath, as enforcing that particular guideline might cost Groundspeak $$$ in the long run...

Link to comment

Perhaps our Reviewers could start enforcing the particular guideline created to reduce such things? :unsure:

Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. The two main goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist, and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area, especially by the same hider. Groundspeak may further restrict cache listings in areas where cache saturation becomes a concern.

I won't hold my breath, as enforcing that particular guideline might cost Groundspeak $$$ in the long run...

Maybe we should change the names of power trails, to the money line. That is one guideline that is not enforced, but if you want to make a cache event with a hike, or to search for some caches they will threaten to archive your event. But guidelines are not rules.

Link to comment

Perhaps our Reviewers could start enforcing the particular guideline created to reduce such things? :unsure:

Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. The two main goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist, and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area, especially by the same hider. Groundspeak may further restrict cache listings in areas where cache saturation becomes a concern.

I won't hold my breath, as enforcing that particular guideline might cost Groundspeak $$$ in the long run...

Maybe we should change the names of power trails, to the money line. That is one guideline that is not enforced, but if you want to make a cache event with a hike, or to search for some caches they will threaten to archive your event. But guidelines are not rules.

 

Sorry, but the idea that geocaching is a low impact sport is so 2009. People now come from all over the US and the world to make their impact. What was once a low impact, under the radar sport is now visible from space. It bodes well for the future of geocaching. Just wait until the enemies of geocaching see this and learn that "We're there and we don't care". It will set them straight.

 

The numbers hounds continue to move our sport forward. Keep up the good work!

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Perhaps our Reviewers could start enforcing the particular guideline created to reduce such things? :unsure:

Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. The two main goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist, and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area, especially by the same hider. Groundspeak may further restrict cache listings in areas where cache saturation becomes a concern.

I won't hold my breath, as enforcing that particular guideline might cost Groundspeak $$$ in the long run...

 

Much like the 'WOW' factor for virtuals, I believe the reviewers have been worn-down by multitudes of cachers complaining that 'their cache has merit, even if it is only 530 feet from the next one'.

 

So Groundspeak said: 'Let them have a cache every 528 feet if they so desire'.

And thus the 'Saturation Guideline' did retreat unto itself.

And the mega-powertrails were made by those who knew it would happen sooner or later.

And the multitudes have spoken by flocking to those 'high density' areas in droves.

 

Be careful what you ask for, because you might get it.

And when you get it, the consequences might not be as pleasant as you envisioned.

Link to comment

From what I recall from the old threads on the alien head and the trail people were actually proud of the fact that they were leaving such a big trail out there. And I would guess the cache owner is apparently non-concerned as well in spite of the message on the cache pages because they could easily see that there was this trail developing and have disabled some or all of the caches.

Link to comment

This is pretty amazing to me...USDA's updated a good deal of the rural US in the last year and the new imagery is in beautiful high resolution. The new Google maps in my neck of the woods shows the trampoline we bought last summer in the back yard!

 

As for the markings good/bad, I say its relative. If this was a swath of Hell's Canyon or the Costal Rain Forest in WA being clear cut by machete wielding cachers there may be cause for alarm. Out by Rachel, NV though? Ever driven out there? There's a LOT more desert in NV that can be left pristine--I think the trails being visible on the USDA images is astounding, and as long as they are simply footprints in the desert I'm cool with it.

Link to comment

Perhaps our Reviewers could start enforcing the particular guideline created to reduce such things? :unsure:

Please don't hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. The two main goals of the saturation guideline are to encourage you to seek out new places to hide caches rather than putting them in areas where caches already exist, and to limit the number of caches hidden in a particular area, especially by the same hider. Groundspeak may further restrict cache listings in areas where cache saturation becomes a concern.

I won't hold my breath, as enforcing that particular guideline might cost Groundspeak $$$ in the long run...

Cars, has to be the cars. Certainly hundreds of people walking the same path in the desert simply wouldn't leave a trail, now would it?

Link to comment

... if you want to make a cache event with a hike, ... they will threaten to archive your event.

 

Not so in my area, if by "they" you mean the reviewers. I had no trouble at all last summer holding an event that required a ten-mile RT hike. Yes, there were a couple of caches along the way, but the point was the hike, and our reviewers approved it with no threats of any sort.

Edited by GrievousAngel
Link to comment

if you want to make a cache event with a hike, or to search for some caches they will threaten to archive your event. But guidelines are not rules.

 

there is nothing in the guidelines prohibiting events with a hike

 

around here they are very common

 

i have a feeling you are not making that statement from personal experience, but rather from something heard through the grapevine

Link to comment

I can't tell you how excited I am that Google has finally updated the satellite imagery for Rachel, Nevada! You are probably familiar with the Alien Head power trail - it's near the ET Highway, but far off the road, with notices posted on each of the cache pages that say things like "Please don't drive to these caches" and "tread lightly and walk to the landing sites"...

 

Walk? When we're on a numbers run?

 

I was worried that all of the logs mentioning an increasingly obvious automotive geotrail were exaggerating, because whenever I looked at the imagery I could see nothing but unmolested desert. But then the maps were updated with the first shots taken since 2010 (March '11), and happily I was wrong - WE DID IT! We've marked up the area with off-roading tire tracks so well that it can be seen from space! And that's after only nine months or so - I can't wait to see how much better this thing looks moving forward!

 

The next time someone tells you that geocachers can't make a difference, you tell them right back that oh yes we can!

 

Click to enlarge:

 

alienhead.th.jpg

 

That is just awesome! My son (16 y.o. and on an "alien kick" right now...reading/watching/youtubing about aliens) will find this hilarious.

Link to comment

You're impressed by such little things. Did you happen to notice the 360 foot tall KFC logo at Groom Rd and Old Mill Street? THAT'S the first thing I see when they look at Rachel NV in aerial imagery.

 

Although the logo was removed in mid-2007, it is still visible on Google Earth.

Which begs the question as to whether these trails are new or if they just increased the map's resolution. The 'trails' could be normal trails caused by several hikers taking the same route, for all we know.

Link to comment

You're impressed by such little things. Did you happen to notice the 360 foot tall KFC logo at Groom Rd and Old Mill Street? THAT'S the first thing I see when they look at Rachel NV in aerial imagery.

 

Although the logo was removed in mid-2007, it is still visible on Google Earth.

Which begs the question as to whether these trails are new or if they just increased the map's resolution. The 'trails' could be normal trails caused by several hikers taking the same route, for all we know.

Would the impact on the fragile desert ecology be any less if that were the case?

Link to comment

You're impressed by such little things. Did you happen to notice the 360 foot tall KFC logo at Groom Rd and Old Mill Street? THAT'S the first thing I see when they look at Rachel NV in aerial imagery.

 

Although the logo was removed in mid-2007, it is still visible on Google Earth.

Which begs the question as to whether these trails are new or if they just increased the map's resolution. The 'trails' could be normal trails caused by several hikers taking the same route, for all we know.

Would the impact on the fragile desert ecology be any less if that were the case?

Objection, the question assumes facts not in evidence.

Link to comment

You're impressed by such little things. Did you happen to notice the 360 foot tall KFC logo at Groom Rd and Old Mill Street? THAT'S the first thing I see when they look at Rachel NV in aerial imagery.

 

Although the logo was removed in mid-2007, it is still visible on Google Earth.

Which begs the question as to whether these trails are new or if they just increased the map's resolution. The 'trails' could be normal trails caused by several hikers taking the same route, for all we know.

Would the impact on the fragile desert ecology be any less if that were the case?

Objection, the question assumes facts not in evidence.

Overruled.

Link to comment
Which begs the question as to whether these trails are new or if they just increased the map's resolution. The 'trails' could be normal trails caused by several hikers taking the same route, for all we know.

The logs going back several months mention increasingly obvious automotive tracks going from cache to cache. Those are the only eyewitness accounts I'm aware of.

 

Yes!

Link to comment

Let's not go overboard here just because something we did is visible from space. Your house is certainly visible from space. Are you going to tear it down because of that?

 

LOL. I was thinking along those lines. :rolleyes:

 

The area isn't pristine wilderness or wildlife refuge.

 

It's most probably BLM land and the BLM has deemed geocaching to be a fair and equitable use of public land. So what if there's a geotrail.

 

Trails happen. I have hiked and explored the Eastern Sierra since I was 12 years old. Animals make the lion's share of the trails I follow when I'm off of forest service trails. It is the same anywhere else. The animals know the best paths of least resistance and trails form "naturally." I don't get why people doing the exact same thing is so bad in this instance. Maybe we should all just move into outer space to protect the planet. :rolleyes:

 

I DO hope the chest beating and gnashing of teeth continues though. It's quite entertaining. :laughing:

Link to comment

You're impressed by such little things. Did you happen to notice the 360 foot tall KFC logo at Groom Rd and Old Mill Street? THAT'S the first thing I see when they look at Rachel NV in aerial imagery.

 

Although the logo was removed in mid-2007, it is still visible on Google Earth.

Which begs the question as to whether these trails are new or if they just increased the map's resolution. The 'trails' could be normal trails caused by several hikers taking the same route, for all we know.

Would the impact on the fragile desert ecology be any less if that were the case?

Objection, the question assumes facts not in evidence.

Overruled.

Your 'ruling' still doesn't make your case.

Link to comment
Trails happen.

And even faster with cars!

 

Woo-hoo!

 

Has anyone checked too see if that area is approved for offroad vehicle use? Hmmm.? :unsure:

 

Quite a lot of the areas in Nevada are unless they are deemed Desert Tortoise habitat. DT habitat is easy to spot. There are turtle fences to keep the cute little critters from getting flattened on the highway.

 

I bet Moosemob could settle that. It's his home turf.

Link to comment
Has anyone checked too see if that area is approved for offroad vehicle use? Hmmm.?

I keep checking the cache pages, and they keep saying "Please don't drive to these caches," every time I load them up.

 

Thankfully, that rather weak request ("please"? who says "please" these days?) hasn't gotten in the way of some awesome geocaching artistry!

Link to comment

Someone please call BLM and ask them how they feel about it.

 

I really dislike it when people say, its just a desert. That kind of attitude does give geocaching a black eye. :unsure:

If you are referring to my post I said,

The area isn't pristine wilderness or wildlife refuge.

 

I never said it's just a desert.

 

I'm pretty confident any spot of desert that close to a highway is hardly pristine. I've cached my share of Nevada and anyone that has knows of what I speak.

 

I happen to love the desert, but I'm realistic in this case.

 

The visible trail doesn't give me the least bit of heartburn. If anything, it makes the eventual trip out there easier to plan. :laughing::anitongue:

Link to comment
Has anyone checked too see if that area is approved for offroad vehicle use? Hmmm.?

I keep checking the cache pages, and they keep saying "Please don't drive to these caches," every time I load them up.

 

Thankfully, that rather weak request ("please"? who says "please" these days?) hasn't gotten in the way of some awesome geocaching artistry!

If a cache page said to please walk to the cache location from your home, but it was legal for me to drive there, I would drive.

 

If a cache page stated that it was OK for me to hike to a location, but I came across a No Tresspassing sign, I would not go to that location.

 

What I am legally permitted to do trumps the whims of the cache owner.

Link to comment
Has anyone checked too see if that area is approved for offroad vehicle use? Hmmm.?

I keep checking the cache pages, and they keep saying "Please don't drive to these caches," every time I load them up.

 

Thankfully, that rather weak request ("please"? who says "please" these days?) hasn't gotten in the way of some awesome geocaching artistry!

Have you spent much time caching in Nevada? :unsure:

Link to comment

I'm with you Addisonbr, isn't it so cool when our impact on the environment is visible from space? It's going to do great things for our sport. Imagine the possibilities! The numbers hounds should be very proud. Please, more power trails so we can continue to make our mark on the planet!

 

Humans have been leaving their mark on planet earth for eons. Here are a few examples:

 

Pyramids (and not just the ones in Egypt)

The great wall of China

Nazca lines

just about any city

... we've even left our mark on the moon (although some would argue that we havent been there).

 

How - exactly - are those different/better/worse/ok than what is happening now?

Link to comment

What I am legally permitted to do trumps the whims of the cache owner.

 

Yar. Pretty much my point. Unless the cache owner is quoting the particular land use permits for that area.

 

I had a bleading heart cacher accuse one of my caches on a mountain ridge of causing a road to be created. They didn't have 4wd and walked it.

 

Funny thing. That road had been there for 40+ years at the time I placed the cache. :laughing:

 

Just sayin', if you want to wring your hands and gnash your teeth, you should probably be the one who does the homework so your righteous indignation can be properly served. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Pyramids (and not just the ones in Egypt)

The great wall of China

Nazca lines

...

How - exactly - are those different/better/worse/ok than what is happening now?

They aren't. The Great Wall of China is *exactly* the same as geocachers driving through an area they were asked not to drive in. Although, this is awesomer, because it makes a face!

 

Next time I hope it's a dirty word, that would be pretty cool.

Link to comment
The visible trail doesn't give me the least bit of heartburn. If anything, it makes the eventual trip out there easier to plan.

I know, right? You won't even need to take your GPSr!

 

Almost exactly right. I find a great deal of caches just by looking at the maps and distinguishing landmarks. GPS is secondary.

 

Also, I won't be wandering willy nilly through the brush just waiting to shake hands with a rattlesnake or tarantula hawk. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

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...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...