Wrong Coordinates

[+Chazbo1948]

So there is this cache I've been looking for, from time to time, for over a year now. It's in Boca Ciega Millennium Park in St. Petersburg, Florida. I've never been able to find it and, according to past posts, same for others. There also have been posts from those who have found it using the posted coordinates. Some said it was an easy find which made it even more frustrating. Now today I go back to the park for some hiking and decide to give it one more try. To my amazement there are new posts which claim the original coordinates are way off. The new coordinates place the cache over 150 feet away in a completely different spot! I went to the new area but didn't have time to look. I'm wondering how the coordinates could be that far off when people were finding it over a year ago using the original coordinates. How would one know to look over 150 feet away in a completely different place? Would you expand your search area out that far looking for something in the woods if you thought the coordinates were correct? Not sure if this happens a lot but I've never expanded my searches out that far. Even on a bad day I wouldn't think today's modern GPS units would be that much off. Oh well...guess I'll go back soon and see if the 20th time is a charm.

Edited February 15, 2015 by Chazbo1948

[+TriciaG]

Has anyone posted a NM log to ask the CO to check the coordinates?

[+Chazbo1948]

Has anyone posted a NM log to ask the CO to check the coordinates?

Not sure about that but the old coordinates are still listed. The cache is titled "Wood or Would Not"

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Yeah, your log posted on it pretty much reads as does your post here in the forums.

Problem is... you say that you didn't spend much time looking for it, but you rant anyway. I can understand such if you had spent some time looking for it, but it seems you didn't bother.

 

Folks have apparently provided (better) coordinates and are finding it -- leastwise that's what the logs say to me.

There are two NM logs (one of which was a finder), both posted on Feb, 10, 2015.

[jholly]

The problem is that the cache owner is no longer living in town and the person that maintains the cache is a little slow to respond to problems. Others have noted the changed coordinates in their logs. Perhaps when the local maintainer took over and had to replace the missing cache he decided it needed to be moved to a better place. Unfortunately since he does not have access to the cache page to do this and the CO has all but dropped out of the game it is not going to happen. Maybe the best way to address the problem is with Needs Archive logs instead of Need Maintenance logs.

[+L0ne.R]

There are at least 4 letterboxes (posted on Atlas Quest) in that park. It could be possible that people are finding a letterbox and not the cache.

[+colleda]

Yeah, your log posted on it pretty much reads as does your post here in the forums.

Problem is... you say that you didn't spend much time looking for it, but you rant anyway. I can understand such if you had spent some time looking for it, but it seems you didn't bother.

 

 

Didn't you notice the bit where the OP said they've searched almost 20 times? Possibly and exaggeration but seems to indicate multiple attempts. How is that not being bothered? Hardly sounds like a rant to me, just a little frustration.

 

Seems this should be NA'd. With coords out by so much not only makes it tricky for some to find but it could also have, maybe more importantly, proximity issues where someone may want to place a cache but can't.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Yeah, your log posted on it pretty much reads as does your post here in the forums.

Problem is... you say that you didn't spend much time looking for it, but you rant anyway. I can understand such if you had spent some time looking for it, but it seems you didn't bother.

 

 

Didn't you notice the bit where the OP said they've searched almost 20 times? Possibly and exaggeration but seems to indicate multiple attempts. How is that not being bothered? Hardly sounds like a rant to me, just a little frustration.

 

Seems this should be NA'd. With coords out by so much not only makes it tricky for some to find but it could also have, maybe more importantly, proximity issues where someone may want to place a cache but can't.

'Cuz he said so, in both the OP and the log. Read "Now today I go back to the park...".

 

Yeah, I noticed.

[+L0ne.R]

Yeah, your log posted on it pretty much reads as does your post here in the forums.

Problem is... you say that you didn't spend much time looking for it, but you rant anyway. I can understand such if you had spent some time looking for it, but it seems you didn't bother.

 

 

Didn't you notice the bit where the OP said they've searched almost 20 times? Possibly and exaggeration but seems to indicate multiple attempts. How is that not being bothered? Hardly sounds like a rant to me, just a little frustration.

 

Seems this should be NA'd. With coords out by so much not only makes it tricky for some to find but it could also have, maybe more importantly, proximity issues where someone may want to place a cache but can't.

 

Several NMs posted, the cache owner moved away in 2013. Another cacher unofficially adopted it, but hasn't been keeping an eye on it for the last few months. Perhaps a Needs Archive will grab their attention.

[+BCandMsKitty]

So there is this cache I've been looking for, from time to time, for over a year now. It's in Boca Ciega Millennium Park in St. Petersburg, Florida. I've never been able to find it and, according to past posts, same for others. There also have been posts from those who have found it using the posted coordinates. Some said it was an easy find which made it even more frustrating. Now today I go back to the park for some hiking and decide to give it one more try. To my amazement there are new posts which claim the original coordinates are way off. The new coordinates place the cache over 150 feet away in a completely different spot! I went to the new area but didn't have time to look. I'm wondering how the coordinates could be that far off when people were finding it over a year ago using the original coordinates. How would one know to look over 150 feet away in a completely different place? Would you expand your search area out that far looking for something in the woods if you thought the coordinates were correct? Not sure if this happens a lot but I've never expanded my searches out that far. Even on a bad day I wouldn't think today's modern GPS units would be that much off. Oh well...guess I'll go back soon and see if the 20th time is a charm.

 

We have often expanded that far ... and have even sometimes found caches that far off.

Modern GPS units are only as good as the coverage the day of hiding, and the day of searching. each unit could be, and quite often are 50 or 60 feet off. Not far from the 150 feet quoted. There was one hider 9now inactive) in our area that used a cell phone to plot coords for her hides. Not sure if it was the phone, or her use of it, but her hides were routinely 100 to 200 feet away from the published coords! When we looked for her caches, we never looked around the published coords!

Edited February 16, 2015 by BC & MsKitty

[+J Grouchy]

I'd say it's unreasonable for the coordinates to be that far off. I've seen caches disabled by a reviewer when they are that far off or more. Of course it's not unusual for the occasional unit to be off by that much. With my old phone, I had one day where my readings were consistently off by 100 feet for an hour or two until I rebooted the device. It WOULD be unusual for that to happen to more than one or two folks, though.

[+niraD]

How would one know to look over 150 feet away in a completely different place? Would you expand your search area out that far looking for something in the woods if you thought the coordinates were correct?

I think the furthest I've ever expanded my search radius was about 150ft. In that case, I had solved a puzzle cache incorrectly, and one of the digits of my solution was wrong. I searched my GZ fruitlessly, eventually read the hint and searched some more, and then noticed something about 150ft away that matched the hint. Sure enough, there was the cache. And armed with the coordinates of the container, I was able to work out the correct solution and fix my off-by-one error.

 

Other times, the caches were in steep canyons with heavy tree cover. The cache owners provided good hints to make up for the poor GPS reception, and the hints gave me a GZ that was about 100ft from where my device took me.

 

Another time, I found the cache after expanding my search radius about 60ft. It turned out that the cache was a very early field puzzle that had been grandfathered as a traditional cache, and I didn't figure out that there even was a field puzzle until after I'd found it. Based on the logs, I'd guess that about half the finders expand their search radius or use the "corrected coordinates" provided in past logs, and about half the finders read the description more carefully and figure out the field puzzle.

 

But usually, after I expand my search radius by 30-40ft (which is usually my limit), I return to GZ and discover that my backpack is sitting right next to the cache that I failed to spot initially...

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Two more Finds on Feb 13., logged today. One of those logs actually gives spoiler directions to the cache.

[+cerberus1]

How would one know to look over 150 feet away in a completely different place? Would you expand your search area out that far looking for something in the woods if you thought the coordinates were correct? Not sure if this happens a lot but I've never expanded my searches out that far. Even on a bad day I wouldn't think today's modern GPS units would be that much off. Oh well...guess I'll go back soon and see if the 20th time is a charm.

Last Fall, my other 2/3rds asked if I'd hit an easy close-to-home roadside cache (don't normally do them) for her.

Couldn't find it, private property with posted signs along the road at GZ.

Posted that coords may be off, with a bit o snark that the CO was a no-finds hider.

CJ went out out a few days later and found it 428' away from posted coords.

Since she normally does those, rather than go by coords, she simply drove along the road and went by what she felt would be a good spot.

[+redsox_mark]

If the hint was "base of tree" in dense woods, I would be EXTREMELY unlikely to find it if the coordinates were pointing me 150 feet away. I'm not going to check every tree in a 150 foot radius!

 

If there is something distinctive in the hint that can be seen from that distance, then maybe. E.g. the hint says "back of small ruined building", and I see such a building 200 foot away but none where my GPS points, then I'll look at that building.

[+redsox_mark]

And I've now looked at the cache.

 

Lots of people posting the coordinates where THEY found it, and yes it seems the posted coordinates are way off. I've found some like that, where I've tried the coordinates given by others in their logs. Yes the owner should take note and check/change the coordinates, but in the meantime use the information your fellow cachers are giving you in their logs.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

And I've now looked at the cache.

 

Lots of people posting the coordinates where THEY found it, and yes it seems the posted coordinates are way off. I've found some like that, where I've tried the coordinates given by others in their logs. Yes the owner should take note and check/change the coordinates, but in the meantime use the information your fellow cachers are giving you in their logs.

 

There was a cache about 25 miles from me that was a boat accessible only cache. I had planned on going for it because it hadn't had a find in about four years then someone went and "found it" the weekend before I was planning on going. They didn't actually find the original cache but threw down a replacement in "a better location" and added new coordinates in their log. The reviewer posted a not on the cache asking the cache owner to change the published coordinates with an update coordinates log and the CO didn't response in a timely manner so the cache was archived by the reviewer. Seems to me that this cache is in a similar state so I wouldn't expect that it will last long. I have to wonder if the coordinates people are posting are for where a container is now. Some caches migrate and throw downs are not always placed where a cache was originally located.

 

 

[+Chazbo1948]

The reason I'm "ranting" about this is only because I've spent plenty of time on numerous occasions looking for this cache at the original posted coordinates only to come up empty handed as have others. How this cache has now turned up 150 feet away in a completely different area is still a bit of a mystery to me. If someone new has taken over this cache and decided to move it I would expect them to change the coordinates accordingly and not have to read about it in other peoples posts. And oh, by the way, I did use the new coordinates to take me to the new location. When I get a chance to go back to the park I'll look in the new area. If I find it fine and dandy...if not oh well. Like REDSOX Mark says if there's a distinctive hint that points to an area quite a ways from where my GPS is telling me to be then I'll go take a look. Otherwise I doubt I'll expand my search area out 150 feet or more on many occasions. If that means I don't rack up 6,000 or 14,000 "finds" in the remainder of my lifetime I'm ok with that. Happy caching to all!

[+BCandMsKitty]

I'd say it's unreasonable for the coordinates to be that far off. I've seen caches disabled by a reviewer when they are that far off or more. Of course it's not unusual for the occasional unit to be off by that much. With my old phone, I had one day where my readings were consistently off by 100 feet for an hour or two until I rebooted the device. It WOULD be unusual for that to happen to more than one or two folks, though.

 

I agree .. it's totally unreasonable

And in the case of the hider I talked about, I routinely posted NM on the cache(s) to try to get the coords fixed. It fell on deaf ears, though, so I just ignored that cacher's hides. As stated .. that person doesn't hide any more, thankfully.

I only mentioned this experience to say that it is possible.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

The reason I'm "ranting" about this is only because I've spent plenty of time on numerous occasions looking for this cache at the original posted coordinates only to come up empty handed as have others. How this cache has now turned up 150 feet away in a completely different area is still a bit of a mystery to me. If someone new has taken over this cache and decided to move it I would expect them to change the coordinates accordingly and not have to read about it in other peoples posts. And oh, by the way, I did use the new coordinates to take me to the new location. When I get a chance to go back to the park I'll look in the new area. If I find it fine and dandy...if not oh well. Like REDSOX Mark says if there's a distinctive hint that points to an area quite a ways from where my GPS is telling me to be then I'll go take a look. Otherwise I doubt I'll expand my search area out 150 feet or more on many occasions. If that means I don't rack up 6,000 or 14,000 "finds" in the remainder of my lifetime I'm ok with that. Happy caching to all!

 

I took a look at the listing and read a bunch of the logs. I noticed several things about it.

 

The original CO is long gone and it looks like it's been formally adopted at least once.

 

The original container was a sandwhich container but it's had at least one other container since.

 

Some of the earlier found it logs mentioned finding it easily and at least a few logs mentioned good coordinates.

 

The cache is rated 3 for difficulty and it has a pretty fair amount of DNF logs. From many of the logs it sounds like it was a tricky hide. A cache rated 3 stars or higher isn't *supposed* to be easy to find.

 

It's possible that cache has moved from it's original hiding place (and the published coordinates) at least once. A cache "at the base of a tree", when there are a lot of trees nearby could migrated over time (after all, the cache is 8 years old).

 

WIth 78 DNFs and 278 finds, it's obviously not an easy one to find. It wouldn't be the first time that someone felt entitled to a find and threw down a replacement. The coordinates being posted 150' away might not be for the original cache but one someone threw down after failing to find what was intended to be a difficult find.

 

 

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

<snip>

If someone new has taken over this cache and decided to move it I would expect them to change the coordinates accordingly and not have to read about it in other peoples posts.

<snip>

You see, the problem with that is because somebody has done EXACTLY what you said. They have "taken over" the cache but they have not gone through the adoption process.

It is the adoption process that makes the cache "theirs". If the cache isn't theirs, they cannot change the coordinates.

 

Frankly, I would be seriously tempted to dump a NA log on it.

 

It just might get the owner to sit up and pay attention.

An absentee owner does little good for anyone.

 

There are seven NM logs and nary a one Maintenance Performed log.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Gitchee-Gummee

[+Chazbo1948]

Thanks for all the replies. Being relatively new to geocaching (1+ yrs) the reason I started this discussion is because of all the caches I had a hard time finding I don't think any had coordinates that were 150' off. It just made me wonder how this could happen and how someone could possibly find it thinking the original coordinates were correct. Don't know if I like the idea that someone who is frustrated and can't find a particular cache can just take it upon themselves to "throw down" a new cache in a different spot from the original then post the new coordinates on the original owners cache site if that owner doesn't respond to NM posts. I would rather have the original cache posted as "unreliable" or something to that effect and advise others to disregard it and move on to a different cache.

Taking note of how many "finds" some of you have it's obvious that geocaching is your thing, you do it well and spend a lot of time doing it. For me, and I'm sure others, it's something I do usually while I'm doing something else like hiking or bicycle riding. Sometimes when I take a break or have some extra time it's fun to break out the smartphone, crank up the app and see what's nearby and possibly do a little caching. I would say I probably spend no more that a half hour searching for any particular cache and yet I've had pretty good luck. I guess the bottom line is that no matter how much time we devote to it it's something we all like to do and if nothing else it gets us outdoors in the fresh air which is a good thing. Happy trails and happy caching to all! Chazbo1948 over & out.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Chazbo1948