Waterfall Earthcaches No Longer Approved?

[+JL_HSTRE]

I created an Earthcache almost a month ago about a waterfall, with some related questions about erosion control in the area. I finally got a Reviewer response today with this:

 

"Thanks for the Earthcache submission. Unfortunately, the topic of your submission is no longer being accepted."

 

Are waterfalls no longer considered valid subjects for Earthcaches?

[+egroeg]

This was the latest I could find about restrictions:

 

Waterfall classification

We no longer accept EarthCache submissions that feature various types of waterfalls with a logging task asking to identify the type of waterfall. We do accept waterfall EarthCaches with specific information about the local geology and related logging tasks.

(Emphasis added.)

 

If you feel that your cache and the related questions are outside the restrictions, write a nice email to the Reviewer with your explanation.  If you can't tie the waterfall to the erosion control questions, then the Reviewer may feel the waterfall is superfluous to the cache.

 

 

 

[+hzoi]

This has been in effect for a while.  I think since 2010, when GSA revised their criteria significantly.  Before that, it wasn't hard to get an earthcache published based solely on what type of waterfall it was, or how fast a spring was flowing, without any more information.

 

It's still possible to get a waterfall or spring cache published - we've gotten a few springs and one waterfall published since the rule change.  We just needed to do more to get into the geology. 

 

For your waterfall, do some more research to see if you can get more into the geology there.  What kind of rock is exposed; what lessons can you teach using that?

[+Team Microdot]

55 minutes ago, hzoi said:

For your waterfall, do some more research to see if you can get more into the geology there.  What kind of rock is exposed; what lessons can you teach using that?

 

Rate at which the waterfall is eroding / dissolving the rock and thus how long it would take for the waterfall to effectively move backwards a particular distance (as a means of getting the finder to cosider the scale of geological time)?

 

 

 

 

[+JL_HSTRE]

On 7/13/2018 at 7:47 AM, Team Microdot said:

Rate at which the waterfall is eroding / dissolving the rock and thus how long it would take for the waterfall to effectively move backwards a particular distance (as a means of getting the finder to cosider the scale of geological time)?

 

I have no idea how to estimate or calculate that.

[+JL_HSTRE]

On 7/13/2018 at 6:50 AM, hzoi said:

This has been in effect for a while.  I think since 2010, when GSA revised their criteria significantly.  Before that, it wasn't hard to get an earthcache published based solely on what type of waterfall it was, or how fast a spring was flowing, without any more information.

 

It's still possible to get a waterfall or spring cache published - we've gotten a few springs and one waterfall published since the rule change.  We just needed to do more to get into the geology. 

 

For your waterfall, do some more research to see if you can get more into the geology there.  What kind of rock is exposed; what lessons can you teach using that?

 

There are lots of older style waterfall Earthcaches still active so I was quite deceived that they were still viable. I took notes on my last vacation for potential Earthcaches for five different waterfalls; I wrote off one because after getting home I found a new Earthcache had just been recently placed in the area and overlapped some of the information. Of the other four, I think I can only make one viable. Which is particularly unfortunately because three of the four have no nearby physical caches.

 

I tried to find out more about the geology of the specific waterfalls, but could not find any such information for any of them. I don't know enough about identifying rocks, especially when they're wet, to be able to even ask a meaningful question in that regard.

[+Team Microdot]

11 hours ago, JL_HSTRE said:

On 13/07/2018 at 12:47 PM, Team Microdot said:

Rate at which the waterfall is eroding / dissolving the rock and thus how long it would take for the waterfall to effectively move backwards a particular distance (as a means of getting the finder to cosider the scale of geological time)?

 

I have no idea how to estimate or calculate that.

 

It was only a suggestion - and not necessarily a good one depending on what the reviewer thinks.

 

And yes - there can be all sorts of factors involved in making that estimate - but sometimes an estimate is enough because from there you might be able to phrase the question as : If we assume that the waterfall erodes x millimetres of rock per year from the rock face, how long might it be before the waterfall effectively moves backwards to (name of town / location further back along river)

 

Knowing what type of bedrock the waterfall flows over would be a good start.

[BlueRajah]

Most of the ones I see now that are listed focus on the rock, rock layers, and differences in the how those layers are eroding with the waterfall.  Mostly there was a ton of cookie cutter caches about falls, that were not about learning the geologic process involved.  So there is a shift in how you need to do it now. 

[+JL_HSTRE]

On 7/16/2018 at 12:28 AM, BlueRajah said:

Most of the ones I see now that are listed focus on the rock, rock layers, and differences in the how those layers are eroding with the waterfall.  Mostly there was a ton of cookie cutter caches about falls, that were not about learning the geologic process involved.  So there is a shift in how you need to do it now. 

 

I'm not sure how this could be done effectively in practice unless the waterfall is in a fairly barren rocky valley or has a very small flow. Otherwise the falling water would obscure the rock too much.

[+Team Microdot]

9 minutes ago, JL_HSTRE said:

 

I'm not sure how this could be done effectively in practice unless the waterfall is in a fairly barren rocky valley or has a very small flow. Otherwise the falling water would obscure the rock too much.

 

Unless the flow of the waterfall was seasonal?

 

Granted that might impact on making that EC more difficult or even impossible during wet weather / when the flow rate was greater...

 

...but, might that variable flow rate impact on the shape of the channel eroded in the rock by the water also? Could that make a decent earth science lesson?