Geology vs. other Earth Sciences

[+Kennon136]

Forgive me if this topic has been posed elsewhere before but I was unable to locate a similar thread.

I’m curious why the Knowledge Book (https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=51&pgid=295)

is so narrowly focused on the science of geology when there are other Earth Sciences available. I live in Rhode Island (“The Ocean State”) and there are many topics that would be great for Earth Caches (i.e. bogs, marshes, etc.) but the current guidelines do not allow them because they are not specifically geology related. Since our Earth is made up and exists of far more than just geologic sciences, I believe the opportunity to learn more of the Earth through Earth Caches is being missed.

 

It appears there are many other earth sciences that can be included but it is currently narrowed to just geology which leaves a lot of other “earth” elements unable to be published, even though they can be as equally educational. There are only so many topics on geology that can be done for our smallest state in the U.S. and I see them repeated over and over again across the state.

So, why just Geology and will the Knowledge Book eventually evolve to include other earth sciences?

[+cerberus1]

IIRC, "Earthcaches" aren't published by Groundspeak Reviewers, but by volunteers through the Geological Society of America.

A few other options have been asked for numerous times, but a group of area-specific professionals volunteering their time are needed.

I miss waterfall caches ...  Guess they're on Waymarking if I looked...

Many were hoping for a Historycache, but AFAIK no historical society has come on board to volunteer.

  - A cache with the reason it's location is historic should suffice for now...

 

Edited July 8, 2023 by cerberus1
fixation

[geoawareUSA9]

On 7/8/2023 at 11:08 AM, Kennon136 said:

Forgive me if this topic has been posed elsewhere before but I was unable to locate a similar thread.

I’m curious why the Knowledge Book (https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=51&pgid=295)

is so narrowly focused on the science of geology when there are other Earth Sciences available.

 

The earthcache program is a partnership between the Geological Society of America and Groundspeak, so yes, the focus is rather on things that are tied to the GSA's mission.

 

There are other related topics that earthcaches can cover, such as environmental engineering. But the focus is on permanent earth features, again, because it's partly the GSA's program.

 

On 7/8/2023 at 11:08 AM, Kennon136 said:

I live in Rhode Island (“The Ocean State”) and there are many topics that would be great for Earth Caches (i.e. bogs, marshes, etc.)

 

Bogs and marshes are acceptable topics, as long as there is a focus on the forces that made them.

 

Normally, the focus when studying wetlands is on biology - the plants and animals that make up the habitat. Biology is a life science, not an earth science.

 

A wetlands earthcache can work if there is sufficient focus on the visible geology that formed the wetlands. From the guidelines:

 

Quote

We only accept bogs/wetlands where the focus is on the underlying geology of why it exists in this location, and where that underlying geology is visible.

 

If you don't like that limitation, well, I'm partly to blame, as I'm the one who suggested it to Groundspeak and the GSA. But it's based on the overall limits on earthcaches, so the limit already existed, this was just my suggestion to make it clearer to cachers what works and what doesn't.

 

On 7/8/2023 at 11:46 AM, cerberus1 said:

IIRC, "Earthcaches" aren't published by Groundspeak Reviewers, but by volunteers through the Geological Society of America.

 

That was true at the outset, with the original geoaware reviewer. But for years, earthcache reviewers have been recruited by Groundspeak, not the GSA. I'm not connected to the GSA. Nor am I a geologist. I'm an attorney with the US Army (at least, for another week and a half before I retire). But I have studied geology independently, and my profession is all about interpreting rules, so it works.

 

On 7/8/2023 at 11:46 AM, cerberus1 said:

I miss waterfall caches

 

They're still allowed. But they have to be more involved than "here is a waterfall, here are the waterfall types, what type is this one?"

 

Similarly, artesian well/spring caches are also still allowed, but they have to be more involved than "here is a spring, how fast is it flowing, what magnitude is it?"

 

I'm a little biased, but I think I did a pretty good job incorporating geology into my waterfall earthcache - the underlying geology directly impacts what you see, as the travertine forms when it precipitates out of the cooling water as it falls. What made the water warm? Oh, not much, just a magma bubble from 2 million years ago that still hasn't cooled down. You can't see the pluton, of course, it's still underground. But you can see its effects, and that counts.