The Wisconsin Geocaching Association

  Login or Register

Website Navigation

62.png Home

49.png Information Center
26.png WGA Newsletters
24.png Reviewer's Words
53.png Presentation Resources
39.png Geocaching Files
27.png Bookmarks
56.png Location Rules and Regs
49.png BOD Info Center

17.png Forums
16.png New Posts
20.png Unanswered Posts

calendar_day.png Upcoming Events
mapicon.png Map
29.png Calendar
11.png Submit Event

mapicon.png WGA State Park CachesNew content !

shield_star.png Cache of the Month
mapicon.png Past Winners Map

LonelyCache.png Lonely Cache Game
mapicon.png Current Map
26.png Scoreboard
11.png Submit Report

rescueiconsm.png Cache Rescue
11.png Submit a Mission

icon_community.gif Members
27.png Your Account
47.png Private Messages
contact_blue.png WGA Member Map
Geocaching_LIVE_poweredby_16.png GC.COM Authorization

icon_members.gif News
tree-T.gif Topics
tree-T.gif Archives
tree-L.gif Submit News

image_cultured.png Photo Gallery
tree-T.gif Updates
tree-L.gif Popular

shield.png Fun Stuff
28.png Recent Logs
TB.gif Picnic to Picnic TB Race Standings
TB.gif WGA Hauler

49.png Board of Directors
 
Contact Us

 
Facebook

Wisconsin Geocaching Association

 
Follow Us

Twitter Button

 
Subscribe to Newsletter

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required
 
Geocaching.com Search
View Search Syntax
 
COTM
Winner -
July 2014 Northern Zone:
Call Box

Winner -
July 2014 Northeast Zone:
Twisted Metal

Winner -
July 2014 West Central Zone:
The Island

Winner -
July 2014 South Central Zone:
Puzzle of Books

Winner -
July 2014 Southeast Zone:
Make do with what you have

Winner -
July 2014 Series of the Month:
Door County Barn Quilt Series


More Info >>>

 
 
Wisconsin Geocaching Association: Forums
 

 

View next topic
View previous topic
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Author Message
Lostby7
WGA Member



Joined: 2005-06-07
Posts: 3190
Location: Lake country area, WI

PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:10 pm Reply with quote Back to top

cheezehead wrote:
Will the WGA Camp out ever be held in Patterson Park or Amnicon Falls Park or Copper Falls State Park? Very, very unlikely cuz the Majority of the people that play this game are down south. That will always be true.
Or Until a UWGA is formed.

Sorry for the off topic...I agree that it is unlikely but Door county where one WGA event was held isn't exactly down south so never say never.
 
View user's profile Send private message
cheezehead
WGA Member



Joined: 2006-07-02
Posts: 6063
Location: Hayward, WI. USA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:14 pm Reply with quote Back to top

True, but Door County is a lot closer to Madison, Milwaukee and Green Bay than Douglas or Ashland County.

Rough distances I took from my Map Source Map.

Start- Patterson Park
to-Madison 275 miles
to-Milwaukee 314
to-Green Bay 236

Start Egg Harbor

to Madison-172
to Milwaukee -141
to Green Bay-53
 
View user's profile Send private message
kbraband
WGA Historian



Joined: 2002-02-19
Posts: 2461
Location: Mequon, WI US

PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 6:05 pm Reply with quote Back to top

This topic has turned into a free-for-all for ax grinding, but I'll bite anyway. Lake Wissota State Park -- site of the 2005 WGA campout -- is in the NW quadrant of the state. I know for a fact that the board has considered hosting events in all corners of the state and has tried hard to extend the "reach" of the events. It comes down to many factors, such as suitability of the park, group camp sites, cooperations from park management, availability of volunteers, etc.

And despite what you might perceive, we're not beating up on you -- just stating opinions. Smile
 
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Buy_The_Tie
WGA Member



Joined: 2002-07-12
Posts: 2792
Location: New Berlin, WI

PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 8:14 pm Reply with quote Back to top

The "Hiding A Cache" page is more-or-less split up into two sections. One section highlighting rules, procedures, etc.. depending on the location. The other half is more-or-less an echo of the Geocaching.com guidelines.

From the little bit of research I have done, it would appear that Geocaching.com has the most comprehensive (and restrictive) set of guidelines as compared to the other sites. Therefore, if you follow Geocaching.com guidelines, you should be good to go no matter which site(s) you decide to list your caches on. Yes, it is a bit authoritative, but if newbie were to follow them, they would be much *less* likely to run into trouble.

The guidelines that Geocaching.com puts forth (and that our "hiding a cache" page mirrors) are quite land-manager friendly. If us (as geocachers) can make land managers happy, we will be able to continue playing our game on their land. Therefore, it makes complete sense to me to have the most *conservative* guidelines listed.

However, I must side with Rogheff, in that nowhere do we give any listing of geocaching websites. We implicitly direct people to geocaching.com if you include a geocache number (like this: GC3B1), but nowhere on the entire site (that I can find) is a single reference to other listing services (other than in the depths of these forums).

Maybe we should add a section to the "Hiding A Cache" page, talking a bit about listing services.
Quote:

Geocache Listing Services

Geocaching.com: This is by far the most popular geocache listing service in the world, and contains the most geocaches.

Navicache.com: This site requires no sign-up of any kind use. There is somewhat more flexibility in the types of caches that can be listed on this site.

Terracaching.com: A semi-open community of cachers seeking the highest quality geocaches. Requires "sponsorship" by two other terracaching.com members to use.

Each listing service has its own set of guidelines for placing & publishing a geocache.

I just threw together the descriptions based on my limited understanding of the two "other" sites.
 
View user's profile Send private message
cheezehead
WGA Member



Joined: 2006-07-02
Posts: 6063
Location: Hayward, WI. USA

PostPosted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:32 pm Reply with quote Back to top

OK, Last time I going to post cuz it was not my intention to derail the subject but ask any "Up Northerner" and they would say unofficial line would be Hwy 8.
 
View user's profile Send private message
SammyClaws
WGA Member



Joined: 2007-04-27
Posts: 331
Location: Muskego

PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:34 am Reply with quote Back to top

Well as long as this thread is zizagging all over, I'll toss my question in here. My interest in other sites started when I found a place to put a cache, however its too close to a waypoint on a multi. Personally, I think it would be fun to do a multi and pick up some additional caches along the way.

Additionally, we have had suggestions about archiving caches so that new ones could be put out, but I am wondering what the .2 diameter of real estate per cache/waypoint rule is supposed to accomplish? I dont think it is to cut down on traffic. Because if that is the case, then how come you can put an Earthcache on top of a geocache(or vice versa)?

While none of this is a major concern to me or something that would keep me from playing, it is something that I have not been able to find answers for on GC.com and it would be good to know.
 
View user's profile Send private message
cheezehead
WGA Member



Joined: 2006-07-02
Posts: 6063
Location: Hayward, WI. USA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:26 am Reply with quote Back to top

The distance is actually 525 feet or .10 of a mile. Cache saturation is the reason.

I do have a Terracache that is within the 525ft of a Geocache final location. It has been found twice in almost 2 years. There is no way it could be found or mistaken for the Geocache as it is across the creek and up a very steep hill. They can all coexist.
 
View user's profile Send private message
Team Deejay
WGA Member



Joined: 2005-10-02
Posts: 2390
Location: Rochester, WI, US

PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:40 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Cheezehead's answer is correct, but let me expound a bit on saturation. There are several issues at play. First, and most importantly, if caches are too close together, people with older/misbehaving geocaches may find the wrong cache. We already have that issue with letterboxes, alternative listing sites, etc, but this is an attempt to minimize the issues. Now, some of you are probably saying that 200 feet or so would be adequate to accomplish this, and, except for certain hiders, you would be correct.

The second issue has to do with perceptions of land managers. Most people running parks, forests, etc., don't want their parks blanketed with geocaches. We are just getting to the point where these folks are seeing geocaching as a positive thing, so we don't want the situation where you can't walk 100 feet without tripping over another cache. The 0.1 mile guideline helps prevent this saturation.

Thirdly, remember that the original intent of the geocaching was NOT about the numbers game, but about getting people to find new, different and unique places. If a cache is already established in a particular location, adding another does not necessarily build on that experience.

The final reason has to do with history. One of the founders of geocaching involved in establishing the initial guidelines suggested that you should not be able to stand at one geocache and see another. This concept was strongly agreed to by those creating the guidelines. The 0.1 mile guideline is a bit of a compromise from that ideal, but basically establishes that geocaches should be "discrete experiences".

Remember that the whole idea was to get people out into the woods and mountains, not provide a directory for discount store parking lots and guardrails. If a good cache is already established in an area, placing another cache should serve to highlight something not presented by the original cache. Geocaching is about a sense of place. Take people to places you love, and they will most likely also love those places. Take people to parking lots and guardrails and those same people will probably yawn.
 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Team Deejay
WGA Member



Joined: 2005-10-02
Posts: 2390
Location: Rochester, WI, US

PostPosted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:55 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Oh and the exception for earthcaches, virtual stages, etc, was in response to player requests. Only physical stages are subject to proximity.
 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
GrouseTales
WGA Member



Joined: 2002-02-18
Posts: 3399
Location: West Allis, Wi

PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 7:36 am Reply with quote Back to top

I don't know that the WGA has to be devoted to any specific brand of gps games. lets face it, geocaching.com is the microsoft of gps games. Other games exist, but the vast majority of people seem to be "Geocaching".

Although I would still prefer to geocache "under the radar", I fully support the rules in place. These rules are not created simply to keep the man down, they are created to solve problems, and add safety.

For example:
- Geocachers get arrested for hiding and hunting caches hiden on RR right-of-way. Rule: Don't place caches on right-of-way! No brainer in my opinion.

- Sure you can geocache in my yard, just don't trample my beautiful garden. Rule: No geocaches in SNA's.

Regarding the 528' rule:
I remember in the early days of geocaching, we would frown if someone would put a cache in the same park as ours. Heck, can't you find a different park to place a cache! I remember one geocache owner emailing a guy and telling him off because the guy would visit cache "A", then hide his own cache somewhere else in the same park. Boy, now we allow them every 528' Smile I guess the rules are too loose on this one!

So in recap:
-The winter storm watch has been cancelled.
-Sure, the WGA can represent GPS gamers of all kinds. Why not?
-Rules address past problems. We need to learn from our mistakes and make sure they don't happen again.
-I've never found a Navicache, Terracache, googlecache, or Ubercache.

_________________
\"There are two kinds of hunting: ordinary hunting and grouse hunting.\"
-Aldo Leopold, A sand county Almanac


Brian
Grousetales at wi<dash>geocaching{dot}com 
View user's profile Send private message
Team B Squared
WGA Friend



Joined: 2005-11-20
Posts: 257
Location: Bark River, MI

PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:16 am Reply with quote Back to top

rogheff wrote:

Never bury a cache. A cache is considered buried if it must be dug up by hand or by tool. Placing rocks, bark, logs etc. over a cache is not considered burial, nor is placing a cache into a naturally occurring crevice or hole. If a shovel, trowel, or other pointy object is used to dig to hide or find a cache, it's not appropriate.

While GC.com does not approve buried caches, other websites may not have such restrictions. Perhaps a Buried Treasure cache would be an exciting adventure.


I know I am out of state, but this statement jumped out at me right away. From the outside looking in it seems that the WGA is really trying hard to establish good working relationships with the WI dnr and other parks systems around the state.

I know that in Michigan, one of the major problems park systems initially have when approached is that they don't want anyone digging in their parks, and for some reason when people hear about geocaching, they immediately think "buried treasure". It seems to me that if the WGA were to advertise on their website that it was ok to dig to place or hunt caches (buried treasure) that it would be counter-productive to what the WGA is trying to accomplish. The stricter guidelines of gc.com are a definite benefit when trying to work with parks systems.

I do not feel that gc.com is the end all, be all of cache websites, but in this instance it is probably best to advertise their guidelines.

_________________
"Show me a man who is a good loser, and I will show you a man who is playing golf with his boss."
--Jim Murray
[img]http://img.geocaching.com/stats/img.aspx?txt=Brian,+Lynn,+and+CJ&uid=0841d9ba-2750-42ac-a7c9-50cf6c75fa6c&bg=2[/img] 
View user's profile Send private message
kbraband
WGA Historian



Joined: 2002-02-19
Posts: 2461
Location: Mequon, WI US

PostPosted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 11:21 am Reply with quote Back to top

cheezehead wrote:
OK, Last time I going to post cuz it was not my intention to derail the subject but ask any "Up Northerner" and they would say unofficial line would be Hwy 8.


"Any"? That's a pretty wide net to cast. I bet I could find some residents of Cornucopia who enjoy looking down their noses at those "southies" from Hayward Very Happy Here in SE Wisconsin, we don't look down our noses at those who live "up north" but we do enjoy making fun of flatlanders from Illinois. My point is that, instead of appreciating how much we have in common, many people like to differentiate themselves from others based on arbitrary boundaries.
 
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
rogheff
WGA Member



Joined: 2005-11-05
Posts: 348
Location: N42* ish x W87* ish

PostPosted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:03 am Reply with quote Back to top

Sorry for my absence, I was on a Spring Break Camping trip to Mammoth Cave (a trip I highly recommend BTW). Interestingly somehow related to this discussion, I spent a lot of time Terracaching while I was there. First time I went on a long trip and didn't seek any Groundspeak caches.

I like the simple point that Buy_the_tie made about posting the links to the geocaching websites and the statement that each has it's own set of rules.

The buried cache idea, to clarify, would have to be on the hider's own property or would have to have specific permission. As a Shrubber, I know full well the problems that can occur with buried power, phone and cable lines. Digger's Hotline would have to be called to provide me proof of a safe digging radius before I would ever stick a shovel in the ground. I just think it would be fun.

The 528' rule that Groundspeak uses, was great back in 2000 when there was only a handful of caches snagging the prime hiding spots. Let's face it, once the 20 really interesting spots in my area have a cache, we're done placing caches if that's the only reason to place a one. I've had my hand slapped multiple times because I was 480', or 510', or 435' from another cache. Even if you're looking for Rogheff caches, 435' is plenty of room. If there's an obvious physical barrier (a uncrossable river, a marina, a highway, etc) why can't they be closer?

Big, lumbering multi caches and incredibly difficult puzzle caches create another problem. I have personally had to struggle for hours to solve a puzzle cache (that I really didn't want to HAVE to hunt) in order to place a cache of my own. I also have had to find (via the force and a bunch of dumb luck and much searching) a puzzle cache that I couldn't solve in order to place a cache. Trudging along to find every point of a huge multi just to locate each leg of a cache (again, that I didn't want to hunt) is silly.

I can hear the replies, "Rogheff, you don't HAVE to place a cache here, place it somewhere else." When I find the perfect hiding spot that fits my cache, this becomes a necessary task. With very few exceptions, I'm always 350'+away from those locations with my hide.

_________________
[url]www.rogheffgeocaching.homestead.com[/url]Rogheff's geocaching website

[url]www.diamondwillow.homestead.com[/url] Rogheff's Hiking Stick website
 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
marc_54140
WGA Member



Joined: 2004-01-28
Posts: 2631
Location: Little Chute

PostPosted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:10 am Reply with quote Back to top

It is always possible to e-mail a cache owner for assistance.

'I want to place a cache in X but I do not know the final for your puzzle in the area. Could you help?'

'I have found a really great place for a cache. However, it is within 528 feet on your X cache. Is there a possibility you would move or archive your cache?'

etc.......
 
View user's profile Send private message
labrat_wr
WGA Vice-President
WGA Vice-President



Joined: 2007-05-19
Posts: 6061
Location: The Wildside

PostPosted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 8:09 pm Reply with quote Back to top

cheezehead wrote:
The distance is actually 525 feet or .10 of a mile. Cache saturation is the reason.


This rule was also clarified for me in a recent response to a question regarding waypoints within a multicache:

Quote:
OK, first of all, the 528 foot distance requirement does NOT apply to stages within the same cache. You can put them as close together as you like, but just make sure they are far enough apart so that people won't find the stages out of order. You do have to maintain 528 feet from all OTHER caches for all your waypoints. Finally, don't think you have to avoid "monopolizing real estate". You have just as much right to place your multi as someone else has to place their guardrail cache
.

_________________
Operor vel Operor Non , Illic Est Haud Tendo

All forum posts are the thoughts and opinions of the poster and do not necessarily reflect the thoughts and opinions of the WGA Board of Directors 
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:       
Post new topic   Reply to topic

View next topic
View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001-2008 phpBB Group
:: Theme & Graphics by Daz :: Ported for PHP-Nuke by nukemods.com ::
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
 
Forums ©
 
Legal Notice | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Parental Consent Form | contact | Comments ]

All content © 2013 Wisconsin Geocaching Association, except comments and forum entries which are property of their posters.

The Groundspeak Geocaching Logo is a registered trademark of Groundspeak, Inc. Used with permission.
 


Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the WGA Terms of Use


Distributed by Raven PHP Scripts
New code written and maintained by the RavenNuke™ TEAM


(Original PHP-Nuke Code Copyright © 2004 by Francisco Burzi)
Page Generation: 0.15 Seconds

:: fisubice phpbb2 style by Daz :: PHP-Nuke theme by www.nukemods.com ::
:: fisubice Theme Recoded To 100% W3C CSS & HTML 4.01 Transitional & XHTML 1.0 Transitional Compliance by RavenNuke™ TEAM ::

:: W3C CSS Compliance Validation :: W3C HTML 4.01 Transitional Compliance Validation :: W3C XHTML 1.0 Transitional Compliance Validation ::