Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,621 through 1,635 (of 1,903 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Winter caching #1767207

    I have to echo Ruth’s sentiments. Caching in snow will almost certainly increase the number of your no finds, but it makes the ones you do find more special. You will get much better exercise, trudging through the snow drifts, and it makes even the most mundane micros a challenge. I personally prefer to hunt forest caches in the winter (less tree cover problems) and also prefer winter for the longer hikes (easier to control body temperature and no bugs, but sometimes your water freezes). Right after a big snowfall, you might find parking to be a bit of a challenge, as most of the places we go are not exactly high priority for snow removal. Usually I just use this as an excuse for a longer hike.

    Some hints:

    • Carry a stick, even if you don’t normally use one. Its very useful for poking through the snow.
    • Use portable handwarmers on your GPS to extend battery life when the temp is below 20
    • A small shovel or trowel can be useful.
    • Avoid micros that appear to be ground hides. (Actually a good idea at all times)
    • Most importantly, take a buddy and let someone know where you are going. If you get hurt by yourself and fall into a snow drift, no one will find you until first thaw.
    • Skiing or snowshoeing is a good method of transport when the big snows hit.

    Have fun!

    in reply to: My Old Palm seems to have bit the dust! #1767157

    The M100 cradle is considerably different than the M500 cradle, as you would expect, given that M500 has rechargeable batteries and charges through the sync cable, which the M100 is on AAA batteries (I think this one was produced in 1996). If you think you can get it to work, we could exchange it at the next event or the next time I’m in south central Wisconsin or you are in SE Wisconsin. Whatcha think?

    in reply to: New game starting Sat from Caching Place #1766927

    Oh, and can you imagine the complaints from Mr. Lostby7 if his case selection screen was like this (Pretty ugly, eh?):

    I’m hoping to get 42, 34, 26 and 14 for my last four picks so that I can set the record for the worst luck.

    in reply to: Garmin GPSMap 60 CSx #1767105

    Hmmm, I’m guessing that info is out of date, since I use 20 characters for my waypoint names (determined the limit by trial and error). I don’t have my GPS with me to count how many are in the comments, but I think its 40 (will post later).

    Just how permanent are the POIs? Can you delete them with the POI loader or not at all? I suppose you could always reformat the chip, but thats a little drastic I think.

    in reply to: The Tapps rocks to his 2,400th find! #1767147

    Woohoo! Great job!

    in reply to: Garmin GPSMap 60 CSx #1767102

    Hogrod, I only seem to be able to use 20 character waypoint names for Waypoints. Do POIs allow for longer names?

    in reply to: New game starting Sat from Caching Place #1766926

    @Lostby7 wrote:

    Let’s face it driving 50 miles one way twice to DNF a game requirement can really make one want to throw in the towel.

    I’m just trying to figure out what requirement would make you drive 50 miles. 😆 (says the guy with logs in Indianapolis, Chicago, Fox Lake, Racine, Franklin, Greendale, Kenosha, Eagle, Waukesha…..)

    in reply to: 3Hawks nab #400 at The Phoenix #1767133

    Nice job!

    in reply to: Bushwhacking Queen Breaks 5000!! #1767110

    Amazing job! Congratulations on your accomplishment. (Think you can make 10000 by the end of the year? Better hurry!)

    in reply to: Cache Clash Rash #1767075

    Also, my understanding is that virtual caches and virtual waypoints (where no actual container is present) are generally not covered by the cache proximity rule. The idea of the rule is to prevent someone from accidentally finding the wrong cache container. Its not likely that someone will mistake a tombstone or phone booth for a cache container. Here is a link

    http://wi-geocaching.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1072&highlight=

    On a related note, I had the pleasure of working with a relatively new cacher to try and “fix” one of these problem caches. His cache was too close to a mystery cache (no, it wasn’t one of mine) where the bogus coordinates were around 0.75 miles away, so he didn’t think to check it. To make matters worse, he had used a similar hiding technique as the existing cache, and both caches had provided hints describing the technique. When I explained to him that there were already 5 caches in the particular park and 5 more caches within a mile, he decided the park didn’t need another cache and moved on. Problem solved, but…….

    I was under the impression that if the “additional waypoints” feature was used, the approvers could see immediately that there was a conflict. I have good reason to believe that, at least in this one instance, that the additional waypoint was specified (or at least it should have been). I’m sure most of the people who post here have been diligent in adding these waypoints to their mystery and multi caches. Has the approval process been modified to check these additional waypoints yet? If not, what is the timeline on this?

    in reply to: Norweiganbird sings her way to 200 #1767087

    Woohoo! Nice work!

    in reply to: New game starting Sat from Caching Place #1766896

    Oops, posted to the wrong forum!

    in reply to: Poll: Revisit prohibition of geocaches in SNAs? #1767058

    re: NSLP’s comment, I think we can all agree that there are certain areas where there is an expressed desire to keep visits to a minimum, and in those areas, geocaching is not appropriate. I would even go farther and state that allowing hiking or canoeing is not enough to suggest geocaching is acceptable by default. I think it is reasonable to assume that, if you are only allowed to hike or paddle in, the number of visits will be minimal. On the other hand, SNAs where snowmobiling, biking, climbing, skiing, motorized boating, hunting, fishing, or trapping are allowed should be open to geocaching, as well as those that actually have roads running through them. These other activities are more attractive to the general population and are allowed with the purpose of drawing visitors to the SNAs. And its pretty hard to argue that geocaching is more disruptive than driving an automobile through the area.

    in reply to: Not good #1766994

    My experience is similar in the wildlife areas. While the DNR seems really interested in what happens in the Parks/Rec Areas, the Wildlife areas don’t seem to be a priority for them.

    in reply to: Waukesha area #1741696

    Both Commander’s and Brian’s statements are true, but you should understand that, with several exceptions, the caches in the city of Waukesha tend to be of the urban micro variety or the short walk to an tupperware/ammo box in a city park variety. Nothing wrong with either of these. If you want numbers, I can’t think of a better place to cache than Waukesha, other than maybe Chicago. You will be surprised at the high density of caches in the city.

    If you prefer hiking caches and have transportation, there are some great hides close by. Here’s a list of my favorites.

    Snake Bite and Egyptian Magician – In Minooka Park
    Glow In the Dark and Glow In the Dark II – Also in Minooka Park, night cache only
    Dew It For Fun, A Little Bit of Paradise, Survival in a Can, Keebler Vacation Home, Ottawa Panorama, Its Like…The Hilliest – In the Kettle Moraine (its closer than you think)
    Vernon Marsh Cache – In Vernon Marsh near Mukwonago

    And not to be missed (although not a hiking cache)
    One Degree of Separation – Pharmteam (in North Prairie)

    Have fun!

Viewing 15 posts - 1,621 through 1,635 (of 1,903 total)