[Team Deejay]

@tyedyeskyguy wrote:

So, now I have to ask this question. My Great Aunt passed this weekend, and I’m thinking of making a memorial cache.

Her gravestone is going to have a bronze flower vase built into it, that is removable. You know, the ones that showed up in the news recently because they were being stolen to recycle. I’m trying to think of a way to attach a small micro to this vase so that it won’t be in the way for myself and family members when we want to use the vase. If this works out, I may place more because all of my family buried in this cemetery, have this style of marker.

My question is, is a cache like this acceptable? My family thinks it’s a great idea, so permission from us is not an issue. But, will it be an issue with GC.com? And do I need permission from the cemetery?

BTW I won’t be placing this cache until fall or next spring for obvious reasons.

Ummm, please don’t do this. Geocaches in cemeteries should not be placed on or near grave markers. Use the edges of the cemetery and try to make inconspicuous placements. Certain people are very offended by the concept of “playing a game” in a cemetery, so try to keep the containers simple and easy to find, away from the graves.

[Team Deejay]

Nice post, Zuma. I would add (and correct me if I am wrong, so I can edit this) that these opinions/proposals apply to WGA sanctioned events only. Non-WGA events, i.e. every event in the state except the campout and picnic, would still be free to allow or not allow logging of temps as the event holder sees fit. I am sure there will still be many “find a bunch of temps” type of events in the state. Since people seem to like temp caches as part of their events (whether they log them or not), I would expect that to continue. I personally don’t log temps, but I enjoy finding them when attending events.

As far as posting permanent caches for events, WGA or otherwise, your state reviewers are very supportive of this and enjoy working with the event holders to get everything released at the proper time. In fact, someone is doing that right now for an upcoming event. Feel free to contact WGA3 or me if you are planning a mass release of caches for an event, so that we are ready for it and don’t accidentally publish one before its time. We now have a new tool where we can publish a whole bunch of caches with just a couple clicks of the mouse, so this is much less work than it used to be. Just get the listings in early and don’t forget your DNR notification forms!

[Team Deejay]

@Cachelovskys wrote:

As talked about it another thread…here would be the camo version of my previous entry. It would be used so that the WGA sticker could be placed on camoed caches. 😀

If you want to see this compared to my original entry, just look back to the first posting earlier in this tread.

Oooh, I like it, but can you make the state outline a little bit heavier line? It kind of washes out in the camo. The letters are actually fine, just the outline.

[Team Deejay]

Now I’ve voted twice today. They may make me an honorary citizen of Chicago.

[Team Deejay]

@Lostby7 wrote:

so what is the point of platbooks in the age of GPS?

Wrong question! The question is “What is the point of platbooks in the age of GIS websites?” The answer is that mobile computing is not yet widespread enough to allow everyone to access the websites on the road. Ten years from now, I expect you won’t be able to get platbooks for most places.

[Team Deejay]

Mosquitoes, ticks, deerflies, mud, flooding, rain, blazing heat….bring it all on! Anything but snow!

[Team Deejay]

@-cheeto- wrote:

Also I wish that the Reviewers would not allow posting the coordinates to the entrance and calling it a Multi. I beleive that if it’s classified as a multi, the posted coordinates should be the Marker that you are required to find. Otherwise to me it should be posted as type Unknown. Especially, when the marker you are trying to find is described like marc describes them 🙂 Like “find anna” and there are a handful of markers with anna on them.

The current reviewers require that multicaches start at the listed, accurate coordinates. Basically, if you provide coordinates to the gravestone for the information, you can either call this a multi or a mystery, as it qualifies as both. If you just provide coordinates to the general area, this is NOT a multi and cannot be listed as such. Of course, there are many caches out there now which are incorrectly labeled, as Groundspeak was not clear on this guideline in the past. If anyone needs help changing their cache type, just drop me a line.

To summarize, a multicache must start at its listed coordinates. A mystery cache can just get you to the general area, as long as somewhere along the way, you get a set of coordinates to search using your GPS. If you never get a set of coordinates (or a bearing and distance from a known point), not matter how clear or obtuse your directions are, this is NOT a geocache and needs to be listed on letterboxing.org.

[Team Deejay]

I guess I don’t have any issues with taking information off of monuments. After all, the whole point of placing a memorial in a public cemetery is for people to visit and reflect on the person. Reading information off a stone is in no way disrespectful.

On the other hand, placing a cache container in close proximity to stones is not a good idea. There is a cache in Caledonia where you need to straddle a grave marker to find a cache hidden in a nearby tree. This is really too close.

[Team Deejay]

Pedestrian bridges and tunnels, bicycle bridges and tunnels, snowmobile bridges, fishing piers, boat docks (they kind of look like a bridge) are all ok. The logic is a) the DOT doesn’t inspect pedestrian bridges (apparently walking is not “transportation”.) and b) nobody expects terrorists to blow up pedestrian bridges (just a waste of good dynamite, I think). Now, if you pick the pedestrian bridge leading to the airport, well, this isn’t going to work.

Culverts are generally ok for ditches and small creeks, but I did have someone once try to convince me that the Highway 41 bridge over the Fox River at Oshkosh was a culvert, not a bridge. As you might guess, he didn’t win this argument.

[Team Deejay]

With regard to virtual stages at “terrorist targets”, the idea is to consider how people hunting geocaches would be perceived by neighbors and other observers.

If you are taking info off a historical marker near a dam, nobody is going to be suspicious about that. If you require that someone slide down the dam and swim underwater to read a number below the surface, well, that might draw some unwanted attention.

If you have someone drive through an airport to record the speed limit, that might be ok. If you have someone crawl into the baggage claim area to see how many turns are on the conveyors, well, I’m not bailing you out of jail. Its basically common sense.

Note that bridges are a special case, as not only are they considered a terrorist target, but we have also been asked by the DOT to not place anything on bridges due to inspection requirements. Plus, there have already been a handful of incidents where people were detained while hunting caches hidden on bridge structures, when they were suspected to be planting a bomb. An easily accessible plaque on a bridge would be ok as a virtual stage, however, if it was located in an area frequented by pedestrian traffic. Just consider how your finders will be perceived when retrieving the information.

[Team Deejay]

I’m not. In today’s high speed economy, everything gets rushed to market. If you choose to be an early adopter for any kind of technology product, you are basically volunteering to be a beta tester. Additionally, you can be sure that when your buddy buys the same item 6 months later, the price will be at least 25% lower with most of the bugs worked out. For every Iphone launch, there are 100 Windows Vista launches.

And by the way, my issue was not with the bugs (as I would wait until they were fixed), but the fact that for most of the stuff I do with my GPSr, it is not as good as the unit I have now. To me, the only advantages are the more advanced maps displays and Wherigo functionality, neither of which is worth slower routing, a dimmer display, the inability to delete waypoints in the field, or the inability to show multiple waypoints on the maps. I’ll stick with my old reliable 60CX with all the scratches.

[Team Deejay]

Wow! That webpage convinced me that this unit would not be an improvement over my current setup. Thanks for the link!

[Team Deejay]

Oh and the exception for earthcaches, virtual stages, etc, was in response to player requests. Only physical stages are subject to proximity.

[Team Deejay]

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.

[Team Deejay]

Track functionality (to and from the unit) is supported on the 7xx, 8xx, and 5000 series Nuvi units. I suppose Garmin thinks this is something that wouldn’t be used by the average automotive users.

[Author]

Posts