Appreciation Event

Mary and I had a great time at the IowaAdmin appreciation event last Saturday. As I told Bucknuts, the event organizer, I'm having a hard time getting my hats to fit my head as a result of all the attention. Geocachers are the ones who make this hobby so much fun. I'm just glad to have a role that lets me be so involved with the activity and which gives me the opportunity to correspond and meet so many fun people. Here's a video from Team Gamsci (I didn't realize how boring a speaker I can be.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlBEgETgWgI
And here are a few photos from the event.

I received the following email this week:

Hiya,
I can't find a contact button on your blog, go figure.
I was wondering if you could post some photos on your blog of what the "reviewer interface" looks like and what all that cache reviewers do from when they get the cache to when they click the publish button. 

And here's my response: 

Thanks for your inquiry. Unfortunately, I can't share the type of information you're asking for. Groundspeak does not want its volunteer reviewers to reveal information about the reviewing web pages. I think it may be out of concern that the system might get hacked or otherwise abused. I can tell you that when a new cache is submitted, I look to make sure it complies with all the guidelines as published at geocaching.com, such as minimum distance from existing geocaches, that the geocacher lives close enough to the cache to maintain the cache or has indicated his/plan for regular maintenance, and has obtained permission when necessary (such as on Iowa DNR-managed land). If there are specific questions you have, let me know and I will answer those that I can.

Ken
IowaAdmin
volunteer reviewer

Iowa geocacher busterbabes in Groundspeak video

Congratulations to Iowa geocacher busterbabes for her appearance in Groundspeak's Lost & Found Celebration video at Groundspeak headquarters in Seattle. Very nicely done. It looks like it was a great event.
Did any other Iowa geocachers make the trip out there?

Door prizes

To encourage some of you who may be sitting on the fence about attending the geocaching get-together this Saturday in Des Moines, I'll be bringing some geocoins to give away as door prizes.

A reviewer appreciation meet & greet in Des Moines

Geocacher bucknuts has organized a Reviewer Appreciation Day for July 17 in Des Moines at Boston's pizza place on University. I think this event was inspired by one held in Georgia in May, which was attended by three of my fellow reviewers. I'm very flattered that bucknuts would want to do this, and I'm even more honored that some geocachers have already signed up to attend. I may even convince my wife to attend. It should be a fun event. I hope to see you there!

Jones County geocaching policy and permit form

Jones County now has a geocaching policy, apparently since the beginning of 2009. So if you are placing a geocache there, you'll first need to obtain the permit from Jones County. Here's a link to the form. I also added this link in my list in the right column of this blog. My thanks to geocacher BlueDuece for drawing this to my attention.

Another Okoboji weekend

It's Memorial Day weekend so that means we're at Okoboji for the 24th consecutive year. While here, my wifi coverage is weak so don't expect at lot of caches to get published this weekend. I'll get caught up as the week progresses.

A great 10 years of geocaching event

I enjoyed my time at GC22TB1 10 Years! Cedar Rapids Area this past Saturday. I know everyone says this about geocaching events, but it truly is fun to put faces with the names that you see online. The group hike in the woods to find a couple of geocaches that afternoon was also a lot of fun. Thanks for Super Goober for organizing it and inviting me to tag along. Here are a few photos from the day.

Cache permanence: A lesson learned?

An interesting situation arose today that I want to write about because it highlights the section of the geocaching.com guidelines that deals with "cache permanence." I'm not going to name the cache owner because I don't want to embarrass anyone, but a cache was submitted yesterday for the purpose of giving grade schoolers a chance to try geocaching at their school.

First, let me explain that I have reviewed and approved other caches that are placed on school property. (I've found a few, too.) As long as the cache owner states that the cache is placed with the knowledge and permission of school officials, that's normally enough to get the cache approved -- even though it's possible that not every teacher, school administrator or facilities employee will be made aware of the geocache. As a result, geocachers may look suspicious and may be questioned if they're seen lurking around a school building during school hours, so it's up to each geocacher to decide if he or she wants to look for that particular cache.

Now, back to the cache in question. It was placed just outside the doors of an elementary school building by a teacher at the school. But what I did not know was that the teacher intended to leave the cache in place for just one day so his or her students could search for it and, in the process, learn about geocaching and how to use a GPS receiver. An admirable goal, to be sure. Teachers who make the extra effort to make school interesting and fun should be commended, and I do commend this teacher. However, the problem in this case is about cache permanence. Geocaches can't be listed on geocaching.com if the intent is to leave them in place for just one day. Quoting from the guidelines:

Cache Permanence

When you report a cache on the Geocaching.com web site, geocachers should (and will) expect the cache to be there for a realistic and extended period of time. Therefore, caches that have the goal to move ("traveling caches"), or temporary caches (caches hidden for less than 3 months or for events) most likely will not be published. If you wish to hide caches for an event, bring printouts to the event and hand them out there.
We realize that it is possible that a planned long-term cache occasionally becomes finite because of concerns with the environment, missing or plundered caches, or the owner’s decision to remove the cache for other valid reasons. Please do your best to research fully, hide wisely, and maintain properly for a long cache life.

So even though I didn't want to put a damper on this fun class project, I archived the cache this morning -- the very day that it was supposed to be in place for the students. I haven't heard for sure, but I assume the teacher was still able to conduct the geocaching demonstration with the kids, only without the element of looking up the coordinates on Geocaching.com.

Along the way, in addition to learning about navigation satellites and using a GPSR, my hope is that another valuable lesson was also imparted to the students. About reading directions.

Upcoming events

I have two events on my calendar that I'm looking forward to attending this spring and summer. Well, more than two actually, but these two are public events that other geocachers may be interested in as well. The first is

10 Years!: Cedar Rapids area, Iowa

on May 1. In case you haven't heard, geocachers around the world are hosting events to commemorate the 10th anniversary of geocaching. 

The other event happens on August 21 in the Quad Cities: 

Floatzilla 

Mary and I are planning to paddle the "advanced" route, which will be 9 miles from Ben Butterworth Parkway, Moline, to Rock Island's Lake Potter.

Will we see you at one of these events?

IGO's system to recommend caches for archiving

Back in the December, bucknuts (Dale), a member of the Iowa Geoachers Organization (IGO) board asked me my thoughts about working with IGO to get caches archived that may have passed their useful lives because the owners are no longer maintaining them. We agreed to give it a try. The IGO system for calling such caches to my attention has been in place for about a month. So far it's been working well, although there has been some questions and discussions about it among Iowa geocachers. To shed more light on the system, I'm posting (with permission) an email I received from Rlowtek (John), who raised valid concerns about the IGO system, followed by my response.

Ken, 

I have exchanged messages with the President of IGO over my concerns with the new IGO cache “Tagging” process.  Below I have provided my thoughts and would like to know your opinion and how in practice you use this process.

I believe this will not enhance geocaching (to the contrary) and that a proper, open method already exists to accomplish the desired result. In effect, this creates two parallel systems. Publicly, you, the administrator or other Groundspeak volunteer, warns the owner and they generally have 30 days.  The open system, governed by geocaching.com/Groundspeak, provides if someone publicly abuses the “Needs Maintenance” or “Needs Archived” logging,  the system will be self-correcting.  However, the underground, anonymous system, is not self-correcting and is without benefit of public exposure to the point of not requiring the "tagger" to have personally posted a "Needs Archived" log. Further, it appears that archiving is instantaneous.

While I share everyone’s frustration with caches that are not maintained, I believe this “cure” is worse than the disease. It will result in accusations, retaliations and misunderstandings. If one is concerned about caches needing justified attention – use the “Needs Maintenance” or “Needs Archived” logs. The IGO tagging will be influenced by individual personal bias and opinions of what geocaching is supposed to be – bias that we all carry. Even with the purest of intentions, hard feelings will be the result. 

I believe we have enough squabbles and misunderstandings in the caching community. We simply do not need more fuel for the fire. While at times we all feel the need to be the geo-police, it is ill-advised to give in to the temptation. I further submit there is a better system already in place that is reasonably impartial and is certainly in the open.

RLowtek/John

My response:

John,
    Thanks for your feedback.
    A few responses...
    First of all, archiving a cache is not a death sentence for a cache.
It's simply another method to take it off the books until the owner decides to do something about the DNFs, Needs Maintenance, or SBA logs. If, after archiving, the owner truly wants to keep the cache going, he or she needs to be prompt about getting it fixed before another cache takes its place. In most cases it can be brought back to life with a simple email to me explaining that it has been maintained and is ready to be unarchived.
    Second, I agree with you that there is already a system in place for dealing with caches that need attention. I don't view the IGO tagging process as a replacement for the geocaching.com system of logs. Rather, it's a useful supplement to that system because it gives the elected organization leaders a way to notify me about caches they feel need to be maintained. I view it as a useful aid to help me monitor caches that may be in need of TLC.
    Regarding whether there was a Needs Archived log on a cache before it is archived, I agreed that there should be.  In fact, I pointed this out to the IGO board -- requesting that they not forward to me requests for archiving unless there has been a SBA log posted on it for a reasonable amount of time -- say two weeks -- without a response from the cache owner.
    I hope this clears up the situation and the current interaction I have with IGO about its tagging system and how I respond to it.

Ken
IowaAdmin
volunteer reviewer

Remember locationless caches? They're still no longer allowed.

Here's email I received today, followed by my response. (Name withheld)

Is there any way that you would publish a mystery/puzzle cache without there being an actual container? The whole point would be to get pictures of Cachers from around the world without them having to travel to the actual cache. The one that I want to put out would be to get people to take a picture with there favorite rock or rock formation, and post it in there log, and then it would count as a find.  So it would be sort of like a virtual or locationless earth cache, but it would be posted as a mystery cache.
Hope to hear from you soon.

Thanks for your email. Sorry to say that this type of cache cannot be published on geocaching.com. There has to be a physical cache for people to find and a log for them to sign, as per the guidelines. I'm not sure how
long you have been geocaching, but a few years ago there was a category of geocaches called "locationless", which the cache you describe would fit into. The cache owner would stipulate what the requirement was to log a find: see a yellow Jeep, find a Kent Feed sign, etc., and then post the coordinates where you saw it. Those cache types are no longer allowed to be listed on geocaching.com.

Time to catch up on SBAs

To those of you who have posted SBA (Should Be Archived) logs lately, help is on the way. (Actually, to be precise, the log type is now called "Needs Archived") Expect to see action within the next few days to address many of those inactive disabled caches across the state. Owners of caches that may be in need of maintenance can expect to receive a note from fellow reviewer Nomex, who has graciously agreed to lend me a hand with this task.

A cold weekend in Iowa

We made it to Cherokee this past weekend and enjoyed a nice time with many of our relatives. However, we didn't do any geocaching -- it was just too darn cold and there was too much snow on the ground to spend time rooting around for geocaches. Friday night and early Saturday it got down to -24F. As we were driving home Saturday afternoon it was still only -12F. Just after 4 p.m. Saturday as we were driving on Hwy 20, we came upon the scene of a single car accident. A car had left the 4-lane roadway and rolled over several times in the median. It looked like no one could have survived, but I read online that there were three people in the car and they all survived. We had stopped for gas just a mile or two before arriving at the accident scene and I saw a state trooper whiz by while I was stopped at the gas station. It made me think what might have happened to us if we would not have stopped for gas and had been near the other car when it blew a tire. It's disheartening to see the chances some people take when they're driving without ever thinking about the consequences to themselves, their passengers or people in other vehicles.

To Grandma's house we go

We were hoping to make the drive to Grandma's house in Cherokee for Christmas but the snowstorm forced us to change our plans. The new plan is to go to Cherokee this weekend. Maybe we'll be able to find some Tonedog52 or Wonder Boy caches if we have time between family activities.

A nice Christmas thank-you

Here's an e-mail I received a few minutes ago. It's the nice notes and comments from geocachers I meet in person that make it all worthwhile.

We just wanted to thank you for all the time and effort you give so that we can put out and hunt caches. It is amazing how many you have approved this past year. We just started geocaching in June and are having such fun as a family. We appreciate all you do and we know we couldn't do it with out you. THANK YOU!
Merry Christmas to you and your family!

Who's not getting my vote for cachers of the month

File this one under the category of "Ya Think?"
Here's the cache they were going for: New Phila Ballfields in Ohio.
And here's the result, a story in their local newspaper:
Headline: Shortcut may cost geocachers

The DARPA balloon project

In case you haven't been following what's going on at Groundspeak today: http://www.10balloonies.com/  Looks like they're closing in on all 10 balloons, thanks to the nationwide network of geocachers.

Peak placement season seems to be over

It was a busy summer for new geocache placements in Iowa. Now that the leaves are nearly all down and the temperatures have dipped, the pace has definitely slowed, which it does every year about this time. Instead of opening my browser and seeing a queue of 20 to 40 new caches on weekend mornings, this morning there were only four... so far. However, if this year follows form, there will be a mini-spike of new caches just after the holidays when new GPSRs are doled out as Christmas gifts. By the way, my wife was at Garmin headquarters near Kansas City this past week (on business) and mentioned to them that her husband is a geocacher. They told her I should stop in sometime and meet with their geocaching team. Evidently Garmin has a designated team assigned to the geocaching market, which only makes sense considering how many GPS units must get purchased every year primarily for geocaching.

"Team" finds or "ghost" logs? What do you think?

This week two different cache owners wrote to me to ask my advice/opinion about how to respond when a geocacher posts a "find" on their cache page but did not sign the log. The first situation (messages are posted below with permission from the cache owner; names changed to protect identities) involves members of a geocaching "team" who all log a find even though only one of them is present at the cache. Here's the message I received:

Hello Ken,
You have been a wealth of information to me lately and because of that, I have a semi-hypothetical question for a real-life situation and how our geocaching guidelines apply to it....

Let's say you and I are good geocaching friends and we call ourselves "GeoPair". So maybe I go out and make a find today (by myself) and sign the log as "GeoPair". I let you know I found it, and BOTH OF US log a find. But since GeoPair is just a pseudonym for our partnership, we have to log our find individually using our separate usernames on geocaching.com. The owner of the cache does a log check and finds GeoPair signed the log, but you and I both posted finds. Perhaps it is well known that you and I together are "GeoPair", perhaps not. The general guideline is once you've signed the physical log, you can post the find on the internet. In this situation is it allowable for both of us to log a find? Is it acceptable (without repercussion) for the owner to delete both of our logs (due to the "bogus" nature of the logs)?

I ask these questions because I am aware of a situation that exactly mirrors my description of this hypothetical situation. What are the exact "rules" that apply here? If I had made this "find" today I could have just as easily signed my name and "forged" your name and the owner probably wouldn't/couldn't know the difference. I assure you, I am NOT doing this. I am aware of another geocacher that IS doing this (signing a pseudonym and/or signing for others). I am just looking for clarification of our geocaching guidelines and options/remedies for a situation such as this. I am relatively new to geocaching, but I believe in and insist on maintaining the integrity of this sport.

I would appreciate your insight and opinion regarding this matter. Thank you!

And here's my response...

I appreciate your efforts to protect the integrity of geocaching, but the geocaching logs are sometimes a mysterious place where one person's viewpoint conflicts with the next person's. As a volunteer reviewer, I have been instructed time and time again that reviewers are not the log police, so we shouldn't be editing or deleting logs on caches (other than those we own) unless a log violates terms of agreement that all geocachers "signed" when they created their account on geocaching.com.

Note: The rest of this email is my personal opinion and not necessarily that of geocaching.com. My personal opinion -- and I believe the widespread opinion of many long-time geocachers -- is that if you are not physically present for a find, you shouldn't claim it as a find.

In additon to my IowaAdmin account (which I rarely use to log finds), I have an account that I use when I cache hunt on my own and a third account that my wife and I use when we geocache together. Having said that, I know of many couples (usually husband and wife) who have just one account and log all their finds there regardless of whether they were both present. If a single account is shared by a nuclear family, there's seems to be widespread agreement among geocachers that it's OK for family members to log a find even if a spouse or kids were not present. To each his/her own.

Regarding the situation you describe, the cache owner IS the cache police for his/her own cache. I believe the cache owner is justified in deleting any logs he/she truly feels are not legitimate. Like any situation where there may be a difference of opinion, all actions by the cache owner should be done with tactful courtesy and not out of spite or nastiness. The cache owner should clearly explain why he or she is taking the action, such as deleting a log, and give the geocacher a chance to respond or revise the log. If the geocacher doesn't like the outcome, he/she can choose not to search for any more caches owned by that particular cache owner. But there's no need for public shouting matches about it. Just accept it and move on.

I hope this helps.

So what do you think?

Stats a lot of caches!

It's time once again for some stats about geocaches.

• I reviewed 3,053 new geocaches during the past year -- roughly from September 2008 through August 2009. All of these were in Iowa. That comes to an average of 8.36 caches reviewed per day.
• Worldwide, 391,742 new geocaches were reviewed during the past year.
• In the United States, 193,054 new geocaches were reviewed during the past year.
• Iowa now has 7,949 active geocaches (including event caches but not including EarthCaches) listed on geocaching.com.
• Worldwide, there are now 912,967 active geocaches.

What's your guess for the exact date that we'll hit 1 million?

Cemetery caches - what's the policy?

If you're a regular reader of the forums at geocaching.com, you may have noticed discussion about an update to the guidelines that mentions caches hidden in cemeteries. The discussion from Groundspeak is summarized in this posting from MissJenn. In a nutshell, the guidelines now include cemeteries as areas where geocaches might not be allowed. Quoting from the guidelines: "Caches placed in areas which are highly sensitive to the extra traffic that would be caused by vehicles and humans (examples may include archaeological or historic sites or cemeteries)." (Boldface added by me.) MissJenn's posting says, in part, "This is why we have local experts (your reviewers) who know the deal in their respective territories. They know the right thing to do. They have been doing that and they’ll continue to do the same."

My standard operating procedure for cemetery caches remains what it has been for several years. When a cache is submitted that is inside a cemetery in Iowa, I temporarily disable the cache and send this note to the cache owner:

"This cache appears to be in a cemetery. Because of complaints about geocachers
playing 'games' in cemeteries across the country, I need to make sure you
received permission from the cemetery owners or caretaker before this is listed.
Also, the cache needs to be placed away from graves so it doesn't upset mourners
who may accidentally find it or see geocachers in the cemetary. Please reply by
posting in a reviewer note the name and contact information of the person who
granted permission for this cache and then re-enable the cache so it reappears
in my review queue. If you don't plan to seek permission, please archive
the listing and remove the cache. Thanks for your understanding."

Therefore, if you are planning to place a cache in a cemetery in Iowa, you'll need to seek permission. Once you receive permission, please be sure to include that information somewhere on the cache page, either in a reviewer note or in the short or long description.

Occasionally, a cache owner will submit a new geocache and state that it is just outside of the cemetery. It happened just this morning. In those cases, I have not been asking the cache owner to seek permission. However, if the cache is hidden on the gate, fence or wall that surrounds a cemetery, I have been asking them to seek permission, because gates, fences and walls are part of the cemetery and owned/maintained by the cemetery owner/groundskeeper.

Submitting caches in advance for an event

Here's a recent question that has been asked of me at different times by different geocachers.

Ken,
Just a question regarding our upcoming event. For last years event,
you allowed us to submit caches "pre-approval" before the event and then
published them a few days after the event. We are already scoping out
places for this year's event and were hoping to do the same thing. A few
of the containers we make for a specific spot. How much extra work
is it for you to pre-approve these caches and then sit on them? Do you have a separate database of caches that have been approved
but are not yet published? As always, thanks for your time.

So that more geocachers can understand how I like to handle these situations, here's my answer. In general it's fine to submit caches for pre-approval that you don't want published until a specific date. I'll look them over and let you know if they appear to comply with all the guidelines, including the 528ft. proximity guideline. Rather than me setting some type of timer on them for publication on a specific date (a feature which is not available to me but which would be nice to have), I'll disable them and wait for you to re-enable them when you're ready for publication. That way they will to reappear in my review queue.

It's fine to submit caches several weeks in advance. Even a couple of months is OK if you're planning to submit a large number of them. However, it wouldn't be fair to other geocachers to let you submit geocaches more than a few months in advance, because that would be abusing the privilege of "reserving" geocaching locations.

Get out there and get 'em

I was at Okoboji at a family gathering this past weekend, so even though I logged on to approve a few caches a couple of times overe the weekend, I didn't want to spend much time reviewing caches while I was with the family. So, I just finished publishing about 50 new geocaches this evening -- catching up on those that were submitted over the weekend.Those are in addition to the 90 or so I published after last weekend. If you don't have a new geocache near you... well, maybe you haven't checked geocaching.com lately. :-) Here's a little video of fun on the water while at Okoboji...

Cherokee's Welcome Spring event

I had a great time in Cherokee last weekend attending the "Welcome Spring" geocaching event hosted by Tonedog52 and Wonderboy. The caches placed for the event that I found were worthy of standing on their own. By that I mean the organizers did a very nice job of hiding quality caches. Some of the parks where the geocaches were placed did not exist when I lived in Cherokee back in the late 1960s to mid 1970s. It was great to meet so many geocachers that I have corresponded with, and to renew a few aquaintences as well. Lots of people came up to me with questions about specific types of cache hides or specific caches that they were thinking about hiding, so it was enjoyable for me to offer guidance and encouragement. I especially enjoyed the Sunday morning paddle trip down the Little Sioux River as we found geocaches along the way that Tonedog52 and Wonderboy had placed for the river event. I wish every event included a paddling-while-caching aspect to it. Lots of fun, despite the fact that a few paddlers managed to dunk themselves that morning.

Power Trails back in the discussion

Two years ago I wrote about power trails and explained the reasons behind Groundspeak's guidelines and restrictions against placing lots of caches in a row along a trail. That posting led to a number of excellent comments on this site. This spring some additional geocaches were submitted that I felt crossed the sometimes grey line into what constitutes a power trail -- a series of caches along the new Old Creamery Trail near Vinton and a series (not yet published) along the Little Sioux River near Cherokee. In both cases I have corresponded with the cache owners and we have had polite and constructive dialog to get as many as the caches approved as possible while complying with the intent of the power trail guideline. As I said two years ago, power trails are a difficult area of the guidelines for me as a reviewer to interpret and enforce. But if you read what I wrote back in June 2007 about them, and what I wrote in the subsequent comment discussion, it gives you a pretty good insight into what the guidelines are asking -- at least my interpretation of those guidelines.

No more ALR caches

In case you haven't heard the news, the geocaching.com guidelines have been updated and ALR (Additional Listing Requirement) caches have been banned/stricken/outlawed/disallowed... whatever word you prefer. Here's the new guideline text:

Logging of All Physical Caches

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

If it is appropriate for your cache location or theme, you may ask the cache seeker to accomplish an optional and simple task, either close to the cache site (normally within 0.1 miles or 161 meters) or when writing their online log. For example, wear the goofy hat inside the cache container and upload a photograph. Cache finders can choose whether or not to attempt or accomplish optional tasks. Cache owners may not delete the cache seeker's log based solely on optional tasks.

This guideline change applies immediately to all logs written from April 4, 2009 and going forward. Older caches with "additional logging requirements" (ALRs) are not grandfathered under the older guideline. If you own an existing cache with mandatory additional logging requirements, we request that you:

• Cease deleting logs based on additional logging requirements.
• Review your own cache listing to see if the ALR can be made into an optional and simple task, or whether it must be removed altogether.
• Adjust your geocache listing by editing the text then contact a reviewer to change the cache type, if appropriate.

Compared to some parts of the U.S. and the world, I think this change won't affect Iowa geocachers that much because I've seen very few ALR caches submitted in Iowa. Many ALRs had nothing to do with geocaching, such as the requirement to draw a picture, stand on your head, step under a waterfall, sing a silly song, etc.

What do you think? Do you (did you) love ALRs and think this is a terrible idea? Or did you hate them and think it's about time they were written out of the guidelines?

Yesterday's blog post

For those of you who may still be scratching their heads about my blog post yesterday describing changes to the guidelines... think about the date on which it was posted. Yes, it was an April Fool's joke. No, there are no such plans in the works.

But wouldn't it be nice?

My thanks to General Disarray, who reviews caches for Oklahoma, for letting me borrow the idea. I understand Heartland Cacher, who reviews for Nebraska, also played this prank in the Cornhusker state.

New guidelines take effect today

As some of you may have heard, there are modifications in the works for Geocaching. I would like to take this opportunity to inform you of some of the changes to take effect starting today. These changes are being implemented in order to take geocaching back to its roots.

Cache Size: Cache containers must now be of the one quart size or larger. No “nanos”, matchstick containers, or film canisters will be published.

Cache Content: All caches must contain a logbook (not log sheet) and items for trade. Fast food toys will be added to the list of items disallowed inside caches.

Permissions: As all land is owned by someone, all cache owners must obtain permission from the landowner in writing and fax or email this to me. This will be kept on file for the duration of the caches existence. *fax number to be added to my profile*

New Saturation Guidelines: The .1 mile rule still applies to caches placed within public parks. There is a new guideline for “linear” trails (sometimes referred to as “power” trails). This guideline states that caches must be placed no closer than 3-4 miles apart and must be in a location that will “wow” your fellow cachers.

Logging Guidelines: 1. Physical logbook: your physical log must contain more than just a signature. 2. Online Log: Acronyms are no longer an acceptable way to log online. You must write a minimum of three sentences detailing your experience. Logs containing “TFTC”, “TFTH”, “SL”, etc will be deleted.

As more information becomes available to me I will make it available to you via this site and my profile. Let’s continue to make Iowa the best state to geocache in.

Cherokee's "Welcome Spring" Event

When I saw that Tonedog52 and Wonderboy are hosting an event in Cherokee the weekend of May 16, I put it on my calendar but I seriously didn't think I would be able to make it there because we'll traveling to Okoboji the following weekend. Well, after thinking about it for awhile I decided what the heck, it's going to be right in my old 'hood (I went to high school in Cherokee) and my mom lives there. So... I have made plans to be there. It should be fun to explore some of the newer parks that were not yet public areas when I lived there. If you're planning to attend this event, I'll see you there.

Today is my anniversary

Eight years ago today I embarked on a pathway of joyful bliss and began a new journey that would lead to greater discovery, understanding and happiness than I ever imagined would be possible and a deeper appreciation about what is really important in life. No, I'm not talking about getting married, although that's been terrific too. I'm talking about geocaching. Eight years ago today I found my first geocache. Her name was Beverly. She was just a little plastic container under a bush, but for me it was love at first sight. I don't keep in touch like I should, but it was good to virtually check in on her today just to see how she is doing. Although she is getting up there in years, it looks like Beverly continues to be active and is still entertaining and enlightening her visitors.

Why do people cheat on virtuals?

Just a heads up -- if you own a virtual cache and you care whether anyone is placing bogus finds on it, you may want to check for a find by a geocacher named The-Sledge. He/she posted a find on my American Gothic virtual cache today and dated it Dec. 31, 2007 -- so it wouldn't appear at the top of the list, I guess. I deleted it. I see he posted many other finds in many states, supposedly on that same day. I don't understand why anyone would go to these lengths.

La première dérive

My daughter is undertaking an interesting GPS-based project today for one of her art school classes. She calls it Dérive, which is French for drift. Jacey has been geocaching with me a few times over the years, so it's interesting to me to see how she is applying her experience with GPS to create this project. You can read the blog she created for this here. I'm not sure I completely understand what's she's doing, but I'm looking forward to reading about it and viewing her photos.

Heading home

If you submitted a new geocache in Iowa that was published this past week, you may be interested to know that I clicked the "publish" button from Grand Cayman. We were there this past week on a scuba diving vacation. In fact, we still there... er, here... waiting at the Grand Cayman airport right now for our flight home. I just discovered there's free wifi here, so I'm online killing time for the next hour and a half. Mary is on her computer too, and she's telling me the temps back home are supposed to reach the 50s today. Looks like we won't be hit with the frigid temps that Midwesterners experienced this past week. Woo hoo! Here are a couple of photos from the past week. These were taken by Matt Leverson, a professional video shooter from Albert Lea, Minn., whom we met down here. You can see more of Matt's photos and videos at his web site. When we weren't diving, we had time to look for a few geocaches. We did manage to find two that were within walking distance of our hotel.

The day the music died

I'm two days late posting this, but it has now been 50 years since the music died.

Total caches published

This morning I noticed an announcement for an event hosted by Minnesota geocachers to commemorate Surfer Joe's 10,000th published geocache. This is a well-deserved honor for my fellow reviewer to the north, especially when you consider that he's been reviewing for just three years.
This got me to thinking about how many geocaches I have published. In a post last September, I wrote that I had published close to 6,000 geocaches in my 5+ years of reviewing. I don't recall how I arrived at that figure, but upon checking this morning, IowaAdmin has officially published 6,491 caches since the summer of 2005, which is as early as the "published" log type goes back. I probably published an additional 1,000 in the 12 months before that. And for a year prior to creating my "IowaAdmin" I.D., I reviewed geocaches in Iowa and Wisconsin using the I.D. "WGA2". Because WGA2 is now owned by a different reviewer, I don't have an accurate way to know exactly what my total is. My best estimate is that it's now around 8,000 caches.

Happy New Year's 2009!

On this first day of 2009, I know that some of my friends celebrated by going geocaching. However, I participated in a different outdoor activity to mark this first day of the year. My daughter and I went kayaking. The weather wasn't great -- 23 degrees, wind gusts up to 30 mph and snow falling -- but the challenging conditions seemed to make it that much more fun. And before you start thinking that we are completely nuts, I should tell you that the lake -- Columbia Lake near Portage, Wis. -- is a cooling lake for a coal-fired power plant so the water temperature is in the 70- to 80-degree range year round. That doesn't make the wind any less bitter when you're putting your kayaks back on top of the car, but it does make the paddling a little more bearable. How ever you celebrated today, I hope you had a good one. Here's to a great 2009! (It's got to be better than 2008, right?)

Iowa had largest cache % gain of any state!

Last January, I posted here about Iowa geocache statistics that were compiled from geocaching.com by my fellow reviewer, Riviouveur, who reviews caches for France. He recently provided me with an updated spreadsheet that once again shows Iowa in relation to the rest of the world, and Iowa continues to show a very high rate of growth in number of geocaches. In fact, for the period of Riviouveur's latest spreadsheet (May 2007 to early December 2008), the U.S. state with the largest percentage gain in active geocaches was -- drumroll, please -- Iowa!

Here are some details. We grew from 2,943 caches on May 30, 2007 to 6,260 caches on Dec. 7, 2008. That was a gain of 3,317 geocaches, which was a 113% increase during those 18 months. That equates to approximately 184 new active caches per month. If you clicked on the link above to my previous post, you saw that our previous rate was 155 new caches per month, so you have really picked up the pace during the past year.

According to Riviouver’s latest calculations, Iowa now has 43 caches per 1,000 square kilometers, (up from 28.7 in his previous report). That puts us 38th out of 143 regions (countries and states) worldwide in terms of cache density (up from 51st in his previous report).

In terms of population, we currently have 209.9 caches per 100,000 population, which ranks us 21st on the list of 143 worldwide regions. (Previously we were at 140.4 and in 28th place.)

Once again, the numbers included in the spreadsheet are ACTIVE cache figures. Reviewers have actually reviewed more caches than those numbers indicate. The numbers are the net of total caches submitted minus those that have been archived and minus those that were not approved for listing.

In case you're interested, the state with the most caches per 1,000 sq kilometers is Rhode Island, with 307.3. Alaska has the fewest caches per 1,000 sq kilometers with 1.6. The state with the most caches per 100,000 population is Utah with 523.5. New Jersey has the fewest caches per 100,000 population at 60.9.

Roundabouts

On my way to and from one of my office locations, there's a newly constructed roundabout that I now pass through. It's so new that occasionally drivers in front of me seem to be confused about what to do so they slow down or even stop before entering. It's all I can do to keep from yelling, "Keep moving!" But I tell myself not to get too excited. After all, it's something new to them. They'll get the hang of it...eventually.

Yesterday I reviewed a geocache that was placed in a roundabout (the first geocache in an Iowa roundabout submitted to www.geocaching.com that I can recall). Since I had not come across this before, I had to do some research to find out how other reviewers are handling roundabout caches, and to find out if there are any applicable local traffic regulations about walking inside roundabouts. Some reviewers say they use the rule of thumb that if there does not appear to be any pedestrian walkway into the center portion of the roundabout, it would appear that pedestrians are not welcome in the center portion, and therefore neither are geocaches.

Think about it -- how distracting would it be to some drivers if they saw someone poking around in the bushes or rocks inside a roundabout when they're already trying to watch for merging vehicles while trying to find their exit? And it's not just me saying this. The Iowa DOT has a web site that gives advice about roundabouts. (I orignally wrote that previous sentence as "the IDOT gives roundabout advice" but that didn't sound quite right.) The IDOT says this: "Never walk though a roundabout or cross the center island."

Bottom line, unless you seek and obtain special permission for your specific geocache from the local governing municipality, I'm not going to publish geocaches that are placed inside roundabouts .

Useless hints

As I have previously posted, useless hints are just that -- useless. I was reminded of this tonight when I read a post in the IGO forums complaining about useless hints. Bottom line: When you create a new geocache, if you're not going to give useful information in your encrypted hint, leave that field blank. If not, all you're doing is frustrating your fellow geocachers and diminishing their opinion of your cache.

Paperwork -- sometimes it works!

Success! My effort to follow-up with the internet service provider of the web site that ripped off my blog content appears to have paid off. As I mentioned in my previous post, I sent a document -- about 12 pages of explanation and samples of material copied from this blog -- to the ISP. After waiting only a few days, I checked the offending web site and found this message:

ForbiddenYou don't have permission to access / on this server.
Additionally,
a 403 Forbidden error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to
handle the request.

It appears the ISP quickly realized that their customer was doing some bad things and so they took them down. I don't know if they will resurface on a different URL, but thanks to the power of Google searches, I'll be ready. :-)

Ripping me off on the web

A couple of weeks ago I received a Google alert that a web site mentions IowaAdmin. (I will not mention that site by name here so as not to give them any additional visits from my site.) So I checked it out and discovered the site has duplicated several posts from my blog -- some credited to me, most not. I posted a few comments on that site politely asking that they remove all these posts because it appears I am the one who is selling geocaching goods on that site, which I am not. The site is also advertising for sale geocaching gear from Groundspeak. When I click them, it looks like lots of copyright violations and re-selling of Groundspeak stuff! So far they have not responded to me. It looks like they removed my comments and now they have added even more of my blog posts. This evening I sent a formal letter of copyright infringement to the Internet provider for that site. We'll see if this helps.

I feel like someone has broken into my house and stolen some of our stuff. Have any of you ever experienced anything similar?

A gift from the Frog

I recently received an unexpected gift from Groundspeak, the company that owns and runs geocaching.com. It's a glass award to mark my five years of being a volunteer reviewer for their web site. During those 5+ years I have published close to 6,000 geocaches, which comes to approximately 100 per month. I don't know how many others I have reviewed but not approved, but I'm guessing it would be an additional 10 percent to 25 percent. Sometimes you encounter people who just seem to have a grudge against me, geocaching.com and the world in general. But by far it's been an enjoyable "job" and it's been great to meet and/or talk to so many interesting geocachers.

Another kayak video

I have posted some vacation photos here in the past. Sometimes I felt a little weird about doing so because, by my own definition, this is primarily a blog about geocaching and the review process. But some of you have been kind enough to comment or e-mail that you enjoy seeing my vacation photos. Because of that, and because I haven't posted here for a number of days, here's another installment of vacation images -- this time as a video. If this bores you, well, don't watch it.:-)

Technology is great... when it works

The past few evenings have been frustrating because we've been having problems with our Internet connection at home, making it tougher for me to review new geocaches and communicate with those of you who submit questions and details about your caches. I thought I had the problem fixed about two weeks ago after I replaced the cable modem, but now it's acting up again. I've been compensating by logging on at work to keep up with the review queue, [shhhh!] but it takes more time to review at work because I don't have all the reviewer reference links and files on my work computer that I have accumulated on my home computer over the years. So, thanks for your patience if you've noticed a bit of a delay this week. I'll try to get things repaired by the cable company.

A pretty amazing new geocache

Iowa Tom would be proud of this a new geocache called Captain Crunch created and hidden by geocacher linuxonthebrain. If you're in the Waterloo-Cedar Falls area, you have to check this out. I don't want to give anything away but I have a feeling you won't be disappointed. I just hope it doesn't get damaged or stolen anytime soon.

What's in a name?

I think you can tell what kind of weather we've been having in the Midwest just by looking at the names of some of Iowa's newest caches.

Hi and Dry - 2008 Flood
River View
The Watering Hole
STOP! it'sTwister Hill
Gonna Storm
At the waters edge
Waterfront Property
IT'S CREEKY

Our thoughts and prayers go out to all those who have been affected by the floods.

Dam-age

The big weather news since the weekend is rain. Over near the Wisconsin Dells, Lake Delton is now just a bug mud hole after the wash-out of an earthen road/levee that held the lake back from the Wisconsin River. In case you missed it, here's video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0bVsSWXG-I

Getting started

Today I received a message via geocaching.com from a geocacher who is planning to place a bunch of caches this summer. Here's his message -- with his name and location withheld in case he doesn't want to be identified.

I have been doing geocaching for about a year now, and plan on putting out my first cache. To make life easier for both of us, I thought I would ask you for any suggestions or tips on placing a cache. Our current plan is to put between 10 and 20 caches in the ______ area, mostly in the citys parks. We have received permission from their parks department already. Our goal is actually to have them in place before the end of July. We have collected a variety of containers, some magnetic, a few coffee cans, and others. We have 2 GPS units to verify the co-ordinates with. Would it be best to activate all of them at the same time, or to do one or two at a time as we get them placed? Any insight you can give us would be greatly appreciated. I have read the placing caches section on here.
Thank you for your help,

And here's my response to him:

I recommend that you activate a couple at a time as you place them. That way you'll get feedback from geocachers when they post their finds (and possibly feedback from me when I review them) that will help guide you and possibly improve your caches and cache hiding as you go along. You'll also see which containers work best over the weeks and months. In general, coffee cans have a limited weatherproof life in the outdoors, so you may want to reconsider using those. Placing a few at a time will also help you determine how many caches you want to have active at any given time -- that is, how many you can comfortably maintain on a regular basis.

As far as other advice, you may want to spend a little time reading my blog (http://iowaadmin.blogspot.com) because I mention a number of geocaching topics there that may be helpful. Here are some highlights:
- Don't hide caches that are on or that simulate electrical equipment unless you can show express permission that you have permission from the owner of the electrical equipment. (I still think these are a bad idea, but they may be approved if the cache owner has permission.)
- Check to make sure your caches are at least 528ft from existing caches and from physical cache waypoints of multicaches. Try to avoid a string of caches placed close to the minimum separation distance along a trail. This is known as a "power trail" and Groundspeak frowns on them because they tie up stretches of a trail so that other geocachers can't place caches there.
- Use the "attributes" feature to add attributes on your cache page, especially one to indicate whether or not the cache is wheelchair accessible.
- Use the "add/edit waypoints" feature to enter coordinates for all waypoints and final locations of multicaches and puzzle caches.
- If the cache is on land managed by the Iowa DNR, you'll need to first get permission from the local land manager. Some local parks departments also require permission for caches in parks.

Thanks for asking. I hope this helps. I look forward to seeing what you come up with, and so will geocachers in your area.

Ken
IowaAdmin

Okoboji event

Thanks to everyone who attended my Waterlogged at Okoboji event! It turned out to be a very windy day this past Saturday so I didn't know whether to expect anyone to show up on the water, but three intrepid boatloads of geocachers did show up despite the cool temperatures and treacherous waves. Davy Duck, who lives closest to the event, boated the longest distance -- from East Lake Okoboji. Other floating geocachers were present from Webster City and from Minneapolis. I was the lone manually powered boater -- paddling out in my sea kayak (equipped with proper safety equipment, including PFD, spray skirt, wetsuit and dry shell). Mary had started the voyage with me but she decided to turn back because of the conditions, so I escorted her most of the way back before heading out once again. I had my GPSR mounted on the deck of my kayak in a waterpoof pouch but I couldn't read the display because of the waves that were washing across the deck, so instead of using my GPSR to navigate to the coordinates, I simply headed for the three boats that were bobbing around on the lake. When I got close enough, I shouted that it was too rough for me to try to hand out coins out there on the water and that I would meet them at the parking coordinates. I turned around and enjoyed the quick ride back to shore with the wind and waves pushing me all the way. Safely back on land, Mary and I enjoyed meeting the boating and non-boating geocachers who were waiting there.

What's up with Scott County Park?

One of the most geocache-saturated pieces of land in Iowa is Scott County Park. It seems like every week someone is submitting a new geocache for that park. Just when I think another new cache couldn't be wedged in sideways, another one is submitted. So what's up with this park? What makes it a geocache magnet?

A busy day

I reviewed and published 56 new geocaches on Sunday. This must be a record for new geocaches published in Iowa in one day. It doesn't even take into account the geocaches that were reviewed that day and not yet published. Additionally, I estimate that for at least half of those caches, I posted a reviewer note asking the owner to add an attribute that indicates whether or not the geocache is wheelchair accessible. This is something that Groundspeak has encouraged us to do by highlighting caches that do not have such an attribute, so your help in remembering to use the attributes feature -- especially one to indicate whether your geocache is wheelchair accessible -- would be greatly appreciated.

Iowa DNR posts geocaching rules and permit form

The Iowa Department of Natural Resources has just posted a web page outlining its geocaching "rules and regulations." (I always love that term. It makes me think, "Which ones are the rules and which ones are the regulations?") Anyway, after a couple years of informal geocaching policy which instructed geocachers to obtain permission from the local DNR manager before placing a geocache on DNR-managed land, there is now a formal process. From what I can tell, there are three major changes:
1. The process now includes a permit application (available at the DNR web site linked above).
2. All permits expire annually on March 31.
3. The cache container must be clearly marked on the outside with "Geocache" in block letters no smaller than one half inch in size and the name of the geocache.

One very nice aspect of the new DNR web page is that they include a link to Staff Contact Information: Park E-Mail and Phone List -- a very helpful tool for geocachers seeking information on placing a cache.

How will these changes affect my review process for caches on DNR-managed land? For the past few years I have asked geocachers who submit such caches whether they obtained permission from the local DNR land manager, and if so, to post the name and contact information for that person in either the description or in a reviewer note on their cache page. From now on, I am going to ask if you have obtained the required DNR permit. I may also refer you to the DNR web page to make sure you're aware of the March 31 expiration date.

Once they are approved, I will not be policing these caches annually to enforce the March 31 expiration date. That's an Iowa DNR rule and not part of the geocaching.com guidelines, so the annual expiration and removal of these caches will be a matter left up to the DNR and the cache owner. I couldn't enforce that rule if I wanted to. It would simply be too much for one non-paid person to keep track of.

It will be interesting to see what effect this formal policy will have on geocache hiding on DNR-managed land. Will it encourage more caches there, or will it discourage them? And what effect will the annual March 31 expiration have? Will cache hiding tail off in the first quarter of each year and then explode with pent-up placements after March 31? I'd like to know what you think. How will this change affect you?

The Caches of Madison County

Here's information about geocaching in Pammel Park in Madison County. (And for those of my readers who live outside Iowa, yes, it's THAT Madison County.) My thanks to Barheet for giving me permission to publish his email here.

Date: Mon, 5 May 2008
To: IowaAdmin
Subject: Barheet contacting IowaAdmin from Geocaching.com

Hey there. I recently submitted 3 caches for approval in Pammel Park, near Winterset. I wasn't aware that I needed the director's approval before placing caches there. I contacted the local director who said not to place anything there. Here are the reasons he gave me:

1. They don't know what people would place inside the caches and don't want any inappropriate items in the parks.

2. They want to place their own caches for educational purposes.

He said they wanted to be able to control what was in the caches. I'm not sure how they'd do that, unless they made it just a local scavenger hunt or something. He also says Pammel is not a state park anymore and is managed by the county.

Anyway, just thought I'd let you know what happened for future reference. I will remove the caches and archive the listings. Thanks!

Barheet

Degree Confluence Project

Anyone else own a Degree Confluence first posting? Here's mine.

Change to cache adoption

My thanks to fellow reviewer WisKid for letting me borrow his explanation. Actually, I never asked him, but it's easier to beg forgiveness after the fact. :)

There's been a slight change in Groundspeak's rules for adopting caches. First, Groundspeak will no longer process "forced" adoptions except in very unusual circumstances. They haven't really delineated what constitutes unusual, but assume that we will not be able to allow you to adopt someone's cache without permission. We can still try, but it is not likely to be approved. The only specific exception discussed involves the death of a cacher with permission of the family.

Second, we have been instructed NOT to unarchive caches to allow someone else to adopt them, even with permission. If you want someone to adopt your listings, I would suggest you post to the (IGO) forums to ask for volunteers. We can still unarchive if you archive by mistake, change your mind, etc., but not specifically for the purpose of adoption.

Of course, you can still do your own adoptions when both sides are agreeable at www.geocaching.com/adopt.

Thanks, WisKid, for letting me rip off your quote. Anyhoo, I also want to add that you can also use the above link to transfer ownership of travel bugs and trackable geocoins.

Waterlogged event cache is published

My event cache is set for May 24. (Thanks to the reviewer for approving it so quickly!)
Check it out by going to the listing on geocaching.com for GC1B6CP.
Please post your "will attend" log if you're planning to be there so I have an idea of how many to expect.

Water logged

I have an idea of hosting a 5-star terrain event cache. The event would be held in such a place (think famous NW Iowa lake) that special equipment would be required to get there (think watercraft). As incentive for geocachers to attend, I would offer special prizes -- Groundspeak's trackable 2008 Volunteer Geocoin for the first, say, six or eight geocachers who show up at the coordinates at the designated time, which would probably be mid-morning the Saturday before Memorial Day. There would also be a special FTF prize -- a Groundspeak Lackeys 2007 trackable geocoin. What do you think? Would anyone show up?

More about mobility

On a few occassions in the past I have blogged about reveiwing geocaches while "on the road" at exotic locations such as Cozumel, The Bahamas and Dyersville. I did the reviewing by packing along my notebook computer, a Dell Inspiron and finding a wifi hotspot. Sometimes I used my wife's notebook, because she has nationwide broadband coverage. While this has worked fine for the most part, my computer is not the most convenient thing to lug around. It has a large screen and, as notebooks go, is not the most trim PC you could own. Well today I tried something new. For the first time I reviewed (and approved) a geocache using a mobile phone. Recently my wife upgraded her cell phone to get one with more bells and whistles so her old phone -- a Cingular 8125 -- was going unused. Even though I don't use it for phone service, I decided to charge up her old phone to see if I could use it to access the Internet via our home wifi. I logged into geocaching.com and reviewed a new cache called Drake Bulldogs Madness (GC1A395). Now I have a pocket-sized way to access the Internet, provided I'm in a free wifi hotspot. I'm looking forward to trying this out "on the road" sometime because it means I may not be lugging around my computer or relying on borrowing time on my wife's computer. Besides, it's fun to be geeky with gadgets.

How to know if your new cache is 528 ft from others

After I couldn’t immediately approve his cache last week, a geocacher asked how he’s supposed to know if there are multicache waypoints that are too close to the new cache he just placed and submitted.

There are two ways to find out. First, you could find all the nearby multis within two miles and keep a record of the coordinates for each waypoint. The reason I say two miles is because that’s the maximum distance that waypoints of multicaches and puzzle caches are supposed to be from the original listed coordinates on the cache page. If there are a lot of geocaches in the same area as your new cache, and if a lot of those are multis or mystery caches, there’s a good chance that your geocache is closer than 528 ft. from one of the waypoints. And if those waypoints are actual physical caches, then they need to be at least 528 ft. away from your cache.

A second and easier method is to record the coordinates of your proposed new cache location and submit them on a new cache page. But be sure to write a reviewer note stating that the cache is not yet in place and that you just want to see if this location is available. That way I can easily check it against the Geocaching.com database and let you know if that spot is OK. If it’s not, I can suggest which direction you may want to move it, or if it might be better to choose a new location all together.

Family strata

This evening as I was reviewing new geocaches, I was pleasantly surprised to see a photo of a rock that I immediately recognized. (OK, I can hear you snickering out there. Yes, it's true. I recognized a rock.) It's called the Gwynne Rock and it's located on the Iowa State campus. It's actually a boulder, and it is featured in a new geocache placed by called LCC 50th--Hitaga Sand Prairie Big Rock (GC19KX7) , a cache by Linn County Conservation and jimmygps. I have several "connections" with this rock. First of all, I'm an ISU alum and I walked and rode past that rock hundreds of times. Secondly, the rock is named after the late Dr. Charles Gwynne, a former professor of geology at ISU and my great uncle. Thirdly, several years after my graduation from ISU, I lived in Marion for seven years and one of my favorite places to go hiking, biking and cross-country skiing was Squaw Creek Park, where the rock was discovered before being moved to the Iowa State campus. Read more about Dr. Gywnne and the rock here.

What do Iowans think about ... that word?

Today an Iowa geocacher submitted a geocache with the word "sucks" in it. I was born and raised in Iowa, and I was taught that this word is not used by polite people in public settings. I asked the geocacher to change the name of his cache, which he did. (Thank you.)

Then I got to thinking about it and I checked to see how many other geocaches are out there with that word in their names. Turns out there are quite a few. So in the interests of fairness, I wrote to the geocacher and told him he could change the name back if he wanted to. I added this note: "But I hope you don't."

Iowans, what do you think? Is "sucks" an offensive word we want to keep out of our geocache names, or does it not bother you at all? I'd really like to know.

Mystery at Gray's Lake

Over the years, I've seen several geocaches placed near Gray's Lake in Des Moines. In reading the logs for those caches, it seems as though strange things like to happen in that area. Caches disappear. Geocachers trip across the homesteads of homeless people. And now another unusual situation -- a geocache and a waymark that both lead to a hidden compartment behind a door in a tree. I first heard about it when Team Signal posted about it in their blog. You can read about in this story from the Des Moines Register.
Creative weirdness abounds.

Ever heard of Crabtown?

I hadn't, but now I have because there's a geocache there (GC195FC). It's one of several submitted in the area by plumberbutt. If you're a FTF hound who feels compelled to rush out tonight, be careful out there in the snow.

Stats very interesting

What do New Hampshire and Iowa have in common? If you answered “first in the nation” status, you are correct. But I’m not talking about the presidential campaign process. Instead, I’m referring to the world-wide rankings of geocaching regions.

One of my fellow reviewers who goes by the user name Riviouveur and who reviews caches for France, likes to collect geocache statistics. He graciously consented to let me publish some of the data he collected from the www.geocaching.com site.

One stat that I find especially interesting is that, for the period from May 30, 2007 to January 27, 2008, of all the states in the U.S., only New Hampshire had a greater percentage increase in its number of geocaches (42.8%) than Iowa (42.2%). During those eight months, Iowa went from having 2,943 geocaches to 4,184 – an increase of 1,241 caches. That equates to approximately 155 new caches per month since last May.

According to Riviouver’s calculations, Iowa now has 28.7 caches per 1,000 square kilometers, which equates to roughly .011 per geocaches per square mile (if my math is correct). That puts us 51st out of 143 regions (countries and states) worldwide in terms of cache density. So Iowa is not a cache-barren land. In fact, we’re closer to the top of the list than the bottom.

In terms of population, we currently have 140.4 caches per 100,000 population, which ranks us 28th on the list of 143 worldwide regions. That means Iowans like to hide geocaches more than average.

Another factoid, the numbers included in the spreadsheet are ACTIVE cache figures. Reviewers have actually reviewed more caches than those numbers indicate. The numbers that appear here are the net of total caches submitted minus those that have been archived and minus those that were not approved for listing.

Some additional trivia from Riviouver:
- Five US states hit 10,000 active caches in the last two months.
- The numbers are growing substantially faster outside the U.S. than within the U.S.

Away for a bit

Just a heads-up that I'll be taking a break from reviewing for one week beginning this Saturday. During my absence, the Iowa review queue will once again be managed by my very capable fellow reviewer, Electric Mouse.

I wanted to let those of you who read this blog know in case you or someone you know sends me an email about a cache and you don't hear from me for a few days.

Ken