Questions and Answers about Geocaching

I receive a number of questions from geocachers asking about specifics of getting caches listed on geocaching.com. Most of the time I can answer their questions right away. Sometimes I have to consult with my fellow reviewers and/or the lackeys at Groundspeak to be sure I'm giving the correct answer. I thought you might enjoy seeing a few of the recent questions I have received, followed by my responses. I changed the text slightly in some of these to protect the privacy of the email writers. 

Question:

Hey Ken!
We were wondering what exactly the rules would be if we had a cache that had a micro SD card in it so that cachers could simply insert it into their phone and save a video or  photo to log their find. I'd think that that would be perfectly fine, but would we also NEED to have a paper log? It would be no trouble to include one, it's just that we think it would be a little cooler/high tech if it was only the SD card. Geocaching is a high tech sport/hobby/obsession and with the huge increase in popularity of smart phones or phones with cameras, this would be a really cool cache.

My Answer:

Thanks for your inquiry. It's cool to hear that you're thinking up new ways to make geocaching fun. As you have guessed, yes, you would also need to include a paper (or similar substrate) logbook that geocachers can sign. Using the SD card would have to be clearly marked as optional. In the past, geocachers have hidden USB drives in caches in hopes that geocachers would need to plug them into their laptop computers to obtain final coordinates of a multicache or unlock a code to find a puzzle cache, but Groundspeak has not allowed those to be a required part of finding a cache because of the potential for someone to introduce malware to the storage device. That same reasoning would apply to an SD card. 

Question:

Hi Ken,
I was wondering if you could tell me the coords for the GCXXXX cache stage that is too close to the cache I placed today GCYYYY (40ft up a tree).

My Answer:

I'm not allowed to give you the coordinates of the second stage because you would need to find it on your own, but I can tell you that you would need to move your cache at least 290 ft east of where it is now to be at least 528 ft from stage 2 of GCXXXX. If you know the owner of GCXXXX, you may wish to ask him for the exact coordinates of his second stage. Thanks for working that out with him.

Question:

A geocacher could not find 3 of my caches and he took it upon himself to replace them. I take great  pride in maintaining my caches. They are almost all local and as soon as someone says it needs attention, I am right there to do it. If there are several dnf's listed in a log I go out to check on it. Just because he didn't find it, does that mean it isn't there? That decision belongs to the owner. I went out and replaced the containers he left with my own and my own logs. Only one of these caches had a dnf before Sunday and it was only 1 dnf. I replied to him about replacing the one cache and he mentioned in his reply to me that he had also replaced the two others. He did not log that in his log entries. I would never have known he did that unless he had told me in the email. I deleted all 3 of his logs. What do you think of this and is there any way you can mention to him that it is not acceptable to do this?

My Answer:

I sympathize with the frustration you feel about having your caches replaced by another geocacher. I had the same thing happen to me in the past. Sometimes it was done with my permission because a geocacher asked me ahead of time if it would be OK. Other times it was done without my knowledge or permission. In your case, if your caches were replaced without your permission, then no, that is not OK. In my opinion, based on what you have told me about the situation, it sounds like you did the right thing by writing to the geocacher and then deleting the logs that you felt were not legitimate. That's your responsibility as the cache owner. Regarding your question about whether I should mention anything to them, with your permission, I may post this email conversation in my blog so more people become aware of the issue. But in the long run, there will always be behaviors displayed in geocaching that you, I, or other geocachers disagree with. Neither you nor I can stop everyone from doing things they shouldn't do. But in the case of geocaching, we CAN control how much the things they do affect us -- our attitudes and our lives. What I'm saying is, you should go ahead and delete the logs and maintain your caches in the correct manner, like you are apparently doing now. But don't let the actions of a few spoil geocaching for you. 

Question:

Hello Ken,
I have a question regarding the new “chirp” accessory and the beacon attribute. First of all, I would like to know if the “chirp” is considered a “physical container”, and whether its placement falls under the 528ft saturation guideline. I would think not, since it would not be seen or handled by a geocacher.

My Answer:

Even though a Chirp is a physical waypoint, Groundspeak allows considerable "latitude" (if you'll pardon the pun) on the saturation guideline for the waypoint locations of the wireless beacons. The range of a Chirp is around 32 feet for an exposed chirp; inside objects, it's less than that, so that's why they allow them to be placed closer together than 528 ft and closer to existing geocaches and physical waypoints. So I'd say, yes you can place your Chirps closer than 528 ft, but you should probably place them at least 40 ft from each other. Does this answer your question?

 Their Response:

Yes, that answers my question. The stages I have in mind will be several hundred feet apart, so the 40ft suggestion you made is not an issue. But, it is possible the "virtual" waypoints of the hide I have in mind will be within a few hundred feet of other virtual and physical waypoints of nearby caches. I just wanted to verify if I had working room for my idea. I think you have verified that. I'd hate to set the whole thing up and have you deny it when I submitted, based on saturation rules. Thanks for your help and input. As always, you are a "wealth of information". 

 

For the poker players

This is not geocaching related, but I wanted to share news about our son's recent accomplishment on the World Poker Tour. Last fall Tom (also known as TitanTom32 in the online poker world) made it to the final table of the Legends of Poker tournament in L.A. The first half of the rebroadcast was televised this past Sunday. Part 2 will be on this coming Sunday, March 6 on the Fox Sports Network at 8 p.m. and again at midnight. In Part 1 they showed the elimination of the fifth and sixth place players, so in Part 2 he will be the first one eliminated because he finished in fourth place in that tournament.

Des Moines Register blogs for geocaching

Last week Kyle Munson, who writes a blog for the Des Moines Register, interviewed me about geocaching. The interview was mainly for background because his real information came from the geocachers -- Team RSV -- who took him on a few cache hunts and showed him the ropes. You can read Kyle's column here and watch a video of their cache hunts.

Fun reviewer notes

I love reading the fun reviewer notes you guys post when you submit new geocaches. For example, tonight one of them said: "Cache is ready for your blessing. Thank you!" I joked with my wife that I need to get one of those big Pope hats.

Behind the scenes with a geocaching reviewer

For the past five years -- through this blog -- I have tried to provide readers with a behind-the-scenes view of geocaching reviewing. Today Groundspeak posted a nice story on this same topic on their blog Latitude 47. Check it out. My special thanks to geocacher "swr rat" (Kevin) for the nice comment! 

EarthCache guidelines updated

If you're an avid EarthCacher, you may be intersted to know that the guidelines for that aspect of our hobby have been updated as of January 1, 2011. The biggest change is that:

"Requests for photographs must be optional. Exceptions to this guideline will only be considered if the requested photograph is related to an Earth Science logging activity such as recording a phenomenon. This particular guidelines was updated on 1 January 2011. All EarthCaches must conform to this guideline as photo requests are considered "additional logging requirements" (ALRs) and follow the guidelines set forth by Geocaching.com. Existing EarthCaches that do not meet this guideline must be updated to comply. Cache owners may not delete the cacher's log based solely on optional tasks."

And in case you weren't aware of it, I don't review Earth Caches in Iowa. They're reviewed and published by a different group of reviewers. If you have questions about Earth Caches, you can address them to glewis@geosociety.org.

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas to geocachers (and muggles) everywhere! May you be FTF peace, hope and love.

Chirping?

In case you haven't heard, Garmin has come out with a new geocaching device called Chirp. And tonight I received my first inquiry from a geocacher about it. My response, based on guidance from Groundspeak (the company that operates Geoaching.com):

Any caches that use a Chirp (or any future similar device) should use the new "beacon" attribute. If you put a Chirp in a traditional cache and geocachers have an alternative method to find it without using the Chirp, then it's OK to be published.  If for some reason you absolutely don't want to provide an alternative means of finding it, it must be listed as a "mystery" cache with the beacon attribute. Your cache description may mention the "Chirp"as long as the text doesn't go on and on with overtones of advertising, marketing, or promotion.

Notifications are not part of my domain

At one of the geocaching events I attended this summer, someone asked me if I intentionally send email and mobile notifications about newly published geocaches to certain people first. The implication was that I keep a "friends" list and those who are on it get first dibs at being FTF for new caches. I assured the questioner that not only do I NOT give first notice to a list of friends, I have no control at all over email and mobile notifications. That's all up to the inner workings of the geocaching.com website, once you set your account to receive notifications. I was glad this person asked the question. It made me think they might have been holding a grudge against me for quite some time. Well, for all I know, maybe they still do. :o)

The end of new FTF series caches

In the past, a few geocachers have criticized me for being more strict than other reviewers -- at least that's the way they saw it. As evidence to the contrary, let me point out that I have been more liberal than other reviewers regarding FTF (first to find) series caches. These are caches that require or suggest that the person who is FTF such a cache is "strongly urged" to continue the series by hiding a similar one in the same area. I have been approving such caches as long as they made it clear that placing another cache was not a requirement. However, I am no longer going to publish new FTF cache series because of clarification that Groundspeak has issued. Essentially the requirement or suggestion to place another cache has been judged to be an ALR (additional logging requirement) so volunteer reviewers have been instructed to no longer approve them. I just wanted to give Iowa geocachers a heads-up: I will no longer be publishing such caches.

Hike N Seek Shelter

I'm in the Fort Madison/Burlington area for IGO's annual Hike N Seek event, although looking at the forecast for today they may need to rename it Hike N Seek Shelter. The rainy weather that is now moving across the state is expected to arrive down in this corner of Iowa around noon. The main event starts here -- well it started a few minutes ago at 8 a.m. with check-in so I'd better get over to the park. But the competition part of the event kicks off at 10 a.m. I'm not planning to take part in that but it will be interesting to see who does. Last night I attended the IGO Board of Directors get together. About 100 geocachers packed into a small restaurant in West Point for a meal and socialization, followed by an IGO board meeting. It was a nice event with fun conversation.

Are you ready for some new geocaches?

Over the past few weeks several geocachers have been busy preparing for three large geocaching events in Iowa. I know because I have been pre-reviewing the many caches they have submitted for these events. Today is the big day for two of those events: 

Lake Red Rock GC2B26J, for which 90 new caches have been submitted and will soon be published,

and Welcome to Marcus GC2AJW7, for which 76 new caches will soon be published. 

Then next weekend there will be at least 147 new caches published for IGO's annual Hike N Seek event  in the Fort Madison area. I'm planning to attend the Hike N Seek event next weekend, although I don't plan to be one of the competitive types vying to find the most geocaches in 24 hours! If you're going to be there, please say "hi" and introduce yourself. I look forward to seeing familiar faces and meeting new friends.

Apostle Islands kayaking Aug-Sept 2010

Apostle Islands kayaking Aug-Sept 2010

Mary and I have been counting down the days until vacation time, and now that time is just about here. Tomorrow we leave for a kayaking trip in the Apostle Islands of northern Wisconsin on Lake Superior. If you're a long-time reader of this blog, you may recall we kayaked the Apostles three years ago. On that trip, wifi hot spots were more rare than they are now. Nonetheless, I will be getting some help during the week from a fellow volunteer reviewer, so Iowa geocachers, don't be surprised if you see a new geocache published by someone other than me next week. I'll post some photos of our trip here and let you know if I find any cool geocaches up there.

Churning

If you haven't checked out the brouhaha going on in the Groundspeak forums about a pair of geocaches that I reviewed, you should take a look. Apparently a friend of the cache owner objects to the fact that I wouldn't publish two caches that his friend submitted. The caches were not new. They were simply renamed versions of his existing caches, which he had recently archived so he could resubmit them. When stock brokers buy and sell a client's portfolio simply to inflate their commission, it's called churning. That term can also be applied when cache owners archive and then resubmit their caches when nothing about them has changed -- not the location, not the cache container, or not anything about the hide. Most of those posting in the forum topic seem to agree with me when I requested that they should ask for their previous caches to be reactivated/unarchived rather than published as new caches. What do think?  And for the record, despite the title of his forum topic, I never claimed that publishing these caches would cause a FTF frenzy. I simply implied that this appeared to be the only reason for relisting the exact same cache at the exact same location. So, OK. Maybe I should keep my opinions to myself? ..... nah

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!