People are different

The answer to this question may be obvious, but have you ever noticed how different people can be? Case in point: For the past couple of months I've been asking geocachers whose caches I review and who have additional waypoints for multicaches, to use the "add/edit waypoints" feature on the edit page to enter their coordinates. To my way of thinking, it's a fairly straightforward request and not that hard to do. Most geocachers see it that way. Most will say "OK, I didn't know about that feature," and they do it without whining. Then there are other geocachers who say something like "This is the final straw. I've had it!" and they proceed to let me know how this is the worst thing that has ever happened to them. Yup, people are different, all right. Sometimes that difference makes you appreciate the nice guys even more.

Think before creating a useless hint

I just posted this note to the owner of a new geocache:

"The only recommendation I will make is that you delete the text you placed in the hint field, since you're not actually giving a hint. It can be frustrating for some geocachers who spend the time at ground zero to decrypt a hint only to find there is no hint."

I try to post a note to the owner similar to this every time I see a hint like "No hint necessary." If no hint is necessary, why frustrate geocachers by making them decrypt the text you place there? The purpose of the hint is to give geocachers a final resort whenever they decide they have looked long enough and can't find the cache. If you think this through and put yourself in the geocache hunter's situation, it's easy to see why you shouldn't post a hint that says "No hint necessary." I know... there's nothing in the guidelines about this. But to me it's a matter of courtesy.

A correction/clarification about the 528' rule

In a comment I posted here on May 31 I wrote:
"My understanding of the guidelines (and if you have better info from Groundspeak, please let me know) is that individual waypoints of multis need to be at least 528' from each other and from other caches. Finals for mystery caches also need the proper spacing. So, yes, individual parts of a multicache need to be at least .1 mile apart."

Well, a couple of geocachers DID let me know that they had better information from Groundspeak, so I want to thank them. Turns out that individual waypoints of your own multi don't need to be at least .1 mile from each other. The reference cited from groundspeak was a note posted in the "Getting Started" forum which reads, in part:

This guideline applies to all stages of a multi-stage cache, which must be .1 miles distant from any other cache. Within a multicache, the guideline doesn't apply - you can place stages of your own multi 250 feet apart, for example.

I have to admit, I missed that one. However, there have only been a couple of geocaches submitted where I asked the owners to space their waypoints futher apart. Now that I stand corrected, I won't be making this a requirement from now on. Thanks for the feedback!

How long can you hold a cache location?

This past week a geocacher (cary1952) posted a couple of "Should be archived" notes for a few geocaches that had been placed by a pair of geocachers from Texas. My thanks to Cary1952, because he called to my attention several caches the Texas tandem had placed in the Iowa Great Lakes area and then disabled last summer. (Originally they explained that they have relatives in the area who would maintain the caches, so that's why I approved them even though they don't live in that area.) However, as I said, they subsequently disabled their caches and said they would relist them "next spring." Well, spring came and is now nearly gone, so rather than keeping these spots reserved with their "temporarily" disabled caches, I archived them. It's not fair to hold these locations, especially when they're along such a nice bike trail in one of the most popular tourist destination areas in Iowa. It would have been OK for them to keep the caches active, provided the relatives who live in the area were willing and able to maintain them. But with creative local geocachers like davyduck hiding caches in the area, it's not like these were the only caches available in the Okoboji area.

Requesting archives

I just checked email and see that I have 11 messages for "Should be archived" notices on caches -- and they're all from the same geocacher. I know this person probably has good intentions, but it's just kind of frustrating to see one person post so many at one time. I'll look at each one, but I also like to wait a few days before taking any action to see if the cache owners take it upon themselves to reply to the request, either by archiving the cache themselves or by posting a note that they will perform maintenance.

A reminder about adding waypoints

Greetings from sunny (and breezy) Okoboji! I'm logged on to check the cache queue. I was able to approve a couple new ones just now, but for four others I had to post a note to the owners asking them to use the "add/edit waypoint" feature on the edit page to enter the additional waypoints for their multicaches. I know it may take some time for all geocachers to become aware of this new feature, so I'll keep plugging away to get the message out.

Okoboji meet and greet?

We'll be joining my extended family for our annual Okoboji Memorial Day reunion next weekend. If there's any interest in a geocachers' meet-n-greet -- say on Sunday morning for breakfast -- maybe we can organize something. It's too late to list an official event cache on geocaching.com, but let me know if you're interested and we can publicize it on this blog and in the IGO forums.

A reminder: "add/edit waypoints" feature

For the past few weeks I've been asking cache owners who submit new caches and who have not used the "add/edit waypoints" feature to go back and edit the cache page to add waypoints (if they originally listed additional waypoints in their description). And so far, the system seems to be working well. Everyone has been complying nicely. My thanks to everyone for doing this. It makes reviewing more efficient and it gives us a better way to document where the additional waypoints are for multicaches, which helps maintain the .1 separation.

Cemetary caches: What's the policy?

I received a suggestion today from Iowa geocacher Windchill, who suggested I link to a post in the IGO forums about an e-mail that fellow geocacher Iowa Tom received. It's a very moving story from the parents of a baby who died more than 40 years ago when the parents lived in the Waterloo area. If you're a parent or have ever wanted to be a parent, you should read the post.

Then Windchill went on to say: "With the strong feelings that this topic brings out, I thought I'd mention it and ask if you would share the official Groundspeak position, and your personal position, on cemetery caches."

There is no universal guideline for all areas of the world about cemetary caches. I understand that in Europe, it's no big deal to geocache in a cemetary. However, in some areas of the U.S., it is highly discouraged.

To answer Windchill's question about the official Groundspeak position, the closest that the guidelines come to a position on cemetaries is this:

"For all cache types please be sensible when choosing your location for cache placement. Please be aware of what may be a perceived to a non geocacher as dangerous or questionable behavior. For example, suspicious looking characters wandering about near an elementary school. The land may be public property, but keep in mind what is on the other side of that property line."

The way I interpret this guideline is to ask the geocache owner to obtain permission from the cemetary owner or caretaker. I feel it's important that the cemetary caretakers know ahead of time that geocachers may be visiting the cemetary, and why, and that they approve of the cache placement.

I also request that the cache owner consider including a note in the description to tell hunters not to geocache after dark, don't hunt for the cache if there are mourners in the area, and in general to be respectful at all times, including not posting photos of themselves next to a gravestone, for example.

To sum it up: If you get permission, you can place a geocache in a cemetary. But please don't place it on or around a gravestone.

Polk County permit required

For geocachers in Polk County who may not be aware, the county now requires a permit be obtained before placing a geocache in county parks. I have already approved a couple of geocaches since March, when the Polk County policy went into effect. Those geocache owners stated in their descriptions that they had obtained the proper permit. You can read more about the Polk County policy at this site. Click on Policies>Facility Policies>then click on search by Facility and go to Polk County.

Shining Happy People

If you haven't read the geocaching.com profile for the Texas approver, Prime Approver, it's worth checking out. I love his description of what it takes to be one of the shining happy geocachers. (And I quote from Prime Approver's profile and borrow the image he has posted):



Why are the people above shining and happy? Their cache was approved, because they read and followed the Cache Placement Guidelines before they placed their cache. Thus, they received the golden orb of approval happiness.

The people above would never place a cache that's closer then 1/10 of a mile to another cache. If they're placing a multi-cache, they would check that each stage also follows this rule. Everyone deserves a little space.

The shining happy people would never place a cache within 150 feet of a railroad track, because they know that area belongs to the railroad company, and they get grumpy if things are placed in their right-of-way.

The people above know that they would never receive the golden orb if they submitted a physical cache that didn't have a log book. Trying to submit a "code-word" cache is the path to darkness, and will not be allowed.

The shining happy people know that when they submit a multi-cache, or any cache where the actual location is not the one posted, they should submit a reviewer note informing the approver where the actual locations are, including all the stages of a multi-cache. That way, they know they're following the golden path to quick approval.

[And for Iowa geocaches, I'm asking that all multi waypoint coordinates be listed with the "add waypoints" feature, and not merely in a note to the reviewer.]

The shining happy people know that virtual caches are no longer being published on geocaching.com. If you've found something really special, and can't make it part of a physical cache, see if there's a place for it over on waymarking.com.

The shining happy people know that sometimes, bad things happen to good caches. But they also know that disabling a cache is meant to be a temporary measure. If you can't get your cache repaired in a timely manner, you should archive it, so that it will stop showing up in search lists. It's also not fair when your disabled cache prevents others from placing a cache in the same area. Remember, geocaching is about finding caches, and they can't be found if they're not there.

If a cache has been disabled for too long, and a reviewer archives it, the shining happy people know not to get upset about it. When your cache has been repaired, it can always be un-archived (as long as it still follows the current guidelines).

Nice words

I received this email from a geocacher today. He gave me permission to post it here. Thanks, AB!
-----

Hi Ken,

This is AB of AB-n-AP, and I just wanted to say your blog is very informative! I went back and read through all your posts since January, and learned a lot about the way you prefer new caches to be submitted and also how you go through the whole approving process. In addition to being informative, it's also very interesting to read your updates and the Q&A segments you have had. Thanks for giving geocachers a great place for valuable geocaching information.

All Beef

Volunteer geocoins

I'm enjoying reading about the travels of my IowaAdmin Geocoins that are traveling around the state. Most of the coins that are circulating have a goal to move from cache to cache in Iowa. A few of them have been allowed to travel outside the state. You can see a list of them here.

Additional waypoints -- please use this feature

Back on January 21st I posted some tips about how to use the additional waypoint feature at geocaching.com. Now that this system has been around for several months, it seems to have most of the bugs worked out. I encourage each of you to use this feature when you submit new geocaches. It will be especially helpful for reviewers as we have more multicaches out there if everyone submits all their multicache waypoints using this feature. That way, I'll be able to see quickly if any of the multicache waypoints intrude on each other's 528 ft. rule for cache separation. From now on, if new caches are submitted without using the additional waypoint coordinates feature, I'm going to ask the owner to edit the cache page to include the additional waypoints for multicaches -- and for parking (for those who choose to include parking coordinates in their description). For those who want to go back to their existing cache pages and use this feature -- well, that would be great, too. If the cache is a simple traditional cache with no parking coordinates or no multiple waypoints, then, of course, you won't need to use the additional waypoints feature.

State parks managed by counties

This weekend there were two new caches submitted for review called A Grove View and A Large Dead One which are both located in Oak Grove State Park. I wrote to the cache owner and requested that permission be obtained from the Iowa DNR. However, the owner, campingfarmer, correctly pointed out that even though this is a state park, it is managed by the county. He also provided a link to other such parks. As the DNR states at this site: "These parks fall under any rules, fees and regulations established by the county. Please contact the county conservation board listed for more information about a specific park." My thanks to campingfarmer for pointing this out.

My GPS? That old thing?

In a comment to yesterday's post, welch asked: Which reminds me, what sort of gps unit do you use IowaAdmin?

Answer: I have a five-year-old Garmin eMap with 8 mb of memory (which I upgraded soon after I bought it to get that much memory). I know, I know, it's practically an antique, but it still does the job for me. I like the large screen and the low-power consumption so batteries last forever. I also like that I have a handlebar mount for my road bike so I can take off for miles without getting lost. Well, not too far lost anyway. I also have an external antenna for it that I can plug in when I'm in wooded areas searching for a cache. It draws a lot more battery power in that mode, but the external antenna sure is effective. My wife has a Garmin eTrex Legend and a Garmin Forerunner (wristband model) that I gave her which she uses for her daily 4:30 a.m. 3-mile runs.

Now, the answers...

Thanks for the questions posted here yesterday. Volunteer geocoins are on their way to welch and bluedeuce. Now, so as not to keep team gamsci in suspense any longer, here are the answers.

Welch asked: Do you ever try to encourage or discourage certain types of caches?

A: It is rare that I do. However I did just that a couple of days ago when a cache was submitted for a micro at the base of a lamp pole in a parking lot. Before I approved the cache, I posted a note to the owner that he might expect some negative feedback from fellow geocachers about this cache, since some geocachers really dislike these types of drive-up urban micros that don't take you to an interesting place. In general, if a cache meets all the guidelines, it will get approved, no matter the "lameness factor," which I don't feel is my place as a reviewer to judge. Of course, if not approving a cache is considered discouraging it, I will "discourage" caches that are no longer approvable, such as locationless, virtuals and web cam caches.

Bluedeuce asked: How do check the location of cache placements? Do you use the internet based mapquest or purchased mapping software?

A: I use MapQuest, Google maps, Topozone and Terraserver. In recent months I also started using Iowa Geographic Map Server, which is a very handy tool for certain caches. I have not been using purchased mapping software. What do you use?

And lastly, team gamsci asked: Will we get to see the answers on here to the questions?

A: Yes.

Thanks for the questions! Please don't wait for the bribe of a geocoin to ask yours.

Geocoins to give away

It's time to prime the pump again. I'll mail my IowaAdmin volunteer reviewer geocoins to each of the next two Iowa geocachers who post a comment on my blog. The comment needs to be a legitimate question about geocache reviewing in Iowa.

Buddy Holly Shrine virtual

After visiting the virtual cache "Holly Shrine" on Aug. 11, 2002, I've kept it on my watch list. I'm always interested in the comments that cachers write about this place. The experience seems to have a significant impact on most of them. It's also very interesting to view the gallery of photos that have been uploaded to the cache page. The time of the year makes a profound difference in how the location looks. When I was there on a hot August day, the place was like a jungle with tall corn all around. Contrast that with the winter photos, where it appears you can see the cache from half a mile away.

If you haven't yet been to this spot, I recommend it, especially on a warm and quiet early morning in July or August.

Are you sure you want to say that?

Over the years, I have seen many cache owners add a statement like this to their cache page descriptions: "Please put the cache back exactly as you found it." However, it's been my experience that that's not the best way to keep a cache hidden the way you originally placed it. Consider what happens when a critter drags a container out of position. (It happens!) Also, it only takes one geocacher to leave a cache out in the open or slightly exposed. If all the subsequent geocachers put the cache back exactly the same way, the container remains out in the open until the owner eventually goes back for a maintenance check.

Here's a better way: prominently place a note inside the cache (such as on a laminated card) that describes exactly how the cache should be hidden. For example, you might write: "Please make sure the cache is concealed entirely inside the hollow tree and completely covered with pieces of bark." That way, each geocacher knows exactly the intent of the cache owner.