Geocaching Australia

I think I've found the same one (Oxenford?)

I arrived just after some rain, and the amount of mud and sticks that has accumulated in the bag was amazing! There was more mud IN the bag than there was OUTSIDE it!

Drove past this today. Didn't even bother stopping. Face it with a description this appealing why would someone stop?

Have to drive a little further than normal for this job. Figured a cache drop on some of these would be a good idea.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As above. It was to be placed yesterday, but there was a pretty bad bus accident, and we had a long day, so on my trip back today, I "rapidly" placed this cache.

As there wasn't a whole lot of thought to it, it's pretty easy to find!

DJ

djcache wrote:Drove past this today. Didn't even bother stopping. Face it with a description this appealing why would someone stop?

Have to drive a little further than normal for this job. Figured a cache drop on some of these would be a good idea.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As above. It was to be placed yesterday, but there was a pretty bad bus accident, and we had a long day, so on my trip back today, I "rapidly" placed this cache.

As there wasn't a whole lot of thought to it, it's pretty easy to find!

DJ

At least they are honest!

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_de ... =GC1GBQN<p>

New cachers. New hides. <p>
Found by several cachers with 'experience/solid numbers' of finds. <p> Constructive criticism and direction either personally with the hiders or in the cache logs. <p>
Changes made. New geocachers take that onboard. <p>
It's a win/win situation. Is it not?<p>

cdmark wrote: It's a win/win situation. Is it not?<p>

But it's still a Premium Member only cache.

Hmmm...that is a bit odd.<p>
I guess it can't be changed after it is published even if the hider wanted it to be?<p>

cdmark wrote:Hmmm...that is a bit odd

I guess it can't be changed after it is published even if the hider wanted it to be?

It's just a simple matter of editing the cache page and un-ticking the Premium Members Only box

duplicate post

I had the pleasure of doing about 10 caches by Lava12 the other Sunday morning.

Most were in parks or semi bush but because of the hides I didn't feel exposed like I usually do wandering aimlessly around parks.

The quality of the containers was also exceptional. Really good camo jobs on all (puts to shame).

It made an early Sunday morning cache run really enjoyable.

Lava12 hasn't been caching a long time but that isn't reflected in the quality of the caches.

team waldron wrote:I had the pleasure of doing about 10 caches by Lava12 the other Sunday morning.

Most were in parks or semi bush but because of the hides I didn't feel exposed like I usually do wandering aimlessly around parks.

The quality of the containers was also exceptional. Really good camo jobs on all (puts to shame).

It made an early Sunday morning cache run really enjoyable.

Lava12 hasn't been caching a long time but that isn't reflected in the quality of the caches.

Agreed with Glenn, though the only thing that i would like to see improve, is the cache descriptions, as they are quite often short, and don't explain why you are going there.
For a cacher that hasnt been around long, the containers are always painted, brand new, and well sealed, and aren't just tossed into a bush, and the co-ords taken wherever it happens to land (or even worse, a few meters from where it landed)

<p>
I have to wonder what we would all think of the original cache.
<p>
As I understand it, it was just a bucket, uncamouflaged, just put somewhere in the bush, with no history, beautiful place, or view. in fact the reason for its placement had nothing to do with the place or hide at all!
<p>
Have we just become ultra picky?
<p>

Alansee wrote:<p>
I have to wonder what we would all think of the original cache.
<p>
As I understand it, it was just a bucket, uncamouflaged, just put somewhere in the bush, with no history, beautiful place, or view. in fact the reason for its placement had nothing to do with the place or hide at all!
<p>
Have we just become ultra picky?
<p>

I believe it was then buried in a hole with the lid at ground level and it had a can of food in it. (and something much much worse, a copy of "George of the Jungle"!!)

Alansee, if you go to your forum profile and select "Always allow HTML: No" you don't need to insert paragraph breaks.

At least the early ones (that I have found anyway) were places for the point of the sport, were a reasonable size, and the finding was the whole point of the excercise with GPS receivers not as good as they are these days.

Nowadays anyone can chuck a lame magnetic micro anywhere and you sometimes wonder why did they bother except they wanted to hide one. I have had enough experience that I will try to make them interesting from either a historical or travel side. And there are enough in the local area I don't need to add one for the sake of it.

There are areas that need some more such as Barrington Tops, though unluckily any would have to be placed in the State Forest areas rather than the NP. Shame because there are some great spots there they could be placed to lead people on some of the walks.

team waldron wrote: Most were in parks or semi bush but because of the hides I didn't feel exposed like I usually do wandering aimlessly around parks.

...or tennis courts, as the case may be