<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">I'm so confused now. In your other thread you just wrote: </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><EM>"Why spend all that money in $3 a gallon gas and <BR>help support the record profits the oil companies are enjoying (at our <BR>expense) when I can drive a short 10 minute drive up the road from my house <BR>and park less than 1/4 mile away and hike to this cache?"</EM></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">and now here you're saying you want caches 1-2 miles apart so they have to be in remote areas??? Wouldn't that require a lot more gas??</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">Me, I'd rather drive a short 10 minute drive to a densly populated South Mtn and get some much needed exercise. To me that makes those "remote-area" caches that much more special when I do go out and do them.</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">By the way, (to stay on topic) the additional waypoint entries are extremely helpful tools, especially if you own a multi-cache. Thanks for sharing the info with us Artemis.</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">Jared of AZBliss02<BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">----- Original Message ----<BR>From: Roping The Wind <arizcowboy@hotmail.com><BR>To: listserv@azgeocaching.com<BR>Sent: Friday, August 4, 2006 1:31:15 PM<BR>Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Additional Waypoint Entries<BR><BR>
<DIV>>From: AZcachemeister<BR><BR>>I would say that by far the best answer to the proximity issue is for new <BR>>caches to be placed many miles away from existing caches.<BR>>That way we get to visit a new area, and no conflict!<BR><BR>AMEN to that!!!! I hate visiting one area and clearing all the caches in <BR>that area, only to have someone place a new one in the same area two days <BR>later! How many times have I hiked to the almost exact same location <BR>somewhere to find another cache. Ever hear of originality!? :)) For <BR>instance, South Mountain Park in Phoenix is so dense in caches that I have <BR>hiked the same trails dozens of times to find newly placed caches. I would <BR>agree that the minimum distance should be MUCH more than 0.10 mile. It <BR>should be at least a mile or two apart. It would be very difficult to find a <BR>place anywhere in the Phoenix area to hide a cache if this was the rule! It <BR>would definetly promote more
remote caches.<BR><BR>Scott<BR>Team Ropingthewind<BR><BR><BR>____________________________________________________________<BR>Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv@azgeocaching.com<BR>To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:<BR><A href="http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching" target=_blank>http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching</A><BR><BR>Arizona's Geocaching Resource<BR><A href="http://www.azgeocaching.com/" target=_blank>http://www.azgeocaching.com</A></DIV></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif"><BR></DIV></div></body></html>