[Az-Geocaching] Mo' bettah caches!

[Bill Tomlinson]

I don't want to beat a dead horse (or a live one for that matter), but
it seems I'm completely lost.  I'm reading two objections, but can't
understand either.  First, you say that it is a matter of saturation,
but as I read Graldrich's listing, he noted somewhere between .20 and
.33 but when I look at the guidelines posted at geocaching.com, it says
that caches must be placed at least .10 apart.  If the guidelines have
changes, they should be posted.  Second, you mention the possibility of
land managers getting upset, but graldrich said he would obtain
management approval before placement (as we always should).  Seems to me
they aren't going to get too upset if he does something they approve of.

Confused in Arizona

-----Original Message-----
From: az-geocaching-bounces at listserv.azgeocaching.com
[mailto:az-geocaching-bounces at listserv.azgeocaching.com] On Behalf Of
Artemis Approver
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 8:57 PM
To: listserv at azgeocaching.com
Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Mo' bettah caches!


Gladdly, as it was explained to graldrich in email from myself, co_admin
and other reviewers. As it was explained in the forum he started and as
others have said.

The guidelines changed because many land managers were getting pressure
and they put the brakes on cache saturation. Since this is an arbitrary
issue, we use a reviewers group to make decisions. Since it was thrown
to the reviewers group and over 80% said it was a saturation issue, we
explained very well to gradlrich why you cannot compare caches that were
listed two years ago to caches of today.

Just as anyone who has been around can tell you that in '02 and '03 you
could waypoint a man hole cover in the street and make it a virtual,
this cannot be done today. I explained in many long emails about how
many states have started requiring a permit for every cache hidden on
state property. This was not the case two years ago.

I explained how many land managers look at the cache maps and say enough
is enough and ban geocaching.

Very little of this has actually made it to everyone, but in a nut
shell, why can California have it and not Arizona? Because it was listed
before the guidelines changed.

Artemis


On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 21:30:36 EST, AZBob at aol.com <AZBob at aol.com> wrote:
>  
> Well, since Artemis is watching this also, Artemis can you explain why

> they can do it in California and we can't have the same in Arizona? 
> Want to say that I always thought I'd like to help in the approving 
> department but know someone has to make the rules and know I don't 
> now.....I'm sure it very time consuming and a no find job!! Still, if 
> some can be accepted in some states it should be that way for all and 
> I think, if Guy puts together a great trail it should be accepted. Can

> you explain California vs. Arizona??
>   
> Jeep'en Jumpers


-- 
Volunteer Reviewer
Geocaching.com
____________________________________________________________
Az-Geocaching mailing list listserv at azgeocaching.com
To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching

Arizona's Geocaching Resource
http://www.azgeocaching.com