- <<Yes Crestwood did sponsor the cache... however all the leg work was don= e by=20 a geocacher.>> Well, that is exactly what I was talking about. If there are NO physical = caches allowed at all now, then you are a step ahead in the right directi= on. Sure it means theirs and nobody else's at first, but that is one step= beyond NONE. NADA. ZIP. I just think it is a good start and a reasonable= follow-on to the EarthCache step. And I think a geocacher SHOULD do it. = And the park folks should be involved so knowledge from both sides is exc= hanged so that it can meet the needs of both sides. The park folks may be= helpful in planning a path with waypoints to help them preserve areas wh= ere they don't want traffic, and actually educate the geocacher about WHY= that is a priority, and the geocacher can explain why they shouldn't rea= lly erect sign posts pointing you along the the paths directly to the cac= he so you don't need a GPS. Although you can go to the Crestwood web and = download a map showing you all the waypoints and the cache location, so s= omeone could, in theory, do it without a GPS, they didn't put up sign pos= ts along the way ;-) . The geocacher would probably not be able to make = the permanent waypoint markers without the park's blessing either. All in= all, I think it was a pretty good deal. The only thing I didn't like abo= ut it is that the final cache is pretty small, and you get the impression= that there is going to be more to it than what is there. I think the kid= s would get a bigger kick out of it if it were bigger and allowed better = "prizes". It isn't that I don't like the idea of the EarthCache, mind you. It does = sound pretty cool, and it is something I would like to take my son on as = an educational experience. I was just a bit curious about why this was su= ch a big deal considering it could have been done all along as a virtual = cache. I didn't think of the gc.com approval aspect of it, but that is be= cause I am new at this. So I learned something, and perhaps in my naivet=E9= thought of what could be a good next step. But y'all are here so you can say "be careful what you ask for!" Bruce S wrote: >- > > > > =20 > >>From: Mike Lusicic <lusicic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>- >>Gee wiz, maybe the another answer is for the park to start sponsoring >>their own caches like Crestwood did. Then they can toot their own >>whistle wherever they want. The two together would probably be a nice >>combo, and maybe a way to perhaps get some geocachers in there to maybe= >>set them up for the park service, and then they can maintain it as just= >>another part of the park facility. It could start up a nice relationshi= p >>that may help the two sides appreciate each other and maybe be better >>for the encounter. >> >> =20 >> > > >Careful what you ask for. There are places in the country that parks do= =20 >sponsor caches but they only allow their own caches and don't allow any = >others. > >Yes Crestwood did sponsor the cache... however all the leg work was done= by=20 >a geocacher. > >_________________________________________________________________ >Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools a= nd=20 >more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx > > **************************************** > Our WebPage! Http://WWW.GeoStL.com =20 > Mail List Info. //www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/list?list_id=3Dgeocach= ing > Mail List FAQ's: //www.freelists.org/help/questions.html=20 > **************************************** >To unsubscribe from this list: > send an email to geocaching-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in= the Subject field > > > > > > =20 > **************************************** Our WebPage! Http://WWW.GeoStL.com Mail List Info. //www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/list?list_id=geocaching Mail List FAQ's: //www.freelists.org/help/questions.html **************************************** To unsubscribe from this list: send an email to geocaching-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field