Return to Project-GC

Welcome to Project-GC Q&A. Ask questions and get answers from other Project-GC users.

If you get a good answer, click the checkbox on the left to select it as the best answer.

Upvote answers or questions that have helped you.

If you don't get clear answers, edit your question to make it clearer.

If we have E.C., why not Bio Caches and Botanic Caches?

0 votes
95 views
asked Jul 19 in Miscellaneous by RuiASP (180 points)
I recently asked an EC reviewer from Germany. "because of historical reasons" was the answer.

6 Answers

0 votes
It's a choice from GS. I can't explain why geologics more than other life science but maybe there's some good reasons.

It should be very interesting to expand the concept to others sciences (Botanic is a perfect example) but i wonder how GS want to reduce the virtual caches (caches without physical items).
answered Jul 19 by DaneteYaourth (2,540 points)
0 votes
Perhaps it's to promote the 'Geo' in 'Geocaching'. There isn't much else that separates geology from the other fields and yet these others are limited to multi's and puzzles. I think there would be too many types of caches if they included all sciences.
answered Jul 20 by Potatonator (9,250 points)
+4 votes
It was an agreement between groundspeak and the geological society of america. the following link has a brief description. (http://www.geosociety.org/GSA/Education_Careers/Field_Experiences/EarthCache/GSA/fieldexp/EarthCache/about.aspx)

ive often thought a history cache  (not sure of the name) would be a good addition where you could highlight a area for a specific historical reason but with its own cache icon. That is very unlikely mind so we will have to stick with trads for the time being
answered Jul 21 by NSCR (3,640 points)
0 votes

I also find that the earthcache is limited to mineralogy, opening to the biology of trees seeing insects would be rewarding ... vote +1

traduit par google du francais

je trouve aussi domage que les earthcache soit limité a la minéralogie, ouvrir à la biologie des arbres voir des insectes serait enrichissants ... vote +1

answered Aug 12 by Chup'a (7,070 points)
0 votes
The field of botanics is just too large. Imagine the number of different species of plants on a single geological feature. Also botanics are not permanent like geological features. They die.
answered Aug 13 by ChrisDen (3,740 points)
0 votes
Late to the discussion, but depending on your definition of bio cache and botanical cache, this seems impractical.

Earthcaches based off geology work well as geocachers, because a well planned earthcache subject will be relatively unchanged from month to month.

Bio cache: would this be based off animal habitat? Animals have a habit of moving around and keeping to their own schedule. How would this be tied to precise coordinates, unless these are limited to zoos or other contained environments?

Botanical cache: OK, a little better, most trees and plants tend not to hunt or migrate, so this could be more feasible. There's still a limit though - you'd need some guarantee of permanence. A cache based on an outcrop of flowers is going to require a lot more oversight than one based on a saguaro cactus.
answered Oct 26 by hzoi (2,790 points)
...