Within the past few minutes finished a review of the cache placing 
information provided by Ground speak.  First, the information seems 
straight forward and well presented.  The discussion of virtual and 
the reluctance of approvers to grant them tweaked my interest.  I 
found nothing there indicating a reluctance toward virtual, 
nevertheless find the trend of postings mentioning virtual somewhat 
alarming and it leaves me wondering.

As sometimes tourists, quite often we find ourselves in surroundings 
where the only thing familiar is the map.  That's how we got into 
this game to begin with. We've learned that a check of virtual 
listed in the area is perhaps the most rapid way to become familiar 
with our surroundings. Plus, it adds a whole new dimension to 
tourism, without mentioning the economical advantages.  A good 
example is the area surrounding Acadia NP in Maine where there is 
hardly a single overlook or historical point not represented by a 
visual- great stuff!  Similarly, we have the Superstitions in the 
east Valley rift with legends, overlooks, hikes and sites of 
geological and photographic interests that can only be exploited by 
virtual.

Side issue:  Over a wonderful lifetime have become wary of special 
interest groups who tend to create needs for regulations and 
organizations to establish boundaries.  This same wariness is 
multiplied once regulators assert themselves.  Yet, it's unfortunate 
that even a brief conversation with a park ranger, or public lands 
administrator out here reveals an incredible level of hostility 
toward geocaching in general.  Why?   Are we unwittingly creating 
our own suicide by getting too obvious or aggressive?  After all, 
the whole activity is based upon stealth or is that the problem to 
begin with?

Cord Harris: Team Doublebogie6

Rant terminated, Low Batteries!