MartianMaggot@netscape.net wrote:
> Hi! I've got a question for anyone who has found, or even the person
> who created, the Mt Tammany letterbox... Is there any way to get in
> touch with who put it there, in case they know what happened to it?
> It was navigational error or anything, I checked everything twice.
> I think it was just stolen.

It would not be the first, we've had a few other letterboxes that were
likely stolen. The only way to verify for sure though is to to have
Marty Chamberlain check on it. Since the clues for the Tammany box
are a bit involved I would recommend that you not automatically
assume you have found the spot. I was sure I had found the spot
for the Multnomah Falls box in Oregon but I did not and later Mitch
Klink, the placer of the box verified for me that I had missed it
because I was trying to find the bearing from within the park instead
of by the parking lot outside the park. So, even when bearings are
involved there can be some amibiguity.

Dan Servatius (Dan'l)
St. Paul, MN
mailto:elf@pclink.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/group/letterbox-usa
http://www.eGroups.com - Simplifying group communications

I'll check on it when I get a chance, which may be a while. Has anyone
else been up there recently?

Marty

At 10:48 PM 5/11/99 -0000, you wrote:
>Hi! I've got a question for anyone who has found, or even the person who
created, the Mt Tammany letterbox. I went up there earlier today and
didn't see it. I followed the clues and everything, even found the dead
log at the end of the clues, and it wasn't in there. Is there any way to
get in touch with who put it there, in case they know what happened to it?
It was navigational error or anything, I checked everything twice. I think
it was just stolen. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks!
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>The Weather Underground. We provide weather across the world.
>Visit http://clickhere.egroups.com/click/48
>
>
>eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/group/letterbox-usa
>http://www.eGroups.com - Simplifying group communications
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________
NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet. Shouldn't you?
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/group/letterbox-usa
http://www.eGroups.com - Simplifying group communications

Speaking of compass bearings, I had a general question. I have noticed
that some compass clues are clearly marked as magnetic bearings and others
are not. Is the assumption then that these are true bearings (corrected
for magnetic declination)? I know the answer to this question may vary
according to whomever seeded the box. Perhaps we can ask people to
clarify this in their clues.


Todd Lane
Department of Geosciences
Princeton University
(609)258-2489

On Tue, 11 May 1999, Daniel Servatius wrote:

> MartianMaggot@netscape.net wrote:
> > Hi! I've got a question for anyone who has found, or even the person
> > who created, the Mt Tammany letterbox... Is there any way to get in
> > touch with who put it there, in case they know what happened to it?
> > It was navigational error or anything, I checked everything twice.
> > I think it was just stolen.
>
> It would not be the first, we've had a few other letterboxes that were
> likely stolen. The only way to verify for sure though is to to have
> Marty Chamberlain check on it. Since the clues for the Tammany box
> are a bit involved I would recommend that you not automatically
> assume you have found the spot. I was sure I had found the spot
> for the Multnomah Falls box in Oregon but I did not and later Mitch
> Klink, the placer of the box verified for me that I had missed it
> because I was trying to find the bearing from within the park instead
> of by the parking lot outside the park. So, even when bearings are
> involved there can be some amibiguity.
>
> Dan Servatius (Dan'l)
> St. Paul, MN
> mailto:elf@pclink.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Too much effort to find the stock info you want each day? StockMaster
> lets you enter a company name and quickly shows you a daily quote,
> chart, and news all on one page. Free! http://clickhere.egroups.com/click/71
>
> eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/group/letterbox-usa
> http://www.eGroups.com - Simplifying group communications
>
>
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/group/letterbox-usa
http://www.eGroups.com - Simplifying group communications

> Speaking of compass bearings, I had a general question. I have noticed
> that some compass clues are clearly marked as magnetic bearings and others
> are not. Is the assumption then that these are true bearings (corrected
> for magnetic declination)?

A harder question (for me anyway) is what is a pace? :-)

I have attempted to clarify both questions with boilerplate
language on all of my clues:

> NOTE 4: [...] All bearings magnetic unless otherwise
> noted. A pace is a long stride counted on a footfall of
> either foot, i.e. two paces are counted each time
> the right foot hits the ground.

At least for my clues, hope that clarifies. As for when this information
is not specified in a clue, I assume magnetic bearings because declination
varies with location, and I'm too lazy to look it up unless the clue
explicitly specifies true bearings (if I feel I need to, I assume a decl
of 15 deg, which seems close enough for use in the lower 48 -- from my
experience, you can generally be within 10 degrees of a bearing and still
hit the box or next clue leg). I use the magnetic assumption because it is
likely that the clue writer read the bearing right off of the compass
after writing that leg of the clue (at least that is how I do it).

I find pacing much more difficult to handle in the field. I have to
guess is it one or two paces each time the right foot hits the
ground, is it a long or normal stride, is it a tall or short person,
etc. On this one, I hope the hider used a pace calibration leg in
their clue; when they do not, I try all of the above combinations
and still don't hit it sometimes :-) I have found variations of
50% or more in pace counts between me and the hider, and when you
start talking about 100 paces, turn left, then 200 paces, etc, the
error can add up (especially if there is intervening vegatation and
other forest clutter/terrain), and can be quite a challenge.

--
Randy "the mapsurfer"
Orienteer * Letterboxer * Globetrotter
http://www.letterboxing.org/faq.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/group/letterbox-usa
http://www.eGroups.com - Simplifying group communications

Randy wrote:
>
> I find pacing much more difficult to handle in the field. I have to
> guess is it one or two paces each time the right foot hits the
> ground, is it a long or normal stride, is it a tall or short person,
> etc. On this one, I hope the hider used a pace calibration leg in
> their clue; when they do not, I try all of the above combinations
> and still don't hit it sometimes :-) I have found variations of
> 50% or more in pace counts between me and the hider, and when you
> start talking about 100 paces, turn left, then 200 paces, etc, the
> error can add up (especially if there is intervening vegatation and
> other forest clutter/terrain), and can be quite a challenge.
>
Boy, don't I know it. Can't wait to have a conversation with you in person about E. Shore :-)

I agree with randy totally about the assumption that all bearings are magnetic unless otherwise specified. It gets way too complicated otherwise, esp. for kids.

JDW


------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/group/letterbox-usa
http://www.eGroups.com - Simplifying group communications

Randy wrote:
> ter writing that leg of the clue (at least that is how I do it).
>
> I find pacing much more difficult to handle in the field. I have to
> guess is it one or two paces each time the right foot hits the
> ground, is it a long or normal stride, is it a tall or short person,
> etc. On this one, I hope the hider used a pace calibration leg in
> their clue; when they do not, I try all of the above combinations
> and still don't hit it sometimes :-) I have found variations of
> 50% or more in pace counts between me and the hider, and when you
> start talking about 100 paces, turn left, then 200 paces, etc, the
> error can add up (especially if there is intervening vegatation and
> other forest clutter/terrain), and can be quite a challenge.



Most people that I've observed pacing a distance seem to use a 3-foot
measure, which I always found a bit odd. A short person has to really
stretch to do this, and I feel very inaccurate.

I am tall, but I've found that a 2 1/2 pace is an easy saunter, able to
be corrected by dead-reckoning when going around/over obstacles, etc.
And, the math is easy - every left (or right) foot equals 5 feet.

To get the "calibration" right, I practice from time to time with a
known distance (say, 1 or 2 hundred feet). Its worth the effort.

However, rather than feet (excepting Prayaer ROck, which goes over some
rough spots), I use "paces" in the clue, being 2 1/2' paces.

This is in the "for what its worth" catagory - I'm certainly not
advocating any hard-and-fast rule. But, I'm glad it was brought up.

I also think magnetic bearings make more sense, and I try to be clear
about using them. Declination can be east or west, depending on
location, and, frankly, having to think it thru is just one more chance
for an error.

Erik Davis


------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/group/letterbox-usa
http://www.eGroups.com - Simplifying group communications