Highpointer

Thank you for the advice. Earlier in the day, I had sent another brief & friendly reminder to RClan, and a few minutes after I posted my last note, they responded to me. I sent them information to explain how to log the travel bugs, and they did that. Thank you to RClan for your reply and for properly logging the travel bugs.

This also happens in Arizona. I found this example this evening while logging today's cache findings. Here is a geocaching team that found one cache on May 28 of this year, took the travel bug, and never logged their travel bug finding and have yet to find another cache. Their last visit to Geocaching.com was over three months ago. Here is the log entry that I made today for this cache, Big & Easy in Paradise Valley, AZ: Highpointer's log entry Here is the only log entry by this new geocaching team, that took the travel bug Buzz USA and completely dropped out of geocaching shortly afterward: Log entry of short-lived geocaching team (they wrote their names as "Crystal and Mike" in the logbook) What can we do, as experienced geocachers, to encourage new geocachers to practice geocaching responsibly? What can we do to prevent travel bugs from becoming lost in this way? Ken Akerman (a..k.a. Highpointer)

I recommend making most new caches "Members Only" to deter the thieves. Thieves are not likely to purchase the Premium Membership. Thus, if a cache is well-hidden and not likely to be found accidentally, then it is less likely to be stolen. If you own a "Members Only" cache, you can see who has viewed your cache through the "Read the audit log." Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

There are many caches to visit, and if you enjoy hiking then there are many caches in the various desert parks and preserves. The weather is getting more hospitable for outdoor activities (daytime highs are now below 100° F). I live near South Mountain Park so that would be a good place to consider if you are in the southern part of Phoenix or the suburbs of Tempe or Chandler. Here is an example of a quality cache in South Mountain Park that is one of the newest caches in the Park, and here is another quality cache that is the oldest active cache in South Mountain Park (note the four-character waypoint name). Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Thank you for the comment. Edited the log entry to remove the pontification.

Did I do the appropriate action when I made a return visit to this cache in Phoenix, Grandma Left the Building? Log entry of Sept. 12, 2005

Why is it that I am a geocacher with over 1,700 cache findings, yet I experience difficulty finding some caches? There are some caches that I am unable to find at all and I have to log a "No Find". Other geocachers, even some geocachers with a very small number of findings, find some caches that I am unable to find. Often they write log comments such as "easy cache," "found it easily," or "quick find," which frustrates me even more and makes me feel embarrassed that I am unable to find the cache. Therefore, what can I do to improve my geocaching finding skills? I do not like to leave any caches unfound, and I know that many geocachers have higher success rates that I do. My goal is to find every cache that I attempt as long as the cache is not lost. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

I encourage the placement of more caches in the backcountry of northern Arizona, particularly by geocachers from large desert urban areas such as Phoenix, Tucson, and Las Vegas. It is important, however, to monitor these caches via Geocaching.com and log onto Geocaching.com every day that you use a computer. It is also vitally important for these caches be of high quality so they will last a long time and have a low risk of becoming lost or stolen. They should not be placed where a non-geocacher could likely find it accidentally, such as next to a road or a campground. Such a cache should require a hike to reach, but it doesn't need to be a long hike, and it shouldn't be placed too close to the trail. For a backcountry cache, the only container to use is an ammo can, because of its durability and tight closure to protect the contents. A cache that is durable and closes tightly is particularly important in high-elevation areas where the cache will likely be buried in snow for several months out of the year. Do not use containers such as paint cans, cookie tins or plastic food containers. Less durable metal containers will rust and absorb moisture, and the lids become bent and damaged with repeated openings and closures. Thin plastic containers disintegrate in the heat, so plastic should be avoided in remote desert caches. Authentic Tuperware containers, made of thicker molded plastic with tight seals, are fine for urban caches and caches in urban parks like South Mountain Park, but thin plastic containers (i.e. disposable Glad lunch containers) should never be used for cache containers. There is an example of a cache that I found earlier this mountain in Coconino National Forest where the location was excellent, in a relatively accessible location where there are no other caches nearby. The container was a paint can, which is not a suitable container for a cache. The cache is less than two months old so it has not experienced a northern Arizona winter yet, so I don't expect that the contents will survive a northern Arizona winter. I really like the cache but I wish the owner will replace the container with an ammo can. However, the cache owner has not logged onto Geocaching.com in nearly a month, and the owner has yet to respond to any of my e-mails. I don't want to mention this cache name in this reply, so please contact me if you want more informatioon about this cache. If I had a full weekend to spare, and if the to an ammo can, and placing one or two of my own caches in this same area of Coconino National Park, each about a mile from this cache. "Clustering" of caches in remote areas is a good idea to consider, because this will encourage more cache visits by geocachers who like to accumulate high find counts. Also, it is a good idea to pair a hard cache with a easy cache, so you can attract the rugged hard-core geocacher without deterring those geocachers who prefer to find mostly easy caches. Here is an example of where I paired a fairly easy cache with a very demanding cache in the foothills of the Rincon Mountains northeast of Tucson. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Please place these caches in the Flagstaff area. We need more caches in areas of outstanding scenic beauty with lots of open spaces such as the Flagstaff area. Also, the Flagstaff area is a great place to visit during the hot summers of the Phoenix area. Even though I live in Tempe, I am the owner of this cache in the Flagstaff area. The Phoenix area is already saturated with caches, and we need more caches in areas of low cache density like the Flagstaff area. This makes me think of another topic: What can we do to encourage the placement of more geocaches in backcountry areas and regions of low cache density, such as northern Arizona? The most satisfying caches for me are those caches in areas such in the mountains of northern Arizona, the Mogollon Rim, and other regions where it is higher and cooler than the Phoenix area and there are wide-open spaces that are great for hiking, climbing, mountain biking, skiing (in winter), and other outdoor activities. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Go to the travel bug page and log the travel bug into your inventory, using the six-digit number on the travel bug tag. This next step is important, but is frequently overlooked by many geocachers who log travel bugs that they find in a cache where the travel bug is not listed. After logging the travel bug into your inventory, go the page of the cache that you found the travel bug in, make a "Note" entry and log the travel bug into the cache. This will earn the travel bug credit for its visit to the cache. Delete your "Note" entry. Next, go to the travel bug page again, enter the six-digit number on the tag to put the travel bug back in your inventory. Move the travel bug to a cache as you normally would do.

No message.

Here are some comments on my visit to CDs and TBs: - The travel bugs that I removed from this cache had been in the cache an average of 25 days each, and each of these travel bugs had been passed up by an average of 10 geocaching teams before I grabbed them. I took five travel bugs, but I immediately moved two of them to nearby caches later in the same day. I took pictures of those travel bugs and uploaded them to both my cache and travel bug log entries. - There is no need for a travel bug hotel in this location. There are many geocaches nearby with regular-sized containers. This is not in the middle of the city but is near the edge of Tonto National Forest. There are over 50 caches within a five-mile radius of this location, and most of these caches have containers that are large enough to fit most travel bugs. It may take a little more effort, but if one has multiple travel bugs, isn't it better to put them in a variety of different caches rather than one single cache? - This cache is exposed and is very close to a street corner. The cache site is close enough to be seen by motorists who are stopped at the stop sign. Whenever I come here, I see new litter desosited in the area, and usually I pick some of it up. There is good chance that this cache could be found accidentally by a non-geocacher, who would likely take the cache and/or it contents, especially since the contents contain a large variety of music and computer CDs which is more valuable than the contents of most caches. I do not like to put travel bugs in caches that I feel are too exposed. - The geocacher who commented on what I did on the cache page has nearly 1,000 cache findings, but has more than 2,000 travel bug findings. I, on the other hand, have close to 1,600 cache findings, but I have less than 400 travel bug finds. Enough said. Addendum: To the best of my knowledge, I did write in the logbook at the cache that I had visited the cache and had exchanged travel bugs. To save space in the logbook, I may have written my comments on ununused space on a page before the last entry, instead of opening up an unused page. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

This is great! I'm watching Dave right now as I am reading this. Thank you, Dave. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

I reviewed this cache and I counted at least seven geocaching teams that passed up this travel bug before Mr. Moose picked up and logged this travel bug on Aug. 8, 2004, more than 22 months after it had been placed in the cache. Thank you to Mr. Moose for grabbing and moving this travel bug. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

I agree that this is a stupid rule. Here is the cache in Tucson: Tucson Travel Bug Mansion Here is a good example of why this is an absurd rule. This geocacher visited this cache and wanted to take some travel bugs to Oregon, but because of this rule, he did not take any travel bugs. Thus, some travel bugs were denied the opportunity to travel from Arizona to Oregon. Restrictive rules like this keep travel bugs in the cache longer than necessary. If I visited Tucson, I would visit this cache and take all of the travel bugs in it, no matter what the owner thinks about it. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Whenever I put a travel bug in a cache, I put that cache on my watch list until the travel bug has been claimed by a geocacher. On Dec. 25, 2004 I put the travel bug WYLIE COYOTE in the multi-cache K9 Conclusion, which is not a difficult cache. The coordinates to the cache container are in plain view on a sign outside a public building in Tempe, and the cache container is less than 1000 feet off State Route 88 in flat desert terrain north of Apache Junction, Arizona. Since I visited the cache more than three months ago, at least four geocachers have visited the cache container, and one of them added another travel bug. No one has taken a travel bug, so WYLIE COYOTE has been in the cache for more than three months, and it is now sharing the cache container with a second travel bug. I got this log entry from a visiting geocacher today. A geocaching team visited the cache but did not take either of two travel bugs because they claimed that they did not have anything to trade for the travel bugs. Here is their log entry: We have had the final coordinates for quite awhile, but this is the first chance to get out this way and find it. Had to pass on the bugs as we didn't have anything to trade for them (left our stash in the car). TNLN SL TFTH I sent them an e-mail explaining that they should have taken the travel bugs because travel bugs are not regular trade items, and thus they did not need to add additional items to the cache. They are regular geocachers so they could have moved the travel bugs to other caches relatively soon. Travel bugs are continually being passed up. Perhaps there are too many travel bugs out in the geocaching world. They don't seem to interest many geocachers anymore. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

I'll take as many travel bugs as I can, because I will move them as quickly as I can and I will move them to different caches. I don't like to see more than one travel bug in a cache at one time, because I like to move travel bugs to different caches. On Jan. 15, 2005 I took eight travel bugs from a cache in Apache Junction that the owner had designated as a "travel bug hotel". The cache owner didn't like this, but I felt that it was okay for me to do this, because several geocachers had visited this cache without taking any travel bugs. I don't understand why one cache should have so many travel bugs, so I took these travel bugs to move to eight different caches. I moved the travel bugs as soon as I could. I did not move these travel bugs to micro caches or to highly exposed urban caches, but I did move all of these travel bugs to easily accessible caches and to caches that fit the theme of the travel bugs. A geocacher who owned two of the travel bugs that I picked up sent me e-mails thanking me for picking up his travel bugs and moving them to good caches (one in South Mountain Park in Phoenix, another in Camelback Mountain Park in Phoenix). Here is my log entry for the cache. This is what travel bugs are supposed to do. They aren't supposed to be sitting together in one cache and are not supposed to be passed up by visiting geocachers. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

However, this has been occurred primarily with American geocachers, all or most of whom appear to have English as their first language.

Why does it appear to me that many geocachers don't know how to properly log travel bugs? Many geocachers don't log their finds when they find them in caches, and they don't log them correctly into caches when they move travel bugs to another cache. Thus, many travel bug visits to caches are not properly recorded. This is not very difficult to do. I am getting frustrated and tired of continually sending explanatory messages to geocachers to explain to them how to do this correctly. How can we educate geocachers on how to properly log the findings and movements of travel bugs? Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Here is a list of examples showing why travel bug hotels are not a good idea. These are all "travel bug hotels" that were stolen or destroyed in Arizona, some after a short lifespan and some lost or destroyed with travel bugs inside (dates reflect months of first and last finds): East Valley Travel Bug Hotel, Tempe, Jan. 2004 - March. 2005 West Valley Travel Bug Hotel, Surprise, April - Dec. 2004 (contents dumped in July 2004). Badger Travel Bug Hostel, I-17 near Bumble Bee, Aug. - Nov. 2003. The Travel Bug Hideaway, Chandler, Oct. 31 - Nov. 3, 2004 (4 days ). The Tucson Bugport, Tucson, Aug. 2002 - Jan. 2005. Have Bug, Will Travel, Phoenix, Jan. 2002 - Sept. 2003 (cache contents stolen or ransacked at least three times between May 3, 2003 and Sept. 1, 2003), July 2004 - March 2005 (found at least once by a non-geocacher in July 2004 and destoyed in Feb. or March 2005). These examples show that travel bugs hotels are risky places for travel bugs. Future travel bug hotels should not be approved unless they satisfy some rigorous requirements of safety and security to reduce the risk of travel bug losses. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

If you travel to Las Vegas and visit only micro or virtual caches, then you could take a picture of the travel bug at the site of the cache, particularly if there is a notable landmark at the cache site or an item that fits the theme of the travel bug (i.e. a travel bug resembling a lion pictured with the lion statue in front of the MGM Grand, for example). That's one way to have fun with travel bugs that will earn travel bugs credit for miles traveled to caches and will bring the travel bugs to appropriate locations when you are unable to physically put the travel bug in a well-concealed cache that is big enough to fit the bug. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

In metropolitan Phoenix, when I do note a cache that is likely to be in playground equipment, I know of a good time to visit when I can search unobstructed - midday during the summer months Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

I don't like travel bug hotels, because many such caches are located in areas where they have a high risk of becoming lost or stolen. Travel bug hotels are designed to be easy, accessible caches so one can drop travel bugs in them quickly, but easy, accessible caches are not the best caches for the safety of travel bugs. An easy and accessible cache is more likely to be found accidentally by a non-geocacher and become lost, stolen, or rasacked, and if a cache becomes lost with travel bugs in it, then the travel bugs become lost as well. Many of the people who visit easy, accessible caches are inexperienced or infrequent geocachers who may pick up the travel bugs, but fail to log them properly or don't move them to another cache. I'd rather move the travel bugs that I have to caches that require a little more effort to get to and are not too close to roads or parking areas. These caches are less likely to be muggled, and the person who claims the travel bug would more likely be an experienced geocacher who would know how to properly log and move the travel bug. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Why would you have to apologize to the bug owner? The travel bug had no tag on it, so how would you know that the bug was supposed to be going to China? Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)

Many of the caches that appear to have a short live expectancy are those in private neighborhood parks owned by an HOA. Many geocachers place caches under bushes or in other locations in these parks, but these caches are usually soon found by landscapers or other non-geocachers who in turn remove them. Putting a cache under a bush in a neighborhood park would seem to be an obviously bad location for a cache, because such a cache probably won't last very long. This seems be a particular characteristic among new geocachers - they are anxious to place a new cache, but don't want to spend a little more time traveling or searching for a good location where the cache will be less likely to found by a non-geocacher and become lost. However, experienced geocachers sometimes put geocaches in such areas as well. Also, while it would appear to be good common sense not to put a travel bug in a cache that has a high risk of becoming lost or stolen, many geocachers put travel bugs in such caches, even highly experienced cachers. I believe that geocachers should avoid putting travel bugs in highly exposed caches or in those caches that have a high probability of becoming lost or stolen before the next geocacher comes to visit it. If there is one common urban location where I feel that cache placement should be banned, it is in playground equipment. As a single male geocacher with no children, I feel very uncomfortable looking for such a cache when there are children around. Ken Akerman (a.k.a. Highpointer)