niraD

I've found a few caches "in the woods" (wooded suburban park areas) without a GPSr. Sometimes I can find landmarks in the satellite photos that can still be seen through the trees. Other times, I pace off the distance between a visible landmark and the location. (Pacing off the distance can work for offset multis too.)

I had that reaction to Tear Down This Wall!

That works for me, but how do we get TPTB to update the official guidelines? Right now, cache owners can argue that it's a traditional if the cache is at the posted coordinates, no matter how involved or puzzle-like the rest of the experience turns out to be. And that it can't be a puzzle/mystery cache if the coordinates listed are the actual cache location.

The day I was introduced to geocaching, I tried to get an old Magellan GPSr to work. After a while, I gave up and used GPSrs belonging to others in the group, and we found four caches. Since then, I've used Google satellite photos. I tried a couple more times to get the old Magellan GPSr to work, but I eventually declared it to be dead. That's okay--it had only two decimal places of precision for minutes (i.e., nn° nn.nn rather than nn° nn.nnn). Eventually, I'll probably get a GPSr, but I'm having fun finding (and hiding) caches without one. I posted more details a while ago, for those interested.

What about puzzle caches where the container is at the posted coordinates, but you must solve the puzzle to get the combination to open the cache container?

Are you sure the cacher drilled the hole? Some government-erected signs are mounted to vertical posts that have horizontal holes drilled through them. Sometimes a given post will have multiple holes. I have no idea what the intended purpose of these holes is, but I've found caches hidden in them.

Yep. And eventually someone else hides one there, so I can stop worrying about how I'll hide one there. :-/

I usually don't read the logs until I'm logging a find or a DNF myself. Sometimes I end up searching for a cache that I wouldn't have bothered with if I had read the logs (e.g., GCPFVM), but some logs include spoilers that I'd rather not see. By the time I read the logs, either I've found the cache myself, or I'm looking for more hints than those the owner provided.

FWIW, I think combination-lock caches where you have to solve the puzzle to get the combination should also be listed as puzzle/unknown caches, even though the cache container may be located at the posted coordinates.

Or perhaps a few twenty-fives? ;-)

A local cacher known for his excellent hides has held a series of workshop events: The Little Shop of Horrors Little Shop of Horrors: the Sequel! Little Shop of Horrors: Audry's Return! Basically, he set up tools and workbenches in his garage and yard, provided some basic supplies, and invited everyone over to work on their (fiendishly clever?) cache containers. I think something like that is a great way to promote more interesting hides.

I found one that was about 150' from my GZ once, but that's because I solved the puzzle incorrectly and didn't notice that my checksum was wrong.

I picked up several color sample cards from the paint store, went to the site and found the closest color match, and then had the paint store mix me up a quart of that color. It should be easy to get close enough that it doesn't attract attention. If it doesn't quite match, then that's a feature, IMHO: attentive cachers might find it by noting the subtle color inconsistency.

FWIW, around here, there's a concept of a "demonstration trail". Basically, every 0.1 mile or so, there's another cache, but they're all different, created and owned by different cachers, and designed to show off different hide styles, different camouflage techniques, etc.

I would post a DNF and send the owner email with additional details. Recently, I searched for a regular-size cache that appears to have been missing for a while. I was confused when I found a film canister with a scrap of paper in it. It turns out that a non-local cacher had searched unsuccessfully, and rather than log a DNF, he hid the film canister as a "replacement cache" and logged a find. I do not recommend that approach at all. (I logged a DNF.)

It worked for me for one of my recent finds. Or maybe I just needed to take a break, and come back to it with a fresh perspective.

That would be what folks around here call a "bad evil" hide. It's a "needle-in-a-haystack" hide, and encourages cachers to trash the garden where it's hidden. Hidden in a different location, it could be a "good evil" hide, requiring more of a mental shift than a brute-force search.

I've seen non-waterproof boxes like that used as camouflage for waterproof containers. That's another alternative.

I own a Magellan GPSr. It doesn't work any more, and I've never used it for geocaching, but does that count? IIRC, there was a cache with logging requirements that restricted it to fathers. Others were welcome to post Notes, but not Found It logs. The outcry was predictable: it discriminates against women, it discriminates against men with no kids, and all that. But as someone else asked, why are you specifying the additional logging requirements? If it's something that people will have fun doing, then that's one thing. If it's just to annoy people while showing how clever you were to think up the logging requirement, then that's another.

FWIW, some of the puzzles that I've enjoyed the most have required resources that I do not have with me "in the field" while geocaching. But I never set out for a cache unless I know the actual coordinates (perhaps a side effect of not owning a GPSr, but using Google satellite photos instead).

The day I was introduced to geocaching, I tried to get an old Magellan GPSr to work. After a while, I gave up and used GPSrs belonging to others in the group, and we found four caches. Since then, I've used Google satellite photos. I tried a couple more times to get the old Magellan GPSr to work, but I eventually declared it to be dead. That's okay--it had only two decimal places of precision for minutes (i.e., nn° nn.nn rather than nn° nn.nnn). Eventually, I'll probably get a GPSr, but I'm having fun finding (and hiding) caches without one. Yes, it's a challenge, especially for multi-caches. At first, I'd find multi-caches in multiple trips to the site, checking the satellite photos online each time I came up with a new set of coordinates. Since then, I've started trying to get multi-caches in a single trip, pacing off the distance between the known coordinates and the new coordinates. As for details: I keep the cache description on my Palm computer, and update the page with my own notes once I find the cache. I use those notes when I log the find online. I usually just remember where the caches are located by viewing the satellite photos shortly before I go caching. Sometimes I remember the cache locations longer (especially when I'm already familiar with the area), and sometimes I print a copy of the satellite photos (especially when I'm caching while on a trip out of my local area). Obviously, it's easier in more urban areas with good landmarks visible in the satellite photos.

Hmmm... most of the ones I've found have been virtuals until the final stage. There is no container, just a plaque or similar object with information that you can use to calculate the coordinates of the next stage. Multi-caches with a container at the posted coordinates have been rare.

I don't have an answer for you, but I can offer some sympathy. I started a similar thread on the GBA forums about an old Magellan GPS 310. It used to work fine, within its design limitations (e.g., only 2 decimal places in the minutes value).

There isn't an official "nano" size, so it's pretty much up to each person. I call a micro a nano when it's just barely large enough to hold a custom-designed log sheet (typically a rolled-up strip of paper). Most of the nano caches that I've found have been blinkers or bison tubes. And most have been reasonably appropriate, placed in a location that wouldn't really support a larger cache. I actually like nano caches attached in plain sight to public art. But the time I found a nano in the woods, I was left wondering why anyone would do that. I haven't found a glue that holds to fishing line very well. Your best bet is to tie it to something, so there is a solid mechanical connection. FWIW, I think the idea of camouflaging a micro/nano as an abandoned lure is clever, but make sure it's waterproof. I found a handmade nano container that wasn't waterproof, and I had to dry out the log on the car defroster before I could sign it, and then it was very hard to roll back up tight enough to get back in the container because the paper had been affected by the water. Plus, the text of the attached stash note was illegible at that point. And don't hide it where it prevents someone else from hiding a larger container. And make sure to remove anything dangerous (i.e., fishing hooks) before hiding it. I think it's a good idea to label all the stages (and decoy containers, if any). Otherwise they're more likely to disappear (CITO from geocachers, or just plain muggling).

And there's always the approach of creating a public bookmark list called something like "Non-SCUBA caches that misuse the SCUBA attribute".