SpaceHiker

I haven't seen this mentioned yet, I hope I didn't miss it somewhere: Split Geocaching into 2 separate sports with separate sites and searches: driving caches and human-propelled caches. To see an example of what I mean, open up the Google cache finder and type in Central City, CO. It's so hard to find a real cache to hike/ski/climb to in this beautiful wilderness area, and the roadside cache saturation is so extreme, that it's really making me sick of Geocaching altogether. Even many of the caches that appear to not be on a road, when you look at the description for the cache it will say "You can't take your car to this cache, so you'll need your 4-wheeler or dirt bike". Sheeeesh! The human-propelled distance from the nearest parking area wouldn't even need to be that much to classify it as a human-propelled cache, say 1/4 mile for instance. It would at least separate 2 forms of Geocaching into a common-sense distinction, those who open their car door and sign the log, and those who put some human power into it (whether it be hiking, skiing, snowshoeing, rock climbing, paddling, etc..., you get the idea).

OK, I can't let this part go without comment. Waymarking is EXACTLY what geocaching would be like if they had continued to allow any old virtual. You're complaining about the quality of waymarks, yet that is proof that those are the kinds of "virtuals" most people would list here if they could (and have in the past). Fortunately for new cachers like yourself, most of the crappy virtuals have since died a slow and painful death, but it wasn't always the case. I've personally done virtuals that were a tree, a fire hydrant, a telephone pole, a house, a rusting tower, and all sorts of uninteresting crap. If it's such a remote place, place a high quality hide there (good container like an ammo box in a place it's not gonna be found by non-cachers) and shut up. A *good* hide shouldn't need any maintenence for years to come. It only becomes a problem when people hide crappy containers and/or in poor areas. I absolutely cannot believe your response Mopar. Get back in your car and go driving around and find some more nice roadside caches, it seems to be your full time occupation. Wish I could do that. But in the short time I have available to Hike, I see more than you ever will. If I ever get to place this cache, I can guarantee you will be in tears before you get even half way there.

I'm bumping this thread because it's an important issue that Groundspeak needs to deal with. Virtual Caches ARE A NECESSARY CACHE TYPE. Waymarking is not even close to replacing Virtual Caches, but I suppose it's great if I want to find the nearest Starbucks. I have the perfect location for my next cache. Only problem is, I cannot place a traditional cache there because it is so difficult to get there, that I am sure that I will never return, therefore there can be no cache maintenance. Instead, I want visitors to send me a photo of what is there to prove they found it. I'm trying to place caches that push the limit of what is possible, and that can't always be accomplished with a traditional cache. The hike to this cache is only a few miles roundtrip, yet it takes over 8 hours. It is painstakingly difficult. I'm going to maintain this thing? No way. This is a location that people would be amazed to see. Waymarking would spoil the surprise of what is there, assuming there is an actual Waymarking category for this location (which I doubt). If all of the plastic boxes placed next to the road haven't turned me off of Geocaching, the ban on Virtual Caches certainly has. Virtual Caches DO have a place in Geocaching; they are great for those once in a lifetime experiences that are off the beaten path. I realize that not everyone uses Virtual Caches for that purpose (such as the one I found that was placed smack in the tourist trap area of Great Sand Dunes), but used properly, Virtual Caches are a great adventure. BRING THEM BACK!