First cache finding experiences ... are we missing something?

February 9, 2003

My son and daughter and I had our first experiences Geocaching this weekend. I thought we'd try three relatively easy caches right near our house. My daughter had been especially excited and, although we found the locations using the coordinates and found the landmarks described in the clues, in all three cases we did not find the cache container. In one case, we found items that most likely were part of the cache at one time but not the actual container described by the cache hider, who had been there only a few weeks ago and said it was there then.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=36859

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=16365

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=25957

While it's possible that we are dealing with cache thieves, I have to doubt that. Should we have to "dig" to find a cache (like bring a shovel)? I would think not. I tried looking under bushes, in trees, near logs and stumps (or in stumps in a couple of cases) but did not want to seriously disturb the landscape - I don't expect that I should have to or that anyone should want to disturb the landscape.

In one case, where we new that the cache was hidden right alongside a very public trail, we were walking back and passed another family who said "did you find it?"; When I answered "No", they replied "well that other family found it" - I am not sure of which cache they were referring to but I thought it a bit odd.

Any suggestions?

Thanks.

Alien with an Attitude

L.O.S.T. Member #14

**Tread Lightly**

1.4k · February 9, 2003

Looks like you have to go and look again.

Also since you didn't find the cache instead of logging a find you should have logged a "Did Not Find".

====================================

As always, the above statements are just MHO.

====================================

1.7k · February 9, 2003

Try something a little easier for your first time, perhaps.

My first was a virtual cache.

The next was going to be another virtual, but the area closed as we drove up, so we did a 1/1 physical cache.

We then moved up to a 1.5/2 cache .......

Also, you need to develop an eye for (1) where people would hide things, and (2) rocks and sticks that are piled unnaturally. Certainly starting with 1/1 caches will help.

DustyJacket

...If life was fair, a banana split would cure cancer.

6.4k · February 9, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by dustyjacket:
Try something a little easier for your first time, perhaps.

My first was a virtual cache.

The next was going to be another virtual, but the area closed as we drove up, so we did a 1/1 physical cache.

We then moved up to a 1.5/2 cache .......

Also, you need to develop an eye for (1) where people would hide things, and (2) rocks and sticks that are piled unnaturally. Certainly starting with 1/1 caches will help.

DustyJacket

...If life was fair, a banana split would cure cancer.

I agree. Start with the 1/1's maybe even a virtual so you know your GPS is set right and your using it properly. Also the game is about finding the cache, not just the spot, so you need to go back and change all those finds to did not finds. Looks like some of them were found pretty recently, they probably are still there. It's easy to find a spot that matches the clues when you want to.

Heck, a few weeks ago I looked all over for a 1/1 cache, couldnt find it but was sure i found the spot it had been. Logged my DNF, and the hider went and checked it the next day. Cache was right were it belonged. Well, I went back last week, and found it this time in 20 seconds. I just walked right up to it! It happens!

Tae-Kwon-Leap is not a path to a door, but a road leading forever towards the horizon.

February 9, 2003

We experienced this problem when we started. Have you checked your format on your GPS set-up menu? It should read hddd*mm.mmm' We happened to find a cache with just the clues, and found out that something was not right.Our GPS was off by about half a mile with the wrong setting. Hope this helps. The next one will be alot easier.

February 9, 2003

I don't know about your neck of the woods, but I did my third and fourth caches today, and these folks are doing a real good job of hiding stuff here in the Republic of Texas! I've stood within 2 feet of the cache and had to look for a bit to finally see it without disturbing the surroundings as to give it away for the next cacher.

Dennis "The Menace" Mitchell

February 9, 2003

Thanks for the advice.

You're right, of course, there was no way that all three could just be "missing". I'll change the "finds" to "did not finds" and we'll look some more. I'll have to read about virtual caches. Mainly, I just wanted to confirm that I shouldn't have to disturb the landscape.

We did find the first cache of the multi-cache, so I suspect my GPS is okay. It got down to 1.4 ft while I was pacing back and forth. Although today, when we were trying to home in on the harder one, it was jumping around like crazy (of course, this was in pretty thick trees, too).

Dennis- I like your logo/avatar

Alien with an Attitude

L.O.S.T. Member #14

**Tread Lightly**

February 10, 2003

was in a local park, and the cahce was hidden in an area with heavy forestation. I hadn't processed the concept yet that it might take a little longer for the gps to get a good satellite fix as I walked around. I walked back and forth and all over and seemed to be going no where. I fianlly sat on a bench and decided to study my surroundings closely to see if I could find the trees ferred to in the hint. I sat and pondered the landscape and saw nothing that looked like the trees in the hint. It was getting dark so I decided to go and come back another day and try again. When I stood up and turned around the trees described had been right behind me. On a local multiple, I failed to realize I had missed some coordinates and spent hours looking in the wrong place on two occaisions(strike palm to forehead and exclaim "duh!"). I later met some other cachers who were doing the same thing . Be patient, stop and smell the roses and think "where would I have hidden it?" Check the forums in a few days and see if anyone else has found it.

February 10, 2003

You'll find 'em!

I went to one easy cache 3 times before I found it. I had been walking all over it.

1.6k · February 10, 2003

One of the earliest tricks I found was caches were hidden under leaves or pinestraw. Unlike the unnatural and easy-to-spot geocairn--the pile of limbs to hide a cache--leaves are a very natural cover. When combined with the cache next to a log, it's very hard to spot.

The trick I found to hunt these out is use a long thin stick. I used to have a piece of bamboo. Three feet long and 1/8" in diameter is about right for me. To use the stick and discover the cache simply poke the stick through the leaves. Don't use it as a rake. You'll be able to feel, and maybe hear, the cache when you strike it.

I now use a hiking stick, but it's not nearly as sensitive.

Hope this helps!

CR

1.6k · February 10, 2003

Poop. Double post. Thought the first one failed. Waited and waited and waited...

Double poop.

3.1k · February 10, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by L.O.S.T. Mutant_KJ:
We did find the first cache of the multi-cache, so I suspect my GPS is okay. It got down to 1.4 ft while I was pacing back and forth. Although today, when we were trying to home in on the harder one, it was jumping around like crazy (of course, this was in pretty thick trees, too).

That may be part of your problem. From what you said here, it sounds like you're relying too much on the GPS when you're getting close. You generally shouldn't be looking at the GPS by the time the distance is that low. Having it zeroed out usually just means you're within ~30-60 feet of it.

Also, I read your logs, and it sounds like for the first one you listed, you may be looking for the black garbage bag too quickly; from the description, it sounds like there are more than two stages to that one. Look for another small container with more coords.

Good luck to you!

Mein Vater war ein Wandersmann, und ich hab' auch im Blut

February 10, 2003

My best results seem to be once GPS has me within a couple of feet. I put down unit and back pack as a "marker" and start a manual search of a circle of about 30ft in diameter of "marker" .. Maximum distance of a cache location from marker has been about 18 feet... I have not found that many (11) but it is a technique I have used on last 5 or 6 finds. Instead of worrying what GPS says, I can concentrate on what the area is like and what is natural or unnatural as relating to where cache might be.

Dale

--------------------------------------------------------

I'm Diagonally Parked, In A Parallel Universe.

--------------------------------------------------------

February 10, 2003

Having found 8 caches, and "not found"

three, I would suggest keeping at it for a while.

One thing I thing which I gleaned from reading the forums here is to use your GPSr while walking briskly directly toward the cache, stop about 30 feet away and look at what is 30 feet in front of you.

As you slow down when you near the cache your GPSr gets less accurate in heading, and the exact distance appears to shift when you are very near to a waypoint.

After you get to the place where you estimate the GPSr said to go, just stop. Look around carefully for hiding places, then expand your search, slowly.

Pacing back and forth with the GPSr will just keep you busy for a while. (At least it will if you are like me ...)

Also, keep in mind that ratings are subjective. I spotted a "2.5" difficulty cache from 50 feet away, and have been skunked on "1"s.

Good luck, and keep plugging. I think you'll get the knack of it (and I think I'll be getting better--I just hope it is soon....).

My two cents worth, refunds available on request. (US funds only)

February 10, 2003

Alien with an Attitude

L.O.S.T. Member #14

**Tread Lightly**

February 10, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by L.O.S.T. Mutant_KJ:

Any suggestions?

Thanks.

Alien with an Attitude

L.O.S.T. Member #14

**Tread Lightly**

Two suggestions:

1. Come to the WSGA meeting Tuesday night and you'll have a chance to connect with a huge bunch of very friendly local geocachers.

2. If you can't make it to the meeting, drop me an email. I'd be happy to get together with you and go along while you hunt for either the ones you've been stumped on, or some other local caches. After you've found a couple, you'll find it's much, much easier.

Don't give up, though. Even the best geocachers get stumped some of the time. Once you get the hang of it, you'll find it's mostly a matter of knowing what to look for.

-Paul

February 10, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by L.O.S.T. Mutant_KJ:
My son and daughter and I had our first experiences Geocaching this weekend. I thought we'd try three relatively easy caches right near our house. My daughter had been especially excited and, although we found the locations using the coordinates and found the landmarks described in the clues, in all three cases we did not find the cache container. In one case, we found items that most likely were part of the cache at one time but not the actual container described by the cache hider, who had been there only a few weeks ago and said it was there then.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=36859

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=16365

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=25957

While it's possible that we are dealing with cache thieves, I have to doubt that. Should we have to "dig" to find a cache (like bring a shovel)? I would think not. I tried looking under bushes, in trees, near logs and stumps (or in stumps in a couple of cases) but did not want to seriously disturb the landscape - I don't expect that I should have to or that anyone should want to disturb the landscape.

In one case, where we new that the cache was hidden right alongside a very public trail, we were walking back and passed another family who said "did you find it?"; When I answered "No", they replied "well that other family found it" - I am not sure of which cache they were referring to but I thought it a bit odd.

Any suggestions?

Thanks.

Alien with an Attitude

L.O.S.T. Member #14

**Tread Lightly**

I guess we all feel your pain. I, too, would encourage you to keep on caching. My first try's were discouarging, but funny. I'd like to say that it just gets easier, but there are times when it just doesn't work. I'm still stymied by 1/1's from time to time.

BTW, who goes with you? My wife does not care at all about geocaching, but she's a good sport. I may have "the hardware and the software, the plans and the maps", but she seems to find the cache! Go configure!

Keep on caching,

Bluespreacher

"We've got the hardware and the software, the plans and the maps ..." -- Citizen Wayne Kramer

2.6k · February 10, 2003

quote:
Originally posted by L.O.S.T. Mutant_KJ:
Mainly, I just wanted to confirm that I shouldn't have to disturb the landscape.

**Tread Lightly**

Well, you may have to move some leaves or twigs or rocks around to see the cache. Digging into the dirt is not acceptable but under some leaves is not uncommon.

george

Pedal until your legs cramp up and then pedal some more.

February 10, 2003

OK, I'm new to GPS navigation and Geocaching ( five finds as of tonight, and I started Saturday! ), but do have some time logged as a private pilot. What I have found to work well for me, is to use the compass screen as you would the ADF in an aircraft. Sure, you tend to go a bit past the waypoint, but you quickly circle back into it. Once the distance shows less than 10 feet, my eyes are on the terrain more than the GPS. By doing this, I have already established a circle in which the cache should be located. So far, I have been within 3 feet of the cache every time I've spotted it! Granted my third was hidden very well, but I "knew" I was right on top of it. All it took was looking at the spot from a different angle.

Like they said, once your in close, rely on your eyes, not the GPS!

Dennis "The Menace" Mitchell

First cache finding experiences ... are we missing something?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation