Very Remote Cache (is It Too Remote)

[+pathfind2003]

This week we are heading out on an expedition. We will be kayaking from Michigan's Upper Peninsula to Rock Island in Wisconsin. We will (hopefully) be placing a cache near an abandoned lighthouse on a island called "Poverty Island". This island has no ferry service and no population and lies about 6 miles from the nearest mainland shoreline. It is a very dangerous trip by kayak. That said, what do you think. Too dangerous. I expect to get about 2 finds every decade. I (or another) expect to be able to visit the island about every 6 months. Any thoughts. Not much more difficult than the Antarctic caches.

 

The expedition team website for more info on the location.

 

Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Edited June 21, 2005 by pathfind2003

[+sept1c_tank]

If I could only find someone to go with me, I'd try for FTF!

 

Sounds very cool to me, exactly the kind of cache I would plan a whole trip around.

[+pathfind2003]

By the way, we plan to pool are cash and maybe add $50-$100 to it for the FTF.

[+Kewaneh & Shark]

I would think that if you can get out there to place a cache, a cacher can figure out how to get out there to find it. Unless the placement goes against any of the general placement guidelines, go ahead and place it. Then just sit back and see who's willing to go after it. It certainly won't be a high traffic cache, but it could be fun.

 

Keep on Caching! - Kewaneh

[+sept1c_tank]

Now, you've really got my attention; paddling expeditions are my speciality! And I'm not all that far from the upper peninsula.

 

There won't be many who will try for a cache like that, but at least you have a good reason (cache maintenance) to go back periodically. Personally, I'd like to see a larger interest in canoe/kayak caches.

[+Dagg]

Six miles?

 

You won't get much traffic, but thats what makes it fun go for it!

Edited June 21, 2005 by Dagg

[+sept1c_tank]

...what makes it fun go for it!

Daggummit! Now you've got me wantin' ta come back up there too!

 

Although I have not paddled on Lake Michigan, I know a little about the terrain and conditions. For the great majority of casual paddlers, the cache would be intimidating.

 

Hey Dagg, why don't you come to the midwest; there's some cool paddlin'. I have a couple of nice paddle caches, too, although not so remote.

 

And I'm still going to take you up on that Vancouver Island paddle adventure you mentioned...something about you were going to supply the beer?

[+Criminal]

Oh boy, I hope it's a micro!

 

[+bluet]

No cache is too remote!!!!!!!!!

[+tabulator32]

I consider your opening post an omen. I was just in anotherbrowswer screen where I was looking into purchasing a kayak for geocaching and other little excursions. Now I know that is what I need to do.

 

Thanks.

 

[+PlasteredDragon]

Sounds great! I just hope nobody sticks some guy's travel bug out there. I say go for it, as long as you can safely make the trip yourself.

 

EDIT: typos.

Edited June 21, 2005 by PlasteredDragon

[knowschad]

I'd say that if people have gone after caches in Antarctica and the Himalayas, that an island in Lake Michigan (or is it Superior?) would be a piece of cake for some.

 

That said... you say that you hope to visit every six months... which months... July and January? June and December? You must be one tough bunch of kayakers to go out into the Great Lakes in the middle of winter! (spoken by a former Yooper)

[+Team Cotati]

Well "very" dangerous sound just a bit too dangerous. Probably not a good idea. Remotness is one thing, however placing a cache in a location that has a high likelihood of causing harm to your fellow cachers is something that should be avoided.

 

Is there some way to place the cache that might reduce the danger level?

Edited June 21, 2005 by Team Cotati

[+Sparrowhawk]

Remote? You ain't nowhere near what some cachers call remote!

 

Now THIS is REMOTE!

Edited June 21, 2005 by Sparrowhawk

[+pathfind2003]

Well "very" dangerous sound just a bit too dangerous. Probably not a good idea. Remotness is one thing, however placing a cache in a location that has a high likelihood of causing harm to your fellow cachers is something that should be avoided.

 

Is there some way to place the cache that might reduce the danger level?

Only kayaking there would be dangerous. If some takes a fishing boat, or inflatable, then it would be much less dangerous. But it is the open water of Lake Michigan, which is kayaked all the time, but has it's risks. For instance, the record for wave height on the Lake is assumed to be 45 feet, but the worst this year was 7-10 feet. Most of the time they are 1-3 foot. Obviously, if the weather turns, then it is dangerous. If the weather stays nice, no problem.

[+pathfind2003]

Remote? You ain't nowhere near what some cachers call remote!

 

Now THIS is REMOTE!

Funny log from the guy that tried to find it.

[+Dagg]

 

And I'm still going to take you up on that Vancouver Island paddle adventure you mentioned...something about you were going to supply the beer?   

 

Come on up. My back hatch holds LOTS of beer

[+rusty_tlc]

Sounds like a great idea. As far as how many finds, well I can tell you I really enjoy the logs from the caches I have that only get one or two finds a year. There is usually a great story, and when someone spends a lot of effort to find a cache they tend to write more about it.

[CoyoteRed]

I say go for it.

 

One of our most cherished finds for me is one that has been found only twice in the 3 years it's been out. It's something like a half-hour PWC ride to it. Sand Dollar is one of my best memories geocaching.

[+dino_hunters]

here's one, 6 miles from shore on the bottom of the Great Salt lake

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...3e-f06565740d84

[+yokes]

This week we are heading out on an expedition. We will be kayaking from Michigan's Upper Peninsula to Rock Island in Wisconsin. We will (hopefully) be placing a cache near an abandoned lighthouse on a island called "Poverty Island". This island has no ferry service and no population and lies about 6 miles from the nearest mainland shoreline. It is a very dangerous trip by kayak. That said, what do you think. Too dangerous. I expect to get about 2 finds every decade. I (or another) expect to be able to visit the island about every 6 months. Any thoughts. Not much more difficult than the Antarctic caches.

 

The expedition team website for more info on the location.

 

Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Given that there is a cache outside of the world's most northernly settlement (Alert, Canada), this isn't too "remote" by any measure!

[twjolson & Kay]

I can't for the life of me find the link to it, but one cache is on a remote ocean island that requires, and my figures might be wrong, a 3 day trip there at a cost of 2000 bucks. Another is at the top of a remote mountain that requires a 9 day trip! So 6 miles from shore is nothing. Place it, if no one finds it, as long as you have fun placing it, then it doesn't matter if anyone finds it.

[+Team Cotati]

Glad to hear that it really isn't very dangerous at all. You kidder you!.

[+Sparrowhawk]

I can't for the life of me find the link to it, but one cache is on a remote ocean island that requires, and my figures might be wrong, a 3 day trip there at a cost of 2000 bucks. Another is at the top of a remote mountain that requires a 9 day trip! So 6 miles from shore is nothing. Place it, if no one finds it, as long as you have fun placing it, then it doesn't matter if anyone finds it.

Besides... it would drive the "gotta get every cache within 100 miles of me" types absolutely nuts.

[+pathfind2003]

I can't for the life of me find the link to it, but one cache is on a remote ocean island that requires, and my figures might be wrong, a 3 day trip there at a cost of 2000 bucks. Another is at the top of a remote mountain that requires a 9 day trip! So 6 miles from shore is nothing. Place it, if no one finds it, as long as you have fun placing it, then it doesn't matter if anyone finds it.

Besides... it would drive the "gotta get every cache within 100 miles of me" types absolutely nuts.

Yeah, it would drive them nuts.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Ah. Sort of like this one? Spooky Island Cache.

Unfortunately, this one is on my caching buddy's Ten-Mile List. Do not think we'll ever get to this one. Oh, well. More likely to end up on the nearby island: Riker's Island.

Three logs in almost four years!

Edited June 22, 2005 by Harry Dolphin

[+glowstick]

It would be fun to see who will go for it.

[+reveritt]

There are caches in Antarctica. No location is too remote. Go for it!