What The Heck Is Terracaching?

[+kasma_gang]

I am so new I make that tadpole look a very pale green....so what is the difference between geocaching and terracaching???? I get the virtual caching...took a minute, but I got it. Then once I know what it is, how to I go about finding which ones are in my area??? Thanks for helping this poor li'l tadpole. I still don't even have a quote yet, but that was another thread

[+StarBrand]

Just somebody else's listing site for Geocaches - different idea of how it should work and what guidelines apply - go there to ask specifics.

[+Chuy!]

To find caches in your area:

First, create a membership - it's free!

Then, go to the caching home page; in the top right corner, enter your zip code and you'll get a list of twenty caches. You should be able to figure it out from there; have fun!

Edited February 21, 2006 by Chuy

[+briansnat]

Terracaching is one of several listing services for geocaches. T Terracaching (like the other services) has one disadvantage vs Geocaching.com. There aren't any caches listed. Well that's a bit of an exaggeration, but for example...

 

Cache listings for New Jersey:

 

Geocaching.com - 3,799

Terracaching.com - 5

Edited February 21, 2006 by briansnat

[+tozainamboku]

As pointed out already, Terracaching.com is one of several alternative cache listing sites. These sites generally get started when there is a disagreement over the rules (oops! I mean guidelines) for listing caches on Geocaching.com. One area where there is disagreement are virtual caches. Geocaching.com does not list any new virtual caches - although existing virtual caches have been grandfathered (i.e. remain listed). Geocaching.com has started a new website - Waymarking.com - for listing locations that you may want to find using your GPS but where there is no physical cache hidden.

 

To find the existing grandfathered virtual caches near you go to the Advanced Search page. Select -Virtual Cache from the drop down list and enter your postal (zip) code in the box below. Then click seek. And visit Waymarking.com for finding other places you visit using your GPS.

Edited February 21, 2006 by tozainamboku

[+kasma_gang]

Thanks for all the info. Appreciate it.

[+Renegade Knight]

There are several sites for geocaching. In the USA the main ones are (there are others that serve the USA as well but I haven't checked to see if they have any US cache listings recently)

 

Geocaching.com

Navicache.com

Terracaching.com

Gpsgames.org

 

Of these, Geocaching.com has the most listings. Navicache is perhaps the closest to non profit, Terracaching tries to emphasize quality and Gpsgames.org has some interesting spins on GPS games that are not caching but are related. They also list caches.

[+Tharagleb]

Terracaching is one of several listing services for geocaches. T Terracaching (like the other services) has one disadvantage vs Geocaching.com. There aren't any caches listed. Well that's a bit of an exaggeration, but for example...

 

Cache listings for New Jersey:

 

Geocaching.com - 3,799

Terracaching.com - 5

 

Vermont:

 

Geocaching.com - 534

Terracaching.com - 0 (at least I couldn't see any on the map after I zoomed in.)

[+Airmapper]

Did somebody say the "T" word??

Edited February 21, 2006 by Airmapper

[Macduff]

Terracaching is one of several listing services for geocaches. T Terracaching (like the other services) has one disadvantage vs Geocaching.com. There aren't any caches listed. Well that's a bit of an exaggeration, but for example...

 

Cache listings for New Jersey:

 

Geocaching.com - 3,799

Terracaching.com - 5

 

Vermont:

 

Geocaching.com - 534

Terracaching.com - 0 (at least I couldn't see any on the map after I zoomed in.)

 

I guess it depends on where you are. For example, in Montana we have 1071 Geocaches and 147 Terracaches. I think that once 'critical mass' is met in regards to TC hides, more people will be interested, and the growth then becomes more exponential.

[+headybrew]

Cache listings for New Jersey:

Geocaching.com - 3,799

Terracaching.com - 5

Vermont:

Geocaching.com - 534

Terracaching.com - 0 (at least I couldn't see any on the map after I zoomed in.)

I guess it depends on where you are. For example, in Montana we have 1071 Geocaches and 147 Terracaches. I think that once 'critical mass' is met in regards to TC hides, more people will be interested, and the growth then becomes more exponential.

What is missing here is an understanding that Terracaching is not the same game as Geocaching. It's not about quantity. Some will say it's about Quality, but that's not fair either because there are many quality Geocaches too.

 

The thing is that Terracaching has a point system that rewards both the hider and the finder based on the quality and the difficulty of the cache. I actively play both games. But comparing the two is silly. I could say I have 5000 apples but only 4 oranges. But that does not mean that apples are better than oranges. It's a matter of taste.

 

There is also the community spirit thing. Franlky I'm afraid to click the post button when I'm writing this. Because I'll get flamed and possibly banned from this site if I'm not careful. Or this post will be deleted. On TC.com I can speak free from censorship. Even if I am criticizing TC.

 

Both sites have their merrits. Why limit yourself to only one? Do you like football or basketball? why not enjoy both?

[+briansnat]

Franlky I'm afraid to click the post button when I'm writing this. Because I'll get flamed and possibly banned from this site if I'm not careful.

 

Not unless you are violating forum guidelines.

 

On TC.com I can speak free from censorship. Even if I am criticizing TC.

 

As you are also free to do here, provided you do so in a constructive, respectful manner. Nobody is banned or censored here unless they violate the terms of use and/or forum guidelines.

Edited February 24, 2006 by briansnat

[+headybrew]

Franlky I'm afraid to click the post button when I'm writing this. Because I'll get flamed and possibly banned from this site if I'm not careful.

 

Really?

 

Yes really.

But I'm going to stop talking about that now.

[+nfa]

2 different sites designed to help people enjoy the same activity in slightly different ways.

 

There are good things and bad things about each site...no big surprise.

 

jamie

[+The Leprechauns]

I guess it depends on where you are. For example, in Montana we have 1071 Geocaches and 147 Terracaches. I think that once 'critical mass' is met in regards to TC hides, more people will be interested, and the growth then becomes more exponential.

 

1. If TC growth is ever "exponential," this means it would be growing faster than GC ever did. Fizzymagic can explain why.

 

2. I agree, it really depends on where you are. Perhaps if I lived in Montana or Washington I'd pay more attention. But every few months I check the TC site, thanks to a friend who's a member there, and I see nothing that inspires me to dash out on a terracaching adventure. When I checked in January for terracaches within 100 miles of me, I saw:

-- a virtual cache of a fire ring in the middle of the woods, that was not even visited by the out-of-state owner to obtain accurate coordinates. Never found.

-- a film canister micro with a forty-foot hike. Never found since being moved over from GC.

-- a micro at a parking garage. Never found since being moved over from GC.

-- a micro outside a post office. Found once, by someone who found it when listed here.

-- a rubbermaid with a 200 foot hike to a view of something I've seen before from finding geocaches in the same area. Never found since being moved over from GC.

-- a cache near a bridge, found once by the person who was with the owner when the cache was hidden.

 

Where are the "quality caches?" And where is the "community of approvers" who make sure that crappy caches get "system archived?" I'm just not seeing it.

[+shunra]

Franlky I'm afraid to click the post button when I'm writing this. Because I'll get flamed and possibly banned from this site if I'm not careful.

 

Not unless you are violating forum guidelines.

 

On TC.com I can speak free from censorship. Even if I am criticizing TC.

 

As you are also free to do here, provided you do so in a constructive, respectful manner. Nobody is banned or censored here unless they violate the terms of use and/or forum guidelines.

 

Are those forum guidelines published anywhere, for reference?

 

I feel about it like Headybrew. It's apples and oranges. Yes indeed, on both sites, it's first and foremost about the fun and the joy of hiding and finding challenging caches, but that's where the similarity ends. It's a totally different game. GC is family-friendly and good for everyone, and indeed, "it's not about the numbers". The smiley count (of those who engage in it) is meaningless. TC, on the other hand, is a competitive games, and since numbers DO have a meaning, it CAN be about the numbers.

 

It doesn't have to, but for me it is. The other differences between the sites are just that, differences, and there is no point in bashing one site or another, and the animosity I see (on both sites!) is outright silly. However, I have the impression that the animosity for GC on TC is a result of frustration with GC, whereas the animosity for TC on GC seems to be a matter of policy, which I don't understand.

 

I don't understand it, especially since several GC approvers are active on GC, some of them ranking high in the leaderboards, and there really is no contradiction. Jeremy himself participated in a hike during which the participants found and hid TC as well as GC caches.

 

Play and Let Play!

Edited February 24, 2006 by shunra

[+headybrew]

I guess it depends on where you are. For example, in Montana we have 1071 Geocaches and 147 Terracaches. I think that once 'critical mass' is met in regards to TC hides, more people will be interested, and the growth then becomes more exponential.

 

1. If TC growth is ever "exponential," this means it would be growing faster than GC ever did. Fizzymagic can explain why.

 

2. I agree, it really depends on where you are. Perhaps if I lived in Montana or Washington I'd pay more attention. But every few months I check the TC site, thanks to a friend who's a member there, and I see nothing that inspires me to dash out on a terracaching adventure. When I checked in January for terracaches within 100 miles of me, I saw:

-- a virtual cache of a fire ring in the middle of the woods, that was not even visited by the out-of-state owner to obtain accurate coordinates. Never found.

-- a film canister micro with a forty-foot hike. Never found since being moved over from GC.

-- a micro at a parking garage. Never found since being moved over from GC.

-- a micro outside a post office. Found once, by someone who found it when listed here.

-- a rubbermaid with a 200 foot hike to a view of something I've seen before from finding geocaches in the same area. Never found since being moved over from GC.

-- a cache near a bridge, found once by the person who was with the owner when the cache was hidden.

 

Where are the "quality caches?" And where is the "community of approvers" who make sure that crappy caches get "system archived?" I'm just not seeing it.

 

If you are a member of TC and you don't like those caches, then you can very easily vote on them. If their "measure of cache excellence" drops below a certain point, they will be archived. Keep in mind that others may be voting opposite of you because everyone has different tastes. In this way, the community set's it's own standards.

 

Some people like parking-lot-micro caches.

 

Again, I think the real issue is that there is a game going on over there, with points and scoring, etc. It's not at *ALL* about quantity. It's not about getting hordes of people to find your cache quickly. In fact, you get more points as a hider or a finder, if you hide/find a cache that is unique and not found 800 times a day.

 

You can chose to compete on many levels. Perhaps you dont' care about the "TPS" points. You can pride yourself in your "MCE" points instead. That's the "measure of cache excellence" which is decided by people voting on your cache.

 

It's just a different game. comparing GC to TC is like apples to pineapples. Just try both. And if there aren't enough TC's in your area, hide a few. You actually have an advantage in the point system if they take a long time before somebody finds them. And while you're waiting, you can feel free to *also* hide GC's. The two games are *NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE*

[+briansnat]

Are those forum guidelines published anywhere, for reference?

 

 

Right at the top of every forum page

 

However, I have the impression that the animosity for GC on TC is a result of frustration with GC, whereas the animosity for TC on GC seems to be a matter of policy, which I don't understand.

 

I really don't see the animosity towards TC that you're referring to. Its more of a "what's the point?" attitude.

 

Many geocachers have accounts both places. I personally have a hide and some finds on TC. I know I've been critical about some of the rules there. For instance how can you rate a cache that you haven't found? I've seen caches auto archived that had no finds. That's just plain silly, but I bear no animosity towards the site. I simply just don't see the point of it. The paucity of listings makes it nearly useless and I've seen none of the higher cache quality that they boast. Also, the competetion angle doesn't appeal to me.

Edited February 24, 2006 by briansnat

[+Renegade Knight]

People still find caches on both sites. Beyond that it's all hype and spin.

[+headybrew]

 

... The paucity of listings makes it nearly useless

 

.... Also, the competetion angle doesn't appeal to me.

 

Well then, that's precisely why you dont "see the point" of the site. It's perfectly OK to not be interested in the competition aspect of it. But saying that "The paucity of listings makes it nearly useless" is just plain wrong. If there are no or few caches in your area, then you are simply at a different stage of the game. You actually have an advantage in the point system over others who may hide six months later in your 100 mile radius.

 

If you are not interested in competition, that's fine. That may make it useless to *you* if there are no caches. But not to someone who likes the idea of placing caches and watching to see how they bear fruit in the point system over *time*.

 

The "nearly useless" comments are exactly what comes across as "animosity". Some people consider 8000 nearly identical caches hidden in really easy places to be "nearly useless".

 

It's just a different game, that's all. I like them both. Currently I have more finds on GC than TC, and it will probably stay that way for some time. Because finding an average TC in my area is a day-long endeavor or more. I gotta climb a mountain or something. on GC, in *my area* there are hundreds of caches within walking distance during my lunch hour from work. That's fine if I want to rack up smiley faces. I don't disparage that at all. Though some people might enjoy some other measure of their participation in the sport beyond mere quantity.

[+OConnellz]

Where are the "quality caches?" And where is the "community of approvers" who make sure that crappy caches get "system archived?" I'm just not seeing it.

 

It seems like the few terracaches in your area don't live up to your expectations. Frankly, from your descriptions, they don't impress me either. While this particular tangent of discussion is probably better suited for the forums over there, I would suggest a few options:

1. Rate them SBA (should be archived). I generally don't agree with this if you haven't found them and they don't violate any laws, but it is an option. Your rating counts 10x more if you have actually found the caches.

2. Post better ones. Lead by example, I say. Actions speak louder than words. I would guess that you could post some caches that might inspire others to seek them.

3. You can bring them to the attention of the community on the forums over there, and let the community go after them. Caches that are cross listed, or just relisted without being relocated, don't go over too well. There are occasionally threads there dedicated to that purpose.

3. Continue to exclusively cache here. Obviously, the terracaching community in your area could use a good boost, but unless you want to contribute to it, it seems counter productive to just sit there and continually complain about the same few caches.

 

If it was up to me, I would encourage you to pursue #2. Looking at your stats here, I think I would enjoy the types of caches you place, and they would do extremely well on either site. Recent changes to the sponsorship process on tc.com have been geared towards localizing the community to discourage situations like yours, and give the sponsors more ownership in the caches they approve.

 

True enough, each site has its own appeal, if you are looking for something. I like to hike in the mountains, and find caches there. I enjoy doing that on both sites. I don't really care about the competition over there, but I do like the statistics that are required to post a cache there (altitude gain, total RT distance are the biggies).

[+briansnat]

But saying that "The paucity of listings makes it nearly useless" is just plain wrong. If there are no or few caches in your area, then you are simply at a different stage of the game. You actually have an advantage in the point system over others who may hide six months later in your 100 mile radius.

 

Really? I'm in this sport to find caches and TC simply doesn't have enough. I can find every TC in my state in an afternoon, then what? As far as "advantage", I'm not interested in any "advantage". I just like to find caches and a site that doesn't have listings doesn't do it for me. The day that TC or Navicache or any other site lists caches for me to find is the day I will there look for them.

 

Picture websites that sell songs on Mp3. If a website comes along and tells me they have better (or different) songs than the ones on iTunes, but at the moment they only have ten "really good songs", I'll stick with iTunes.

Edited February 25, 2006 by briansnat

[+headybrew]

But saying that "The paucity of listings makes it nearly useless" is just plain wrong. If there are no or few caches in your area, then you are simply at a different stage of the game. You actually have an advantage in the point system over others who may hide six months later in your 100 mile radius.

 

Really? I'm in this sport to find caches and TC simply doesn't have enough. I can find every TC in my state in an afternoon, then what? As far as "advantage", I'm not interested in any "advantage". I just like to find caches and a site that doesn't have listings doesn't do it for me. The day that TC or Navicache or any other site lists caches for me to find is the day I will there look for them.

 

Picture websites that sell songs on Mp3. If a website comes along and tells me they have better (or different) songs than the ones on iTunes, but at the moment they only have ten "really good songs", I'll stick with iTunes.

 

I think you need to re-read my post more carefully. As I said in that post, the "paucity" may make it useles for *you* *if* you are not interested in the competition. As clearly you are not. and that's ok. I don't criticize that.

 

as OConnellz said, He likes the extra info in the listings, like elevation gain, because he is into hiking. That works for him, even though he isn't into the competition aspect. And you can't find 8000 mountaintop hike-in caches in one day anyway.

 

But as long as you disparage other sites with phrases like "nearly useless" then people who do like those sites will continue to see that as "animosity".

 

The bottom line is: GC.com is a cache listing site. TC.com is a cache gaming site in addition to that.

 

To each their own.

[+Bill & Tammy]

I also own accounts on both publishing sites and have found each have their own merits. Is one better than the other? I guess it depends on your personal taste and preference. It is true there are far more geocaches listed than terracaches and that will most likely always be the case. I came into this game just as Groundspeak was in the process of archiving locationless caches and eliminating the creation of new virtuals, so if those are your thing it is probably best to look outside of Groundspeak as I did. I know that Waymarking of course is attempting to fill the void but to me it seems that WM is more of a global coordinate "phonebook" rather than a GPSr scavenger hunt which I prefer.

[+treedweller]

But saying that "The paucity of listings makes it nearly useless" is just plain wrong. If there are no or few caches in your area, then you are simply at a different stage of the game. You actually have an advantage in the point system over others who may hide six months later in your 100 mile radius.

 

Really? I'm in this sport to find caches and TC simply doesn't have enough. I can find every TC in my state in an afternoon, then what? As far as "advantage", I'm not interested in any "advantage". I just like to find caches and a site that doesn't have listings doesn't do it for me. The day that TC or Navicache or any other site lists caches for me to find is the day I will there look for them.

 

Picture websites that sell songs on Mp3. If a website comes along and tells me they have better (or different) songs than the ones on iTunes, but at the moment they only have ten "really good songs", I'll stick with iTunes.

Well, this raises the question (to which I don't know the answer): What did this site look like on Day One? Your criticism seems to boil down to the fact that TC is not well enough established to have the same level of participation as this one. If that were the way the world worked, we'd still be listening to AM radio. After all, when FM came into being, most people didn't have an FM receiver, there were not many FM stations, etc.

 

To reach the level that it has, GC had to get some people to go out and hide stuff and post it here. That's where TC is now. If you can't make the hiding contribution a part of your experience, I guess this is still the place for you. I am assuming from other posts here that you DO hide caches, which would be the first step toward resolving your complaints about the TC site. Or, you could just stay here. Like headybrew said, if it isn't your thing, don't do it.

 

td

[+headybrew]

Hey, I don't want to make it look like we're all ganging up on Briansnat here. His sentiments are understandable.

 

When I first looked at TC after signing up, I had the same feelings. "There are only 6 caches in my 100 mile radius? What's the point?"

 

But after looking at the forum posts for a while, I found the answer to that question. Frankly I hope there are *NEVER* as many TCs in my area as there are GCs. It would ruin the TC game. When I checked a couple of months ago, there were 8347 GCs within 100 miles of my home coords. If there were that many TC's then there would be no challange to it. I'd just have to spend lots and lots of time finding lots and lots of TC's if I cared about the competition angle.

 

Of course the rating system would still give me a way to seperate the cool caches from the boring ones. That would be nice.

 

Come to think of it, that would be very very nice. I'd love it if on GC, I could vote on caches and look at the average vote so I could ignore the boring ones. That alone would be a nice change.

 

It all depends on cache density. With only a few tens or hundreds of caches in my area, no such system is needed on a simple listing site like GC. But when it reaches saturation levels like it is here in Southern California, it becomes a nice addition to the site.

 

I'm sorry, I'm digressing. My point was, simply, that I can see Briansat's point. It's just a matter of what you want from your listing site. So try them both, and if you choose not to use one of them, that's your choice and I respect it.

[+Markwell]

Original question answered. Terracaching is an alternative listing site.

 

Since posts are now bordering on a lack of respect, it's time to close this topic.