Jump to content

Cache Dense Areas


altosaxplayer
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

I'd have to go with Michigan.

I know what you're saying. Surfer, you live in Michigan! How is that opinion impartial!

Well, it's not. However, there are other valid reasons to cache in Michigan besides it being my home state;)

 

• Michigan has over 6000 active caches.

• The SE and SW regions of Michigan are heavily populated with caches. (If puzzle caches are your thing, the Grand Rapids area is your Mecca!)

gcmap.jpg

 

•The MiGO community is very friendly andhave been known to come out in force to help out a visiting cacher.

 

•Ohio, Indiana, and Illinoisa all have dense populations of caches along their freeways for quick caching on the trip up

 

So visit Michigan Today!

 

P.S.: There's no snow this year, and it's rather mild outside! Perfect caching weather! <_<

Edited by surferacf1
Link to comment

Where are the most cache dense areas? I am trying to plan a Christmas caching trip somewhere but don't kow where to go. We were trying to figure out where we could get the most "bang for our buck" so to speak.

 

So, where are cache dense areas that you know of?

Given your location in Bristol, VA, if you're looking to crank numbers I would definitely say Nashville. If you plan your assault well you'll get a good tour of the area as well as lotsa stats.

 

I would suggest a visit to http://www.mtgc.org/index.php to get some locals' perspectives on recommended caches and best ways to plot your course, so that you can include at least SOME caches of "quality" (as opposed to all park-n-grabs)...Nashville does have a diverse selection of caches, but you have to know "where to find 'em". The local "caching ambassadors" in the area there will be glad to help.

Link to comment

If you're just looking for density AND variety, check out the NY/NJ metro area. In NYC and the immediate surrounding area you will find a lot of urban and suburban micros. Go a little west and northwest (about 30 miles) and you get caches that are longer hikes in scenic areas. The NJ/NY highlands have numerious caches that are challenging hikes that offer outstanding views. A little bit to the west in central NJ and Staten Island gives you lowland caches in swamps and similar areas that offer their own challenges. Central NJ also offers a cluster of puzzle caches for those who are into that scene. The only kinds of caches that are lacking in the region are mall parking lot micros and park n grabs. There are a few, thankfully very few, so if they are your bag try another state.

 

cadbc6de-e620-461c-af3f-1f35811dbb47.jpg

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

A student with 1500+ smilies..... yow!

Micros? Almost any larger city.

The State Park System offers a good number of excellent hikes with caches, some of them quite challenging. And it is mile weather so far. There are quite a few in the parks of S.E. Ohio that I'd like to work on some time.

 

Who is a student with 1,500 smileys? Way to go...I am a highschool student who will have a 1,000 smilieys in a week.

Edited by Super_Nate
Link to comment

Where are the most cache dense areas? I am trying to plan a Christmas caching trip somewhere but don't kow where to go. We were trying to figure out where we could get the most "bang for our buck" so to speak.

 

So, where are cache dense areas that you know of?

 

I think the most cache dense area is the area around the White House and National Mall in Washinton DC. That area is loaded with virtuals and since virtuals were not subject to the .1 mile rule they are stacked up on each other. There are three on one block in front of the White House alone with others within eye shot.

Link to comment
Where are the most cache dense areas? I am trying to plan a Christmas caching trip somewhere but don't kow where to go. We were trying to figure out where we could get the most "bang for our buck" so to speak.

 

So, where are cache dense areas that you know of?

 

If you are looking for really nice weather and some of the densest cache areas in the country, you might want to visit Southern California! Areas like Palm Springs are really nice this time of year and Palm Springs has some awesome caching trails. Of course Orange Caounty and San Diego are also really nice! :)

Link to comment

Los Angeles in the US -- you can go on ones in the mountains with snow, and on the beach sand or cliffs in the same day. There are bike paths along the rivers from the mountains to the see and for the power cahcers, some have 50+ caches almost every .1 mile down the path.

 

Others like on Donald Trumps golf course are on an amazing set of cliffs on the Palos Verdes penninsula south of LA where the hike will take a long time, but that's ok with the view looking out to Catalina Island.

 

Another one I thought was neat was when I was looking along the 0 Longitude line. As I started at N 0 W 0 and went north through Africa, then to Europe, then to... WOW London!!!!! I would go to London if not in the USA. Check that one out!!!!

Link to comment

Just did some quick glances:

 

I plugged in my 100 mile radius for my zip code (60544) and came up with about 4400 caches. Using that as a benchmark, I plugged in zip codes that others have mentioned and that I have "heard" are dense.

 

What I did was try to see how far you would have to go in radius to find the similar number of caches. A smaller number would be a more dense cache landscape - higher numbers would mean that you would have to go farther to reach the same 4400.

 

37201: Nashville, TN

117 miles

 

30303: Atlanta, GA

108 miles

 

08817: Edison, NJ

66 miles

 

98101: Seattle WA

48.7 miles

 

94102: San Francisco, CA

38.5 miles

 

90210: Los Angeles, CA

32.6 miles

 

And a comparison: London, UK

71 miles

 

So - Chicago is dense, more dense than Nashville or Atlanta, but the California coast from San Francisco to Los Angeles seems to carry the most weight for density of caches.

 

Anyone else got an area NOT covered by these radii that brings it down lower than 40 miles? In other words, NOT a zip code within 40 miles of either San Francisco or Los Angeles, but somewhere ELSE that has 4400 caches within 40 miles or less.

Link to comment

Since the OP is from Bristol, VA, might I suggest something a little closer to home??? Just down the road from you in good ol' St. Mary's County, Maryland, we have an eclectic mix of some of the best quality caches you'd ever hope to find. Search on the 20650 zip code with a 30 mile radius. Come in the summer and enjoy some hard crabs!

Link to comment

Just did some quick glances:

 

I plugged in my 100 mile radius for my zip code (60544) and came up with about 4400 caches. Using that as a benchmark, I plugged in zip codes that others have mentioned and that I have "heard" are dense.

 

What I did was try to see how far you would have to go in radius to find the similar number of caches. A smaller number would be a more dense cache landscape - higher numbers would mean that you would have to go farther to reach the same 4400.

 

37201: Nashville, TN

117 miles

 

30303: Atlanta, GA

108 miles

 

08817: Edison, NJ

66 miles

 

98101: Seattle WA

48.7 miles

 

94102: San Francisco, CA

38.5 miles

 

90210: Los Angeles, CA

32.6 miles

 

And a comparison: London, UK

71 miles

 

So - Chicago is dense, more dense than Nashville or Atlanta, but the California coast from San Francisco to Los Angeles seems to carry the most weight for density of caches.

 

Anyone else got an area NOT covered by these radii that brings it down lower than 40 miles? In other words, NOT a zip code within 40 miles of either San Francisco or Los Angeles, but somewhere ELSE that has 4400 caches within 40 miles or less.

 

What an informative message -- interesting!! Thanks!! But wouldn't the best way to measure density would be to see how many chaces are in a fixed distance? I guess I was thinking that if you were looking 71 miles away from london, you'd be in the English Channel. But if you looked within a smaller area, it might in fact have a higher density. Just a nerdy thought...

Link to comment

OK I tried an experiment. I took some pockets of dense caches in Chicago.

 

If you look at a 10 mile radius, here are caches and the number of caches within 10 miles:

GCKRGZ - 337

GCF587 - 256

GCPM07 - 417

GCKHQD - 342

GCTVHD - 163

 

For those same caches to reach 400 caches in a radius:

GCPM07 - 09.8 miles

GCKHQD - 11.0 miles

GCF587 - 11.9 miles

GCKRGZ - 12.8 miles

GCTVHD - 14.2 miles

 

The order on the list is slightly different, but it depends on how you look at it.

 

If you were measuring population, you could look at it as how many people live within a certain radius, or how far you would have to go to get a certain number of people. I don't think that one method is more "right" than the other, but the "X with a fixed distance" is definitely used more.

Link to comment

OK I tried an experiment. I took some pockets of dense caches in Chicago.

 

If you look at a 10 mile radius, here are caches and the number of caches within 10 miles:

GCKRGZ - 337

GCF587 - 256

GCPM07 - 417

GCKHQD - 342

GCTVHD - 163

 

For those same caches to reach 400 caches in a radius:

GCPM07 - 09.8 miles

GCKHQD - 11.0 miles

GCF587 - 11.9 miles

GCKRGZ - 12.8 miles

GCTVHD - 14.2 miles

 

The order on the list is slightly different, but it depends on how you look at it.

 

If you were measuring population, you could look at it as how many people live within a certain radius, or how far you would have to go to get a certain number of people. I don't think that one method is more "right" than the other, but the "X with a fixed distance" is definitely used more.

 

Can you tell me how to do those kinds of searches? I just picked a couple in LA/Orange area and could only get a maximum of 500 on pocket queries. I was looking at GCJVZ1 and another using Disneyland at the center GC4B24 -- Also GCRK1K, GCMGTR, and GCWRHW in the San Diego Area.

 

Not only does the LA area have the ocean stopping caches on one side, but you can see where the nearly 10,000 foot tall mountains put a stop to the caches inland too.

 

cceff44e-b2bd-43af-b847-280b6c7d5ab4.jpg

Edited by j_czerwin
Link to comment
This can be misleading because a 66 mile radius around Edison NJ would include about 1/4 ocean, so the actual density would probably be heavier than indicated by this.

 

San Francisco, Los Angeles and Seattle all have large bodies of water. Lake Michigan cancels out a lot of cache location in the Chicago area as well. I plotted some coordinates over the 66 mile radius from Edison and from 60544 (my home town). My area is a little more inland than yours. I only lost about 11% of the plotted points, while Edison lost 19%.

 

But that's why I looked at how far out one would have to go to find the same number of caches instead of a small radius showing pockets of density. I could have just as easily picked something like 7500 caches and done the same thing. By showing what radius one has to use to reach a set number of caches, the data shows that a region is dense, not just a dense clump area followed by a vast barren landscape.

 

Further illustration:

N 39° 00.347 W 087° 44.337 - 5 miles: 25 caches

N 41° 38.389 W 088° 13.810 - 5 miles: 23 caches

Which is the more dense area? They look about the same, and if anything the southern point looks like it has more density. But...

 

N 39° 00.347 W 087° 44.337 - 20 miles: 218 caches

N 41° 38.389 W 088° 13.810 - 20 miles: 917 caches

To get N 39° 00.347 W 087° 44.337 up to the same 917 caches, you would have to extend the radius to 48.55 miles.

Which is the more dense area?

 

Discounting bodies of water is indeed valid, but many areas have military bases, national laboratories, wildlife refuges and national parks that all do the same thing as large bodies of water - eliminate the possibility of geocaches in the area. And while looking at a particular radius is a valid method for rating density, looking at distance to reach a benchmark to determine density is also valid.

Link to comment
Would like to see you go to Disney World for the family, as a vacation, and have you cache Jacksonville and surrounds for sheer cache volume (mostly P&G micros). What do you think?

 

If you're looking for cache density in Florida, it's Pinellas County (St. Petersburg, on Florida's Gulf Coast) #1, Lakeland #2, not far south and west of Disney, and then Jacksonville #3. For maximum finds in a caching day, and convenience to Disney, go to Lakeland a short trip down I-4. GET MAPS - preferably in the GPS, it's called Lakeland because of all the lakes, lovely but a major PITA for driving blind. If it weren't for all the lakes, I expect Lakeland have the most cache density in FL. Also there's some very pleasant preserves for some nice Florida walks in the woods or swamps, if you're wanting that.

Edited by Isonzo Karst
Link to comment

This thread is a little old, so don't know if anyone will see this post. But I just stumbled on it, and had to give my area a try. I just started this sport a few months ago, and was amazed when I ran my first pocket query and found it pegged out so close to home. So I had to see how many within the 10 mile radius to compare to others listed in previous posts. This is part of Silicon Valley, near the hills, so lots of parks and trails, and lots of techies.

 

Within 10 miles of zip code 95124: 1048 caches

 

Lots of rich hunting around here.

Link to comment

This thread is a little old, so don't know if anyone will see this post. But I just stumbled on it, and had to give my area a try. I just started this sport a few months ago, and was amazed when I ran my first pocket query and found it pegged out so close to home. So I had to see how many within the 10 mile radius to compare to others listed in previous posts. This is part of Silicon Valley, near the hills, so lots of parks and trails, and lots of techies.

 

Within 10 miles of zip code 95124: 1048 caches

 

Lots of rich hunting around here.

Sounds like you'd be hard-pressed to even hide one in your front yard! :anitongue:

 

As for me, I've got 13 within 10 miles. 16 if you count mine.

Link to comment

OK I tried an experiment. I took some pockets of dense caches in Chicago.

 

If you look at a 10 mile radius, here are caches and the number of caches within 10 miles:

GCKRGZ - 337

GCF587 - 256

GCPM07 - 417

GCKHQD - 342

GCTVHD - 163

 

For those same caches to reach 400 caches in a radius:

GCPM07 - 09.8 miles

GCKHQD - 11.0 miles

GCF587 - 11.9 miles

GCKRGZ - 12.8 miles

GCTVHD - 14.2 miles

 

The order on the list is slightly different, but it depends on how you look at it.

 

If you were measuring population, you could look at it as how many people live within a certain radius, or how far you would have to go to get a certain number of people. I don't think that one method is more "right" than the other, but the "X with a fixed distance" is definitely used more.

 

Can you tell me how to do those kinds of searches? I just picked a couple in LA/Orange area and could only get a maximum of 500 on pocket queries. I was looking at GCJVZ1 and another using Disneyland at the center GC4B24 -- Also GCRK1K, GCMGTR, and GCWRHW in the San Diego Area.

 

Not only does the LA area have the ocean stopping caches on one side, but you can see where the nearly 10,000 foot tall mountains put a stop to the caches inland too.

 

cceff44e-b2bd-43af-b847-280b6c7d5ab4.jpg

 

You need to call an exterminator with that many bugs :anibad:

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...