Jump to content

Washington's Highest Caches


Moun10Bike
Followers 9

Recommended Posts

Thanks for the response, Moun10Bike, and everyone else too.

 

I have mixed feelings about making challenges completely separate. Like if you had a Highest Elevation challenge that excludes the fire lookout caches. I understand the reasonings for keeping them separate, but sometimes that can just shut down a person and keep them from even trying to do certain challenge caches. For instance, I'm not even looking at the County challenge, and don't ever expect to complete it (maybe in 20 years?) because they excluded every cache before a certain date in order to help keep it separate from the Delorme challenge. Well, I've completed some sections of the Delorme that were difficult for me, and I don't intend to go back to those places again to do the County challenge because of financial and health reasons. So personally I lean towards allowing any cache count that's on the highest elevation list whether its a fire lookout or not. Each challenge stand on its own, ignoring the existence of the other.

 

Also, selfishly, I would like it so that you made it in a way that someone like me can finish it. For there to be enough "easy" ones that a physically challenged cacher could complete it. The History Challenge is close to my heart, and would have been a challenge that I would have created had I thought of it first. But unfortunately, there is no way that I can do it because we live in a wonderful state where there are very long hard hikes to get to these old caches. So while I obsessively watch that challenge and am completing the caches I can do, unless I have a grand miracle happen in my life, I will never complete it. I would like the choice and possibility of finishing the Highest Elevation challenge.

 

Sorry for being long winded, thanks for reading. *whew* <_<

Link to comment

First I want to thank Jon for sharing his efforts at identifying the top 100 and making a bookmark list; it is a personal interest.

 

From the "git go" formulating this into a challenge would be a time consumer for the owner. First there is just the effort in defining the challenge. Only a very few are capable of getting to the summit of Rainier which is a challenge of a totally different nature. Defining a challenge that doesn't require everyone to meet the definition (top 100, top 20, top 10) would be very arbitrary.

 

Then there is the dynamic aspect of the hides. New hides will be placed at higher elevations bumping some existing ones down. I don’t really need a reward cache to identify having completed some percentage of the top 100 plus caches.

 

The overlap of the highest 100 and the fire lookouts diminish my desire for a top 100 challenge. There may be only 31 common to both but doing those 31 greatly closes the gap for meeting a percentage of the top 100.

 

Defining a challenge around people’s abilities seems backwards. If the challenge is the highest geocaches then pick the number and see who has the ability to meet the challenge. If 100 are too many then rather than making the requirement a percentage, change the requirement to the top 50, 25 or 10.

 

I guess I don’t share the disappointment that Jon lost interest. He has a bookmark list that I can continue to work on and share my progress to those that are interested. On the otherhand if such a challenge is created, I will track my progress.

Link to comment

A lot of the responses came before the Lookout Challenge cache posted, though. I would certainly reconsider if people wanted to see both, but I've gotten the impression that people are getting burned out on challenge caches.

 

I wish we could do polls in these forums. Do people still want to see a Highest Challenge?

Just my own opinion, but I'm definitely burned out on the challenge caches. I'm boycotting the county challenge because it unfairly penalizes the people who took the effort to complete the DeLorme Challenge when it was still fairly new. The Jester's Oldie Challenge rekindled my interest because I like the older caches, but when the Lookout and Highest Elevation challenges came along it went beyond the saturation point for me. The more of these challenges that we have, the easier it will be to ignore them all.

Link to comment

A lot of the responses came before the Lookout Challenge cache posted, though. I would certainly reconsider if people wanted to see both, but I've gotten the impression that people are getting burned out on challenge caches.

 

I wish we could do polls in these forums. Do people still want to see a Highest Challenge?

Just my own opinion, but I'm definitely burned out on the challenge caches. I'm boycotting the county challenge because it unfairly penalizes the people who took the effort to complete the DeLorme Challenge when it was still fairly new. The Jester's Oldie Challenge rekindled my interest because I like the older caches, but when the Lookout and Highest Elevation challenges came along it went beyond the saturation point for me. The more of these challenges that we have, the easier it will be to ignore them all.

 

They say you can't burn out unless you are in fire in the first place. :unsure: I might work a bit on the Delorme Challenge, perhaps I'll have it completed in five years :)

Link to comment

Do people still want to see a Highest Challenge?

Like Bull Moose, I appreciate the 100 highest bookmark list. Doing any of the challenges gives me a sense of accomplishment. After climbing to Camp Muir, I know I'll never summit Rainier again, but I like the challenge of a tough hike. If it counts for something, so much the better. If it takes me somewhere I wouldn't have otherwise gone, that's good too.

Even if it never is a challenge cache, I'll make a note whenever I log one.

Link to comment

Do people still want to see a Highest Challenge?

Like Bull Moose, I appreciate the 100 highest bookmark list. Doing any of the challenges gives me a sense of accomplishment. After climbing to Camp Muir, I know I'll never summit Rainier again, but I like the challenge of a tough hike. If it counts for something, so much the better. If it takes me somewhere I wouldn't have otherwise gone, that's good too.

Even if it never is a challenge cache, I'll make a note whenever I log one.

 

I would love to do a highest caches challenge but with two young children (and a husband that makes me feel guilty when ever I have any fun in the mountians) at home I absolutely can not do it.

Link to comment

Do people still want to see a Highest Challenge?

Like Bull Moose, I appreciate the 100 highest bookmark list. Doing any of the challenges gives me a sense of accomplishment. After climbing to Camp Muir, I know I'll never summit Rainier again, but I like the challenge of a tough hike. If it counts for something, so much the better. If it takes me somewhere I wouldn't have otherwise gone, that's good too.

Even if it never is a challenge cache, I'll make a note whenever I log one.

What he said. :rolleyes: I also prefer the Highest challenge, but I am also happy with the bookmark list (the Lookouts is a bit complex, with 9 different areas to deal with).

 

And while I didn't boycott the Counties challenge, even though it was started right after I finished the DeLorme, it might have gone over better with some folks if you couldn't claim the same caches for both challenges. :lol: Something to consider for any Highest vs. Lookouts challenge, perhaps.

Link to comment

Just my own opinion, but I'm definitely burned out on the challenge caches. I'm boycotting the county challenge because it unfairly penalizes the people who took the effort to complete the DeLorme Challenge when it was still fairly new.

Jeesh, here's my 2 cents worth. The county challenge cache was created as just another fun way to see the state. My hope was to renew interest for those who completed the Delorme challenge to get back out to distant areas & see new things. My intent was NOT to penalize people who completed the Delorme challenge previously - the Delorme challenge is separate & I was absolutely not going to include some rule about 'if you do his, then you can't do the same cache for mine'. That's up to the individual cacher. The cut-off date was set at the time the cache was placed - no other hidden reason. At the time, I was only aware of one other challenge cache in existance (Delorme) and thought it would be fun to add another. This talk of boycotting one over another, etc. doesn't make an ounce of sense to me. If it looks fun, do it - don't politicize it. If it was created to cause discontent with other challenge owners, then by all means boycott it if you personally need that. I welcome the addition of other challenge caches - gives people interesting goals that they might personally want to complete and a variety of goals that interest more than one group. If you don't want to do a particular challenge cache, don't - just don't look down your nose at those who post them, just because it doesn't fit a certain criteria... Lighten up.

Link to comment

Just my own opinion, but I'm definitely burned out on the challenge caches. I'm boycotting the county challenge because it unfairly penalizes the people who took the effort to complete the DeLorme Challenge when it was still fairly new.

Jeesh, here's my 2 cents worth. The county challenge cache was created as just another fun way to see the state. My hope was to renew interest for those who completed the Delorme challenge to get back out to distant areas & see new things. My intent was NOT to penalize people who completed the Delorme challenge previously - the Delorme challenge is separate & I was absolutely not going to include some rule about 'if you do his, then you can't do the same cache for mine'. That's up to the individual cacher. The cut-off date was set at the time the cache was placed - no other hidden reason. At the time, I was only aware of one other challenge cache in existence (Delorme) and thought it would be fun to add another. This talk of boycotting one over another, etc. doesn't make an ounce of sense to me. If it looks fun, do it - don't politicize it. If it was created to cause discontent with other challenge owners, then by all means boycott it if you personally need that. I welcome the addition of other challenge caches - gives people interesting goals that they might personally want to complete and a variety of goals that interest more than one group. If you don't want to do a particular challenge cache, don't - just don't look down your nose at those who post them, just because it doesn't fit a certain criteria... Lighten up.

It makes plenty of sense if you look at it from my perspective. After spending a considerable amount of time, effort, and expense to complete the DeLorme Challenge, along comes the County Challenge. It disallows all of the caches I had just found on that epic quest, yet allows people with a more lackadaisical approach to do both at the same time. I can't afford the time and expense to turn around and do that whole trip twice, so in that sense I am penalized for finishing the DeLorme Challenge within its first year. I don't think it's fair to exclude caches found before an arbitrary cut off date when it took the same amount of effort and expense to get to them. I don't think you intended it that way, but it is unfair and that's why I'm boycotting it.

Link to comment

It makes plenty of sense if you look at it from my perspective. After spending a considerable amount of time, effort, and expense to complete the DeLorme Challenge, along comes the County Challenge. It disallows all of the caches I had just found on that epic quest, yet allows people with a more lackadaisical approach to do both at the same time. I can't afford the time and expense to turn around and do that whole trip twice, so in that sense I am penalized for finishing the DeLorme Challenge within its first year. I don't think it's fair to exclude caches found before an arbitrary cut off date when it took the same amount of effort and expense to get to them. I don't think you intended it that way, but it is unfair and that's why I'm boycotting it.

Why use the term boycott? That sounds more like "protest" vs I don't feel the need to travel the state again. If you don't like to travel, waste gas, etc., just choose not to do it. I didn't want cachers to just sit back in front of their computers & state "found it, found it, found it, found it...there completed the actual Challenge", the day it was published. A true armchair cache. Where is the "fair" in giving a smiley to cachers the day it is published, just to reward them again for completing the Delorme challenge? I probably should have stated somewhere that caches found for the Delorme would not qualify, but that would have been a nightmare to verify and there are plenty of rules already to follow. The best I could do on that point was to disqualify micros. I wanted to contribute to geocaching in some significant way - that was my purpose. I have absolutely no pity on cachers who want to do the armchair thing. It defeats the purpose of getting people out to see the state again and actually completing requirements for a new goal. Is one challenge enough? Where's the fun in that? When you've completed the one challenge, don't you like the idea of having another to work on and another reason to get out & see more of Washington? This cache was not created to penalize anyone - that is not it's purpose. No hidden agenda, period. Does this mean that since completing the Delorme challenge, you choose never to do another challenge cache? Because the Delorme caches would not qualify? Jeesh.

Link to comment

Boycott – protest, really, it’s all semantics. I don’t understand the fascination with any of the current challenges. None of these are truly a ‘challenge’ as much as a gathering exercise. (Really, how challenging is it to drive around ‘finding’ guardrail micros?) To be fair, the DeLorme Challenge does require some serious planning since the blocks are pretty small and there are a lot of them, so there’s some challenge in that. However, absent a time limit (all ______ in three days, or only Terrain 4 and above, for example) most of these are all really just a ‘run-around’.

 

If you want a challenge, find all of my active caches in seven days, I’ll even pony up $100 to the first person to legitimately do so. Nevertheless, if we’re going to argue semantics, we might like to drop the C word entirely. Finding all, or some representative sample, of the highest geocaches would certainly be a challenge.

 

*Disclaimer: These are just my opinions; I don’t disparage anyone who doesn’t agree with them. I am not asking for or demanding any change to the status quo. I do not work for or have any influence with Groundspeak, my opinions will not create any change in the geocaching game. When I say “I like girls, I like them a lot”, I am referring to females above the age of consent. Being vocally opposed to logging finds on caches that are (believed to be) missing does not mean that I am demanding any change in, or creation of, rules. The mere fact that I don’t log finds on events does not mean I demand that of others. My definition of a geo(place)cache(container) and the fact that I do not log finds on anything without those two components in no way minimizes anyone else’s method of play.
Edited by Criminal
Link to comment

Why use the term boycott? That sounds more like "protest" vs I don't feel the need to travel the state again. <snip>

Boycott does mean "protest" and that's why I used the term. As I have already stated, I think the County Challenge unfairly penalizes those who did all or most of the DeLorme Challenge when it was still fairly new. It is my opinion and nothing more. I do not think that you intended it to be that way, and I doubt that anyone would be able to log it as an armchair cache since it excludes micros. If you want to discuss it further, I'd be happy to do so but let's do it via email so we don't sidetrack this thread any more.

Link to comment

 

If you want a challenge, find all of my active caches in seven days, I’ll even pony up $100 to the first person to legitimately do so.

 

 

Come on that's two a day, you're going to have to up the ante (sp?) if I need to use up my whole vacation.

 

*Disclaimer: These are just my opinions; I don’t disparage anyone who doesn’t agree with them. I am not asking for or demanding any change to the status quo. I do not work for or have any influence with Groundspeak, my opinions will not create any change in the geocaching game. When I say “I like girls, I like them a lot”, I am referring to females above the age of consent. Being vocally opposed to logging finds on caches that are (believed to be) missing does not mean that I am demanding any change in, or creation of, rules. The mere fact that I don’t log finds on events does not mean I demand that of others. My definition of a geo(place)cache(container) and the fact that I do not log finds on anything without those two components in no way minimizes anyone else’s method of play.

 

:laughing:

Link to comment

It makes plenty of sense if you look at it from my perspective. After spending a considerable amount of time, effort, and expense to complete the DeLorme Challenge, along comes the County Challenge. It disallows all of the caches I had just found on that epic quest, yet allows people with a more lackadaisical approach to do both at the same time. I can't afford the time and expense to turn around and do that whole trip twice, so in that sense I am penalized for finishing the DeLorme Challenge within its first year. I don't think it's fair to exclude caches found before an arbitrary cut off date when it took the same amount of effort and expense to get to them. I don't think you intended it that way, but it is unfair and that's why I'm boycotting it.

If you don't like to travel, waste gas, etc., just choose not to do it. I didn't want cachers to just sit back in front of their computers & state "found it, found it, found it, found it...there completed the actual Challenge", the day it was published. A true armchair cache. Where is the "fair" in giving a smiley to cachers the day it is published, just to reward them again for completing the Delorme challenge? I probably should have stated somewhere that caches found for the Delorme would not qualify, but that would have been a nightmare to verify and there are plenty of rules already to follow. The best I could do on that point was to disqualify micros. I wanted to contribute to geocaching in some significant way - that was my purpose. I have absolutely no pity on cachers who want to do the armchair thing. It defeats the purpose of getting people out to see the state again and actually completing requirements for a new goal. Is one challenge enough? Where's the fun in that? When you've completed the one challenge, don't you like the idea of having another to work on and another reason to get out & see more of Washington? This cache was not created to penalize anyone - that is not it's purpose. No hidden agenda, period. Does this mean that since completing the Delorme challenge, you choose never to do another challenge cache? Because the Delorme caches would not qualify? Jeesh.

Sorry, Jon, for continuing the derailment, but I want to lend Lizzie some support here and throw in a couple points of my own:

  • My initial reaction was similar to Cathy's - geez, I just finished traveling the entire state - but I'd also found places along the way I wanted to revisit, so it didn't take much to get me going again. (I completed DeLorme in September and the County challenge in May.)
  • Agree with Lizzie that previous finds shouldn't count for the County challenge. Else, many folks would have it finished without leaving our computers. There are only 39 counties vs. 99 DeLorme grids, so even discounting micros, some (like me) would have all the counties done between DeLorme and other caching outings.
  • If you don't want to do the County challenge, don't. Not every cache is for everyone. There are plenty I choose not to do, although I wouldn't call it 'boycotting' them.
  • My only quibble with the County challenge (ditto for DeLorme, but it came first) is that you can count the same cache for both challenges (if it's not a micro). That double-dipping does rankle a bit, as it makes it even easier for those who are doing both challenges simultaneously. Having to log different caches for each challenge would even the playing field a bit more (make it a more similar experience) between those who did the challenges sequentially and those now doing them simultaneously.
  • Thanks to Lizzie for setting up this challenge. I think it's great for those who want to travel the state (hey, I'm rhyming!). And thanks to Jester, FluteFace, and Navigatorz, as well as Moun10Bike, for their challenges, as well. Some I've done, some I may never do - just like any other cache - but it's cool they've spent the time and effort to offer a variety of challenges to a diversity of cachers.

Ok, back to discussing a possible Highest challenge - sounds great! Bring it on! :P

Link to comment

 

Come on that's two a day, you're going to have to up the ante (sp?) if I need to use up my whole vacation.

 

OK, I'll make it ten days and give you this helper monkey. Monkey.gif

 

How about 14 days and 3 helper monkeys?

Make it 21 days, 6 helper monkeys, and $500, and I'll do it with MarcusArelius and split the cash and chimps. :P

Link to comment

After further discussion via email, I see Prying Pandora's point. Sometimes it takes a stick to the head to get me to see things from a different perspective. I wish I would've really seen that when I put the challenge together. It was pointed out to me when I was having it reviewed, but I just didn't get it.

 

I still feel that a variety of challenges is good & would love to see the Highest Challenge added. I don't believe it overlaps that much. Thanks Hydnsek for the bandage to my wounded pride....

Link to comment

After further discussion via email, I see Prying Pandora's point. Sometimes it takes a stick to the head to get me to see things from a different perspective. I wish I would've really seen that when I put the challenge together. It was pointed out to me when I was having it reviewed, but I just didn't get it.

 

I still feel that a variety of challenges is good & would love to see the Highest Challenge added. I don't believe it overlaps that much. Thanks Hydnsek for the bandage to my wounded pride....

We all pick and choose which caches to do. This applies to challenges as well as anything else. I chose not to do the county challenge, but that does not take anything away from the challenge as written. I might have tried it had the challenge been written to include those caches I did after the DeLorme challenge was started, but I do not intend to make another trip across Hwy 20 to Pend Orielle. I enjoyed the trip I made last October, but I don't care to do it again so soon after. I have not completed the WDC as yet since I am taking my time due to other demands on my time and money.

 

I have no problem with the county challenge as written. I just choose not to do it. Maybe later.

Link to comment

Personally, I am choosing to do both the WDC as well as the WCC, but along with that choice is the choice to do them at my pace and, I am finding it a neat way to track where I have cached. I agree that the date thing for the WCC is kinda screwy, but that's the rule so......

As far as the Highest Caches challenge goes, I think there will be a small amount of people that will complete that, and it will take some time for that, but I do find it fascinating, and is a cool option for those that are into that type of caching, not only the guard rail types that Criminal mentioned. This kinda fills the void if you know what I mean. Look forward to following it, even though I wont be participating.

Just my two cents.

Link to comment

I put together a bookmark list of the 100 highest caches:

 

Please let me know if you see any errors or omissions.

I was looking at this list again, and wow, we really DO have a "high" state!

#100 on the list is 5798 feet.

 

Several peaks that I think of as high because of the hikes required to reach them don't qualify.

Purgatory, on top of Mount Pilchuck...only 5340 ft.

Mount Higgins...only 4849 feet.

 

But some caches I never really thought of as "high" because they are easy to get to - qualify.

 

It's a challenge for a cache to qualify for this list, much less a cacher! :D

 

Edited to add: I just found an anomaly in the Lake Wenatchee listings.....

Goat Rock is #98 on this list, at 5811 feet.

But She'll Be Coming [GC1D8], on top of nearby Round Mountain, is NOT listed, and it's higher. ??? (Elevation is between Goat Rock and the higher Alpine Lookout.)

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

I put together a bookmark list of the 100 highest caches:

 

Please let me know if you see any errors or omissions.

Edited to add: I just found an anomaly in the Lake Wenatchee listings.....

Goat Rock is #98 on this list, at 5811 feet.

But She'll Be Coming [GC1D8], on top of nearby Round Mountain, is NOT listed, and it's higher. ??? (Elevation is between Goat Rock and the higher Alpine Lookout.)

 

This is what I got off of my TOPO maps:

Round Mountain - 5700

Goat Rocks - 5819

Alpine Lookout - 6235

Link to comment

I put together a bookmark list of the 100 highest caches:

 

Please let me know if you see any errors or omissions.

Edited to add: I just found an anomaly in the Lake Wenatchee listings.....

Goat Rock is #98 on this list, at 5811 feet.

But She'll Be Coming [GC1D8], on top of nearby Round Mountain, is NOT listed, and it's higher. ??? (Elevation is between Goat Rock and the higher Alpine Lookout.)

 

This is what I got off of my TOPO maps:

Round Mountain - 5700

Goat Rocks - 5819

Alpine Lookout - 6235

 

This is what I get from running the caches against the DEM (first number is where the cache falls on the list of highest caches):

 

#57 - Alpine Lookout - 6170 feet

#98 - Goat Rock - 5811 feet

#117 - She'll Be Coming - 5655 feet

Link to comment

I put together a bookmark list of the 100 highest caches:

 

Please let me know if you see any errors or omissions.

Edited to add: I just found an anomaly in the Lake Wenatchee listings.....

Goat Rock is #98 on this list, at 5811 feet.

But She'll Be Coming [GC1D8], on top of nearby Round Mountain, is NOT listed, and it's higher. ??? (Elevation is between Goat Rock and the higher Alpine Lookout.)

 

This is what I got off of my TOPO maps:

Round Mountain - 5700

Goat Rocks - 5819

Alpine Lookout - 6235

 

This is what I get from running the caches against the DEM (first number is where the cache falls on the list of highest caches):

 

#57 - Alpine Lookout - 6170 feet

#98 - Goat Rock - 5811 feet

#117 - She'll Be Coming - 5655 feet

Yokay, I stand corrected. I just remember climbing up to She'll Be Coming (on top of Round Mtn) and down to Goat Rocks (outcropping on the side of a mountain), so I'm confused. But Goat Rocks is on the way to Alpine Overlook, so maybe it is higher. My bad!

 

It would be interesting to see the second 50 or 100 highest caches. I bet a lot of familiar places would finally crop up, like the ones I mentioned.

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

I put together a bookmark list of the 100 highest caches:

 

Please let me know if you see any errors or omissions.

Edited to add: I just found an anomaly in the Lake Wenatchee listings.....

Goat Rock is #98 on this list, at 5811 feet.

But She'll Be Coming [GC1D8], on top of nearby Round Mountain, is NOT listed, and it's higher. ??? (Elevation is between Goat Rock and the higher Alpine Lookout.)

 

This is what I got off of my TOPO maps:

Round Mountain - 5700

Goat Rocks - 5819

Alpine Lookout - 6235

 

This is what I get from running the caches against the DEM (first number is where the cache falls on the list of highest caches):

 

#57 - Alpine Lookout - 6170 feet

#98 - Goat Rock - 5811 feet

#117 - She'll Be Coming - 5655 feet

Yokay, I stand corrected. I just remember climbing up to She'll Be Coming (on top of Round Mtn) and down to Goat Rocks (outcropping on the side of a mountain), so I'm confused. But Goat Rocks is on the way to Alpine Overlook, so maybe it is higher. My bad!

 

It would be interesting to see the second 50 or 100 highest caches. I bet a lot of familiar places would finally crop up, like the ones I mentioned.

 

Good to see some of my caches in the top 100. Yeah, you drop then climb from She'll Be Coming to reach Goat Rocks. Must have been all those skeeters sucked your brain dry! I need to do that hike again and grab the Round Mtn cache it was under 5 ft. of snow last year.

 

Without looking thru 5 pages of posts when is this cache going to be active? Sounds like one right up my alley. I'm surprised at how high the lowest ones are!.....Get me some oxygen to do this one!....^_^

 

Edit: I actually read back a few pages and see it's still in the works. Sign me up. I saw the County cache and as others have mentioned felt it penalized the early WDC'ers. Hey, get this cache going before the snow flies. We're wasting good hiking weather with all this discussion!

Edited by GeoRoo
Link to comment

Without looking thru 5 pages of posts when is this cache going to be active?

 

I'm about 99% sure that the answer is "never". The response so far has been lukewarm at best; people seem to be burnt out on challenge caches.

Don't say that. I'm just getting started.

I'l do as many of the highest caches I can, "because they're there", and the challenge will be for myself.

Link to comment

Without looking thru 5 pages of posts when is this cache going to be active?

 

I'm about 99% sure that the answer is "never". The response so far has been lukewarm at best; people seem to be burnt out on challenge caches.

Don't say that. I'm just getting started.

I'l do as many of the highest caches I can, "because they're there", and the challenge will be for myself.

Ditto. I thought the response in this thread, at least, was pretty positive. I know some folks who don't frequent the forums, like cache ahead, were also interested in a Highest challenge. But understand that it's a bit of work to set up and moderate, and MTB already is managing one very active Challenge.

 

As for challenge caches in general, I'm not sure "burnt out" is really the case. DeLorme is the only challenge that's been active for a year or more. Four new challenges have been posted since December - Counties, Fire Lookouts, History, Well-Rounded - which is a lot to take in. Perhaps "overwhelmed" is more what people are feeling about the sudden deluge of cool new challenges.

 

Most of us will have to choose which challenges to pursue. People may not have time/inclination/ability/resources to do some of them - different strokes for different folks. I like the variety of new challenges, and while the timing means I can't pursue them all - so what? There are new geocaches posted every day; I can't pursue them all, either. I don't have such a need for instant gratification that I can't wait till next year to work on some challenges; meantime I will follow them and take careful notes on strategy. :D

 

For whatever reason, the Highest challenge appealed to me more than Fire Lookouts. But like OBE said, I can pursue the bookmark list as a personal challenge. Thanks for creating it!

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

I just finished updating the bookmark list (available here). The following 6 caches were added to the list:

 

RANK   WAYPOINT	CACHE														 ELEVATION (ft)
====   ========	=====														 ==============
40	 GC13PFK	 Diamond Peak L.O. site by Mr. Gadget #2						  6363.2
52	 GC13W62	 Barb Hill by Gonji											   6196.9
70	 GC142ZM	 SWEETGRASS BUTTE LOOKOUT SITE by the prowlers03				  6083.5
76	 GC145Y3	 Put Junk In Your Trunk At Tunk Booty by piratesRreal			 6034.0
83	 GC140BJ	 Blue Mountain Skyline #2 by Bluesman63						   5952.7
87	 GC140D7	 Blue Mountain Skyline #3 by Bluesman63						   5917.1

 

Of course, everything else shifted and the following 6 caches dropped off the end of the list:

 

WAYPOINT	CACHE														 ELEVATION (ft)
========	=====														 ==============
GCH14X	  Sheep Lake by LightningCrew (adopted by FluteFace)			   5820.7
GCXPKV	  A Stephen King Story by Ben's Honey							  5817.2
GCM1TV	  Chumstick Mountain Lookout Site by The Navigatorz				5812.8
GCW4PM	  Goat Rock by GeoRoo											  5811.2
GCPKDA	  Don't Be A Stranger by wonlostdood							   5804.9
GCZ0G5	  The BIG Ammo Can In The Woods by Bluesman63					  5798.1

 

Here are some interesting stats about the top 100:

 

Highest:
14,197 feet

Lowest
: 5,836 feet

Average
: 6,578 feet

Median
: 6,229 feet

 

An interactive Google map showing the locations of the top 100 is available here.

Link to comment

I just finished updating the bookmark list (available here). The following 6 caches were added to the list:

 

RANK   WAYPOINT	CACHE														 ELEVATION (ft)
====   ========	=====														 ==============
40	 GC13PFK	 Diamond Peak L.O. site by Mr. Gadget #2						  6363.2
52	 GC13W62	 Barb Hill by Gonji											   6196.9
70	 GC142ZM	 SWEETGRASS BUTTE LOOKOUT SITE by the prowlers03				  6083.5
76	 GC145Y3	 Put Junk In Your Trunk At Tunk Booty by piratesRreal			 6034.0
83	 GC140BJ	 Blue Mountain Skyline #2 by Bluesman63						   5952.7
87	 GC140D7	 Blue Mountain Skyline #3 by Bluesman63						   5917.1

 

Of course, everything else shifted and the following 6 caches dropped off the end of the list:

 

WAYPOINT	CACHE														 ELEVATION (ft)
========	=====														 ==============
GCH14X	  Sheep Lake by LightningCrew (adopted by FluteFace)			   5820.7
GCXPKV	  A Stephen King Story by Ben's Honey							  5817.2
GCM1TV	  Chumstick Mountain Lookout Site by The Navigatorz				5812.8
GCW4PM	  Goat Rock by GeoRoo											  5811.2
GCPKDA	  Don't Be A Stranger by wonlostdood							   5804.9
GCZ0G5	  The BIG Ammo Can In The Woods by Bluesman63					  5798.1

 

Here are some interesting stats about the top 100:

 

Highest:
14,197 feet

Lowest
: 5,836 feet

Average
: 6,578 feet

Median
: 6,229 feet

 

An interactive Google map showing the locations of the top 100 is available here.

I'm losing caches from the list faster than I'm gaining them! Goat Rocks.....sniff. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Whoo hooo, I just did two of those new ones last week. "Put Junk in your Trunk" and "Sweet Grass". So far I am gaining. But the question is for how long? There is a fire in the area of "Put Junk in your Trunk" right now. It started by lightning shortly after Lucy and I found it on the 13th. So that one will be unavailable for awhile.

Link to comment

Whoo hooo, I just did two of those new ones last week. "Put Junk in your Trunk" and "Sweet Grass". So far I am gaining. But the question is for how long? There is a fire in the area of "Put Junk in your Trunk" right now. It started by lightning shortly after Lucy and I found it on the 13th. So that one will be unavailable for awhile.

Oh sure.....lightning started it...you just don't want anyone else finding it. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Okay, I rolled my percentile dice and "01" came up :unsure: , so the Washington's Highest Caches Challenge now lives.

 

I am welcome to any and all suggestions on the design.

Woo hoo!! Thanks, Jon, for taking on administration of a second cool challenge! This will definitely be a long-term project for me (as in years), but will be fun way to focus my hiking adventures.

 

I have two query/suggestions:

  • What happens with caches that get archived after you find them? Do they fall off the list (eek) like caches that are pushed off due to higher cache placements?
  • Like the County challenge, participant updates are done by posting new notes on the cache page. I kinda like the bookmark list approach used by Fire Lookouts and Well-Rounded. Is that harder to administer?

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

I have two query/suggestions:

  • What happens with caches that get archived after you find them? Do they fall off the list (eek) like caches that are pushed off due to higher cache placements?
  • Like the County challenge, participant updates are done by posting new notes on the cache page. I kinda like the bookmark list approach used by Fire Lookouts and Well-Rounded. Is that harder to administer?

 

To answer:

  • Yep, if archived, the caches no longer count - sorry!
  • The bookmark approach is actually easier for me, too. I'm going to change that on the cache page momentarily.

Link to comment

Thanks for the challenge, Moun10bike!

 

With the lookout challenge, its been a job for me to update the participants stats and maps as I receive notification of new finds. One big difference I see in managing the lookout challenge vs. the highest elevation challenge is that caches don't drop off the list when new lookout caches are added. With the highest elevation challenge, it seems it will be more work for you to update participants stats and maps as new caches are added, and at the same time update maps/stats as lower elevation caches are bumped off the list. I appreciate your efforts for making this challenge possible. It's going to be fun....and challenging. 350,000 feet? Wow!!

Link to comment

It's going to be fun....and challenging. 350,000 feet? Wow!!

 

Heh, you're already 38% of the way there! :unsure:

 

I think I've got everyone on the participants board who expressly posted that they were in. Let me know if I missed you or you otherwise want to be added.

 

Also, after an email I need to explain that this will not be an "email for final coordinates" cache. Those are not permitted via the guidelines except in very specific cases. The only reason that I have that in the rules is that I just copied from another challenge as filler. I will be providing the true coordinates of the container as an additional waypoint (the same way that the Lookout Challenge works) but I couldn't do that yet because I haven't hidden the container yet! That in itself is sort of a no-no, but I felt that I needed to get the cache posted while the snow-free season was still relatively young. (Plus, when I did a trial run of various cachers, no one showed as being more than 38% complete, so I figured it would be a while before the cache would have a find logged against it.)

 

I'll update the rules on the cache page to prevent any misunderstandings.

Edited by Moun10Bike
Link to comment

With the price of gas and with most of the highest caches being in the Cascades I think an Olympic Mountain highest caches challenge might be in order. I'd be willing to do this if there was enough interest. Since the Olympic Mountains raise striaght out of the sea they are not as high in elevation so the caches in this challenge would be at lower elevations then the ones in the statewide challenge.

Link to comment

Wow, this cache is going to be a tough one to maintain. One day out of the chute and the list has already changed - Tronson Ridge (GCGF03) - formerly #85 - was archived, so everything shifts up and Sheep Lake (GCH14X) moves into the #100 spot. I have rerun everyone's data and updated the page to also include new participants.

Link to comment

Wow, go Patudles - she's the leader so far, with 47% of the required elevation completed! And she's at/near the top of the Fire Lookouts rankings too. You go, girl! :o

 

I think she needs to slow down a little. Lotsa hazards out there ya know, like grunting bears and sharp rocks in the roads. Maybe oughta do more Wal-Mart parking lot lamp skirt caches. :laughing:

Link to comment

I just wanted to add my 2 cents. I have zero qualifying finds, will NEVER get this cache done, and but I think it is great that it is out there, and that Jon is willing to take on another one. I disagree with the "too many challenges" arguement, just ignore what you don't want to do.

 

Yippee for all you Mountain Goats out there!

 

From the sea slug! :laughing:

 

WATreasureHunters

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 9
×
×
  • Create New...