Terra caching web site

[+jleing]

Hey all, I just recently started geocaching and love it! Since then I have been doing quite a bit of research and generally finding any information I can about the sport. As a result of this research I found the web site terracaching.com and was wondering if anyone had an opinion about this site. What is the difference between geo and terra caching? The site claims quality caches, what does this mean? thanks!

 

jleing

[+TeamGumbo]

Have you tried doing a search for caches near your location?

[+Snoogans]

There are really only three main differences: This site is BIGGER, better funded, and MORE popular.

 

It's allllll geocaching. One cache isn't any better than the other, but all caching websites are NOT created equal.

 

If you like finding caches.... umm, what's the difference?

 

IBTL

[+jleing]

Have you tried doing a search for caches near your location?

 

Do you mean on the terra caching site? I have looked at what they had available in terms of caches and it is pretty limited in comparison to this site.

 

jleing

[+jleing]

There are really only three main differences: This site is BIGGER, better funded, and MORE popular.

 

It's allllll geocaching. One cache isn't any better than the other, but all caching websites are NOT created equal.

 

If you like finding caches.... umm, what's the difference?

 

IBTL

 

Well that is true. I definitely will continue to find caches and will most definitely continue to use this site to do so. I have not yet been dissappointed by a cache that I have found. I just wanted to know if anyone had some info on this other form of caching. I know there has got to be users who list and find from both sites. In fact, apparently the owner of terra caching used to be a member on this site.

 

jleing

[+Snoogans]

Have you tried doing a search for caches near your location?

 

Do you mean on the terra caching site? I have looked at what they had available in terms of caches and it is pretty limited in comparison to this site.

 

jleing

 

I like to use terracaching to fill in the spaces left by the arbitrary .1 rule here. It has NEVER created a problem.

 

I had a micro terracache just 6 feet from a regular cache and no NON-terracacher ever found it because the gc.com listed cache was plainly described as fairly large and easy to find.

 

I call it "DOH! Factor." As in, you join tc.com and go DOH! I walked right past that before!

 

If you like hunting caches the listing service makes no difference. That said, I spend 99.2% of my quality caching time right here.

Edited April 24, 2008 by Snoogans

[+Snoogans]

Well that is true. I definitely will continue to find caches and will most definitely continue to use this site to do so. I have not yet been dissappointed by a cache that I have found. I just wanted to know if anyone had some info on this other form of caching. I know there has got to be users who list and find from both sites. In fact, apparently the owner of terra caching used to be a member on this site.

 

jleing

 

It's NOT another form of caching. It's just caching by another name.

 

Lots of people (like me) use all THREE major cache listing sites. This is just the biggest and best.

 

Honestly though, this isn't the site to be asking questions about TC.com.....

 

IBTL

Edited April 24, 2008 by Snoogans

[CoyoteRed]

I've got some geocaches listed over there. They could have been listed here, but I some of the processes here soured my desire. There is not much better, only different. I'm still looking for a site that I'm happy with listing my caches.

[+The Leprechauns]

The site claims quality caches, what does this mean?

It means that they make that claim. Reality may differ, at least in my local area. Anyone can make a plain curbside historic marker into a virtual cache, but then hype it as a nice urban hike by recommending that you park a mile away. I think I will hide a lamp post micro at Wal-Mart but give the parking coords at Target in the next suburb, call it "Off Target," and rate it a 3.5 for terrain due to the length of the hike.

 

I'm curious why you're posting your question here rather than in the Terracaching forum.

[+Snoogans]

THREE major cache listing sites.

 

Wow. Did I say 3?

 

There's only 1 MAJOR and 2 minor listing services. Derrrrr.

Edited April 24, 2008 by Snoogans

[+jleing]

The site claims quality caches, what does this mean?

It means that they make that claim. Reality may differ, at least in my local area. Anyone can make a plain curbside historic marker into a virtual cache, but then hype it as a nice urban hike by recommending that you park a mile away. I think I will hide a lamp post micro at Wal-Mart but give the parking coords at Target in the next suburb, call it "Off Target," and rate it a 3.5 for terrain due to the length of the hike.

 

I'm curious why you're posting your question here rather than in the Terracaching forum.

 

Well because I already looked over their site and wanted to get the opinions of others who may have done some caching from that site. Besides their forum is pretty limited until you get "sponsered". As of now I am not sponsered. Additionally I wanted to get a different take from the geocache community.

 

jleing

[CoyoteRed]

Where you ask your question about a web site you're gonna get a highly biased opinion.

 

Ask about "The Green Site" over on TC.com and the opinions you get about this site will be a lot different than those you receive here.

 

My advise: form you're own opinion by trying them all. It won't cost you anything but a bit of time.

[+jleing]

Where you ask your question about a web site you're gonna get a highly biased opinion.

 

Ask about "The Green Site" over on TC.com and the opinions you get about this site will be a lot different than those you receive here.

 

My advise: form you're own opinion by trying them all. It won't cost you anything but a bit of time.

 

I agree! And I will try all and base my opinion on that. I guess I didn't realize that there was a competition here. I just wanted a geocachers opinion on the terracachers web site. I was under the impression that it is completely acceptable to use both sites to fulfill my geocaching adventures.

 

jleing

[Mr.Yuck]

Where you ask your question about a web site you're gonna get a highly biased opinion.

 

Ask about "The Green Site" over on TC.com and the opinions you get about this site will be a lot different than those you receive here.

 

 

I believe they would say "Big Green", or "The Frog".

[CoyoteRed]

Where you ask your question about a web site you're gonna get a highly biased opinion.

 

Ask about "The Green Site" over on TC.com and the opinions you get about this site will be a lot different than those you receive here.

I believe they would say "Big Green", or "The Frog".

Yeah, that's it. It's been a while.

[+Snoogans]

was under the impression that it is completely acceptable to use both sites to fulfill my geocaching adventures.

 

It IS acceptable.

 

However, it is poor form to solicit opinions about a competing website in the competition's forums. A private local forum would be better.

[hardkoretech]

 

Lots of people (like me) use all THREE major cache listing sites. This is just the biggest and best.

 

 

What's the 3rd site?

[+XopherN71]

http://www.navicache.com

 

I've looked at both Terracache and Navicache and neither had much, if anything in my area.

Edited April 24, 2008 by XopherN71

[+J-Way]

I believe they would say "Big Green", or "The Frog".

True, but if you look closely enough, "TERRA" = "GREEN" when encoded in ROT13 (see the standard hint encryption).

 

I participate on both sites, and in both forums. Some of the people over there absolutely despise the "Froggy" site, and some enjoy going both ways.

 

Main differences:

- Virtual caches are still allowed. Which means you can place caches in US National Parks and sensitive environmental areas where physical containers aren't allowed.

- Locationless caches are still allowed. LC's follow a different point system than TC's (you have different totals for LC points and TC points). Many people would rather find LC's and that is the site that allows them.

- Many fewer traditional caches over there. As an example, there are about 80-90 terracaches in the entire state of TN, compared to 10,000+ listed here. While MOST of them are better than your average LPC, that doesn't do you any good if your closest cache is 100+ miles away.

- MOST (not all) caches over there are higher "quality" than the typical mass-produced geocache. Yes, there are many many many excellent geocaches listed here (well-done puzzles, multis, and generally pleasant traditionals, all of which I enjoy finding), but over on the other site you don't have to spend hours searching through the thousands of listings for LPC's, GRC's, and magnets attached to dumpsters.

- There is generally better swag in trading caches, but this is likely mainly because caches over there are typically found only a few times a YEAR vs. several times a month over here.

- The web site over there is generally hard to figure out and slow. TPTB have been promising an upgrade to "TC 2.0" since well before I joined over a year ago, but it still hasn't materialized.

- You get to rate all caches (0 to 10). While this system still has quite a few kinks and issues, it generally means that "bad" caches are archived fairly quickly because cache owners don't want their placement rating to drop.

- While here a find is a find is a smiley, over there caches that get found often (like a roadside historical marker virtual) are TYPICALLY worth fewer points than caches that are rarely found (like a cache that requires a 16-mile hike up and over a mountain range).

- Your sponsors are your cache reviewers. Some sponsors will allow any cache, which can be bad. Others are much more restrictive, and try to make sure the cache is worthy and doesn't violate any laws.

- Cache owners can require a confirmation code (CC) before logging a cache. This is either written on the log book for traditional caches, or is obtained on site for a virtual cache. This makes it much harder to cheat by logging caches you never actually found. They can also provide a First Finder (FF) code, so there is no question as to who was FTF. Typically this is on a piece of paper or prize that is removed by whoever is FTF.

 

NOTE: There are lots of generalizations here. A full and detailed list of all differences would take many pages and would be extremely boring to write and read. If you want more details, go visit both sites. Also, there are advantages and disadvantages to BOTH sites.

 

Again, I participate on both sites. If I'm traveling to a new area for work, my first step is to see if there are any Terracaches near the destination or in route. Next I switch to GC.com and check out all the puzzle/mystery caches. Then I try to identify caches that will help me by filling in new squares in my D/T grid. Finally I identify caches to light up new counties for my INATN stats.

 

[Edit: Grammar]

Edited April 24, 2008 by J-Way

[+briansnat]

What is the difference between geo and terra caching? The site claims quality caches, what does this mean? thanks!

 

In my state there are thousands of geocaches listed here and maybe a hundred or so geocaches listed on Terracaching. So quantity wise, TC com is totally lacking.

 

As far as" quality", nearly every one of those caches listed on TC is just piggybacked on a previously existing cache listed here, so there is no difference in quality. A totally pointless website as far as I'm concerned.

[+Miragee]

Hey all, I just recently started geocaching and love it! Since then I have been doing quite a bit of research and generally finding any information I can about the sport. As a result of this research I found the web site terracaching.com and was wondering if anyone had an opinion about this site. What is the difference between geo and terra caching? The site claims quality caches, what does this mean? thanks!

 

jleing

I joined Terracaching when I found out a prolific Geocacher/Terracacher placed a cache near a trail I hike. I didn't like the idea of walking past a cache, any cache, without finding it.

 

Around here, the Terracaches take you to challenging places, like local peaks and benchmarks you have to bushwhack to. Sometimes the cacher placing the Terracache will also place a Geocache. Or, someone hunting the Terracache, will place a Geocache. If not for the Terracache in that location, I doubt the Geocache would ever exist.

 

To me, caching is caching.

 

(As an aside, the Terracaches have "interesting" FTF swag. )

[+J-Way]

What is the difference between geo and terra caching? The site claims quality caches, what does this mean? thanks!

In my state there are thousands of geocaches listed here and maybe a hundred or so geocaches listed on Terracaching. So quantity wise, TC com is totally lacking.

As far as" quality", nearly every one of those caches listed on TC is just piggybacked on a previously existing cache listed here, so there is no difference in quality. A totally pointless website as far as I'm concerned.

Your specific location has a LOT to do with the quality of any type of caches listed on any site. As for GC.com, I've been in areas with nothing but park-n-grab style type geocaches and other areas with tons of creative/interesting traditionals, multis, letterbox hybrids, and puzzles. The geocaches around Starkville, MS are outstanding in regards to this, and only 1 TC within many many miles.

 

The same for Terracaches, and I've heard the same thing about the NJ area (briansnat's location). I've seen lame TC's within a few dozen feet of a decent froggy cache. But for the most part that's not the case, which is why the first caches I hit in a new area are TC's (if any are there).

[+Renegade Knight]

...The site claims quality caches, what does this mean? thanks!

 

jleing

 

Last time I looked into it it meant crappy caches could be archived by popular vote. Only the fittest caches survived.

 

My opinion is that it's an alternate site that works hard to have a slightly different spin. That spin being quality over quantity. I have the impression they are more active than Navicache but haven't cheked into that to see if it's true.

[+WebChimp]

My opinion is that it's an alternate site that works hard to have a slightly different spin.

 

I have a virtual cache listed on Terracaching.Com. It is an easy, fun puzzle to solve, yet it has been found very, very few times.

 

Initially I thought it was an interesting way of listing caches, and I looked at it some. Right now, I haven't been there in probably a year. For me, it is overly complicated, and not a very intuitive site to use. Of course, that's just me. I only have graduate hours after my degree, so I may not be educated enough to understand all the subtle things that are going on there.

 

It's a little like trying to use an online auction site that's not eBay. The idea seems right, but the punch just ain't there.

[+WebChimp]

The geocaches around Starkville, MS are outstanding in regards to this, and only 1 TC within many many miles.

 

This statement has been approved by the Starkville Mafia. (And, I'm the owner of that one TC in Starkville. )

[+softball29]

I joined not too long ago and got sponsored, but there's one cache within like 30-40 miles from me. I'll keep an eye and if there's something new or closer, I'll check it out.

 

That being said, I don't go over there a lot because the site is confusing, and well, I like to find caches. The community here is outstanding, the people are great, everything is user friendly and it's the big gun.

 

If I had to choose one over the other, it wouldn't be close. That being said, it doesn't hurt to be a member elsewhere and keep an eye. But, to be honest, until I read this thread, I hadn't been over there in 2-3 weeks -- and that's when I joined.

[+O-Mega]

...The site claims quality caches, what does this mean? thanks!

 

jleing

 

Last time I looked into it it meant crappy caches could be archived by popular vote. Only the fittest caches survived.

 

My opinion is that it's an alternate site that works hard to have a slightly different spin. That spin being quality over quantity. I have the impression they are more active than Navicache but haven't cheked into that to see if it's true.

 

Navicache is getting a few more listings recently, in my area it has gone from about 4-5 to over twenty and more to follow. The thing I like about the other two sites is that the caches that have been grandfathered here are still available there and more importantly they don't mind the "Support our Troops" links.

[+Taoiseach]

I looked up Terracaching the other day - There's 1 in Ottawa (Within 100 Miles of downtown, so that included the Quebec side of the river) and it wasn't even a physical cache

[Sadie]

<snip> more importantly they don't mind the "Support our Troops" links.

I have also seen lots of caches published in illegal locations.

[CoyoteRed]

<snip> more importantly they don't mind the "Support our Troops" links.

I have also seen lots of caches published in illegal locations.

I've seen where caches have been brought to the attention of the community and quickly get voted down until archived. (It's the reason you can vote on caches you've not ever found.) It's not a free-for-all. The concept works. I'd probably be more active if the site wasn't so agonizingly slow. I suspect the site would be more popular if it weren't so slow and therefore more folks to bring illegal placements to light to get voted down.

 

That is if your definition of "illegal" is truly placements that are against the law versus caches that violate guidelines here. Big difference.

[+J-Way]

I have also seen lots of caches published in illegal locations.

Did you mention this fact in a "Note" log? I assume it wasn't a "Found it" log because that means you did something illegal to sign the log...

 

Seriously, TC sponsors who will approve any cache can cause lots of harm to the game through bad publicity when the authorities discover an illegally placed cache. That being said, was there a way for the sponsors to know it was illegal without visiting the site? And if not, how is this different from Geocaching.com?

 

At either site, the process to follow when you realize a cache is placed illegally is as follows:

1. Notify owner that the cache is illegal (they might not know).

2. If nothing happens, notify sponsors (through a PM at TC.com) or reviewer (through a SBA log at GC.com).

3. If you really have a bad case of wadded panties, complain about the cache and owner in the forums. At TC.com, you have the added advantage of being able to coordinate a forced system-archive if everyone votes down the cache.

[+Snoogans]

<snip> more importantly they don't mind the "Support our Troops" links.

I have also seen lots of caches published in illegal locations.

 

Don't just make accusations and walk away.

Give us some examples of your plural experiences of illegally hidden TCs.

 

Your experiences don't match mine. Most TCs exercise a healthy measure of common sense.

[+briansnat]

<snip> more importantly they don't mind the "Support our Troops" links.

I have also seen lots of caches published in illegal locations.

I've seen where caches have been brought to the attention of the community and quickly get voted down until archived. (It's the reason you can vote on caches you've not ever found.) It's not a free-for-all. The concept works. I'd probably be more active if the site wasn't so agonizingly slow. I suspect the site would be more popular if it weren't so slow and therefore more folks to bring illegal placements to light to get voted down.

 

That is if your definition of "illegal" is truly placements that are against the law versus caches that violate guidelines here. Big difference.

 

A cache next to a school playground, or on a highway overpass are probably not illegal, but they are bad ideas no matter where they are listed.

[+Renegade Knight]

<snip> more importantly they don't mind the "Support our Troops" links.

I have also seen lots of caches published in illegal locations.

Even now caching is largely unregulated (as it should be). Most people seem to make up the legality of a cache in any one location to suite their taste on the subject.

[+O-Mega]

<snip> more importantly they don't mind the "Support our Troops" links.

I have also seen lots of caches published in illegal locations.

 

I sure hope you reported them, I would hate to see any more news stories like all those we have seen here lately, just doesn't look good for geocaching.

[+TrailGators]

I believe they would say "Big Green", or "The Frog".

True, but if you look closely enough, "TERRA" = "GREEN" when encoded in ROT13 (see the standard hint encryption).

 

I participate on both sites, and in both forums. Some of the people over there absolutely despise the "Froggy" site, and some enjoy going both ways.

 

Main differences:

- Virtual caches are still allowed. Which means you can place caches in US National Parks and sensitive environmental areas where physical containers aren't allowed.

- Locationless caches are still allowed. LC's follow a different point system than TC's (you have different totals for LC points and TC points). Many people would rather find LC's and that is the site that allows them.

- Many fewer traditional caches over there. As an example, there are about 80-90 terracaches in the entire state of TN, compared to 10,000+ listed here. While MOST of them are better than your average LPC, that doesn't do you any good if your closest cache is 100+ miles away.

- MOST (not all) caches over there are higher "quality" than the typical mass-produced geocache. Yes, there are many many many excellent geocaches listed here (well-done puzzles, multis, and generally pleasant traditionals, all of which I enjoy finding), but over on the other site you don't have to spend hours searching through the thousands of listings for LPC's, GRC's, and magnets attached to dumpsters.

- There is generally better swag in trading caches, but this is likely mainly because caches over there are typically found only a few times a YEAR vs. several times a month over here.

- The web site over there is generally hard to figure out and slow. TPTB have been promising an upgrade to "TC 2.0" since well before I joined over a year ago, but it still hasn't materialized.

- You get to rate all caches (0 to 10). While this system still has quite a few kinks and issues, it generally means that "bad" caches are archived fairly quickly because cache owners don't want their placement rating to drop.

- While here a find is a find is a smiley, over there caches that get found often (like a roadside historical marker virtual) are TYPICALLY worth fewer points than caches that are rarely found (like a cache that requires a 16-mile hike up and over a mountain range).

- Your sponsors are your cache reviewers. Some sponsors will allow any cache, which can be bad. Others are much more restrictive, and try to make sure the cache is worthy and doesn't violate any laws.

- Cache owners can require a confirmation code (CC) before logging a cache. This is either written on the log book for traditional caches, or is obtained on site for a virtual cache. This makes it much harder to cheat by logging caches you never actually found. They can also provide a First Finder (FF) code, so there is no question as to who was FTF. Typically this is on a piece of paper or prize that is removed by whoever is FTF.

 

NOTE: There are lots of generalizations here. A full and detailed list of all differences would take many pages and would be extremely boring to write and read. If you want more details, go visit both sites. Also, there are advantages and disadvantages to BOTH sites.

 

Again, I participate on both sites. If I'm traveling to a new area for work, my first step is to see if there are any Terracaches near the destination or in route. Next I switch to GC.com and check out all the puzzle/mystery caches. Then I try to identify caches that will help me by filling in new squares in my D/T grid. Finally I identify caches to light up new counties for my INATN stats.

 

[Edit: Grammar]

That's a pretty good summary. In my view competition is a good thing. Out here you won't find numbers terracaches. Terracachers are motivated by getting points by finding high point value caches. Numbers caches would get a big 0 for point value. I could care less about find totals or points. I just enjoy getting out, but I do enjoy any cache that takes me to a cool spot! Edited April 25, 2008 by TrailGators

[CoyoteRed]

A cache next to a school playground, or on a highway overpass are probably not illegal, but they are bad ideas no matter where they are listed.

Yeah and this site is not immune to such placements.

 

At least over there the community gets a chance to voice their objections. Here, it's "tough nuts, it conforms to the guidelines."

[+TrailGators]

A cache next to a school playground, or on a highway overpass are probably not illegal, but they are bad ideas no matter where they are listed.

Yeah and this site is not immune to such placements.

 

At least over there the community gets a chance to voice their objections. Here, it's "tough nuts, it conforms to the guidelines."

I wonder if they have defenders? The ratings over there pretty much poo poo any caches like that.

[+onfire4jesus]

After reading this thread, I decided to check this out. There are 3 caches within about 40 miles of my location. Two are virtuals and one is a micro. The micro is placed in a large county park that has 3 ammo can caches in it (one of which is mine). I just shook my head as to why anyone would bother putting a micro in this park - it has room for dozens, if not hundreds more ammo cans, although most would require fairly lengthy hikes.

 

Like some of the other posters, I may join the site and check it to add to other caching runs, but I'm not going to spend a lot of time there.

[+Confucius' Cat]

A cache next to a school playground, or on a highway overpass are probably not illegal, but they are bad ideas no matter where they are listed.

Yeah and this site is not immune to such placements.

 

At least over there the community gets a chance to voice their objections. Here, it's "tough nuts, it conforms to the guidelines."

Or conversely here you place a perfectly safe and legal cache, it gets denied, and all you get is, "tough nuts, it violates an unwritten guideline that we (TPTB) refuse to delineate clearly."

 

TC has a conundrum. They are not popular because they are not popular.

 

I joined about a year ago, found there are very few caches available, didn't bother with it and lost my sponsorship. I logged on again a couple of weeks ago and got sponsored again in minutes, but again there just aren't enough caches to bother with.

 

Until a lot of people decide it IS worth the effort, it will never be worth the effort.

 

GC is the best game in town.

 

(IBTL) *surprised it is still open* mods must be asleep at the switch.

[+TrailGators]

A cache next to a school playground, or on a highway overpass are probably not illegal, but they are bad ideas no matter where they are listed.

Yeah and this site is not immune to such placements.

 

At least over there the community gets a chance to voice their objections. Here, it's "tough nuts, it conforms to the guidelines."

Or conversely here you place a perfectly safe and legal cache, it gets denied, and all you get is, "tough nuts, it violates an unwritten guideline that we (TPTB) refuse to delineate clearly."

 

TC has a conundrum. They are not popular because they are not popular.

 

I joined about a year ago, found there are very few caches available, didn't bother with it and lost my sponsorship. I logged on again a couple of weeks ago and got sponsored again in minutes, but again there just aren't enough caches to bother with.

 

Until a lot of people decide it IS worth the effort, it will never be worth the effort.

 

GC is the best game in town.

 

(IBTL) *surprised it is still open* mods must be asleep at the switch.

Now you know how the first geocachers must have felt. If you read through the old logs of the oldest caches you'll notice that many of them are gone.

[+Confucius' Cat]

Necessity is the mother of all inventions. (sic)

 

There was an original need for more participation and it grew exponentially. I was involved within about a year or so of the opening and I have seen explosive growth at GC- from couple of hundred in 100 miles to nearly 3000 today.

 

Now it could be argued that GC is too big. There are so many caches available that determining which ones to go for is more time consuming than finding the caches themselves. If one wants to utilize their time on caches they are likely to like, they often have to wade through hundreds of caches they are likely to dislike to find them.

 

IMO recent policies at GC are leading to a new "necessity" that could perhaps lead to substantial growth on the other sites (and consequently diminishing of GC). GC is alienating a lot of its customers in subtle little ways. As yet there is no real alternative, but as more and more cachers become aggrieved, the other sites are sure to grow.

 

The question is pretty much "who will bell the cat?" Those brave souls who jump ship first are going to do a lot of traveling for a few caches and are going to have to hide their little aces off to entice others to join in.

[+TrailGators]

Necessity is the mother of all inventions. (sic)

 

There was an original need for more participation and it grew exponentially. I was involved within about a year or so of the opening and I have seen explosive growth at GC- from couple of hundred in 100 miles to nearly 3000 today.

 

Now it could be argued that GC is too big. There are so many caches available that determining which ones to go for is more time consuming than finding the caches themselves. If one wants to utilize their time on caches they are likely to like, they often have to wade through hundreds of caches they are likely to dislike to find them.

 

IMO recent policies at GC are leading to a new "necessity" that could perhaps lead to substantial growth on the other sites (and consequently diminishing of GC). GC is alienating a lot of its customers in subtle little ways. As yet there is no real alternative, but as more and more cachers become aggrieved, the other sites are sure to grow.

 

The question is pretty much "who will bell the cat?" Those brave souls who jump ship first are going to do a lot of traveling for a few caches and are going to have to hide their little aces off to entice others to join in.

GC definitely needs to provide us a more effective and efficient way to sift through all the caches. Edited April 26, 2008 by TrailGators

[+Parabola]

 

To the OP. Geocaching is a sport and there are three major cache sites along with a few other smaller ones. Most of the TC'ers I know hunt caches from both sites (TC and GC) as so do I. Bringing this topic up in the GC site is probably not the best idea. Go over there and ask your questions about that site.

 

I find both sites I use are fun and both have there strong points and weak points. But again I enjoy geocaching (the sport) as well as both of the sites. I think a previous post summed up the verious points very well.

 

But again I live in a well placed area for TC's as well as GC's. I find that a lot of places that I have been too have both so I hunt both. I found when I was running out of GC's near me that there was alot of TC's in those area's I have already visited.

 

I've also seen where a Terra's was there long before a GC was. So that comment in a previous post is completly incorrect.

 

But seriously if you have questions on the other site used those forums. There are people that will be more than happy to answer your quesitons just as some have done in here.

[+TrailGators]

 

To the OP. Geocaching is a sport and there are three major cache sites along with a few other smaller ones. Most of the TC'ers I know hunt caches from both sites (TC and GC) as so do I. Bringing this topic up in the GC site is probably not the best idea. Go over there and ask your questions about that site.

 

I find both sites I use are fun and both have there strong points and weak points. But again I enjoy geocaching (the sport) as well as both of the sites. I think a previous post summed up the verious points very well.

 

But again I live in a well placed area for TC's as well as GC's. I find that a lot of places that I have been too have both so I hunt both. I found when I was running out of GC's near me that there was alot of TC's in those area's I have already visited.

 

I've also seen where a Terra's was there long before a GC was. So that comment in a previous post is completly incorrect.

 

But seriously if you have questions on the other site used those forums. There are people that will be more than happy to answer your quesitons just as some have done in here.

Everything you said is true of me and what it's like out here. There are a couple of hundred TCs and almost all TCers also GC. I really don't think GC worrys about TC. That would be like Google worrying about Ask.com

[+succotash]

We were taking a fairly short walk back through a wooded/swampy area with no defined path after finding the Healing Springs Bath (GCHQ76) when my husband saw something that didn't look quite right. He poked a bit and found a terracache. That's how we learned about terracaching. With the proliferation of fairly lame micros in our area in the past year we thought the idea of "quality caching" was reasonable and signed on to log this one cache. Although we look at the site every so often we haven't found another one worth doing so far. We like all of the options on geocaching with good hikes plus puzzle caches, earthcaches etc and it's pretty easy to do a search for quality caches on the geocaching site so we're very happy with it.

[+ArtieD]

I never really saw the point of Terracaching...

 

There are so few around me to make it worthwhile at all. I could do them all in one day. Where would I be then? Bored. I have done a couple of them, however, and I was not impressed. They were not any more special than your average geocache.

 

The site is clunky at best. Navigating is a pain and the forums are filled with tons of people who spew their ignorant anti-GC.com drivel. It's definately a hostile place, IMO.

 

In summation, while I might hunt a TC if I were bored I certainly don't see it as anything special.

[+NeoAddict]

For my entire state, there are a whole 9 Terracaches.

 

There are 9 Geocaches within .7 miles of my home.

 

As much as this game isn't a numbers hunt, I'd much rather like to be doing Geocaching for more than 9 caches. I find the whole idea of Terracaches kinda boring, especially since they stress "quality" yet they really aren't all that much better than an ammo can in the woods sort of cache. And aren't nearly as plentiful.

[+Mother Wolf]

I signed up with Terra cache last yr. J-Way gave a very good description of the comparisons. I also belong to Navicache. Each has something different to offer for me. Yes Gc has a lot more caches 'everywhere' to chose from. TC has fewer & are fsrther away but are a bit different in style & NC offers virtuals which I like for those special see places that cant or wont allow a physical cache & they are more receptive to individually designed cache pages as far as support groups such as our MILITARY.

 

Is 1 better than the other? It depends on what you are looking for.

 

Is it bad taste to ask about other places & opinions of them on a different website? Only if you fear compitition. I have suggested to cachers on the other sites to visit here if they are looking for something specific that maybe wasnt available on either of the other sites. People who want to cache should be glad that there are different things available to chose from. Where they chose it from shouldnt be the issue. Have fun, enjoy & share. MW

Edited April 26, 2008 by Mother Wolf

[Bidwell]

What is the difference between geo and terra caching? The site claims quality caches, what does this mean? thanks!

 

In my state there are thousands of geocaches listed here and maybe a hundred or so geocaches listed on Terracaching. So quantity wise, TC com is totally lacking.

 

As far as" quality", nearly every one of those caches listed on TC is just piggybacked on a previously existing cache listed here, so there is no difference in quality. A totally pointless website as far as I'm concerned.

 

That’s because the area is saturated with GC’s. Any cache you place these days can be considered a piggy back. By the way, how do you responsibly maintain all of your 200 + caches? Also a write up that simply says “I drove by the area and saw that it didn’t have a cache, so I threw one out. Go find it.” does not attract my attention. Live and let live.