Has caching turned into a P&G hobby?

[+sbell111]

Agreed, not an issue because you can screen out (ignore) most of the P&Gs. For many Geocaching has become a numbers game, but personally I'd rather find one or two worthwhile caches in a weekend, than a 200 guardrail or LPCs.

AMEN!

P&Gs are, by very definition, easily screened. They are caches that have both low terrain and low difficulty.

 

You, and others, are confusing 'Park & Grab' with 'caches that don't amuse me'.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Us lame folks don't need lame caches! I cache in a wheelchair or on crutches and have managed to find my share of caches over the years. Yes, easy terrain is certainly helpful, but that has nothing to do with the difficulty level! The idea that we need P&Gs is false. If you want to consider handicap accessible terrain for some of your caches, great, but you don't have to make them easy to find... we're crippled, not stupid!

I never actually called you stupid. That being said, I do wish that you had actually read my entire post prior to choosing to get all insulted.

You often have trouble interpreting my posts, it seems. I was agreeing with you and not at all insulted. I did not intimate that anyone was treating us as stupid.

[+Chi-Town Cacher]

I feel there should definitely be some easy caches. I geocache about half the time with my nephews, While I do thoroughly enjoy finding a cache myself seeing their faces light up when they've found the cache (usually long before me!) and when they're going through the swag is what motivated me to hide my first cache. That cache has a difficulty rating of 1 and it was done that reason for what I consider a very good reason. I didn't spell it out in the cache description as clearly as I probably should have, but I hinted at what I envisioned for the cache. That was that hopefully adults would hand over the GPRr to a child when in the general area and let the young cacher do the navigating and the spotting of the cache. I see easy caches such as my first one as a great opportunity to get the next generation of cachers hooked on an activity that is wholesome and fun. As far as the LPC and guardrail caches go, yes they're not exciting to me anymore, but the first time I saw one it sure was a lot of fun. It seems like lots of people bash on those type of caches, but if they were honest I'll bet they thought the first one or two were neat. My next cache I plan to place this spring will be a puzzle cache with a difficulty rating of 2.5 (which I suspect I'll probably have to upgrade to a 3 or 3.5 if lots of people struggle with it for long periods) and a terrain of probably a 2 so I do believe in having variety. However, I say lets let everybody enjoy their own form of fun without beating them up verbally. That's my $0.02 for whatever it's worth. Can't we all just get along? Happy caching everybody!

[+Proud Soccer Mom]

Has caching turned into a Park & Grab hobby? Have many given up on the thrill of the hunt? I'm just curious how you all feel about the more difficult hides and if it is worth putting them out.

 

I think there's a need for instant gratification and a certain percentage of the Geocaching population plays the game for that score. They like to see their numbers go up and don't care if it's in the guardrail behind the Pick & Save or under a lampskirt at WallyWorld. We did those p&gs and I burned out on them. The final straw for me was when I started a photography project that involved caching and questioned what I was taking pictures of... dead end guard rails? parking lots?! playgrounds?!?!

 

You can head off the grabby mcgrabs by hiding a series that's named "Not a P&G" and keep the difficulty up. Warn cachers that it's HIPS (hidden in plain sight) or camo'd within an inch of its life.

 

I think there's enough cachers out there who like their statistics but also find a deeper level of enjoyment in the game. They appreciate puzzles and higher difficulties.

 

Do you enjoy hunting for a cache that could take 3 or 4 visits to find.

 

No, I don't. I like a good walk in the woods and finding a regular.

Edited January 22, 2009 by Redneck Parrotheads

[Geo_Bird]

Has caching turned into a Park & Grab hobby? Have many given up on the thrill of the hunt? I'm just curious how you all feel about the more difficult hides and if it is worth putting them out.

Definitely! I don't bother with P&Gs. I could quadruple my count in a few hours, but that's not what appeals to me. I like caches that take some hiking and give me some scenery to look at along the way. If you cache them, they will come.

 

Jim

[+DeRock & The Psychic Cacher]

Has caching turned into a Park & Grab hobby? Have many given up on the thrill of the hunt? I'm just curious how you all feel about the more difficult hides and if it is worth putting them out. Do you enjoy hunting for a cache that could take 3 or 4 visits to find. Or would it be better to conform to what it seems like everyone wants and just start hiding LPC's and nanos stuck stuck to the backs of signs and move on. It seems as time goes by more and more people are in it just for the numbers. All they want is to grab a quick smiley and then move onto the next. It almost seems not worth it to put out a cache that has any difficulty to the hide. If you decide to go against the flow and put something out that actually requires someone to have to put a little effort into their hunt it just turns into problems. First they start getting upset because the had to log a DNF, as time passes some cachers just don't care how much damage they do to an area to make the find. As more DNF's roll in then you risk the possibility of unpleasant logs and emails. Then after one or two finds you might as well downgrade the Difficulty on the cache due to the strong phone a friend networks that have popped up, since everyone is so willing to just tell everyone else exactly where it is. I've even seen where people have marked the location of difficult caches with rocks or even signs with arrows pointing out the cache to help out whoever else comes along to get their smiley. Which I feel is just plain wrong. If someone goes through the effort to put out a hard to find cache it's just not right for someone else to come along and ruin it. Not only are you ruining it for the hider of the cache you are also taking the fun out of it for cachers that do enjoy the hunt.

 

OK Roundnround - which PCB cacher has hid the cache causing all the excitement now?

 

I'll add it to our must do list when we come down with the Tikibirds this spring!

 

Deane

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

[+Smokey Bear Collector]

Catching up on recent posts, it appears many of us share the same opinion. Taking a moment to reflect on the OP, I am reminded of the behavior of some of our games highest scoring players. While collecting numbers is a game in itself, I'm refreshed to find that many of the biggest scorers search for all the types of caches out there. Without naming names, I've observed that the cacher with the highest score, and many close behind, will hike miles in the hills for a multi just as easily scoop up a lot of LPC's.

 

I agree there is a time and place for all types of caches, from the P&G to the 5/5. I don't fear a future of P&G hides, as those become boring. And as adventurists geocachers desire the challenge of a search in the outdoors.

[+briansnat]

P&Gs are, by very definition, easily screened. They are caches that have both low terrain and low difficulty.

 

Really?

 

Involves a hike of a mile round trip

 

Over a mile RT

 

About a mile and a half there and back

 

A three mile hike out and back

 

About 15 minutes from car to cache to car

 

About a 3 mile hike

 

About a half mile to cache and back

 

A 3+ mile hike

 

About a mike and half RT

[+vwaldoguy]

That's the problem with the terrain/difficulty rating in geocaching. It's all /very/ subjective. What is a 1 1/2 star difficulty for you might be a 3 or 4 star difficulty for someone else. Someone with 3000 finds might find all caches very easy, while someone who has never cached before would find even the most simplest cache very hard. Somonen who is a seasoned hiker might find a 3 mile hike only a 1 star difficulty, but someone who has been sitting on a couch for a few years would find a 3 mile hike almost impossible.

[+geomann1]

P&Gs are, by very definition, easily screened. They are caches that have both low terrain and low difficulty.

 

I screen by just looking at where they are located, which is what I have just been doing. My preference is for caches in parks and natural areas. For my weekend mini-vacation with the family, it was quite easy using the mapping function and cache descriptions to pick out several caches we could probably enjoy doing and ignored many that probably would not. If you are not into the numbers game, its easy to screen out what are likely the best caches in an area (for my tastes of course!).

[Mr.Yuck]

 

Do you enjoy hunting for a cache that could take 3 or 4 visits to find.

 

No, I don't. I like a good walk in the woods and finding a regular.

 

Heck no! Give me that ammo box under a pile of sticks after a 1/2 mile 2-3 star terrain hike. Woohoo!

[+Proud Soccer Mom]

 

Do you enjoy hunting for a cache that could take 3 or 4 visits to find.

 

No, I don't. I like a good walk in the woods and finding a regular.

 

Heck no! Give me that ammo box under a pile of sticks after a 1/2 mile 2-3 star terrain hike. Woohoo!

 

Dang straight!

...but I can't tell if you're making fun of me.

[+flask]

like every activity, lots of people will crowd in and look for cheap and easy.

 

i like caches that are for some reason interesting.

 

that leaves a whole lot of possibilities. it is disturbing to note just how many of the new caches don't manage to meet that standard.

[Groleau]

I think the great thing about geocaching is there is something for everyone. I've been caching for several years and have pretty low numbers. I love hiding difficult caches: up here in Maine, some of the caches can take the better part of the day to get to. I tend to rate them 2/4 in difficulty... hard to get to but not too tuff to find. Something for everyone.

[Mr.Yuck]

 

Do you enjoy hunting for a cache that could take 3 or 4 visits to find.

 

No, I don't. I like a good walk in the woods and finding a regular.

 

Heck no! Give me that ammo box under a pile of sticks after a 1/2 mile 2-3 star terrain hike. Woohoo!

 

Dang straight!

...but I can't tell if you're making fun of me.

 

Never. That's how I like 'em. Of course I liked it better when they were all like that.

[GOF and Bacall]

 

Do you enjoy hunting for a cache that could take 3 or 4 visits to find.

 

No, I don't. I like a good walk in the woods and finding a regular.

 

Heck no! Give me that ammo box under a pile of sticks after a 1/2 mile 2-3 star terrain hike. Woohoo!

 

Dang straight!

...but I can't tell if you're making fun of me.

 

I know him. He ain't making fun of you. That's just the way he feels.

[Mr.Yuck]

 

Do you enjoy hunting for a cache that could take 3 or 4 visits to find.

 

No, I don't. I like a good walk in the woods and finding a regular.

 

Heck no! Give me that ammo box under a pile of sticks after a 1/2 mile 2-3 star terrain hike. Woohoo!

 

Dang straight!

...but I can't tell if you're making fun of me.

 

I know him. He ain't making fun of you. That's just the way he feels.

 

Oh, just goofing around. That is my favorite type of cache though. Even a hardcore oldschooler like me can not be a fan of "evil hides". If I go out, I usually expect to find the cache. And no, why would I want to go to a cache that takes 3 or 4 visits to find? Maybe I've done it a few times, but only deep in the woods. Besides, gas will be $5 a gallon again before we even know what hit us.

[+roundnround we go]

I think the thread has wandered a bit from the OP's question about difficulty in the hide to terrain, in part because the original post and title referenced Park and Grab, which sent the thread down the "50 feet from the parking" direction.

 

I believe he was really getting at the question of fondness (or lack of it) for a tough hide.

 

Thanks for helping out with the meaning. I was more interested in how everyone feels about tougher hides. I kind of got on a rambling streak and might have lost my train of thought as I started thinking about how some just don't seem to have any respect for the area as long as they make the find.

 

As for P&G's I don't feel that they are all bad but it would be nice if people chose their locations a little better. There is a big difference between a P&G at a little known park or monument and a dumpster next to a strip mall.

 

 

OK Roundnround - which PCB cacher has hid the cache causing all the excitement now?

 

I'll add it to our must do list when we come down with the Tikibirds this spring!

 

Deane

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

 

The new one where the digging is taking place is Beavers Buffet by us, but Bay Counties Smallest is the one of the caches that people are leaving rocks to mark the location

 

Catching up on recent posts, it appears many of us share the same opinion. Taking a moment to reflect on the OP, I am reminded of the behavior of some of our games highest scoring players. While collecting numbers is a game in itself, I'm refreshed to find that many of the biggest scorers search for all the types of caches out there. Without naming names, I've observed that the cacher with the highest score, and many close behind, will hike miles in the hills for a multi just as easily scoop up a lot of LPC's.

 

I agree there is nothing wrong with playing the numbers game but it's great to get out on the woods and spend the day hiking biking or even just spending the day in the Jeep riding the trails to some out of the way place you would have never found without a cache.

 

That's the problem with the terrain/difficulty rating in geocaching. It's all /very/ subjective. What is a 1 1/2 star difficulty for you might be a 3 or 4 star difficulty for someone else. Someone with 3000 finds might find all caches very easy, while someone who has never cached before would find even the most simplest cache very hard. Somonen who is a seasoned hiker might find a 3 mile hike only a 1 star difficulty, but someone who has been sitting on a couch for a few years would find a 3 mile hike almost impossible.

 

That seems to be a problem for all. When you hide a cache you might think it's not going to be that hard and give it a low rating but then to those that actually have to hunt for it could be devious.

[+briansnat]

That's the problem with the terrain/difficulty rating in geocaching. It's all /very/ subjective. What is a 1 1/2 star difficulty for you might be a 3 or 4 star difficulty for someone else. Someone with 3000 finds might find all caches very easy, while someone who has never cached before would find even the most simplest cache very hard. Somonen who is a seasoned hiker might find a 3 mile hike only a 1 star difficulty, but someone who has been sitting on a couch for a few years would find a 3 mile hike almost impossible.

 

Exactly! Which means that filtering caches by difficulty and terrain is a useless for filtering P&Gs.

[Clan Riffster]

And in spite of anything you do, there are just some lunkheads that are going to grab saws, machetes, and shovels.

Meg, you say "saws, machetes and shovels" like it's a bad thing.

[+sbell111]

Agreed, not an issue because you can screen out (ignore) most of the P&Gs. For many Geocaching has become a numbers game, but personally I'd rather find one or two worthwhile caches in a weekend, than a 200 guardrail or LPCs.

AMEN!

P&Gs are, by very definition, easily screened. They are caches that have both low terrain and low difficulty.

 

You, and others, are confusing 'Park & Grab' with 'caches that don't amuse me'.

P&Gs are, by very definition, easily screened. They are caches that have both low terrain and low difficulty.

Really?

 

Involves a hike of a mile round trip

 

Over a mile RT

 

About a mile and a half there and back

 

A three mile hike out and back

 

About 15 minutes from car to cache to car

 

About a 3 mile hike

 

About a half mile to cache and back

 

A 3+ mile hike

 

About a mike and half RT

P&G's require merely parking the car and making the grab. A cache that requires a long search or a long walk is not a P&G.

 

I'm amused by the fact that you had to edit out the second half of my post to make your's work.

Edited January 23, 2009 by sbell111

[+Renegade Knight]

...Has caching turned into a Park & Grab hobby?...

 

People get out of caching what they bring to it. Park n Grab people enjoy the Park & Grab caches. Puzzle lovers enjoy the puzzles, Hikers can find a nice cache at the end of a trail.

 

There are more of every kind of cache out there. It's only that you have to look at more of everthing including the urban Grab n Bags that may make you think otherwise.

[+JohnnyVegas]

I would not call it a park and grab hobby. THere are cachers that use it as a park and grab hobby, for some it is a way to run their numbers up, but at least they are finding the caches they are loging (not trying to open another can of worms).

Then there are cachers that are only able to do P&Gs because of a physical limitaions.

There are so many P&Gs now that it is easy for a cacher to have large number of finds without having any real geocache experiance as far as types of hides.

[+briansnat]

Agreed, not an issue because you can screen out (ignore) most of the P&Gs. For many Geocaching has become a numbers game, but personally I'd rather find one or two worthwhile caches in a weekend, than a 200 guardrail or LPCs.

AMEN!

P&Gs are, by very definition, easily screened. They are caches that have both low terrain and low difficulty.

 

You, and others, are confusing 'Park & Grab' with 'caches that don't amuse me'.

P&Gs are, by very definition, easily screened. They are caches that have both low terrain and low difficulty.

Really?

 

Involves a hike of a mile round trip

 

Over a mile RT

 

About a mile and a half there and back

 

A three mile hike out and back

 

About 15 minutes from car to cache to car

 

About a 3 mile hike

 

About a half mile to cache and back

 

A 3+ mile hike

 

About a mike and half RT

P&G's require merely parking the car and making the grab. A cache that requires a long search or a long walk is not a P&G.

 

I'm amused by the fact that you had to edit out the second half of my post to make your's work.

 

Duh. You said they could be screened out by looking at the terrain and difficulty. Obviously you are mistaken.

[+cachensfun]

We agree

Edited January 23, 2009 by cachensfun

[+3doxies]

...Has caching turned into a Park & Grab hobby?...

 

People get out of caching what they bring to it. Park n Grab people enjoy the Park & Grab caches. Puzzle lovers enjoy the puzzles, Hikers can find a nice cache at the end of a trail.

 

There are more of every kind of cache out there. It's only that you have to look at more of everthing including the urban Grab n Bags that may make you think otherwise.

 

Gotta agree with RK here. Hunt what you want, leave the rest...and leave others to do the same. Hide what you like, let others do the same. Can't really remember very many occasions where we've been surprised by a cache being a P&G when we expected something else...or vice-versa...when we've actually spent time reading the cache page and looking at the location. At that point, it becomes a simple decision...do we want to hunt it or not? As it should be. And as a hider, haven't had too difficult a time hiding AC's in the woods cause P&Gs have displaced the spot, nor vice-versa.

 

In many ways, that is one of the real attractions of this hobby - there's something for everyone, be it hides or finds. No rules, just right. We all have the ability to make pretty informed decisions when it comes to the caches we hunt...do so, and let others do so. No skin off your back, or mine....well, until we roll down the hill, or fall in the parking lot...

Edited January 23, 2009 by 3doxies

[+cachensfun]

Well we are more into the fun of finding a cache than just getting a . We have seen some caches were people have given it away by making arrows too. We didn't like it because it takes all the fun out of finding it. If you are going to put out a hard or tricky cache you can know that we are all for it.

 

Cachensfun

Edited January 23, 2009 by cachensfun

[GOF and Bacall]

If I find a spoiler at the cache site that the owner didn't mention on the cache page you can bet it won't be there when I leave.

[+deb3day]

I enjoy the ones that take a few visits. I never give up after one try unless the area makes me uncomfortable in some way. But I don't mind the P&G's either. It's nice to see a variety and in my area, we have both. There are a lot of local cachers that put out quality hides. I don't see our area becoming all P&G in the near future. We have a lot of places for good caches.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Yes. I do P&Gs. But, I'll also do almost any cache within my physical and mental capabilities. And, Yes, I've been some very stange places.

As mentioned earlier, we did a nineteen stage multi. Only took us three days over three months! Did a nine stage 3/5 multi that took us five months. And, of course, the 5/5 Mystery cache that took us ten months, and a stroke of lightning (to get the brain to figure out the mystery.) Picked up a 1/5 on a twenty-four mile hike with nine thousand feet of climb. (Only took us four days.) Hope to go for a 2/2 Saturday, and a 5/3 on Sunday.

Hide it, and if I'm capable, I'll probably look for it. But I'll save the P&Gs for bad weather, or long road trips.

[+Kealia]

Still prefer the long hikes with a good view like this recent outing:

[+Rhintl]

Hide caches that you would enjoy finding. Look for caches that you would enjoy finding. If you are not having fun, perhaps this isn't the hobby for you. If you feel the need to act all indignant, perhaps you should take a closer look at your behavior, rather than expecting all others to amuse you (again, collective 'you').

 

Fully agree with that.

However, often it is not very easy and comfortable to me to filter out these caches:

• the pocket queries do not contain the cache attributes, and once in the field I rely on this information
  
• I miss attributes like: <doable without at-home preparation>, <placed in a recreative area>, <placed away from traffic and technical dangers>
  
• An obligatory indication of the required time, distance to walk, height-meters.
  

I would also recommend to discard the counter of found caches.

Currently, this is displayed as most prominent figure, and thus appears to be rather significant.

In reality it is only 1 of 1000 measures, and it is not the one that conveys decent, generic geocaching.

 

Wishing everyone happy caching!

Best wishes from Switzerland

Edited January 26, 2009 by Rhintl

[+briansnat]

Hide caches that you would enjoy finding. Look for caches that you would enjoy finding. If you are not having fun, perhaps this isn't the hobby for you. If you feel the need to act all indignant, perhaps you should take a closer look at your behavior, rather than expecting all others to amuse you (again, collective 'you').

 

Fully agree with that.

However, often it is not very easy and comfortable to me to filter out these caches:

• the pocket queries do not contain the cache attributes, and once in the field I rely on this information
  
• I miss attributes like: <doable without at-home preparation>, <placed in a recreative area>, <placed away from traffic and technical dangers>
  
• An obligatory indication of the required time, distance to walk, height-meters.
  

I would also recommend to discard the counter of found caches.

Currently, this is displayed as most prominent figure, and thus suggest to be rather significant.

In reality it is only 1 of 1000 measures, and it is not the one that conveys decent, generic geocaching.

 

Wishing everyone happy caching!

Best wishes from Switzerland

 

The days of just loading your GPS and going geocaching are over. You need to study sat photos and maps, read through each cache page and log, do research on the internet and more to filter out these caches. If you are traveling to a new area you need to put in hours of research. It does kind of sap the fun out of it which is why I rarely geocache when I travel these days.

 

At one time using geocaching to explore new areas was my favorite aspect of the sport. Now that part is essentially gone - unless I want to explore strip malls, 7-Eleven dumpsters, fast food drive ins and big box store parking lots.

Edited January 26, 2009 by briansnat

[+Isonzo Karst]

Rhintl - although the attributes do not come with the PQ, you can use them to prefilter. I run my PQs for NO Stealth. Ie, I ask to see only caches that do NOT have the Stealth attribute set. This thins the herd quite a bit, but many owners don't use attributes, or don't use them correctly.

 

I absolutely agree with you on removing the find count from the cachers name on logs. It should appear on their profile, only.

 

And some kind, any kind, of ratings system - sooner rather than later, please. As briansnat has noted, it's just getting too time consuming to go caching; the amount of time you have to put into reading cache pages and looking at maps. These days I rarely hunt more than a couple, generally new hides in areas I already know, and will be hiking anyway. It's just not worth the time to figure out what I *might* enjoy in some new place.

 

edit typos

Edited January 26, 2009 by Isonzo Karst

[CoyoteRed]

i like caches that are for some reason interesting.

 

that leaves a whole lot of possibilities. it is disturbing to note just how many of the new caches don't manage to meet that standard.

BINGO!

 

I don't care how short or how long, how easy or how hard, none of that matters more than how interesting.

 

Unfortunately, the second part of the above quote in true, too.

[+Isonzo Karst]

i like caches that are for some reason interesting.

 

BINGO!

 

indeed.

 

There is a steady stream of new cachers who are excited and interested in the mere existence of caches and finding caches. The where, the write up, the hide style, all immaterial to the initial excitement that caches exist.

 

They tend to place caches in areas that are convenient and accessible to themselves (on the way to work or shop). They don't see anything wrong with their own hides; the mere existence of the hide is inherently of interest from their viewpoint. (Next year, they won't be caching).

[+Kit Fox]

 

The days of just loading your GPS and going geocaching are over. You need to study sat photos and maps, read through each cache page and log, do research on the internet and more to filter out these caches. If you are traveling to a new area you need to put in hours of research. It does kind of sap the fun out of it which is why I rarely geocache when I travel these days.

 

At one time using geocaching to explore new areas was my favorite aspect of the sport. Now that part is essentially gone - unless I want to explore strip malls, 7-Eleven dumpsters, fast food drive ins and big box store parking lots.

 

I created a new name for the caches you just described. I call them infected "BOILs," or Belongs On Ignore List caches.

 

Now if we could only implement Coyote Red's Style idea, it would be much easier to skip "BOILS."

[+TotemLake]

Has caching turned into a P&G hobby?

No. It's only expanded to include that.

[Clan Riffster]

I call them infected "BOILs," or Belongs On Ignore List caches.

Kit, you know I'm gonna have to steal that name for a cache title, right?

[+mountainthoughts]

I actually like both types of caches. The challenging ones are great for days when I have TIME to search. P&Gs are great for lunchtime and days when time is limited. I pretty much try to find all the caches I can, regardless of the type.