Caching maturity

[+Machuco]

When I started caching about four years ago I wanted to find every cache in the world. Back then there weren’t as many caches and most of them were small to large in size. 90% of my free time was spent out on the back roads in my local area searching out all the caches that I could physically get to.

 

As I started clearing out all the local easy caches, I expanded my horizons and started traveling miles and miles to find cache rich areas, spending lots of days a long ways from home just to find that most of the caches had no creativity or thought put into them.

 

Then I started to go on the long hikes to find the harder caches.

 

Now with the proliferation of the micro and nano caches, my caching philosophy has changed or “matured”. I find that although I still like to go on the occasional “MEGA” cache run, I get much more satisfaction from the caches that I have to hike to and have a great view or some historic significance.

 

So I was just wondering if other folks had any similar caching maturity issues or am I the only one having a hard time seeing the significance of searching for a micro in a shopping mall?

 

Any other folks have caching maturity stories?

[+Harry Dolphin]

Interesting definition of 'maturity'. To each his own. As I've matured, the aches and pains become greater. Early in my career, I did a 1/5 virtual on the Presi Travese! (Almost five years ago.)

Creativity and enjoyment are the keywords here. If you enjoy long hikes, go for it! But that doesn't lessen the fact that there are a lot of creative caches with great views that do not require a long hike.

To be sure, there are a lot of boring caches only good for numbers hos. But there are also a lot of great caches in beautiful places with great views that aare easier t find.

I feel that you are defining 'elitism', rather than 'maturity'. But, if it keeps you happy, go for it!

But, don't tell me that this view isn't worth going for because it's only a 2/1.5.

[+Machuco]

I'm not saying that a long hike defines a great cache. I'm just more particular about the caches that I choose to seek.

[+niraD]

For me, it depends on how I'm geocaching at the time.

 

If I'm grabbing a quick cache before/after work, then I'm a "blast radius" cacher. I grab a cache near the top of my "nearest to home" list. I'll eventually find them all, and as I expand the "blast radius" around my home, I have to cycle further and further to get the nearest cache.

 

If I'm planning a trip somewhere, then I pick and choose. If I have time, I solve a few of the local puzzles and then find the finals that are the most convenient. I also look for caches that would make interesting destinations for hikes with my non-geocaching wife. (During last summer's vacation, we did a night cache together that was a lot of fun.)

 

If I have an unexpected opportunity to grab a quick cache, then I look at a few of the traditional caches nearest to my current location, and pick the one that looks the most interesting.

[+The Lazy Sunbathers]

Now I am new to this and as such I can't say that I've gained any "geo-maturity" but I can say that I've noticed the difference between a P&G and a multi cache with several stages and a finale. I am not so good at the puzzles yet though!!

 

From what I gather after reading several posts is that what makes a good cache is only relevent to the person looking for it! You like to go on hikes and get the caches that take a little more physical effort than others. Some like to get the ones that are in the "blast radius". I prefer the multi's and themed caches, but if you were to look at my profile it's mostly P&G's. I get what I can when I can! I'm sure that if/when I get to the numbers your at I might feel like I need more of a challenge to have a satisfying experience, but for now I'm happy finding almost anything. I do like the big ones though!

 

I gotta admit that I went to my caches to see if you had found them! Sadly I'm not intersting enough !

[+Machuco]

I gotta admit that I went to my caches to see if you had found them! Sadly I'm not intersting enough !

 

I found two of your adopted caches.

[+The Lazy Sunbathers]

I gotta admit that I went to my caches to see if you had found them! Sadly I'm not intersting enough !

 

I found two of your adopted caches.

 

Bobs caches were definatley creative and interesting though! That's why I helped him out and adopted what I could.

[+Kit Fox]

When I started caching about four years ago I wanted to find every cache in the world. Back then there weren’t as many caches and most of them were small to large in size. 90% of my free time was spent out on the back roads in my local area searching out all the caches that I could physically get to.

 

As I started clearing out all the local easy caches, I expanded my horizons and started traveling miles and miles to find cache rich areas, spending lots of days a long ways from home just to find that most of the caches had no creativity or thought put into them.

 

Then I started to go on the long hikes to find the harder caches.

 

Now with the proliferation of the micro and nano caches, my caching philosophy has changed or “matured”. I find that although I still like to go on the occasional “MEGA” cache run, I get much more satisfaction from the caches that I have to hike to and have a great view or some historic significance.

 

So I was just wondering if other folks had any similar caching maturity issues or am I the only one having a hard time seeing the significance of searching for a micro in a shopping mall?

 

Any other folks have caching maturity stories?

 

I find other hobbies to entertain me, when I no longer have time to find caches I like to find. I recently went to Santa Barbara for a play at the Lobero, and I spent half the day staring at your Dragon's Back cache, wishing I could find it. 99% of the caches in the area did not appeal to me.

 

I've matured to the point where I enjoy using the ignore list more than being an impulsive "radius slave" like many other cachers are. I find the type of caches I like, and skip the rest.

 

Micro Spew (credit for the term goes to Drat19) is the main reason i've taken up DSLR photography, hiking (without caching), hunting, and fishing.

Edited May 2, 2009 by Kit Fox

[+Snoogans]

I'm not saying that a long hike defines a great cache. I'm just more particular about the caches that I choose to seek.

 

That's where you matured. When a cache becomes a choice, you are in control.

[Mr.Yuck]

I'm not saying that a long hike defines a great cache. I'm just more particular about the caches that I choose to seek.

 

That's where you matured. When a cache becomes a choice, you are in control.

 

Gee, thanks for the avatar, Snoogs. I love that horse. No, I never matured, I was never a radius slave. I just like the kind of caches they had in my area when I started. This doesn't have to be a crazy hike, a few hundred feet into a nice park works fine. I was self ignoring an Off Your Rocker and a handful of parking lot micros even before the ignore list was bestowed upon us in early 2005.

 

Not to hijack your thread, I'd love to hear stories from former radius slave's who have "taken control of their choices". Either that or watch a flame war develop.

[+Tequila]

 

I've matured to the point where I enjoy using the ignore list more than being an impulsive "radius slave" like many other cachers are. I find the type of caches I like, and skip the rest.

 

 

My caching "philosophy' parallels the OP. And, like KF, I too have found great use for the Ignore button.

 

In 6 weeks there have been over 500 new caches published within 150 km of my house. Less than a dozen are really worth the effort.

[sdarken]

So I was just wondering if other folks had any similar caching maturity issues or am I the only one having a hard time seeing the significance of searching for a micro in a shopping mall?

 

Any other folks have caching maturity stories?

 

Though I haven't been caching quite as long as you, I've developed a similar philosophy. Driving somewhere by myself to spend a few hours visiting parking lot micros has completely lost it's appeal to me. There was a time when I'd do that regularly but these days I can be selective and I don't feel the urge to get every cache.

 

I'd say that this is at least in part due to the fact that I eventually ran out of local caches and the effort involved in getting to new caches exceeded the fun once I arrived. That helped me to start to be selective and broke the obsession with getting everything.

 

These days I'm interested in the experiences more than the numbers :- caching with friends and visiting unusual or remote places that I'd never see if it wasn't for geocaching. That's what drives me.

[+wkmccall]

So I was just wondering if other folks had any similar caching maturity issues or am I the only one having a hard time seeing the significance of searching for a micro in a shopping mall?

 

Lampost hides can present a challenge; unless you like some that just walk up to the cache and don't really care who sees you..

 

Like some, I make use of the ignore list when it comes to five mile hikes, multi-caches and puzzles.

Historic and interesting places, I can find without a cache so it really doesn't matter to me.

[+VirginiaGator]

It used to irritate me no end if I couldn't find a cache. And it was usually a micro in the woods. Now I have no problem adding that type to the ignore list. Throw in the caches with the intentionally inaccurate coordinates, too..."this will put you in the general area of the cache. good luck searching the 336 places it could possibly be."

[+Harry Dolphin]

I'm not saying that a long hike defines a great cache. I'm just more particular about the caches that I choose to seek.

 

Okay. That works better. Do what you enjoy doing! Ignore what you do not enjoy. Redefining your goals. I did a nice three-mile hike today, with 300' of climb. (Only three miles because I bushwhacked back down the mountain!) Tomorrow, I'll probably be hunting small or micros in small parks. I guess that my objection was to the use of the word 'maturity'. I'm glad that you've been able to define what interests you. Go for it! Lots of caches out there for everyone.

[+Shadowraven]

We've "matured" kinda-sorta. Basically it took us a while to really find what we liked since we had challenges of first not having a car when we got our GPS, then a year or so later having our first kid, and then a few more years later having our second kid. So if you look at my profile, we go caching A LOT, then A LOT, then A LOT... then you won't see us out for a good long while. So at some points we took whatever, just enjoying this new hobby. After a while we realized we hate the "micro in the middle of nowhere" as previous posters have talked about. Then a couple years ago we got our 4x4... now we REALLY like going off-roading with that thing. Throw in some camping paired with a bit of hiking, we try to hit at least one cache every family trip we go. Recently I've gotten the itch to try the puzzle ones... in our area we have the notorious Kit Fox And while I've looked and looked and looked at his puzzles, I'm pretty much clueless about all of them. One of these days... So in the meantime, I'm kinda a radius-slave, but kinda a whatever there is person.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Am I the only one that finds some of the statements in this thread a bit insulting. Maybe I have a different interpretation of terms like "slave" and "maturity" but I've always considered them to have a a negative connotation. In the context of this thread they're used to describe a certain type of geocaching behavior and more specifically those that *choose* to play the game the way they do rather than the way those that are throwing about those terms.

 

Maybe I'm not "mature" enough to express my opinion on the matter since I've only been caching for about 2.5 years and have yet to achieve 1000 finds, but it seems to me one of the biggest factors in how someone chooses to play this game is largely dictated by the area in which one geoaches. You can't really expect someone that lives in an area which only has less than a couple hundred geocaches within 15-20 miles of their home location than someone that has over 1000 caches available to seek to play the game the same way. I know that there are some on this forum that have indicated that they live in areas with over 1000 caches within 10 miles and there are others which have to travel 100 or more miles just to find a single cache.

 

I suspect that there are probably a fair number of geocachers that don't look for the same kinds of caches everytime they go out, let alone follow some arbitrary behavior that is deemed more "mature". Yesterday I had four hours free (a rarity for me) to go caching and had noticed that there were a bunch of caches that would likely go on some ignore lists, but I'm closing in on a numeric milestone and thought I'd do a "numbers run" (I suspect many would consider 16 finds a ho-hum day in cache rich areas). I had to drive an hour to get to the first one but it allow me to grab enough caches to set up for a cache I plan on going for tomorrow (the only one I'll probably look for). It's a 4.5/4.5 cache that I've been saving for a milestone number. I'll probably have other days this year with double digit finds and I have plans for a couple of other days where I may only get one cache. In general, how I cache largely depends on the availability of geocaches and how much time I have available to look for them. As I find more of the caches in my area

th4e distance I have to travel to find a cache and the amount of time needed increases.

 

I know there are a lot of people make liberal use of the ignore feature. I don't use it at all. I don't need to click on a button to ignore a cache. Putting a cache on the ignore list doesn't make it go away. If a cache is really difficult, or in some way less desirable than others, I just won't look for it right away. I don't need to adopt a "I'm too sexy for your geocache" attitude by announcing to everyone all the caches I've got on ignore list because they are too unworthy for my time to seek them.

[+PT_Tex]

I am really getting tried of lamp posts caches. There must be 100 in a 10 mile radius of my house. I pick and choose which caches I want and I don't have too hide them all. The only time I look for an easy lamp post is when I go on a trip and I want a cache in a city or state too fill in my map. I try to find a park with walking trails so I can take my dog with me and do 5 to caches at a time. Its real hard to do parking lot caches with my dog beause she wants to get out and that too much trouble for a P&G.

[+bwmick]

i am not getting more mature, just older, ask anybody that knows me. I have decided to change the way I play by changing my focus from seeker to that of hider. My friends and I enjoy the challenge of finding a good walk/paddle/snoeshoe and then placing caches at the best points that we can find. I want people to enjoy the journey, not just grab a smile for their collection.

 

most of my finding is done while I travel, I will load my gps and when I need a break I look for a nearby cache and have a look. short easy finds are just fine when that happens, but I am a little too shy to enjoy anything too public.

 

not sure whether maturity has any sway at all, I think it is just that no matter how hard I try to clear the first page of the caches nearest it never happens (likely because I always tell it not to show finds.)

 

enjoy the journey.

 

bryan

[+Tequila]

Perhaps "mature" is not the right word. I think what the OP is really saying is that the more you geocache, the more your needs/style/whatever changes.

 

When you first start, the exhilaration of finding the first one is pretty strong. As time goes on, the thrill of finding the 351st LPC diminishes.

 

Of course, on any given day, your objectives change too.

 

The good thing about the Groundspeak website is that features like bookmarks, PQ's and Ignore lists allow each cacher to create his own custom adventure without impacting anyone else.

 

For me, I ignore 90% of the new caches coming out and concentrate on finding the older ones. Still lots of 2001-2005 caches within driving distance.

 

One footnote: Unfortunately forums tend to bring out the negative more often than not. I don't think the OP intended to offend anyone. He was simply seeing if anyone else has changed their "style/preferences" like he has. And it would appear that many have.

[+caver53]

We love caching of all types. Normally, we're more interested in quality than quantity and can have a great day of caching and put in a full day with only 5 or 6 smilies to add to our list. But I love those quick micros when I'm in an unfamiliar town and looking for something to do in the evening besides sitting in a motel room staring at the TV. We'll often take long caching weekends and spend our days "country" caching and our evenings "town" caching.

[Mr.Yuck]

Am I the only one that finds some of the statements in this thread a bit insulting. Maybe I have a different interpretation of terms like "slave" and "maturity" but I've always considered them to have a a negative connotation. In the context of this thread they're used to describe a certain type of geocaching behavior and more specifically those that *choose* to play the game the way they do rather than the way those that are throwing about those terms.

 

 

I know there are a lot of people make liberal use of the ignore feature. I don't use it at all. I don't need to click on a button to ignore a cache. Putting a cache on the ignore list doesn't make it go away. If a cache is really difficult, or in some way less desirable than others, I just won't look for it right away. I don't need to adopt a "I'm too sexy for your geocache" attitude by announcing to everyone all the caches I've got on ignore list because they are too unworthy for my time to seek them.

 

I cut away some of your post. Some snippage has occured, as people would say elsewhere on the internet.

 

OK, message received. I did not invent the term "radius slave", although I did use it. Thing is though, I'd describe some people I know as this, if only I could come up with a better term. People who profess to despise so-called "lame caches", but can be found lifting every lampskirt in town. I've heard many people use the phrase "clear out my radius" in these forums and in person.

 

But putting a cache on your ignore list does make it go away! Yeah, I admit it, I'm too sexy for many geocaches. Not unlike the real Urkel, I suppose. I guess some people could interpret this as elitism, but I don't know what else to say other than I'm just taking charge of my choices. If I appeared to be "announcing" the fact I ignore many caches, it was only in the context of answering the OP's question. And I can also see where some could interpret "maturity" in a context other than I'm sure it was intended.

Edited May 3, 2009 by TheWhiteUrkel

[+JBnW]

To the OP, and from another angle; sometimes how one was introduced to the game defines how they play, and then how they "mature" from that point. Using ourselves as an example, we got introduced to the game by a state-wide challenge series...find a cache at all 29 state parks by a certain date, etc, etc. etc. We started with the idea that one had to travel quite a ways for specific caches, all of which involved a long drive to the park, finding the correct trail to follow, sometimes long hikes, a commitment of planning, time and effort, and for some endpoint to be reached. While there are a number of local caches, we save those for "rainy days" when we need to get out of the house and do something for a short while. Otherwise, a "cache run" for us means at most 8 or 9 caches, and a few hundred miles round-trip, or 3-4 along a route. That's just how we know to play the game. While there are still a few of the local caches unfound, we're just as likely to find one 100 miles away as we are finding one 3 miles away. I don't see us changing anytime soon. Good question, though!

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Am I the only one that finds some of the statements in this thread a bit insulting. Maybe I have a different interpretation of terms like "slave" and "maturity" but I've always considered them to have a a negative connotation. In the context of this thread they're used to describe a certain type of geocaching behavior and more specifically those that *choose* to play the game the way they do rather than the way those that are throwing about those terms.

 

 

I know there are a lot of people make liberal use of the ignore feature. I don't use it at all. I don't need to click on a button to ignore a cache. Putting a cache on the ignore list doesn't make it go away. If a cache is really difficult, or in some way less desirable than others, I just won't look for it right away. I don't need to adopt a "I'm too sexy for your geocache" attitude by announcing to everyone all the caches I've got on ignore list because they are too unworthy for my time to seek them.

 

I cut away some of your post. Some snippage has occured, as people would say elsewhere on the internet.

 

OK, message received. I did not invent the term "radius slave", although I did use it. Thing is though, I'd describe some people I know as this, if only I could come up with a better term. People who profess to despise so-called "lame caches", but can be found lifting every lampskirt in town. I've heard many people use the phrase "clear out my radius" in these forums and in person.

 

I have used the phrase "clear out my radius" myself. That doesn't mean that I'm not exercising choice regarding caches close to home. I can still choose *when* I go search for certain caches. Since geocaching isn't a competition with other, being competitive by nature, I often set certain goals for how I play the game. One of them happens to be to try and find every cache within a certain distance of my home coordinates. Last I checked there were only 187 caches within 10 miles from home so as you could imagine it's not that difficult to find every cache within 10 miles after a couple of years. One of the other reasons I find every cache close to home is that quite often it means that it's my only choice if I want to find any caches at all on a certain day. The amount of time I have to cache is limited by my work schedule and other family obligations. If I only have an hour or two free to go caching there may be some that I'd like to find but are just too far way to be able drive to, find, then return home in the amount of time I have available on a given day. The alternative to finding someone close to home, and thus clearing out my radius is not geocaching at all.

 

I've still a couple hundred finds shy of 1000 finds and would eventually like to archive that goal. I suspect that my caching habits may change somewhat when I do though. I also like finding caches in new new States and countries. On a recent business trip to Providence, I had a few hours on a couple of days to look for some caches. There were certainly lots of caches I could have found in the area I was in to increase my total numbers, but instead I found just one cache in Rhode Island on one day, then only two the next day in Connecticut. They were the oldest caches hidden in those states.

 

But putting a cache on your ignore list does make it go away! Yeah, I admit it, I'm too sexy for many geocaches. Not unlike the real Urkel, I suppose. I guess some people could interpret this as elitism, but I don't know what else to say other than I'm just taking charge of my choices. If I appeared to be "announcing" the fact I ignore many caches, it was only in the context of answering the OP's question. And I can also see where some could interpret "maturity" in a context other than I'm sure it was intended.

 

I still don't think that putting a cache on an ignore list makes it go away. To me it's like putting your fingers in your ears and saying "I can't hear you" when someone is saying something that you don't want to hear. That isn't stopping the other person from talking.

[+Tequila]

 

I guess some people could interpret this as elitism, but I don't know what else to say other than I'm just taking charge of my choices.

 

I don't think it is elitism. The Ignore button is there for a reason. And it is the only way of eliminating unfound caches from PQ's. Choosing not to find a cache or a certain type of cache is part of the game's flexiblity. We shouldn't have to constantly look at a lame cache if we are never gonna find it. Ignore it.

[+Steve&GeoCarolyn]

Maybe I'm not "mature" enough to express my opinion on the matter since I've only been caching for about 2.5 years and have yet to achieve 1000 finds, but it seems to me one of the biggest factors in how someone chooses to play this game is largely dictated by the area in which one geoaches. You can't really expect someone that lives in an area which only has less than a couple hundred geocaches within 15-20 miles of their home location than someone that has over 1000 caches available to seek to play the game the same way. I know that there are some on this forum that have indicated that they live in areas with over 1000 caches within 10 miles and there are others which have to travel 100 or more miles just to find a single cache.

 

I agree that people don't play the game the same way, but I wonder if it is actually the external geography that imposes the structure rather than the internal geography of the mind.

 

We live in a cache-rich area. There are about 800 caches within 30 miles of my house. Presumably there are enough caches around to satisfy any numbers queen. However, my beloved primarily wants a walk in the outdoors (woods, park, ravines, etc.) with as little driving as possible. I want something to find and something to write about. Driving long distances is a bonus for me.

 

His internal game is to drive as little as possible and hike as long as possible and then find a cache. He couldn't be less interested in logging smilies. In fact, his perfect day would be one or two caches found in the course of an all-day hike in a beautiful area followed by a leisurely meal and a stretching session. He also loves solving puzzles. Hell for him is driving from micro to micro and then having to log them.

 

My internal game is writing well and taking photographs. It is also to find things because I love searching for things. I've found that on days we do a lot of caching (more than three caches a day) the cache quantity and the frenzy to find them ruins my ability to write well about each one. So numbers, while ever-interesting to me, interfere with my primary goal. In order to have something to write about, I need to have some sort of experience and time to think about it, which also necessitates longer, more interesting walks. (Which doesn't mean that I'm not tempted by all the caches that are around me. I'm just learning that if I give in to temptation, I won't do as well with my primary goal.)

 

So even though we live in an area that would support totting up numbers of found caches, it doesn't matter because of who we are and what our desires are.

 

Carolyn

 

P.S. I should say that I find nothing wrong with competitive smilie gathering. I'm competitive in other areas (often far less rational areas of my life) and think it is wonderful when people can find outlets for competitiveness that delight them. Geocaching just isn't that sort of experience for me.

[+Tequila]

Maybe I'm not "mature" enough to express my opinion on the matter since I've only been caching for about 2.5 years and have yet to achieve 1000 finds, but it seems to me one of the biggest factors in how someone chooses to play this game is largely dictated by the area in which one geoaches. You can't really expect someone that lives in an area which only has less than a couple hundred geocaches within 15-20 miles of their home location than someone that has over 1000 caches available to seek to play the game the same way. I know that there are some on this forum that have indicated that they live in areas with over 1000 caches within 10 miles and there are others which have to travel 100 or more miles just to find a single cache.

 

I agree that people don't play the game the same way, but I wonder if it is actually the external geography that imposes the structure rather than the internal geography of the mind.

 

We live in a cache-rich area. There are about 800 caches within 30 miles of my house. Presumably there are enough caches around to satisfy any numbers queen. However, my beloved primarily wants a walk in the outdoors (woods, park, ravines, etc.) with as little driving as possible. I want something to find and something to write about. Driving long distances is a bonus for me.

 

His internal game is to drive as little as possible and hike as long as possible and then find a cache. He couldn't be less interested in logging smilies. In fact, his perfect day would be one or two caches found in the course of an all-day hike in a beautiful area followed by a leisurely meal and a stretching session. He also loves solving puzzles. Hell for him is driving from micro to micro and then having to log them.

 

My internal game is writing well and taking photographs. It is also to find things because I love searching for things. I've found that on days we do a lot of caching (more than three caches a day) the cache quantity and the frenzy to find them ruins my ability to write well about each one. So numbers, while ever-interesting to me, interfere with my primary goal. In order to have something to write about, I need to have some sort of experience and time to think about it, which also necessitates longer, more interesting walks. (Which doesn't mean that I'm not tempted by all the caches that are around me. I'm just learning that if I give in to temptation, I won't do as well with my primary goal.)

 

So even though we live in an area that would support totting up numbers of found caches, it doesn't matter because of who we are and what our desires are.

 

Carolyn

 

P.S. I should say that I find nothing wrong with competitive smilie gathering. I'm competitive in other areas (often far less rational areas of my life) and think it is wonderful when people can find outlets for competitiveness that delight them. Geocaching just isn't that sort of experience for me.

 

What a well written response. My compliments.

 

BTW, 800 caches doesn't even whet the appetite of a numbers queen. LOL

[mukanshin]

I'm pretty new to this but I already feel pretty much the same way. I've always enjoyed treks through the woods whether it be by foot, on my dirt bike, or crawling around in the big red beast (4WD F250 diesel). I grew up in a small town with woods all around me but now I live in the city (albeit a small one). I enjoy a challenge but I have to travel a bit to get to them. Therefore the type of caches I search for depends on how much time I have. On weekdays, I pretty much stick to the easy ones here in Longview. I don't have time to make long drives after work. On the weekends, I cover the area. Yesterday, I drove about 30 or 40 miles to get to some near the lake. Unfortunately, East Texas isn't exactly a hiker's paradise so I won't be able to do really good ones except on special occasions. When I put out caches of my own, you can bet they'll be challenging, as much as is possible around here.

 

Also, my knee hasn't completely healed from surgery yet so that kind of limits what I can do. A bit of a hike is alright, but I can't go a couple of miles on rough terrain. I'm hoping this summer I'll be ready for a trip to the Ozarks.

Edited May 3, 2009 by mukanshin

[+Kohavis]

I think we all develop a preference for certain types of caches as our experience builds. I don't know if "maturity" is the best word to describe it. Maybe saying that your "style" of geocaching has changed would be more accurate.

 

When I started they were all the same to me. A nano on the back of a drainage pipe behind Wally World was just as good as an ammo can at the end of a 1 mile hike. And I didn't pay much attention to the specifics. I was anxious to get out there and find it. With time I developed the experience to look at a cache description and the sat. view map and pretty much picture the vital details in my mind - container, likely hide spot, terrain, etc.

 

I don't think that any particular type is better than another. I happen to prefer hides in the woods, but I still go after urban nanos and key-keepers. All hides are the result of a cacher taking the time and trouble to go out and find the spot, make or buy and prepare the container, write up the published page, and maintain the cache after the fact. They're all "good" finds - we just develop personal preferences with time. One person's "lame" hide is another's "Excellent hide!! TFTC!!" log entry

[+Unkle Fester]

So I was just wondering if other folks had any similar caching maturity issues or am I the only one having a hard time seeing the significance of searching for a micro in a shopping mall?

 

Any other folks have caching maturity stories?

No. I'm just happy to find the darned things.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Maybe I'm not "mature" enough to express my opinion on the matter since I've only been caching for about 2.5 years and have yet to achieve 1000 finds, but it seems to me one of the biggest factors in how someone chooses to play this game is largely dictated by the area in which one geoaches. You can't really expect someone that lives in an area which only has less than a couple hundred geocaches within 15-20 miles of their home location than someone that has over 1000 caches available to seek to play the game the same way. I know that there are some on this forum that have indicated that they live in areas with over 1000 caches within 10 miles and there are others which have to travel 100 or more miles just to find a single cache.

 

I agree that people don't play the game the same way, but I wonder if it is actually the external geography that imposes the structure rather than the internal geography of the mind.

 

We live in a cache-rich area. There are about 800 caches within 30 miles of my house. Presumably there are enough caches around to satisfy any numbers queen. However, my beloved primarily wants a walk in the outdoors (woods, park, ravines, etc.) with as little driving as possible. I want something to find and something to write about. Driving long distances is a bonus for me.

 

His internal game is to drive as little as possible and hike as long as possible and then find a cache. He couldn't be less interested in logging smilies. In fact, his perfect day would be one or two caches found in the course of an all-day hike in a beautiful area followed by a leisurely meal and a stretching session. He also loves solving puzzles. Hell for him is driving from micro to micro and then having to log them.

 

My internal game is writing well and taking photographs. It is also to find things because I love searching for things. I've found that on days we do a lot of caching (more than three caches a day) the cache quantity and the frenzy to find them ruins my ability to write well about each one. So numbers, while ever-interesting to me, interfere with my primary goal. In order to have something to write about, I need to have some sort of experience and time to think about it, which also necessitates longer, more interesting walks. (Which doesn't mean that I'm not tempted by all the caches that are around me. I'm just learning that if I give in to temptation, I won't do as well with my primary goal.)

 

So even though we live in an area that would support totting up numbers of found caches, it doesn't matter because of who we are and what our desires are.

 

Carolyn

 

P.S. I should say that I find nothing wrong with competitive smilie gathering. I'm competitive in other areas (often far less rational areas of my life) and think it is wonderful when people can find outlets for competitiveness that delight them. Geocaching just isn't that sort of experience for me.

 

Thanks for the response. It helps illustrate the point I'm trying to make. Since you live in a cache rich area you have the choice between going from micro to micro and going on longer hikes, still relatively close to home for only a few caches (BTW, I went out this morning for that 4.5/4.5 cache about three miles from home, the next closest 4.5/4.5 is over 90 miles away). The choice that those that live in cache sparse areas may often be between finding a few micros or not caching at all because the distance to drive to a cache which have a nice hike may be further than the amount of time one has available to get to the cache, find, and return home. Those that still choose to find a few micros rather than pretend that they don't exist are labeled as less mature, slaves, or numbers hounds.

[+Steve&GeoCarolyn]

Thanks for the response. It helps illustrate the point I'm trying to make. Since you live in a cache rich area you have the choice between going from micro to micro and going on longer hikes, still relatively close to home for only a few caches (BTW, I went out this morning for that 4.5/4.5 cache about three miles from home, the next closest 4.5/4.5 is over 90 miles away). The choice that those that live in cache sparse areas may often be between finding a few micros or not caching at all because the distance to drive to a cache which have a nice hike may be further than the amount of time one has available to get to the cache, find, and return home. Those that still choose to find a few micros rather than pretend that they don't exist are labeled as less mature, slaves, or numbers hounds.

 

I have not yet attempted a 4.5 terrain cache. I am still staring at the swamps and thinking, "Huh! Swamp! Well what is one supposed to do about that? Why aren't there books about swamp trekking in the way that everyone has written about hiking the Rockies? What does one even wear to trek through swamps? Hmmmm. Well at least altitude won't be a problem."

 

Right now 2.5 - 3.5 terrain is exciting enough for us. But perhaps one day I will grow enough in this that I will stride through swamps with confidence. Though I doubt I will ever feel as easy as I felt hiking through the semi-arid heights of Colorado. I also pick up urban caches when they present themselves because I love hunting for things and sometimes they lead me somewhere interesting, though I am trying to remind myself that the further away I move from my desire to have adventures worth writing about, the less pleased I will be with myself overall.

 

I agree that the labeling of people is unpleasant. I don't know if the original poster meant maturity in the way you read it. I think most of us think of ourselves as "maturing" when what is really happening is that we are changing over the course of time. It is easy to assume that change over time means maturity since our entire focus from childhood on is to change and mature. But generally what change over time means is just change. An amusing note: when I read this thread's title, I immediately thought he meant that if we kept caching my beloved would realize that it is fun to seek out micros and fun to write cache logs. But clearly the OP's idea of maturity and mine were woefully different.

 

As to the other terms, I think that "Numbers Hound" or "FTF Hound" is only derogatory because that is how certain people think of those activities. It would be just as easy to think of the term "Numbers Hound" as complimentary just as "Puzzle Hound" would be complimentary (or at least neutral). The reality is that competing for numbers gets a lot of flack in this forum with constant threats to delete logs of people who try to rack up the finds without posting much in logs. That is what gives the word its unpleasant connotation, not the actual activity or the term itself.

 

It looks like Ithaca and where I live in Memphis have a similar number of caches within 30 miles. (Of course I don't know where you live in Ithaca.) When I run a search for caches within 30 miles of Ithaca's posted coordinates, I get 892 caches, which is slightly more than what I get here, but not much more. I agree that if I lived someplace with very few caches (Malaysia, for example, which has only 145 in the entire country) I would probably seek out those, finish, and give up on geocaching since my beloved is not going to do any activity that requires long drives. I certainly wouldn't be in a position to choose my internal game. That's a luxury I have here.

 

Carolyn

[+Zop]

Dadfish,

 

After caching with you for nearly two years, I think I know you well enough to know that you in no way truely mean "maturity" in the way some are interpreting it. Rather I think you have simply come to a point where geocaching is evolving for you. I've seen it coming on. All those nano on street signs, LPC's in the Wallyworld parking lots, the endless number of keyholders under a park bench... It does get old.

 

Unfortunately some of this is because the newbies (like we all were) thought a LPC or the micro in a bush was pretty cool when we were just starting out.. After all, in our area, that's what for the most part we have in abundance and is what the new cachers have to look forward to.

 

Because of this, I wonder if it's not a good idea for some of us who have been caching for a few years to archive our more 'rushed' hides to free up some good locations for others who have the time to put in to a new and unique hide. Also, like you did for me, maybe other seasoned cachers could take a newbie under their wing to 'show 'em the ropes' so to speak so at least some of them can be encouraged to think out their hides and take the time to make the cache fit the location and not simply stock up on 35mm's for a vacant lamp pole.

 

Keep on cachin' buddy... Just go for the ones that call for you and let me know when you want some company!

 

Others,

Now I wonder.... What do the cachers who live out in the country think about all those ammo cans in the woods? Do you ever get tired of the 'same ol' thing?' Ever feel that desire to hunt for something a little different than a metal box stuffed into a hollow log?

 

 

When I started caching about four years ago I wanted to find every cache in the world. Back then there weren’t as many caches and most of them were small to large in size. 90% of my free time was spent out on the back roads in my local area searching out all the caches that I could physically get to.

 

As I started clearing out all the local easy caches, I expanded my horizons and started traveling miles and miles to find cache rich areas, spending lots of days a long ways from home just to find that most of the caches had no creativity or thought put into them.

 

Then I started to go on the long hikes to find the harder caches.

 

Now with the proliferation of the micro and nano caches, my caching philosophy has changed or “matured”. I find that although I still like to go on the occasional “MEGA” cache run, I get much more satisfaction from the caches that I have to hike to and have a great view or some historic significance.

 

So I was just wondering if other folks had any similar caching maturity issues or am I the only one having a hard time seeing the significance of searching for a micro in a shopping mall?

 

Any other folks have caching maturity stories?

[+L0ne.R]

So I was just wondering if other folks had any similar caching maturity issues or am I the only one having a hard time seeing the significance of searching for a micro in a shopping mall?

 

I find I'm more irritated. Partly my own fault. I don't spend the hours required reading through every cache to choose the caches that I think will best suit my geocaching style. I tend to use the PQs, download caches for my intended target area and then drive to the location. Once there I check the GPS and GPXviewer file on my iPAQ for nearest caches and start reading the description. Dang, a micro in the woods. Forget it. So I drive to the next nearest cache. Dang a parking lot. Forget it. Drive on. A regular size cache in the forest. Sounds good but the last 2 entries say the container is in bad shape and the contents are wet. No owner maintenance. Forget it. Drive on. So I find myself driving for an hour (that's not counting the time it took to drive to the area) and maybe get one worthwhile cache, if I'm lucky 2.

 

I now filter out micros (although I know I'm going to be missing out on a few great micros). But recently I've been noticed that some small caches really are micros - the containers are too small for trinkets or they are part of a series (I've learned I don't like series caches - I'm always forgetting to take down the number/letter/code) designed to collect letters or numbers and the containers are not really big enough for trinkets. So now I filter out micros and small caches, just to decrease the irritation.

[+mcrow]

I have not logged enough caches to claim maturity or anything like that but I have formed a preference.

 

I like small,large, and normal caches. While Micros tend to be more challenging, many of them seem to only be based on being small and have nothing really interesting about them other than that.

 

Wow...another magnetic micro under a park bench!

[+Frank Broughton]

I want them all. My goal is to find all 780,000 or whatever the number is up to. Give me more ..... more ..... more...... Then I am gonna find all TWU's caches and replace them with micros, then use his as mine! Ya, that is my plan.

[+bflentje]

I suspect that maturing in geocaching terms means you're finding out what aspect of the game suits you, whatever that may be.