Boy, has geocaching changed! Microcaches everywhere!

[+e-bird67]

If this topic has been covered recently, my apologies. I poked around, but didn't see a similar thread. My husband and I did some caching between 2001-2003 or so. We have a four year old daughter now, and we have started caching again, as she enjoys finding "hidden treasures". We were thrilled that there were hundreds of caches in our area; now there are thousands.

 

But we've noticed that the sport has changed. First, many of the best natural areas, such as our nearby Duke Forest, have banned geocaching. I'm assuming that this has happening because some cachers were not good stewards, or because it took administrators a few years to catch on to the fact that geocaching existed within their area.

 

And the other thing I've noticed is that there is a preponderance of microcaches. When we started caching, most caches were nice, roomy ammo boxes or other large containers, and they were full of great swag. We had a lot of themed caches in our area- just balls, or just DVDs, or whatever. Some of these still exist, but I'm finding that over half of the caches listed in our area appear to be tiny logs the size of fortune cookie papers in microscopic containers. (Ok- I'm exaggerating, but you get the idea!)

 

Is there a reason for the trending towards microcaches? If there are environmental concerns with placing large boxes in wild places, I will quit my complaining, of course. Is it because it's considered more challenging to look for tiny caches that can barely be seen with the human eye? Is it because larger caches are being muggled? It's frustrating to me, because I'm trying to get my daughter excited about the sport, and trust me, doing the toy trade-off is much more fun for her than finding a tiny container with a single rolled up sheet of paper.

 

Ah, well, either way, I get a beautiful hike out of it, so it's not all bad, right?

Edited May 13, 2010 by e-bird67

[+AuntieWeasel]

I started right after you quit, and a proliferation of micros has been a common complaint from the beginning for me. Also, the idea that the game has deteriorated. I suspect in the first few years, the map was full of great places to hide tupperware.

 

I don't like micros and frequently exclude them from my searches. If you're willing to pony up for a premium membership, you can do that.

 

As for parks that ban caching...it's not so much that cachers were proven bad stewards as the administrators were afraid cachers would be bad stewards. For some, the idea somebody's hidden a plastic box of McToys on their land gives them the willies.

[+behind the camera]

My boyfriend and myself focus on the hides in the woods and along nice trails. We seldom bother with the "Tour De Parking" lot finds.

 

I think many focus on numbers and the simplicity of hiding a "altoids tin" in some place that shows you nothing but some guard rail or light post .

[+Walts Hunting]

The topic comes up at least once a week and basically it is lazy cachers. There are places for micros but too many times they are spewed because the placer is to lazy (or cheap) to do up a container that is reasonable for the location. You can filter them out. I will give them about 5 minutes tops and then to the ignore list.

[+Kit Fox]

And the other thing I've noticed is that there is a preponderance of microcaches. When we started caching, most caches were nice, roomy ammo boxes or other large containers, and they were full of great swank. We had a lot of themed caches in our area- just balls, or just DVDs, or whatever. Some of these still exist, but I'm finding that over half of the caches listed in our area appear to be tiny logs the size of fortune cookie papers in microscopic containers. (Ok- I'm exaggerating, but you get the idea!)

 

As geocaching has become more mainstream, it is more popular with "park & grabbers." The quest to find the maximum number of log only caches is quite popular for some. The proliferation of easy micros is similar to a breadcrumb trail of potato chips.

 

 

Ah, well, either way, I get a beautiful hike out of it, so it's not all bad, right?

 

May I suggest my Recipe for fun (Recipe for fun, Share your techniques for avoiding caches you dislike.)

[+redsox_mark]

I don't have the history (only been caching just over a year), but I think part of the increase in micros and smaller containers is due to the numbers - and that is not unique to urban areas. Around me there are many "rings" which are walking ones and in beautiful countryside areas - e.g. a 5-6 mile walk with 20 caches. And there are some COs who own several such rings. These rings are hardly ever ALL micros, but the larger the ring generally the more micros there are. I think that it is simply because micros are cheap and easy to hide.

 

Now for me, if it's a nice walk and I get to find caches, I don't mind too much what size they are; though I do prefer larger ones. And I get frustrated looking for a hard to find micro in a forest.

[+FiveDollarGuitar]

The thing that I am noticing about micros in Florida, is that most of them (not that I have found a ton or anything) seemed to be hidden in the down folds of palm trees. Not very creative once you have found 3-6 there. You tend to know just where to look.

The other aspect of hiding in the palm "bark" is that wasps LOVE to make nests in the dead and hanging layers of palm leaves. I personally will not go digging them out for this reason.

~ 5$

[+sbell111]

If this topic has been covered recently, my apologies. I poked around, but didn't see a similar thread. My husband and I did some caching between 2001-2003 or so. We have a four year old daughter now, and we have started caching again, as she enjoys finding "hidden treasures". We were thrilled that there were hundreds of caches in our area; now there are thousands.

 

But we've noticed that the sport has changed. First, many of the best natural areas, such as our nearby Duke Forest, have banned geocaching. I'm assuming that this has happening because some cachers were not good stewards, or because it took administrators a few years to catch on to the fact that geocaching existed within their area.

 

And the other thing I've noticed is that there is a preponderance of microcaches. When we started caching, most caches were nice, roomy ammo boxes or other large containers, and they were full of great swank. We had a lot of themed caches in our area- just balls, or just DVDs, or whatever. Some of these still exist, but I'm finding that over half of the caches listed in our area appear to be tiny logs the size of fortune cookie papers in microscopic containers. (Ok- I'm exaggerating, but you get the idea!)

 

Is there a reason for the trending towards microcaches? If there are environmental concerns with placing large boxes in wild places, I will quit my complaining, of course. Is it because it's considered more challenging to look for tiny caches that can barely be seen with the human eye? Is it because larger caches are being muggled? It's frustrating to me, because I'm trying to get my daughter excited about the sport, and trust me, doing the toy trade-off is much more fun for her than finding a tiny container with a single rolled up sheet of paper.

 

Ah, well, either way, I get a beautiful hike out of it, so it's not all bad, right?

Micros get hidden because people like to hide and find micros. No greater reason is needed.

 

If a person does not wish to find microcaches, he/she should take the microscopic amount of effort necessary to avoid them.

Edited May 13, 2010 by sbell111

[+kissguy&frannyfru]

i like micros,i also like the ammo cans in the woods! i like em all.

[+e-bird67]

Micros get hidden because people like to hide and find micros. No greater reason is needed.

 

 

Well, that's pretty obvious. My question was more about why there are so many more micros now than there were in the early 2000's.

 

I just upgraded to premium membership, so it will be much easier for me to avoid them now.

 

My boyfriend and myself focus on the hides in the woods and along nice trails. We seldom bother with the "Tour De Parking" lot finds.

 

Amen! For us, geocaching was just a natural extension of our a) love for hiking, backpacking and the great outdoors; and enjoying techie toys. If there's not a hike involved, I'm not really interested. I'll have to poke around my premium membership to see if there's a way to exclude "park and grabs". I ended up in a parking lot filled with trash and broken glass the other day and just walked away.

 

Thanks for the link Kit Fox!

[+drfred]

I love micros, but I'm not such a big fan of the park & grab.

 

I've been blamed for some of the micro proliferation in our area because I was one of the early micro hiders. That said, 1/3 of my hides are traditional containers with swag. Another 1/3 are micros with a twist - something to make them more memorable (hanging on fishing line down a wall, hidden inside another container such as a false sprinkler head, fake conduit, etc.). On a side note, as these hiding techniques have become more commonplace, what used to be thought provoking and different has started looking ordinary.

 

Micros don't have to be something to run from, but filtering out the 1/1 caches will make your finds more interesting.

 

I'll agree that since I have started taking my kids out caching the micros are much less fun for them.

[Mr.Yuck]

I don't have the history (only been caching just over a year), but I think part of the increase in micros and smaller containers is due to the numbers - and that is not unique to urban areas. Around me there are many "rings" which are walking ones and in beautiful countryside areas - e.g. a 5-6 mile walk with 20 caches. And there are some COs who own several such rings. These rings are hardly ever ALL micros, but the larger the ring generally the more micros there are. I think that it is simply because micros are cheap and easy to hide.

 

Now for me, if it's a nice walk and I get to find caches, I don't mind too much what size they are; though I do prefer larger ones. And I get frustrated looking for a hard to find micro in a forest.

 

You don't need a history, I think you're right on! Apparently rural areas were jealous of urban micro proliferation. The rural roadside quick grab is taking off like a rocket to the moon. I also agree the proliferation is mainly due to the numbers, and them being cheap and easy to hide.

 

If you're not a fan of the park-n-grab "for the numbers" type micros like some of us (and the last time I checked, 20% of my finds were micros), I think Kitfox's link is an excellent place to look for filtering methods.

[+Cptnodegard]

I don't get how people can whine so much about the size of containers. Yes, I like bigger caches better too, BUT:

-The amount of normal caches haven't gone down, it's just the REALTIVE number that has changed. As such, complaining about it makes no sense because it only means that those that don't mind microcaches have more caches to find while those that do mind have a smaller number to find, but still a growing number. People put out caches using their own time and those that are so stuck up that they would rather not have the cache than have a microcache should find a more egocentric hobby.

-Over here at least, there isn't a problem with caches being too close at all. In fact I'd love to have more caches just to have somthing to do without having to drive far. the problem is that the cost of a decent sized cache with container, sticker, swag, log etc is at least $15 and if it's bigger it can go to $40 if theres a FTF gift involved. I try to put out tupperware caches when I can, but I just got a shipment of 15+ microcaches from ebay that combined cost less than 2 tupperware caches, so until the cache density is much much higher I'm not going to go broke by spending hundreds of dollars on caches. Besides, a nano cache is much easier to hide and the micro/nanos ive found so far have often been much more satisfying to find than plastic boxes where the only real difference is that the tupperware containers have random crap in them.

-If a cache quality boost is the goal, I'd much rather see cache CREATIVITY. Such as cryptexes, hollow rocks, figurines, fire alarms in the middle of the forest etc. Last time I was out caching I found 7, and the most interesting one was a nano hidden in a water pipe outside an old gas station. I can barely remember the location of the other 6 which were all tupperware containers with various marbles, stickers, business cards etc.

[+roziecakes]

 

-If a cache quality boost is the goal, I'd much rather see cache CREATIVITY. Such as cryptexes, hollow rocks, figurines, fire alarms in the middle of the forest etc. Last time I was out caching I found 7, and the most interesting one was a nano hidden in a water pipe outside an old gas station. I can barely remember the location of the other 6 which were all tupperware containers with various marbles, stickers, business cards etc.

 

YES! I sooooo agree with this. No matter what the cache size, the creativity is important. I also like caches that bring me to beautiful or interesting areas the best, no matter what the size. I personally am not very good at making creative containers, so I try my best to place my caches in a beautiful place or somewhere historically interesting, or interesting for some other reason...

 

Of course I come from the point of view of someone who has no children who like to swap for stuff, and I might feel differently if I were. Although, I think if I did have children I would emphasize the fact that I was bringing them to a beautiful place rather than just the swag or the hunt. Caching would be an added bonus to their already cool experience rather than the reason for going to said cool place.

 

Just my 2cents.

[+e-bird67]

YES! I sooooo agree with this. No matter what the cache size, the creativity is important. I also like caches that bring me to beautiful or interesting areas the best, no matter what the size. I personally am not very good at making creative containers, so I try my best to place my caches in a beautiful place or somewhere historically interesting, or interesting for some other reason...

 

Of course I come from the point of view of someone who has no children who like to swap for stuff, and I might feel differently if I were. Although, I think if I did have children I would emphasize the fact that I was bringing them to a beautiful place rather than just the swag or the hunt. Caching would be an added bonus to their already cool experience rather than the reason for going to said cool place.

 

Just my 2cents.

 

Actually, I do agree with the part about emphasizing the beauty of the outdoors to children, rather than on finding the "prize". We spend most of our weekends in the outdoors, as a family. But since she's only 4 and new to geocaching, I want to get her hooked right away, so we're focusing on caches with swag until she's addicted.

 

Last weekend, my hubby and I went out by ourselves to a nice hiking area and found 3 caches; 2 of which were micros. If I'm doing a loop in a beautiful and/or interesting place and there are micros along with traditional caches, I might as well find all of them, right?

 

I never considered the cost factor! I have never actually placed a cache, but I imagine it adds up quickly!

[+redsox_mark]

Speaking for myself, I don't have a problem with Micros. Just was speculating why they are on the increase. What is most important for me is the location and journey. So if it is a nice walk, I don't care much about the containers. I prefer larger ones on the whole (especially when caching with my children, who like the swag part), but it's not a big deal for me.

 

I also appreciate creative hides - but for me that is a bonus. I'm fine with ordinary containers and hides, as long as it is bringing me to a nice place.

[+roziecakes]

 

Actually, I do agree with the part about emphasizing the beauty of the outdoors to children, rather than on finding the "prize". We spend most of our weekends in the outdoors, as a family. But since she's only 4 and new to geocaching, I want to get her hooked right away, so we're focusing on caches with swag until she's addicted.

 

I wasn't doubting your motivations, I'm sorry if it came across that way. I was just speaking from my own perspective. I know your focus is not just on the swag, I can tell by the eloquent and thoughtful way that you write. I apologize.

[+Cptnodegard]

As for swag for children, I don't know what the normal value of swag is in other parts of the world but over here I mostly come across balloons (that's seriously gross, who would let their kid have that?), money (coins, not GCs) and marbles. I've tried to put out stuff like unopened LEGO boxes to try to up that in my own caches, but people aren't expecting that for the "trade fair or up" rule. If I had a kid, I'd instead have created my own bonus system for him/her. Say, one dollar per cache the kid is in on finding. Find 10 caches, and he can pick a 10 dollar toy in a toy store on the way home. That way there would be no more gross balloons laying around my imaginary car that my imaginary kid would get god knows what from.

Edited May 13, 2010 by Cptnodegard

[+hallycat]

Since the invention of those nano's it seems there are many more shopping center caches.Which suits the numbers hounds just fine. I could live without them so I generally don't do them unless I happen to actually have a reason to be there.

 

One thing do like is being brought to a place/park/monument or otherwise interesting spot that I wouldn't have known about. So if a nano brings me there that is fine and in an urban setting may be the only thing that fits.

 

But, there is no rule that says just because a cache is there you have to do it. If you dislike them, filter them out.

[+DragonsWest]

A frequent gripe of a friend, he doesn't cache much because he prefers it to be an activity he shares with his kid and grand kid - the kids are looking for swag to swap, not so much the thrill of the hunt.

 

While I've certainly hid a few micros, I've mostly hidden small to large caches with trade items in them. Out our way are many large county and state parks, plus a few large city parks. Where a large container is highly likely to encounter mugglage I think people have opted for the smaller containers. Out in the woods the large containers, including ammo cans exist in greater numbers.

 

Just hid a big ammo box on Sunday, bit of a stroll, but there are some other good sized caches in the same county park. Only concerns regarding kids in these parks are the wildlife - boars and mountain lions have been sighted, so keep the kids close by when out for a hike.

[4wheelin_fool]

In the beginning, most caches had about $30 of swag in them and there were very few around. There was a lot of emphasis on different trade themes and carrying around a variety of items for a decent trade. Once micros took off, less people cared about trading and they quickly multiplied due to very low cost. Although you can filter them out, the non trading trend has carried over, as well as the practice of writing just a signature in the logbook, rather than filling up a page with a few sentences.

 

It would have been nice if they had put more separation between the "trading" caches and the "log only" caches in the beginning, such as a more distinct icon, but it probably is too late for that now.

[+L0ne.R]

If I'm doing a loop in a beautiful and/or interesting place and there are micros along with traditional caches, I might as well find all of them, right?

 

On principal, I don't hunt for the micros even if they are near larger caches. I don't want to encourage the proliferation of micros/nanos.

[+L0ne.R]

I never considered the cost factor! I have never actually placed a cache, but I imagine it adds up quickly!

 

It's not so costly if you plant a couple a year and start off with good containers. Spend $4 on a lock and lock and it will last about 5 years, that's less then a dollar a year. Initial swag will cost you about $5 unless you're the generous sort and want to play geo-santa with lots of swag in the pricier range. But then such a CO wouldn't quibble about the cost of planting.

 

The best cache experiences are from COs that are willing to invest a little in this game

• money - good water tight containers, decent swag and replenish the swag when needed
  
• time - regular maintenance visits
  
• creativity - see the Cool Cache Containers forum for ideas
  

Usually when a CO wants to play this game cheaply (free container - film canister, margarine tub, no extra camo on the container because it costs money to camo; scrap of free paper; no pencil), the whole experience is cheap too (poor location, planted just to up the numbers).

[+sbell111]

Micros get hidden because people like to hide and find micros. No greater reason is needed.

 

 

Well, that's pretty obvious. My question was more about why there are so many more micros now than there were in the early 2000's.

1. Because there are much, much more of all kinds of caches than there was 10 years ago.
   
2. Because there are only so many caches that can be hidden inside the local park.
   
3. Because people enjoy hiding and finding them.
   

[+L0ne.R]

In the beginning, most caches had about $30 of swag in them and there were very few around. There was a lot of emphasis on different trade themes and carrying around a variety of items for a decent trade. Once micros took off, less people cared about trading and they quickly multiplied due to very low cost. Although you can filter them out, the non trading trend has carried over, as well as the practice of writing just a signature in the logbook, rather than filling up a page with a few sentences.

 

I've been at it since December 2001 and yes, I agree that geocaching hides have changed with a trend towards the cheap and quick.

 

It would have been nice if they had put more separation between the "trading" caches and the "log only" caches in the beginning, such as a more distinct icon, but it probably is too late for that now.

 

Oh how I wish they would implement this feature. I would love to be able to filter out "log only" caches. So many "small" size caches are "log only" - no room for swag. Some COs even say there's no room for swag (or even a pencil) yet list it as a small because it's a spice jar or a pill bottle, not a film canister.

[+sbell111]

A post from a previous, identical, thread:

I was just reading some old posts in related threads and I noticed that back in 2007, I suggested that by mapping the non-ignored, filtered caches, you may be able to easily identify areas that you don't wish to cache in and areas that you do. This seems good stuff to add to the method, so here it is:

 

The 'Easy Peasy' method of maximizing geocache satisfaction:

1. Run initial PQs that filter out the bulk of the caches that you don't like. In the case of the OP, it would be micros with a low difficulty/terrain rating. It's fine that this also filters out some good caches because 1) there's plenty more awesome ones to find and 2) you can get them back in later.
   
2. During caching days, take a quick read of the cache page for the 'next' cache. If it looks like a stinker, skip it and toss it on the ignore list.
   
3. If someone tells you of a good cache that you've filtered out, place it on a watch list. Run a PQ on this list and merge it with your other PQs in GSAK.
   
4. As caches are listed, take a look at the cache pages for those that would be filtered by your PQs. Those that look tasty go on the watch list. Obvious stinkers get ignored.
   
5. Run a PQ on the non-ignored, filtered caches. If you dump these into a mapping program, you likely will be able to identify bunches of caches that are either in areas that you don't want to cache in, or areas that you do. Ignore those in bad areas, watch those that look like winners.
   
6. As time permits, take a look at the non-ignored, filtered caches. Those that seem good go on the watch list. Those that stink up the place get ignored. NOTE: There is no hurry to do this step as long as there are other caches to look for.
   

NOTE: The only hardcore 'research' that my method entails is in the final step. It should be noted that for nearly all of us that step will never be more than optional. Steps 2 and 4 do require the review of cache pages, but not more than one or two at a time (unless your area has tons of 'filtered' caches being listed all the time. In which case, aren't you glad you are filtering?)

 

It should also be noted that this method works from step one. Additional steps add to the winners, they don't further remove losers. Of course, if you here of a loser that made it past step one, toss it on your ignore list. If you find that you are still finding a ton of losers, you may want to tweak your step one filter or join BS in taking up golf.

[angelskeepbandb]

Okay, so we are new and so far, anything we can find ius a good cache! BUT a really good day caching means we get to hike a little (or a lot) in varied terrain, which even a fat chick can tackle given enough determination and adequate time and water. We get to see critters, not the kind that fasten themselves to one's anatomy. We get to have a picnic in the middle of nowhere or on the way to the middle of nowhere. We like to have some reasnable expectation of finding the cache when we get there, but it's fun to look around a bit before it gets found. Our favorites so far have been bigger caxche containers in scenic areas. We don't typically take anything and are somewhat disappointed at the things others have left, so we try to always leave something fun for kids and/or pets if there's room. Additionally, we usually spend a leisurely day on the hunt, so it's been fun for us to find smaller log-only caches hidden at historic sites. Not so much finding them in cache and dash locations.

 

We are old people with grandkids, which might explain why we do it the way we do it. One of us is trying to lose weight and one of us is pretty fit.

 

We are glad to have found this adventure, in whatever form it takes.

 

Barb and Bob

[+briansnat]

I love micros, but I'm not such a big fan of the park & grab.

 

I've been blamed for some of the micro proliferation in our area because I was one of the early micro hiders... .

 

You have something there. People tend to hide the kinds of caches they find. Where I live micros are only 15% of the caches. I think that is because most of the early hiders here used ammo boxes and other larger sized containers and newcomers found those and emulated them. As the sport has grown the newbies have continued to hide the kinds of caches they find. In areas where the early hiders hid a lot of micros, newer cachers tend to hide micros because that is what they see.

[+gpsblake]

I'll agree that geocaching has been over-run with urban micros. But if you look at the FIND COUNTS, micros are found much more often than the larger rural traditional cache.

 

But the good thing about geocaching, you can ignore micros, urban caches, and anything else you don't want to find. If your a number junkie, you'll want to load up on all the micros you can find. If you want a good walk, easy enough to just concentrate on those also.

 

It's your choice. Happy hunting.

[+sbell111]

I love micros, but I'm not such a big fan of the park & grab.

 

I've been blamed for some of the micro proliferation in our area because I was one of the early micro hiders... .

You have something there. People tend to hide the kinds of caches they find. ...

The bolded bit is only true if the person liked what he found.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I'll agree that geocaching has been over-run with urban micros. But if you look at the FIND COUNTS, micros are found much more often than the larger rural traditional cache.

 

But the good thing about geocaching, you can ignore micros, urban caches, and anything else you don't want to find. If your a number junkie, you'll want to load up on all the micros you can find. If you want a good walk, easy enough to just concentrate on those also.

 

It's your choice. Happy hunting.

 

It's only a choice if you have a variety of caches to choose from. A couple of weeks ago I spent a few hours caching in Montpellier, France and most of a day in Barcelona. The largest cache that I found was a preform. My pocket queries for the two cities covered a range that I could reasonably cover (in Barcelona I rented a bike) and didn't include any that I recall that were labeled a small or larger. when caching locally my choices are limited to caches I have not yet found that within a distnace that I can drive to (and return home) in the limited time I have available to go geocaching. That limits my choices significantly.

[+briansnat]

I'll agree that geocaching has been over-run with urban micros. But if you look at the FIND COUNTS, micros are found much more often than the larger rural traditional cache.

 

True, but I think that has more to do with accessibility than size. Regular sized caches in those exact same spots would likely have at least as many finds and probably more, as those who filter micros out would also be logging them.

 

My most popular cache by far is a regular sized cache that is at a scenic turnout along a major travel route. It's popular not because of its size, but because of its accessibility.

[+wolfslady]

Reasons for Micros

Some people like them.

Some people are cheap.

Some people are lazy.

Some people are crazy.

 

IMHO a few are fine, but there are way too many. I don't mind the ones that are in urban places too much. If there are 1 or 2 creative ones on a hike or along a route with a bunch of trading one's I don't have a problem with that either. But, I hate when peoople place them in places where there is plenty of room for something larger and there isn't anything else around.

 

One that popped up today they cache page was a 1/2 mile walk each way and said something like "at first I was going to place an ammo can or something and then I found a place that would allow me to place a micro like I had been wanting to place." nothing else along the walk and I think it's along a drainage ditch. Maybe the view is worth it, but I have a toddler with me most of the time. Besides if there were places to put a larger cache why use a micro? I does anyone weed out the larger caches and say, I love mircos so much that I'm only going for them? Those are the kind of micos I hate. I do reconize that there are lots of places that only a mirco will work, but lets work at being sure that is all that will go there or at least have it on the way to something else.

As for the people who complain about cost, by all means let's do everything the cheap way. Lets stick 50 tiny plastic nanos in holes and say that's all we can afford. But lets face it everyone knows that a small lock n lock type box is less than $2.00 at Walmart and you can fill 5 of them with toys from the party section for about another $2.00 each. So claiming it costs $15-$40 to place a larger cache is not close to what most people spend. Although I'd guess that with the FTF coin and swag my first cache (Large Plastic Ammo can) had a total value of about $40 but I shopped clearance asiles for months looking for some good stuff and the actual cost was more like $25. But it was my first and I can't afford to make all of them quite as nice. Sitll I check the clearance sections almost every time I go to the store and I often pick up some good swag.

[+DragonsWest]

If they original stash had been a film can under a lamp skirt they'd all be micros today, right?

[+dorqie]

not that this has anything to do with the price of rice in china, but I do enjoy a good park and grab once in a while, mostly because I'm so addicted to geocaching that I need to do it even when I'm on my trip to wal-mart, and I only have a couple of mins to squish in a chache.

The beautiful hike ones are my fav, but park and grabs satiate the urge untill the weekend

[+roziecakes]

not that this has anything to do with the price of rice in china, but I do enjoy a good park and grab once in a while, mostly because I'm so addicted to geocaching that I need to do it even when I'm on my trip to wal-mart, and I only have a couple of mins to squish in a chache.

The beautiful hike ones are my fav, but park and grabs satiate the urge untill the weekend

 

To be honest, I do too. I certainly prefer non-urban caches, but if I'm in a city that I don't know very well, and I want to learn my way around, one of the ways I like to do it is by doing a bit of urban caching while I'm there.

[+roziecakes]

duplicate

Edited May 13, 2010 by nymphnsatyr

[+L0ne.R]

I love micros, but I'm not such a big fan of the park & grab.

 

I've been blamed for some of the micro proliferation in our area because I was one of the early micro hiders... .

You have something there. People tend to hide the kinds of caches they find. ...

The bolded bit is only true if the person liked what he found.

 

Not true. I asked the question

If your first hide was a film canister micro..., Tell us what motivated you to hide it?

 

The general response was that people hid micros as stages in a multi and/or because it fit into the place they wanted to hide the cache and/or because cost was low or free. Not because they like micros. One person said he didn't like micros but he hid a lame [his word] micro on a sign to bring people to a scenic barn.

[+mountainman38]

SNIPIs there a reason for the trending towards microcaches? If there are environmental concerns with placing large boxes in wild places, I will quit my complaining, of course. Is it because it's considered more challenging to look for tiny caches that can barely be seen with the human eye? Is it because larger caches are being muggled? It's frustrating to me, because I'm trying to get my daughter excited about the sport, and trust me, doing the toy trade-off is much more fun for her than finding a tiny container with a single rolled up sheet of paper.

SNIP

 

I thoroughly enjoy micros. When you hide a small cylinder or button, the possibilities for placement are far greater, and you can have challenging caches all over town.

 

If I'm headed out in the woods, it's nice to have an ammo can with some fun toys for my kids to play with. The problem with most of those ammo cans is that they're either half full of garbage, or the toys are so lame/worn out/dirty that my kids don't have much fun with them anyway.

[Mr.Yuck]

I love micros, but I'm not such a big fan of the park & grab.

 

I've been blamed for some of the micro proliferation in our area because I was one of the early micro hiders... .

You have something there. People tend to hide the kinds of caches they find. ...

The bolded bit is only true if the person liked what he found.

 

Not true. I asked the question

If your first hide was a film canister micro..., Tell us what motivated you to hide it?

 

The general response was that people hid micros as stages in a multi and/or because it fit into the place they wanted to hide the cache and/or because cost was low or free. Not because they like micros. One person said he didn't like micros but he hid a lame [his word] micro on a sign to bring people to a scenic barn.

 

Yes, what is this people hide caches because they like to find them stuff? My first two caches in 2003 were Tupperware containers. I hid them because I thought Geocaching was pretty cool, I figured I should start contributing to hiding, and to take people to 1) a nice Island Park many might not have known about, or 2) an abandoned Zoo inside a County Park, which many of the locals remembered as kids.

 

And yes, I had found a few Tupperware containers before then. I did like finding them, but believe me, hiding them for that reason never once occurred to me.

[Mr.Yuck]

SNIPIs there a reason for the trending towards microcaches? If there are environmental concerns with placing large boxes in wild places, I will quit my complaining, of course. Is it because it's considered more challenging to look for tiny caches that can barely be seen with the human eye? Is it because larger caches are being muggled? It's frustrating to me, because I'm trying to get my daughter excited about the sport, and trust me, doing the toy trade-off is much more fun for her than finding a tiny container with a single rolled up sheet of paper.

SNIP

 

I thoroughly enjoy micros. When you hide a small cylinder or button, the possibilities for placement are far greater, and you can have challenging caches all over town.

 

If I'm headed out in the woods, it's nice to have an ammo can with some fun toys for my kids to play with. The problem with most of those ammo cans is that they're either half full of garbage, or the toys are so lame/worn out/dirty that my kids don't have much fun with them anyway.

 

True. Of course micros can be harder to find. But the number of challenging micros is miniscule compared to the ones with 10 word cache descriptions (the words quick and easy usually being two of them) placed just for the numbers, and hidden under the lampskirt or on the guardrail.

[+mountainman38]

...But the number of challenging micros is miniscule compared to the ones with 10 word cache descriptions (the words quick and easy usually being two of them) placed just for the numbers, and hidden under the lampskirt or on the guardrail.

 

Those are the ones I hate. I almost dread reading a new cache publication, because as you said it's a lot of variations of "This wun shunt be to hard i stuck itt hear so so everyones quik easy grab and park get can".

 

For crying out loud -- do people REALLY want that many easy, lame caches?! AND WHAT'S WRONG WITH PROOFREADING YOUR STINKING CACHE PAGE! YOU'RE THE AUTHOR -- YOU CAN MAKE IT RIGHT!!111!!!1

 

I guess the amount of effort that goes into the page is indicative of how much effort went into the cache, as well. Whew -- I feel better now.

[+Wooden Cyclist]

If you want to see a change away from micros then be the change.

 

Old School Cache Series.

[+briansnat]

If you want to see a change away from micros then be the change.

 

Old School Cache Series.

 

Or move to New Jersey

[+tozainamboku]

If they original stash had been a film can under a lamp skirt they'd all be micros today, right?

At least according to briansnat's theory.

 

I believe micros came about for two reasons. (1) Cachers looking for ways to hide more urban caches that would be less likely to be found by muggles. (2) Cachers looking for ways to make finding a cache a little more challenging than just looking for an unnatural pile of rocks somewhere.

 

People complain about micros for two reasons. (1) There are too many of them. (2) They are too hard to find.

[BCProspectors]

...I'm finding that over half of the caches listed in our area appear to be tiny logs the size of fortune cookie papers in microscopic containers. (Ok- I'm exaggerating, but you get the idea!)

But you're not exaggerating by much. We once found a nano the size of my thumbnail and had we been able to open the cache and extricate the logbook, it most likely would have been the size of a fortune in a fortune cookie. Hmm, I just got an idea for a new cache: a fake fortune cookie with the little slip of paper as the logbook.

 

A lot of cachers really want to hide a cache but don't want to take the time and effort to think up a good hide. So instead of coming up with a good location, container, and hiding spot (not the same as the location -- the hiding spot is part of the location), they just put a micro cache somewhere convenient for them and they're the proud owners of a cache.

[+briansnat]

People complain about micros for two reasons. (1) There are too many of them. (2) They are too hard to find.

 

I disagree. I think most of the complaints stem from the mundane places they tend to be hidden.

Edited May 14, 2010 by briansnat

[+Setan Meyacha]

Under two different names I have hidden 344 caches, to date. If all of those had been 'ammo can' type caches I would have put out approximately 6880.00 just for the caches and the contents. That doesn't take into consideration the amount of gas, oil, wear and tear on the vehicle, nor my time and energy to place those caches. I have only a couple 'in town' caches; the rest being in the country or in the desert lands. Most of my caches are MICROS; so, you might want to put me on your IGNORE list. But, I've had more positive comments on the micro caches I've hidden than on the much larger caches. Primary reason for the positive comments, the locations I choose to place caches. I've gone with the larger 'themed' caches and had 20 -30 dollar items traded for rubber lizzards gotten 5 for a dollar at the dollar store; not much of the 'trade up/trade even/or don't trade at all' there. That hasn't stopped me from putting out the quality 'larger' caches; i'm just more careful about where I place them so they don't see a lot of traffic.

Before anyone lumps all micro cache hiders into the category of being lazy or cheap, you might want to consider that some of us live on small fixed incomes and be thankful that we hide anything at all for you to find. And not all micro caches are hidden under lamp post skirts or on guardrails or behind dumpsters. Myself, I would much rather search for a micro in an interesting place than to find an ammo can full of junk under a pile of rocks or haphazardly placed limbs. Although the ammo can filled with junk can be a great way to teach a child the importance of fair trade, I would think the more important lesson to be taught would be the value of the beauty that surrounds them and how to preserve it by picking up any trash you see before you leave. They are never too young for that lesson.

 

"As for the people who complain about cost, by all means let's do everything the cheap way. Lets stick 50 tiny plastic nanos in holes and say that's all we can afford. But lets face it everyone knows that a small lock n lock type box is less than $2.00 at Walmart and you can fill 5 of them with toys from the party section for about another $2.00 each. So claiming it costs $15-$40 to place a larger cache is not close to what most people spend. Although I'd guess that with the FTF coin and swag my first cache (Large Plastic Ammo can) had a total value of about $40 but I shopped clearance asiles for months looking for some good stuff and the actual cost was more like $25. But it was my first and I can't afford to make all of them quite as nice."

 

I'm sorry, but if a cache only costs $4.00, including the container, what kind of quality cache can that be? The only difference between it and a micro is the size; definitely can't be considered a quality cache just because it is larger. Most of my larger caches, directed towards adults, contained items ranging from $5.00 - $40.00 each; not counting the cost of the container. If you can stock a cache for $2.00 I'd sure appreciate a lesson on how you do that and make it a 'quality' cache. Eeven my 'kids' caches cost $15 $20, not counting the cost of the container. I'm truly amazed at how you do it for $4.00 total.

Edited May 14, 2010 by Setan Meyacha

[knowschad]

Out of curiosity, I just filtered my finds in GSAK down to my first year.

 

Finds by Container

Number Percent Regular 67 50.3 % Small 32 24.0 % Micro 27 20.3 % Not chosen 5 3.75 % Virtual 2 1.50 % Large 0 0 %

Other 0 0 %

 

My current stats:

Finds by Container

Number Percent Small 1630 33.7 % Micro 1416 29.3 % Regular 1236 25.5 % Not chosen 378 7.82 % Other 111 2.29 % Virtual 31 0.64 % Large 30 0.62 %

I don't think for a second that this proves anything beyond what I went looking for, and what I found, but thought that it might be interesting. Comparing with this year's finds might prove even more interesting, if I really cared, but I don't.

[knowschad]

Out of curiosity, I just filtered my finds in GSAK down to my first and my current year, and ran the stats macro on that database:

 

1st year (2005-2006)

Regular 50.3%

Small 24.0%

Micro 20.3%

 

Past Year (2009-2010)

Regular 25.5%

Small 33.7%

Micro 29.3%

 

I don't think for a second that this proves anything beyond what I went looking for, and what I found, but thought that it might be interesting. Looks like a major decline in regulars, a slight increase in micros, and the rest made up by smalls. Anyone else care to share their findings?

Edited May 14, 2010 by knowschad