Jump to content

Micros the savor of geocaching and maybe the beginning?


Coldgears

Recommended Posts

Am I the only one that likes micros? In my area there is two hiders that hide lame micro's they are SUPER easy to avoid. While on the plus side this means I can't really find 4 - 6 caches to a parking lot, what I do get is usually quality. Most people are very creative about micro's in my area, In fact, I find more creative micro's then LPC's... And I'll go to any cache. Like today, I found a micro, it was really creative so much so that people were avoiding spoilers in there logs. Most caches are like that in my area, and I like that! The issue is, most people that hide larger caches hide ammo boxes, and regular containers. I have NEVER seen a creative regular or larger. Only one or two creative smalls. It's just a lot harder to create a creative large cache. To me it's the creativity that keeps me going, the thrill of finding a cache right under your nose. I like finding ammo boxes don't get me wrong, but they can get boring if that was the only cache type I was to find. Which is why I like a variety. And micro's are great at that.

 

Anyone else think micro's are saving this sport with the creativity? Or is it only my area that has a lot of creative micro's and for most they are LPC's and guardrails?

Link to comment

Am I the only one that likes micros? In my area there is two hiders that hide lame micro's they are SUPER easy to avoid. While on the plus side this means I can't really find 4 - 6 caches to a parking lot, what I do get is usually quality. Most people are very creative about micro's in my area, In fact, I find more creative micro's then LPC's... And I'll go to any cache. Like today, I found a micro, it was really creative so much so that people were avoiding spoilers in there logs. Most caches are like that in my area, and I like that! The issue is, most people that hide larger caches hide ammo boxes, and regular containers. I have NEVER seen a creative regular or larger. Only one or two creative smalls. It's just a lot harder to create a creative large cache. To me it's the creativity that keeps me going, the thrill of finding a cache right under your nose. I like finding ammo boxes don't get me wrong, but they can get boring if that was the only cache type I was to find. Which is why I like a variety. And micro's are great at that.

 

Anyone else think micro's are saving this sport with the creativity? Or is it only my area that has a lot of creative micro's and for most they are LPC's and guardrails?

 

Around Bensalem, Pa., eh? Never heard of it, but apparently a Philadelphia suburb. I can't speak for that area.

 

No, as I said many times, including in another thread in the last week or so (may have been the Canada forum, I can't remember), I think you are in a minority for liking "challenging micros". Considering old schoolers like myself who like hikes to caches in the woods I will probably find when I get there, and the numbers crowd who like to rack up the finds.

 

Believe me, I can throw an ammo box in rocks, or in a hidey hole in a log just barely large enough to conceal it, especially under heavy tree cover, and it will drive people nuts.

 

Micros that are mostly LPC's and Guardrails? Oh, there are plenty of places. I won't call any out in particular, but they are out there. In spades. :rolleyes:

Link to comment

I like micros. I like regulars. I like them all. :rolleyes: All sizes of caches can have good and bad hides. I really enjoy micros, even if they're in the woods, but I also enjoy regulars too.

 

I've seen a lot of creative regulars...an ammo box 50 feet up in the air that you have to figure out how to get down and then discover a rope leading you 50 feet away that allows you to lower the cache down.

 

Another was an ammo can that looked exactly like a piece of Styrofoam. It was placed on a rocky beach shoreline and looked like something that had washed up from the water. The owner said you're looking for an ammo can, so you kind of think it's going to be a regular green one hidden under some rocks, but the thing is just sitting out there in the open staring at you.

 

I think the size of micros allows people to creative things easier than a regular, but cool tings can be done with regulars if someone puts some thought into it.

 

One of the coolest larger caches we've seen was this one:

 

8b8951ce-318e-48c0-b8dd-06f3a038127d.jpg

Link to comment

Size has nothing to do with it. Lame caches are lame caches, great caches are great caches. I have seen all sizes of caches that fit both lame, and great categories, and everywhere in between. Its like saying that short people are less intelligent than tall people. Ridiculous.

Knowschad, if you actually read this give a response... K?

 

Exactly! You understand the point of my thread. FINALLY! I posted something very similiar to this in another thread, I think it was "micros the scurge of geocaching and maybe the end?". And not a single soul replied, they went on with there diatribe about how micro's sucked and they were terrible and it deeply offended me considering most people in my area hide great micro's. I thought I would gain more attention to the fact that any cache of any size can be a good cache, I was just trying to demonstrate this by showing people the otherside, where micros are better then larger caches where I live... Thanks!

Link to comment

Size has nothing to do with it. Lame caches are lame caches, great caches are great caches. I have seen all sizes of caches that fit both lame, and great categories, and everywhere in between. Its like saying that short people are less intelligent than tall people. Ridiculous.

QFT

 

A micro in a sweet location or in a cool container is great. Same with nanos, regulars and larges!

Link to comment

No, as I said many times, including in another thread in the last week or so (may have been the Canada forum, I can't remember), I think you are in a minority for liking "challenging micros". Considering old schoolers like myself who like hikes to caches in the woods I will probably find when I get there, and the numbers crowd who like to rack up the finds.

 

Believe me, I can throw an ammo box in rocks, or in a hidey hole in a log just barely large enough to conceal it, especially under heavy tree cover, and it will drive people nuts.

Can't speak for Canada, but here in California most ammo cans are hidden under a bush.

 

Now certainly of the things that many of us old timers like is figuring out how to get to the cache. A good cache in the wilderness will seldom be one you can follow the arrow to. You need to look at the terrain and figure out the route. For many urban caches you can just put the coordinates in an auto GPS and get turn by turn instructions. Even driving around the block a few times looking for the right parking lot to pull into isn't so bad as hiking 1/2 mile down the wrong trail to realize you have to go back and take the other fork to get near the cache. So I will agree that there are other challenges involved in wilderness caches that you don't find as often in urban hides.

 

But each cacher has different challenges that they like and some like looking for a tiny nano on a long metal fence or a bison tube in a hole drilled in a rock and placed in a pile of rocks. My guess is that nowadays there are more people who like the challenging micro than the challenging hike. There are certainly those who like easy urban hides who may be accused of caching for the numbers.

 

I accept that there are different cachers who like different kinds of hides. I'll go farther and argue that more popular hides are hidden (and found) more often. Still I'm not too disappointed, there are far more cachers who like the hiking type caches that I like then there use to be, so I'm not running out of them because there are more urban micros. While there are a higher percentage of small and micro caches among those hiking caches than there used to be, it doesn't bother me because I happen to enjoy looking for them. Also, since the state parks instituted rules that caches have to be within 3 feet of designated trail, it has become harder to find places to put a regular cache that won't get muggled. So in fact small and micros are a bit of a savior in allowing caches to continue to be hidden in the state parks.

 

My feeling is that more options in cache sizes and hiding styles is good for the hobby. They allow caches to be hidden in more places and let more people get involved in geocaching. No longer is everything a hike in the woods and no longer is every cache under a bush or a pile of sticks. I'd bet that most people like variety. In fact most of the complaints I hear about parking lot micros are about lack of variety. So I accept that there are some "lame" micros because that is just one variety. There are so many good micro hides, along with smalls and regulars, that I can have fun even on day where I might wind up a few times looking under lamp post in parking lots. But since I am able to find places to hike where there are no lamp posts and find cache there, such days are rare. (Sometimes I will find a fence post or even an old guardrail on a now abandoned road with a typical urban micro hide, but I still enjoy it because I got to hike in an interesting area where these relics of the past are hidden). :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Size has nothing to do with it. Lame caches are lame caches, great caches are great caches. I have seen all sizes of caches that fit both lame, and great categories, and everywhere in between. Its like saying that short people are less intelligent than tall people. Ridiculous.

Knowschad, if you actually read this give a response... K?

 

Exactly! You understand the point of my thread. FINALLY! I posted something very similiar to this in another thread, I think it was "micros the scurge of geocaching and maybe the end?". And not a single soul replied, they went on with there diatribe about how micro's sucked and they were terrible and it deeply offended me considering most people in my area hide great micro's. I thought I would gain more attention to the fact that any cache of any size can be a good cache, I was just trying to demonstrate this by showing people the otherside, where micros are better then larger caches where I live... Thanks!

I thought I was the one who posted in the other thread

I keep looking at the title of this thread and seeing how it just as easily could say "Micros the salvation of geocaching and maybe the start of more clever interesting caches in interesting places."

But it's a long thread so you may have said it as well.

Link to comment
Around Bensalem, Pa., eh? Never heard of it, but apparently a Philadelphia suburb. I can't speak for that area.

Bensalem? Sure, been there, done that. Ironically a milestone. Fate I guess.

 

Heh. Ever in Atlanta, I'll give you some challenging regular caches. We are a little less urban than you are there, so the ability to be evil with an ammo box is more opportune. I have a very large ammo box standing upright. He he. Should have seen me carrying that bad boy in while walking J.C. on the leash.

 

Good luck finding it. I even put a picture of it on the cache page. :rolleyes:

 

56033_200.jpg

 

We have someone here who just loves micros. The tougher the better. I don't know how she does it and I can only bow and accept that I am not worthy. She can out-cache me hands down. Some I still cannot find. It takes all kinds, and fortunately in geocaching there is something for just about everybody. That's the beauty of the game we play.

Link to comment

Size has nothing to do with it.,, Ridiculous.

Maybe. Maybe not. For my personal, highly biased tastes, size does play a factor. Given the choice between two equally creative hides, (one a match safe and one an ammo can), in similar stunning environments, with well written, interesting cache pages, I will like both of them, but, everything else being equal, I will like the ammo can more, as, of the two, it is the only one that allows me to partake in two facets of this game which still interests me; pawing through swag and reading lengthy paper logs. While some regular size caches, (usually those closer to parking), suffer from swag degradation, that is not the case for all caches, and even those that do suffer still contain items that tell a story. And while micro spew has resulted in many people scribbling nothing more than their moniker and a date in a full size logbook, this is not true for everybody. To this day I still write at least a full page in logs, and many of my peers follow suit, waxing poetic with their penned prose.

 

This begs the next obvious question: Are the majority of micros clever or creative? Again, that falls under personal preference. Most of the micros I've seen are neither. Most of the regular size caches I've seen are both, to some degree, possibly because it does take a bit of thinking to hide something bigger than a breadbox. Yes, it's true that someone who is really dim might view a film can tucked into the hedge at a Burger King as the most amazing thing ever, but it's hard to believe that someone so lacking in mental capacity would be able to operate a GPS.

 

I would venture to say that, while many players do create clever and unique micros, for the most part they are the preferred size for the incredibly lazy. In two identical environments, which would be easier to conceal from common view, a single carbon atom or a 5 gallon bucket of charcoal? Those who are unwilling to take the time or burn the grey matter necessary to hide something larger will inevitably choose from the smaller end of the spectrum. Add to the fact that they are usually park & grabs just adds more value in the eyes of the slothful, as maintenance is that much easier.

 

So, while it's true that size doesn't matter for everybody, that is certainly not a universal statement.

 

Will micros be the savior of geocaching? Not as long as intellect and effort are still rewarded.

Link to comment

For me, size makes little difference for the most part. When I am deciding which caches to do, I look at the location and the walk involved; I may also look at interesting puzzles or other challenges. The only time I care about the size is if I have a trackable to move.

 

However all being equal, I do slightly prefer larger containers because of trackables. I like to find them and move them. And when I'm with my children, they like to find swag.

Link to comment

Most people are very creative about micro's in my area, In fact, I find more creative micro's then LPC's... I found a micro, it was really creative ... I have NEVER seen a creative regular or larger. Only one or two creative smalls. It's just a lot harder to create a creative large cache. To me it's the creativity that keeps me going,

 

Anyone else think micro's are saving this sport with the creativity? Or is it only my area that has a lot of creative micro's and for most they are LPC's and guardrails?

 

What is your definition of "Creative"???? Can you provide some examples?

Link to comment
the things that many of us old timers like is figuring out how to get to the cache.

 

Yep, and cachers are dropping hides along the route...micros almost exclusively. I know these folks think this is "giving back" but it sure isn't giving back much.

 

I still own some isolated caches. Because the area has a geocaching permit, and requires ammo cans, my caches are still out there, alone at the end of trail. So for someone like yourself, the route finding option (oops, wrong side of the darn water... <_< backtrack, wade? just how big are the local gators? - is still available.

 

If that property allowed micros? no permit? my ammo can would be at the end of the string of micro hides.

 

Are there some really clever micro hides? sure! are there some ultra tough hunts that aren't just haystack hides? absolutely..well placed micros in interesting or scenic places? cute micro caches? yep...But the noise to signal ratio on micros is way way high.

 

But if you are one who savors micros, don't despair just 'cause few old timers get cranky. It means nothing.

 

I pulled queries for the last 10,000 caches placed in Florida. It's micros (micro + other)at 60%, small at 23.6%, regular at 16% and large at .4%.

And if you like 'em on the easy side, got that covered too, 68% at terrain 1 or 1.5 57% at difficulty 1.5 or less.

edit, add stats

Edited by Isonzo Karst
Link to comment

Size has nothing to do with it. Lame caches are lame caches, great caches are great caches. I have seen all sizes of caches that fit both lame, and great categories, and everywhere in between. Its like saying that short people are less intelligent than tall people. Ridiculous.

Knowschad, if you actually read this give a response... K?

 

Exactly! You understand the point of my thread. FINALLY! I posted something very similiar to this in another thread, I think it was "micros the scurge of geocaching and maybe the end?". And not a single soul replied, they went on with there diatribe about how micro's sucked and they were terrible and it deeply offended me considering most people in my area hide great micro's. I thought I would gain more attention to the fact that any cache of any size can be a good cache, I was just trying to demonstrate this by showing people the otherside, where micros are better then larger caches where I live... Thanks!

 

hmmz i typed my fingers blue in that thread in favor of micros

 

and what about post#258?

 

size has nothing to do with the place where its hidden or how ingenious the hide is,

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...2265&st=255

Link to comment

If a hide is in a cool spot and fits the environment in which it's hidden I like it. There's lots of regular sized caches where I am because it's not particularly urban. When I go into towns to geocache I end up finding a bunch of micros.

 

I get my geocaching fix but I don't particularly like to geocache in town, especially when the hides aren't that creative. Sometimes you hid a gem but you have to wade through a lot of wet pill bottles to get there.

 

I think it's more annoying to me when someone takes a great plot of forest land that has a ton of great hiding places and able to handle a larger container and they toss a pill bottle in that.

 

Anyhow, micros do have their place. They fit some environments perfectly. They are sometimes fun to find. Not my personal preference but they have a place.

 

Like other if all other was the same I would likely like a larger cache but I quite enjoy going through all the swag in a cache and leaving my own swag and reading the larger logs in those caches.

Link to comment

Maybe. Maybe not. For my personal, highly biased tastes, size does play a factor. Given the choice between two equally creative hides, (one a match safe and one an ammo can), in similar stunning environments, with well written, interesting cache pages, I will like both of them, but, everything else being equal, I will like the ammo can more, as, of the two, it is the only one that allows me to partake in two facets of this game which still interests me; pawing through swag and reading lengthy paper logs.

 

Exactly. SmileySmileNodding.gif

Link to comment

I think it's more annoying to me when someone takes a great plot of forest land that has a ton of great hiding places and able to handle a larger container and they toss a pill bottle in that.

 

That's what pushed me over the edge about a year ago and when I decided it was time to filter out micros. It just irked me too much to see a nice woodlot completely occupied by 2 leaky micros. It was becoming a regular micro caching experience for me, which left me all grumbly inside. <_<

Link to comment

I think it's more annoying to me when someone takes a great plot of forest land that has a ton of great hiding places and able to handle a larger container and they toss a pill bottle in that.

 

That's what pushed me over the edge about a year ago and when I decided it was time to filter out micros. It just irked me too much to see a nice woodlot completely occupied by 2 leaky micros. It was becoming a regular micro caching experience for me, which left me all grumbly inside. <_<

Problem solved.

Link to comment

Size has nothing to do with it. Lame caches are lame caches, great caches are great caches. I have seen all sizes of caches that fit both lame, and great categories, and everywhere in between. Its like saying that short people are less intelligent than tall people. Ridiculous.

QFT

 

A micro in a sweet location or in a cool container is great. Same with nanos, regulars and larges!

 

unless they're buried in fescue <_<

Link to comment

I'd like micros more in general if the ratio of interesting to not-interesting micros was better than 1 in 20.

 

I don't like spending a long time searching for a cache but if the cache is difficult to find due to creativity I'll certainly appreciate it. (needle-in-a-haystack type hides are not creative).

 

If only there was a way to filter the choices to locate interesting caches...

Link to comment

I think it's more annoying to me when someone takes a great plot of forest land that has a ton of great hiding places and able to handle a larger container and they toss a pill bottle in that.

 

That's what pushed me over the edge about a year ago and when I decided it was time to filter out micros. It just irked me too much to see a nice woodlot completely occupied by 2 leaky micros. It was becoming a regular micro caching experience for me, which left me all grumbly inside. <_<

Problem solved.

 

Not really.

Link to comment

You aren't alone. I particularly enjoy caches with 4-star camouflage. Most of those are micros. I also enjoy caches that call attention to public art. Most of those are micros, including blinkers hidden in plain sight on sculptures.

 

[Edit: fix typo]

Edited by niraD
Link to comment

I like all caches, micro, nano, gigantor. Not saying that I am a numbers runner (did 1 power trail that was nice but tedious), but they actually give me a smiley when I find them, much like when I catch a fish...

I will have to check out Bensalem, PA. And see the area with the cool challenging micros!

Cheers!

Make sure to try the MMC (micro masters challenge) It's 15 micro's placed within a 35 mile radius from each other. When you find them all you go to a GIANT ammobox. The caches in the micro master challenge are phenominal.

Link to comment
Around Bensalem, Pa., eh? Never heard of it, but apparently a Philadelphia suburb. I can't speak for that area.

Bensalem? Sure, been there, done that. Ironically a milestone. Fate I guess.

 

Heh. Ever in Atlanta, I'll give you some challenging regular caches. We are a little less urban than you are there, so the ability to be evil with an ammo box is more opportune. I have a very large ammo box standing upright. He he. Should have seen me carrying that bad boy in while walking J.C. on the leash.

 

Good luck finding it. I even put a picture of it on the cache page. :)

 

56033_200.jpg

 

We have someone here who just loves micros. The tougher the better. I don't know how she does it and I can only bow and accept that I am not worthy. She can out-cache me hands down. Some I still cannot find. It takes all kinds, and fortunately in geocaching there is something for just about everybody. That's the beauty of the game we play.

Funny, you found it months after I did, only a few weeks ago. I have to wonder though... Why travel all the way to bensalem from your state when you could to all the amazing tourist attractions in philly... It doesn't add up... :mellow:

Link to comment

I think it's more annoying to me when someone takes a great plot of forest land that has a ton of great hiding places and able to handle a larger container and they toss a pill bottle in that.

 

That's what pushed me over the edge about a year ago and when I decided it was time to filter out micros. It just irked me too much to see a nice woodlot completely occupied by 2 leaky micros. It was becoming a regular micro caching experience for me, which left me all grumbly inside. :)

Problem solved.

 

Not really.

Your regular micro caching experiences left you all grumbly inside. You now filter micros out of your searches. Therefore, the vast majority of your cache searches are not for these grumbly-inducing micros.

 

Problem solved.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

I think it's more annoying to me when someone takes a great plot of forest land that has a ton of great hiding places and able to handle a larger container and they toss a pill bottle in that.

 

That's what pushed me over the edge about a year ago and when I decided it was time to filter out micros. It just irked me too much to see a nice woodlot completely occupied by 2 leaky micros. It was becoming a regular micro caching experience for me, which left me all grumbly inside. :)

Problem solved.

 

Not really.

Your regular micro caching experiences left you all grumbly inside. You now filter micros out of your searches. Therefore, the vast majority of your cache searches are not for these grumbly-inducing micros.

 

Problem solved.

 

2 things.....

Micros use up nice forest/woodlot space where a larger cache will easily fit - and most of the time they are not placed because the CO has a clever interesting hide but because they don't want to spend the money on a better or larger container. I thought the idea behind micros was to use them where a larger cache wouldn't be practical - at least that's what the gc site use to encourage with regards to micros.

 

Many COs choose the "small" size when the internal cache space is actually under .1L/3oz. I do not want to also filter out small caches. So I drive out to the woodlot, for me it's often a 20 minute (or more) drive away, only to discover a leaky dollar store micro under a log. When this happens I mention the size issue in the log but almost always the CO does nothing about it i.e. leaves the size as small. I only know of one cache where the CO changed the size from small to micro after I noted the problem. One can only assume then that most micro COs who post their caches as small want to prevent their cache from being filtered out by the micro filterers.

 

It's just not a nice way to play the game - using up nice woodlots, especially in cache saturated areas, where someone with an ammo can is going to have a hard time finding a good spot and then micro COs who try to circumvent the micro filters.

Link to comment
Many COs choose the "small" size when the internal cache space is actually under .1L/3oz. ...only to discover a leaky dollar store micro under a log. When this happens I mention the size issue in the log but almost always the CO does nothing about it i.e. leaves the size as small.

 

I pulled a query for a day's caching in a preserve area: No Micros.

 

I found five caches that day, 2 called regular by their owners, 3 small. There was no regular in the group, the largest was food jar, small. The other "regular" was a plastic egg (small egg sized, and very wet).

 

The "smalls" were: 2 medicine bottles (film can sized roughly), and some other cosmetic? container - long and quite narrow, volume somewhat less than a film can.

 

Yepper, it's weird. And ALL of these caches are in a wooded preserve. I pulled my ammo can cache there that day. Lord knows, with easily 20 caches on the south end of that property if there's even ONE that will hold a travel bug.

Link to comment

I think it's more annoying to me when someone takes a great plot of forest land that has a ton of great hiding places and able to handle a larger container and they toss a pill bottle in that.

 

That's what pushed me over the edge about a year ago and when I decided it was time to filter out micros. It just irked me too much to see a nice woodlot completely occupied by 2 leaky micros. It was becoming a regular micro caching experience for me, which left me all grumbly inside. :huh:

Problem solved.

 

Not really.

Your regular micro caching experiences left you all grumbly inside. You now filter micros out of your searches. Therefore, the vast majority of your cache searches are not for these grumbly-inducing micros.

 

Problem solved.

 

Many COs choose the "small" size when the internal cache space is actually under .1L/3oz. I do not want to also filter out small caches.

 

For me it's usually the other way around. Which is also a bad thing. I was expecting a bison tube hidden in a tree when it turned out to be a small lock and lock. I was looking up when it was on the ground. The worse time was when it was listed as a micro, and it was a lock and lock hidden under tons of leaves at the edges of two fences... Yeah I spent a crap ton of time looking for a magnetic nano... I've also had micro's listed as smalls, and that gets annoying too...

Link to comment

Am I the only one that likes micros? In my area there is two hiders that hide lame micro's they are SUPER easy to avoid. While on the plus side this means I can't really find 4 - 6 caches to a parking lot, what I do get is usually quality. Most people are very creative about micro's in my area, In fact, I find more creative micro's then LPC's... And I'll go to any cache. Like today, I found a micro, it was really creative so much so that people were avoiding spoilers in there logs. Most caches are like that in my area, and I like that! The issue is, most people that hide larger caches hide ammo boxes, and regular containers. I have NEVER seen a creative regular or larger. Only one or two creative smalls. It's just a lot harder to create a creative large cache. To me it's the creativity that keeps me going, the thrill of finding a cache right under your nose. I like finding ammo boxes don't get me wrong, but they can get boring if that was the only cache type I was to find. Which is why I like a variety. And micro's are great at that.

 

Anyone else think micro's are saving this sport with the creativity? Or is it only my area that has a lot of creative micro's and for most they are LPC's and guardrails?

 

You need to check out my stuff in Las Vegas. I do have an interesting ammo box hide. The rest are some interesting micros. MR57

Link to comment

No, as I said many times, including in another thread in the last week or so (may have been the Canada forum, I can't remember), I think you are in a minority for liking "challenging micros". Considering old schoolers like myself who like hikes to caches in the woods I will probably find when I get there, and the numbers crowd who like to rack up the finds.

 

Believe me, I can throw an ammo box in rocks, or in a hidey hole in a log just barely large enough to conceal it, especially under heavy tree cover, and it will drive people nuts.

Can't speak for Canada, but here in California most ammo cans are hidden under a bush.

 

Now certainly of the things that many of us old timers like is figuring out how to get to the cache. A good cache in the wilderness will seldom be one you can follow the arrow to. You need to look at the terrain and figure out the route. For many urban caches you can just put the coordinates in an auto GPS and get turn by turn instructions. Even driving around the block a few times looking for the right parking lot to pull into isn't so bad as hiking 1/2 mile down the wrong trail to realize you have to go back and take the other fork to get near the cache. So I will agree that there are other challenges involved in wilderness caches that you don't find as often in urban hides.

 

I have 16 caches now. I try and make each one unigue,clever and different from the last one. I've gotton many positive comments. 15 of them are all within 2 mile radius so most people do the series at one time.

 

But each cacher has different challenges that they like and some like looking for a tiny nano on a long metal fence or a bison tube in a hole drilled in a rock and placed in a pile of rocks. My guess is that nowadays there are more people who like the challenging micro than the challenging hike. There are certainly those who like easy urban hides who may be accused of caching for the numbers.

 

I accept that there are different cachers who like different kinds of hides. I'll go farther and argue that more popular hides are hidden (and found) more often. Still I'm not too disappointed, there are far more cachers who like the hiking type caches that I like then there use to be, so I'm not running out of them because there are more urban micros. While there are a higher percentage of small and micro caches among those hiking caches than there used to be, it doesn't bother me because I happen to enjoy looking for them. Also, since the state parks instituted rules that caches have to be within 3 feet of designated trail, it has become harder to find places to put a regular cache that won't get muggled. So in fact small and micros are a bit of a savior in allowing caches to continue to be hidden in the state parks.

 

My feeling is that more options in cache sizes and hiding styles is good for the hobby. They allow caches to be hidden in more places and let more people get involved in geocaching. No longer is everything a hike in the woods and no longer is every cache under a bush or a pile of sticks. I'd bet that most people like variety. In fact most of the complaints I hear about parking lot micros are about lack of variety. So I accept that there are some "lame" micros because that is just one variety. There are so many good micro hides, along with smalls and regulars, that I can have fun even on day where I might wind up a few times looking under lamp post in parking lots. But since I am able to find places to hike where there are no lamp posts and find cache there, such days are rare. (Sometimes I will find a fence post or even an old guardrail on a now abandoned road with a typical urban micro hide, but I still enjoy it because I got to hike in an interesting area where these relics of the past are hidden). :huh:

Link to comment

Am I the only one that likes micros? In my area there is two hiders that hide lame micro's they are SUPER easy to avoid. While on the plus side this means I can't really find 4 - 6 caches to a parking lot, what I do get is usually quality. Most people are very creative about micro's in my area, In fact, I find more creative micro's then LPC's... And I'll go to any cache. Like today, I found a micro, it was really creative so much so that people were avoiding spoilers in there logs. Most caches are like that in my area, and I like that! The issue is, most people that hide larger caches hide ammo boxes, and regular containers. I have NEVER seen a creative regular or larger. Only one or two creative smalls. It's just a lot harder to create a creative large cache. To me it's the creativity that keeps me going, the thrill of finding a cache right under your nose. I like finding ammo boxes don't get me wrong, but they can get boring if that was the only cache type I was to find. Which is why I like a variety. And micro's are great at that.

 

Anyone else think micro's are saving this sport with the creativity? Or is it only my area that has a lot of creative micro's and for most they are LPC's and guardrails?

 

You need to check out my stuff in Las Vegas. I do have an interesting ammo box hide. The rest are some interesting micros. MR57

 

Somebody needs to learn to use the quote function. I can't tell what was written by Coldgears and what was written by MR57.

Link to comment

I'm new to caching, very new. I like both types. The larger caches are great for my kids because they are usually easier to find. My kids are 6 and 8 and have fun going on caches with me. With that being said, however, I've found that when we search for micro's-particularly in the woods, they get frustrated-mostly because their age level.

 

The only time micro's frustrate me is when they become completely buried in leaves in fall. I'm not about to bring a rake to go caching. Also, like if it hidden in a nut or pine cone AND THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF THEM AROUND that is ridiculous in my opinion. If it is a pine cone attached to a birch or oak tree (or under one) that is cool. Also, micros that are literally buried three feet UNDER a farmers rock wall is a bit much, not to mention people take these walls apart and don't put the rocks back.

 

So yes, I like them in most cases but not all.

Link to comment

I'm new to caching, very new. I like both types. The larger caches are great for my kids because they are usually easier to find. My kids are 6 and 8 and have fun going on caches with me. With that being said, however, I've found that when we search for micro's-particularly in the woods, they get frustrated-mostly because their age level.

 

The only time micro's frustrate me is when they become completely buried in leaves in fall. I'm not about to bring a rake to go caching. Also, like if it hidden in a nut or pine cone AND THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF THEM AROUND that is ridiculous in my opinion. If it is a pine cone attached to a birch or oak tree (or under one) that is cool. Also, micros that are literally buried three feet UNDER a farmers rock wall is a bit much, not to mention people take these walls apart and don't put the rocks back.

 

So yes, I like them in most cases but not all.

 

My kids like bigger caches too, and so do I to be honest. They like them because of the booty contained withing (though they often end up disappointed with the tat contained within). I like them because you are more likely to get travel bugs in them.

 

I have found one microcache I liked, because it wsa disguised as a pebble. IE somebody had gone to the trouble of making it interesting. All too often they are just pointless and bland.

 

So to say that the size is important is ridiculous, is ridiculous. Or something. ;)

 

What I see far too many of these days is cache rings, where you get about 20+ microcaches in a loop. The biggest I saw was about 120 odd, and I made a point of avoiding it completely. I like the caches where you might find (and leave) something interesting, like a book or an old CD. Sadly they are few and far between these days.

Link to comment
I think it's more annoying to me when someone takes a great plot of forest land that has a ton of great hiding places and able to handle a larger container and they toss a pill bottle in that.
That's what pushed me over the edge about a year ago and when I decided it was time to filter out micros. It just irked me too much to see a nice woodlot completely occupied by 2 leaky micros. It was becoming a regular micro caching experience for me, which left me all grumbly inside. ;)
Problem solved.
Not really.
Your regular micro caching experiences left you all grumbly inside. You now filter micros out of your searches. Therefore, the vast majority of your cache searches are not for these grumbly-inducing micros.

 

Problem solved.

2 things.....

Micros use up nice forest/woodlot space where a larger cache will easily fit - and most of the time they are not placed because the CO has a clever interesting hide but because they don't want to spend the money on a better or larger container.

The moment you start presuming that you know why everyone does something that you don't care for, you set yourself up for failure.
I thought the idea behind micros was to use them where a larger cache wouldn't be practical - at least that's what the gc site use to encourage with regards to micros.
You thought wrong.
Many COs choose the "small" size when the internal cache space is actually under .1L/3oz. I do not want to also filter out small caches. So I drive out to the woodlot, for me it's often a 20 minute (or more) drive away, only to discover a leaky dollar store micro under a log. When this happens I mention the size issue in the log but almost always the CO does nothing about it i.e. leaves the size as small. I only know of one cache where the CO changed the size from small to micro after I noted the problem. One can only assume then that most micro COs who post their caches as small want to prevent their cache from being filtered out by the micro filterers.
Again, when you use your angst to try to surmise why others do what they do, you build your argument on unsound principles. Isn't it more likely that either you are coming across as a bit of a jerk or that the cache owners believe that they are correct and you are wrong?
It's just not a nice way to play the game - using up nice woodlots, especially in cache saturated areas, where someone with an ammo can is going to have a hard time finding a good spot and then micro COs who try to circumvent the micro filters.
The game has been in play for over ten years now. If someone wanted to place a larger cache there, he/she should have done so. Coming behind someone who has given to the game by placing these caches and then complaining that the caches don't live up to your personal criteria kind of sounds like a lazy version of sour grapes. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
I thought the idea behind micros was to use them where a larger cache wouldn't be practical - at least that's what the gc site use to encourage with regards to micros.
You thought wrong.

 

Can someone remember if there used to be, somewhere in the guidelines or Knowledge Books something to the effect that micros should be placed where a larger cache won't fit.

 

Many COs choose the "small" size when the internal cache space is actually under .1L/3oz. I do not want to also filter out small caches...When this happens I mention the size issue in the log.

Isn't it more likely that either you are coming across as a bit of a jerk or that the cache owners believe that they are correct and you are wrong?

 

How is the CO correct about cache size? The guidelines specifically lay out the definition of cache sizes. If I point out that the 2oz spice bottle jar container

41Z4cX00hZL.jpg

does not meet guideline definition of a "small" cache but meets the definition of a micro cache is that jerkish behavior? Is pointing out the guidelines being a jerk? How is a cache owner correct when they list a 2oz spice jar as 'small' rather then 'micro'?

 

I feel the CO comes across as a jerk for either not reading the guidelines, ignoring the guidelines and/or deliberately setting the size at small to avoid the micro filterers. If the CO does this, they deserve a little admonition. If it was an honest mistake, they will change the listed cache size and maybe even offer an apology for posting the wrong size.

 

The game has been in play for over ten years now.

I know, I've been playing since December 2001. I've been a witness to the exponential climb in cache hides and cache saturation issues and recently the proliferation of a number of cheap micros - so many that I felt the need to filter them to avoid the aggravation. But I miss out on some well-done micros. Your answer: tough, cry me a river. My answer: a rating system so that I don't have to filter out by size but rather can filter out by what most people think is a good caching experience (which would eliminate at least 80% of micros). Until that day when GS implements a rating system, our only recourse is constructive criticism and pointing out guideline infractions in the online logs.

 

If someone wanted to place a larger cache there, he/she should have done so.

People should not place more caches then they can comfortably handle. They shouldn't place them to block a micro from being put there.

 

Coming behind someone who has given to the game by placing these caches and then complaining that the caches don't live up to your personal criteria kind of sounds like a lazy version of sour grapes.

That's an "every cache is a good cache" principle that I do not agree with. Sometimes what they bring to the game is detrimental. I really don't understand why you advocate/champion lame hides, except that maybe you really truly feel every cache is a good cache, even those that don't follow the guidelines.

Link to comment
Many COs choose the "small" size when the internal cache space is actually under .1L/3oz. I do not want to also filter out small caches...When this happens I mention the size issue in the log.
Isn't it more likely that either you are coming across as a bit of a jerk or that the cache owners believe that they are correct and you are wrong?
How is the CO correct about cache size? The guidelines specifically lay out the definition of cache sizes. <snip>
I bolded the bit that you missed from my post.
If I point out that the 2oz spice bottle jar container...
You do understand the difference between weight versus volume, right? That pic that you tossed up showed a spice bottle that held two ouces of the spice measured by weight. The '2 ounces' on the label had nothing to do with the bottle's volume. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
...Anyone else think micro's are saving this sport with the creativity?

 

No, micros are only one facet of Geocaching. I don't think Geocaching would die out if there were no micros.

 

...Or is it only my area that has a lot of creative micro's and for most they are LPC's and guardrails?

 

Interesting question.

 

I tend to prefer caches that arn't park and grab, no matter how creatively they are placed. Of course, that's one of the things that makes Geocaching so successful; there are many types of caches and many ways to place them. Something for everyone you might say.

Link to comment

I like to find all caches. Even those that some consider lame.

Due to my limited mobility I tend to search for and hide micros.

 

I put a lot of thought into the micros I hide. The location... the container and the whole idea.

 

Micros can be done really well and be a good hide.

 

I have found lame micros hidden in a tree (my first hide is such a thing(but people still enjoy finding it))

and I have found and hidden some really cool ones.

 

I have also found some very cool and creative ammo cans or lock n' locks hidden.

 

I have found as many ammo cans and lock n' locks hidden in lame locations under a tree or pile of rocks/bark or debris.

 

Example

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...