Shrinking Caches

[+michigansnorkelers]

My wife and I like searching for REGULAR caches.

 

When I started geocaching 4 years ago, REGULAR caches were typically the size of an ammo box or larger lock-and-lock. They were big enough for placing a good quantity of nice, larger swag and TBs.

 

Lately, we've been running PQs to search for REGULAR caches, only to find pretty small containers that are barely large enough to hold the logbook. To make matters worse, these containers are so stuffed that the seal is compromised, resulting in wet logbooks and dirty contents. We often return to the car with our original nice swag items and travelbugs.

 

It seems that Regular caches are becoming small; small are becoming micro, and micro are becoming nano.

 

Have you noticed this trend?

[+J the Goat]

Oh, I feel Geobain coming on.....

 

 

Ni!

 

Alright, seriously, I haven't been geocaching nearly long enough to notice the issue you're mentioning. My area however, has a nice number of regular sized caches that are actually regular sized. Smalls here are smalls and micros are pretty well micros. That does include a few nanos, but since that's where they go for now, we can't really complain about it. I'm going to track down an ammo can tomorrow as a matter of fact. Listed as a regular.

[+narcissa]

Ni!

 

Seriously, search the forum for previous threads on this topic.

[+keehotee]

My wife and I like searching for REGULAR caches.

 

When I started geocaching 4 years ago, REGULAR caches were typically the size of an ammo box or larger lock-and-lock. They were big enough for placing a good quantity of nice, larger swag and TBs.

 

Lately, we've been running PQs to search for REGULAR caches, only to find pretty small containers that are barely large enough to hold the logbook. To make matters worse, these containers are so stuffed that the seal is compromised, resulting in wet logbooks and dirty contents. We often return to the car with our original nice swag items and travelbugs.

 

It seems that Regular caches are becoming small; small are becoming micro, and micro are becoming nano.

 

Have you noticed this trend?

 

Yes.

 

It's been very noticeable in the UK.

In fairness, there are probably just as many larger regular containers coming out - but there are also far more smaller regular containers.....

[+dneuwir]

It seems that Regular caches are becoming small; small are becoming micro, and micro are becoming nano.

 

Have you noticed this trend?

 

I've only been caching since March (about 350 finds) but up here in the Pac. Northwest, the sizes seem overall to be pretty consistent with Groundspeak's guidelines. The only containers I typically see listed as "regulars" are ammo box or gallon lock n' lock or larger. Smalls tend to be around your pint peanut butter jars give or take, and micro's are anything equal or smaller than an Altoids mint tin or film canister. The smallest "regular" I've found was about the size of a quart of milk--I could probably argue it should have been listed as a "small" but it was close enough that I could go either way.

 

-Dan

[knowschad]

I can't say that I have seen that trend in my area. Perhaps fewer regular caches, but regular caches are regular size. Have you considered hiding a bunch of real regular caches in an effort to educate those that are mis-stating theirs?

[+Nicodemus3]

I'm not sure if their placement rate has decreased or just that the rate of micro's has sky rocketed in comparison.

Edited October 31, 2010 by Nicodemus3

[knowschad]

I'm not sure if their placement rate has decreased or just that the rate of micro's has sky rocketed in comparison.

This isn't even referring to the frequency of different cache sizes, as I read it. I think he's saying that a regular today is smaller than a regular yesterday.

[Mr.Yuck]

Oh, I feel Geobain coming on.....

 

 

Ni!

 

Alright, seriously, I haven't been geocaching nearly long enough to notice the issue you're mentioning. My area however, has a nice number of regular sized caches that are actually regular sized. Smalls here are smalls and micros are pretty well micros. That does include a few nanos, but since that's where they go for now, we can't really complain about it. I'm going to track down an ammo can tomorrow as a matter of fact. Listed as a regular.

 

There is no Geobain. His username is now XXXRIPXXX or something like that. I of course don't believe he should have taken that drastic step.

 

I always like to muddy the waters in these threads. I have seen a major trend (and not just in my immediate area) of greater than 1.0 Liter Lock-n-Lock's listed as smalls, when they should be regulars.

[+Ecylram]

Ni!

 

Seriously, search the forum for previous threads on this topic.

What search term would you recommend? (Considering the search engine's rudimentary capabilities?)

[+Ecylram]

Caches in our area seem to usually match the guidelines for ranking.

[+ngrrfan]

Caches in our area seem to usually match the guidelines for ranking.

Same in our area too.

[+Isonzo Karst]

I agree re: search terms and finding old threads. I bookmark anything I really think I'll want to find again, because using search is hopeless.....

 

anyway, I've posted the same story twice here, so what the heck -> three times is the charm:

 

Pulled a PQ centered in a large preserve south of me -> No Puzzles, no micros: I found 5 caches that day:

 

1) plastic egg (very very very wet) listed as Regular!!!

 

2) soda preform - listed as Small

 

3) medicine bottle, volume a tad bigger then a film can, but neck much smaller - wet log, very very tough to extract....listed as Small

 

4) medicine bottle, as above (same owner).

 

4) PB jar - 12 oz, listed as Regular - this was the only cache that could contain anything beyond a log that I found - it's absolutely a Small, a nice small, and also dry, unlike the other caches I found....

 

So my no micros PQ yielded 5 caches, ostensibly 3 "smalls" and 2 "regulars"> which were, in reality, 4 micros and one small!

 

and yes, I see this a lot... anything even close to film can size (that isn't a film can) will be called "small".

[+The VanDucks]

If where you live is like where we live, the bigger containers seem to have been mostly placed three or four years ago, in wooded areas or parkland where ammo cans or large plastic containers can be concealed. As geocaching has become MUCH more popular, the newer hides tend to be small sizes because they are being hidden in somewhat more "marginal" locations where there isn't enough camouflage for a large container.

 

I think cost is also a factor; to hide a large cache used to require an ammo can, some nice swag items, and a special prize for the FTF. A lot of the new cachers in our area are hiding tiny cheap containers such as film cans, altoid tins, or pill bottles, with only a log.

 

One relatively new cacher around here has hidden quite a few micros in a wooded park with many trails, where some earlier, larger caches have been archived. Sigh! It's not worth the trouble to us to crash through heavy undergrowth to look for a micro in the woods!

[+Mini-Geek]

All of the caches that I have found in my area have the correct size rating, however I have found that since I started caching, the ratio of small to medium caches has changed massively in the favour of small caches. Since becoming a premium member, I haven't received a single email about a medium cache being published at all within a 10 mile radius, however lots of small caches.

 

5 Miles from my home co-ordinates I have:

 

16 Medium caches (One of them is mine)

64 Small caches

(And what I found quite surprising) Only 59 Micro's

 

Most of these caches are placed quite appropriately IMO, however there are some spots with smalls which I think could support a medium. Personally I quite like small caches, as they can be hid well, so I am not complaining, however it is nice to find a regular once in a while.

Edited October 31, 2010 by Mini-Geek

[+The Chaos Crew]

we’ve found lots of , IMO, wrongly labelled caches – ie listed as a regular but really should have been a small – but I think it goes both ways – I found some huge “smalls” that were bigger than most regulars, for example. And yesterday a “micro” that was really a small – ie plenty of room for small swag items / geocoins etc .

[Skippermark]

The ones we most often find mis-sized are the "mid-sized" ones around 5x3x2 inches. I call that a small but often see them listed as a regulars too. We did a series recently where the containers were 4x2x2 and listed as regulars.