Very Frustrating Day

[+Catalinagrey]

I spent the day caching with a friend yesterday. We wanted to find some newly hidden caches in a fun wildlife area. The caches could have been awesome, but instead they were ver frustrating!!! This one GC2G4G5 was especially frustrating. We spent about 2 hours wading through muck and tall grass trying to get to the GZ. We finally gave up and went on to the next one which we found more than 60 feet off from the given cords. None of the caches were camoed they were just laying out in the open, but when they are more than 60 feet off in a wooded/grass covered/ect. area it can be very frustrating!!!

 

Ok my rant is over and I'm going out to do more caching.

[+narcissa]

I spent the day caching with a friend yesterday. We wanted to find some newly hidden caches in a fun wildlife area. The caches could have been awesome, but instead they were ver frustrating!!! This one GC2G4G5 was especially frustrating. We spent about 2 hours wading through muck and tall grass trying to get to the GZ. We finally gave up and went on to the next one which we found more than 60 feet off from the given cords. None of the caches were camoed they were just laying out in the open, but when they are more than 60 feet off in a wooded/grass covered/ect. area it can be very frustrating!!!

 

Ok my rant is over and I'm going out to do more caching.

 

It's good practice to check the cache description and recent logs before you go. It is clear from recent logs that other people have encountered similar difficulties.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I spent the day caching with a friend yesterday. We wanted to find some newly hidden caches in a fun wildlife area. The caches could have been awesome, but instead they were ver frustrating!!! This one GC2G4G5 was especially frustrating. We spent about 2 hours wading through muck and tall grass trying to get to the GZ. We finally gave up and went on to the next one which we found more than 60 feet off from the given cords. None of the caches were camoed they were just laying out in the open, but when they are more than 60 feet off in a wooded/grass covered/ect. area it can be very frustrating!!!

 

Ok my rant is over and I'm going out to do more caching.

 

Looking at the cache for which you posted the GC number, you could have saved some frustration if you had read the previous logs. It had 6 other DNFs and only one find. Almost all the DNFs mentioned standing water and most complained of getting their shoes wet. It may be a bit under rated in terms of the terrain but I'm surprised that none of those that posted DNFs went back with better footwear and attempted it. The only one to find it only had 4 finds and this one appears to be their first. Of course, their log indicates they had a great time looking for the cache and even though it's posted as a find, the log doesn't actually say they found it.

 

Arriving near ground zero only to discover that you're not dressed for the terrain happens. It's happened to me fairly often. Sometimes I just go after it anyway. Sometimes I just log a mental note to go back when I'm better prepared for the terrain. Sometimes I don't go back for it all. Not all caches are going to be easy to get to or easy to find, and Groundspeak provides difficulty/terrain ratings that a CO *should* use accurately describe what to expect. In this case, the CO has hidden 13 caches since they started two weeks ago and hasn't logged any finds. In the logs for at least one of the other caches there are complaints that the difficulty was underrated and one other mentions there might be permissions issues as well. It sounds like a new geocacher that hasn't read and understands the guidelines and is possibly using a smart phone or satellite maps to obtain coordinates. I'd probably avoid any other caches by that hider and seek others.

[Clan Riffster]

Well, I'm glad your rant is over. Life is too short to spend ranting on an Internet forum. I see some folks complaining on the cache page about finding themselves in a wetland, in a cache titled "Wetlands". Not sure what's up with that. Maybe the locals are just overly whiny? As to the frustration of inaccurate coords, I think we all feel your pain. Sometimes coords can be off on purpose, as some goobers thinks it adds to the "challenge" to publish bad coords. Those folks need to be beaten with rotting lemming corpses. Fortunately, bad coords are not usually deliberate. Mostly they are the result of a quirky satellite constellation, GPSr units with poor reception such as iPhones and/or a user who does not know how to get good coords.

 

If you find that this cache owner has issues on other hides, it might be best to add all of his caches to your ignore list.

 

Good hunting!

[+Catalinagrey]

Well, I'm glad your rant is over. Life is too short to spend ranting on an Internet forum. I see some folks complaining on the cache page about finding themselves in a wetland, in a cache titled "Wetlands". Not sure what's up with that. Maybe the locals are just overly whiny? As to the frustration of inaccurate coords, I think we all feel your pain. Sometimes coords can be off on purpose, as some goobers thinks it adds to the "challenge" to publish bad coords. Those folks need to be beaten with rotting lemming corpses. Fortunately, bad coords are not usually deliberate. Mostly they are the result of a quirky satellite constellation, GPSr units with poor reception such as iPhones and/or a user who does not know how to get good coords.

 

If you find that this cache owner has issues on other hides, it might be best to add all of his caches to your ignore list.

 

Good hunting!

 

I think people are suprised when they get to the cache location, because there are posted signs that say "Stay On The Trails" and this area is a waterfowl reserve.

[+StarBrand]

It happens. Reading previous logs should have been a big clue.

 

BTW - I would not violate an area's posted signage just to find a cache - if the signs say - "stay on trail" - I'd stick to the trails and no more than a few feet beyond.

[+kpanko]

I think people are surprised when they get to the cache location, because there are posted signs that say "Stay On The Trails" and this area is a waterfowl reserve.

Then that cache should not be off the trail. Write a "needs archive" log and explain the problem. Or write a message to the cache owner and ask them to move it near a trail.

[knowschad]

I spent the day caching with a friend yesterday. We wanted to find some newly hidden caches in a fun wildlife area. The caches could have been awesome, but instead they were ver frustrating!!! This one GC2G4G5 was especially frustrating. We spent about 2 hours wading through muck and tall grass trying to get to the GZ. We finally gave up and went on to the next one which we found more than 60 feet off from the given cords. None of the caches were camoed they were just laying out in the open, but when they are more than 60 feet off in a wooded/grass covered/ect. area it can be very frustrating!!!

 

Ok my rant is over and I'm going out to do more caching.

Sounds like quite the adventure! Some people even pay to go on adventures like that!

 

I see that the Wetlands cache was hidden in October, so it isn't as though our wet summer has raised the water level. The cache owner, or, at least that account, has zero logged finds, and 13 hides... that is very unusual!

[+Chokecherry]

We did have on/off moisture this fall.

 

Anyhow, if there are permission issues or signage indicating you must stay on the path and the cache is considerably off the path I'd put a NA up on the cache. That being said I have laid on paths at least 2 times this year that you couldn't go off of it in order to reach a cache. Happy no one was around to witness either one.

 

I can't really comment on the terrain rating. I've gone through boggy sometimes standing water areas with ratings of 2 for terrain. So that didn't seem that unusual to me. No they are not the most pleasant stuff to go through but it wasn't hugely difficult to go through which is probably how they arrived at the rating.

[+DashleyRVA]

I attempted a 13 stage multi today.

 

Found the first 12 stages and then couldn't find the final.

 

A very tough to log DNF.

[+Team MacKenzie]

I see that the Wetlands cache was hidden in October, so it isn't as though our wet summer has raised the water level. The cache owner, or, at least that account, has zero logged finds, and 13 hides... that is very unusual!

 

Just because things like this amuse me, I took a look at some of the other caches placed by this CO.

 

1 of them has 9 DNF's and not a single find since it was placed a month ago.

 

I also figured out why the 0 find, 13 hides record.....odds are the CO is the Convention & Visitors Bureau....one of the logs in one of the caches thanked them for putting the caches out and the CO name starts with CVB

 

Several of the caches have logs mentioning way off co-ordinates, a couple were only found regularly once good co-ordinates were posted.

[+Catalinagrey]

So I did a little more searching - they are all placed by the local chamber of commerce C of C geocaches

They say there are codes you can collect for a prize. So far I haven't found any codes in any of their geocaches. I thought maybe some kids placed them - looking at the way they were hidden and the handwriting on the note inside one of the caches.

[+Chokecherry]

Maybe they let some school kids or a club do it. Great opportunity for an experienced cacher to offer the chamber to help out. Maybe present some better ideas on how to integrate kids and caches and so on.

[+msrubble]

I'm surprised that none of those that posted DNFs went back with better footwear and attempted it.

 

It's in a friggin' swamp. Possibly in a pond.

[Clan Riffster]

I'm surprised that none of those that posted DNFs went back with better footwear and attempted it.

 

It's in a friggin' swamp. Possibly in a pond.

Sounds like my kinda place!

 

Seriously though, since these appear to have been placed by someone within the organization, I would guess that the caches themselves likely adhere to whatever internal regulations are in play, such as not being off trail. With that in mind, it's quite possible that the hider doesn't quite grasp the whole GPS coordinate thing, and could use a helpful nudge or two. This series of seemingly unfindable caches could be providing a valuable opportunity for the caching community to reach out to the land managers. Once the caches are findable, everybody wins.

[+msrubble]

The coordinates were 3/10 mile off.

Edited November 22, 2010 by msrubble

[Clan Riffster]

Maybe the locals are just overly whiny?

 

Yeah, that must be it.

Yup. There is at least one overly whiny local there.

 

Looking at the many DNF notes on the cache page, most seem pretty upbeat:

"I'll be back..."

"Got to do a lot of hiking on a beautiful day!"

"We'll have to try again next time we're in the area."

"really just the tops of our shoes but that didn't rhyme!" (gotta love the humor!)

"We'll be back to try again someday."

 

And there were a few DNFs expressing honest concern:

"There appears to be something wrong with this cache."

"Something does seem amiss with this cache."

"something is wrong here"

 

Then one of the seekers posted a well worded Needs Archived note:

"To avoid further frustration to future cachers this cache should be archived or fixed."

 

A Reviewer did the right thing, disabling the cache, offering the owner a chance to fix it:

"I'm disabling the listing so others do not continue to look for it until you're able to verify them."

 

So, I would say, overall, that most of the posts on that page are fairly normal.

 

But there was one person doing a lot of whining.

 

I'll let you figure out who that person was.

 

Hopefully the owner takes care of the issue and gets it back online.

Edited November 22, 2010 by Clan Riffster