"Special Tool Required" attribute vs 5* Tertain

[Andronicus]

Check out this feedback thread

 

http://feedback.geocaching.com/forums/75775-geocaching-com/suggestions/1085427-a-special-equipment-needed-attribute-should-be-a

 

A "Special Equipment Needed" attribute should be added

A "Special Equipment Needed" attribute should replace the 5* terrain raiting for special equipment. This would leave the 5* terrain raiting exlusivly for extream terrain.

 

by Andronicus | 12 comments

Status: completed

These sorts of situations can be covered by the "Special Tool Required" attribute.

 

Moun10Bike

Admin

 

Does this constitute a change in the standard practices? I hope so, but somehow doubt it.

[GOF and Bacall]

I can't say if it is a change in the "official policy" but in practice I doubt you'll see much change. People out there in the real world are used to things the way they are. And to be honest it has worked for all this time.

[+dfx]

Does this constitute a change in the standard practices? I hope so, but somehow doubt it.

 

I don't think so. For once, "tool" doesn't equal "equipment". And second, even if you do have an attribute, terrain is still likely to be 5. For example, a scuba cache will always be T5 (and probably D5).

[+CanadianRockies]

And to be honest it has worked for all this time.

I guess it depends on the purpose of terrain ratings.

 

If the terrain rating is meant to indicate how difficult it is to reach Ground Zero, then Groundspeak's current tips for selecting appropriate ratings hasn't worked very well, in my opinion. Paddling 50 yards to reach an island in a calm lake (T5) usually isn't harder than a 15-mile round-trip hike up and down a mountain (T4.5).

 

The special equipment and tool attributes should provide information about the cache. They might be appropriate to consider when selecting a terrain attribute, but they shouldn't be the only reason a T5 rating is assigned (as appears to often be the case).

[GOF and Bacall]

And to be honest it has worked for all this time.

I guess it depends on the purpose of terrain ratings.

 

If the terrain rating is meant to indicate how difficult it is to reach Ground Zero, then Groundspeak's current tips for selecting appropriate ratings hasn't worked very well, in my opinion. Paddling 50 yards to reach an island in a calm lake (T5) usually isn't harder than a 15-mile round-trip hike up and down a mountain (T4.5).

 

The special equipment and tool attributes should provide information about the cache. They might be appropriate to consider when selecting a terrain attribute, but they shouldn't be the only reason a T5 rating is assigned (as appears to often be the case).

 

All in how you look at it. If you know that T5 means equipment required then it isn't much of a leap to realize that T4.5 is gonna most likely be much more physically demanding.

[+CanadianRockies]

And to be honest it has worked for all this time.

I guess it depends on the purpose of terrain ratings.

 

If the terrain rating is meant to indicate how difficult it is to reach Ground Zero, then Groundspeak's current tips for selecting appropriate ratings hasn't worked very well, in my opinion. Paddling 50 yards to reach an island in a calm lake (T5) usually isn't harder than a 15-mile round-trip hike up and down a mountain (T4.5).

 

The special equipment and tool attributes should provide information about the cache. They might be appropriate to consider when selecting a terrain attribute, but they shouldn't be the only reason a T5 rating is assigned (as appears to often be the case).

 

All in how you look at it. If you know that T5 means equipment required then it isn't much of a leap to realize that T4.5 is gonna most likely be much more physically demanding.

Yes, it all depends on how you look at it.

 

To me, it seems silly to assign terrain ratings to represent (among other things) attribute qualities. Why doesn't Groundspeak also suggest that we assign T4.5 to indicate that quads, motorcycles, and ATVs are allowed? Perhaps because we have attributes that already provide this information. Just as we have attributes to indicate whether boats, SCUBA gear, or special tools are required.

[+CanadianRockies]

[E]ven if you do have an attribute, terrain is still likely to be 5. For example, a scuba cache will always be T5 (and probably D5).

If the terrain still is a 5, then I wouldn't have any problem assigning a T5 to a boat-required cache. If it requires some difficult whitewater, for example. But a 50-yard paddle across a calm lake hardly constitutes a T5 in and of itself...at least in my books.

[GOF and Bacall]

And to be honest it has worked for all this time.

I guess it depends on the purpose of terrain ratings.

 

If the terrain rating is meant to indicate how difficult it is to reach Ground Zero, then Groundspeak's current tips for selecting appropriate ratings hasn't worked very well, in my opinion. Paddling 50 yards to reach an island in a calm lake (T5) usually isn't harder than a 15-mile round-trip hike up and down a mountain (T4.5).

 

The special equipment and tool attributes should provide information about the cache. They might be appropriate to consider when selecting a terrain attribute, but they shouldn't be the only reason a T5 rating is assigned (as appears to often be the case).

 

All in how you look at it. If you know that T5 means equipment required then it isn't much of a leap to realize that T4.5 is gonna most likely be much more physically demanding.

Yes, it all depends on how you look at it.

 

To me, it seems silly to assign terrain ratings to represent (among other things) attribute qualities. Why doesn't Groundspeak also suggest that we assign T4.5 to indicate that quads, motorcycles, and ATVs are allowed? Perhaps because we have attributes that already provide this information. Just as we have attributes to indicate whether boats, SCUBA gear, or special tools are required.

 

Don't forget that the system we have been using started out as an expedient when we didn't have all the attributes. I agree that on the face of it it seems odd. However, when you take into account how it came to be it makes more sense. The problem with changing it now is that it is likely to cause even more confusion than leaving it.

[Andronicus]

And to be honest it has worked for all this time.

I guess it depends on the purpose of terrain ratings.

 

If the terrain rating is meant to indicate how difficult it is to reach Ground Zero, then Groundspeak's current tips for selecting appropriate ratings hasn't worked very well, in my opinion. Paddling 50 yards to reach an island in a calm lake (T5) usually isn't harder than a 15-mile round-trip hike up and down a mountain (T4.5).

 

The special equipment and tool attributes should provide information about the cache. They might be appropriate to consider when selecting a terrain attribute, but they shouldn't be the only reason a T5 rating is assigned (as appears to often be the case).

 

All in how you look at it. If you know that T5 means equipment required then it isn't much of a leap to realize that T4.5 is gonna most likely be much more physically demanding.

Yes, it all depends on how you look at it.

 

To me, it seems silly to assign terrain ratings to represent (among other things) attribute qualities. Why doesn't Groundspeak also suggest that we assign T4.5 to indicate that quads, motorcycles, and ATVs are allowed? Perhaps because we have attributes that already provide this information. Just as we have attributes to indicate whether boats, SCUBA gear, or special tools are required.

 

Don't forget that the system we have been using started out as an expedient when we didn't have all the attributes. I agree that on the face of it it seems odd. However, when you take into account how it came to be it makes more sense. The problem with changing it now is that it is likely to cause even more confusion than leaving it.

No more confusion than the ALR debacle.

[+Vodor and Scorsby]

It isnt the TERRAIN rating that is 5 for needing a tool. It is the difficulty rating that increases to 5 !!!

 

Please see Groundspeaks guide for rating DIFFICULTY below. I have selected needing a tool.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Difficulty Rating: 5

* Easy. In plain sight or can be found in a few minutes of searching.

** Average. The average cache hunter would be able to find this in less than 30 minutes of hunt.

*** Challenging. An experienced cache hunter will find this challenging, and it could take up a good portion of an afternoon.

**** Difficult. A real challenge for the experienced cache hunter - may require special skills or knowledge, or in-depth preparation to find. May require multiple days / trips to complete.

***** Extreme. A serious mental or physical challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment to find cache.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

To test this open the "Submit new listing form" and scroll down to the terrain/difficulty section and use the "Try this system" tool

 

 

Hope this clears it up for everyone. Oh and if you need to take equipment with you to do a cache eg a kayak, ladder, climbing gear, radiation suit (yes there are US caches that need them) Then I fully agree with a 5* Difficulty rating. It works well.

 

Wayne (Vodor)

[+Chokecherry]

It isnt the TERRAIN rating that is 5 for needing a tool. It is the difficulty rating that increases to 5 !!!

 

Please see Groundspeaks guide for rating DIFFICULTY below. I have selected needing a tool.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Difficulty Rating: 5

* Easy. In plain sight or can be found in a few minutes of searching.

** Average. The average cache hunter would be able to find this in less than 30 minutes of hunt.

*** Challenging. An experienced cache hunter will find this challenging, and it could take up a good portion of an afternoon.

**** Difficult. A real challenge for the experienced cache hunter - may require special skills or knowledge, or in-depth preparation to find. May require multiple days / trips to complete.

***** Extreme. A serious mental or physical challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, or equipment to find cache.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

To test this open the "Submit new listing form" and scroll down to the terrain/difficulty section and use the "Try this system" tool

 

 

Hope this clears it up for everyone. Oh and if you need to take equipment with you to do a cache eg a kayak, ladder, climbing gear, radiation suit (yes there are US caches that need them) Then I fully agree with a 5* Difficulty rating. It works well.

 

Wayne (Vodor)

 

Terrain ratings include special equipment as well (from the knowledge book):

 

"5 star Requires specialized equipment and knowledge or experience

(boat, 4WD, rock climbing, SCUBA, etc.) or is otherwise extremely difficult."

 

Just because you need special equipment to physically get to the cache does not mean it's a 5 for difficulty. You could have to use climbing gear to get to a cache on a cliff only to find it sitting out in the open. That would be a 5 terrain and 1 difficulty. It would become a 5 difficulty if you needed something like a lock pick to get into it.

[+Dgwphotos]

Special Tool could also include something like a magnetic retriever, or a screw driver, which would certainly not make it a 5 terrain. Better to leave it as it is to avoid the confusion.

[+dfx]

But a 50-yard paddle across a calm lake hardly constitutes a T5 in and of itself...at least in my books.

 

Again, depends on how you look at it. Imagine you load up a PQ of your target area and head out. You do some caches and then go back to your car to find some more to hunt for. One is a T4.5, involving a multi-km hike up a mountain. The other is a 500-meter paddle across a lake and rated T5.

 

The first one you could do. It's gonna be difficult and would require quite a bit of effort, but you could do it if you wanted to. The other one you couldn't, because you have no boat. Makes sense now, doesn't it?

 

I agree that a 50-meter paddle shouldn't be rated T5, because you could swim to it. But anything that can't be done with swimming, wading or other means definitely deserves T5.

[+CanadianRockies]

But a 50-yard paddle across a calm lake hardly constitutes a T5 in and of itself...at least in my books.

 

Again, depends on how you look at it. Imagine you load up a PQ of your target area and head out. You do some caches and then go back to your car to find some more to hunt for. One is a T4.5, involving a multi-km hike up a mountain. The other is a 500-meter paddle across a lake and rated T5.

 

The first one you could do. It's gonna be difficult and would require quite a bit of effort, but you could do it if you wanted to. The other one you couldn't, because you have no boat. Makes sense now, doesn't it?

 

It depends on how you look at it.

 

I've found a dozen or so T5 "boat-required" caches simply by walking across frozen lakes/rivers. Much easier than hiking up those T4.5 mountains. For me, swimming 500 metres across a lake also would be easier than hiking up those T4.5 mountains. And if I really needed a boat, I could borrow or rent one and easily paddle the 500 metres. Still not a T5 in my book.

 

I've found lots of T1.5 caches that would be harder to reach without a car than crossing 500 metres of lake without a boat. I've found lots of T3.5 caches that would be much harder if I didn't own sturdy hiking boots and water bottles. In my opinion, the terrain rating should be based on how difficult it is to reach a cache when you are properly prepared -- not how hard it is when you are unprepared.

[+nittanycopa]

I don't necessarily believe the T5 ratings on many caches that are brought up in pocket queries within a 250 mile radius of where I live.

 

I'd generally agree that most paddle caches aren't really a T5 unless they require skillful kayaking through rough water.

 

I was under the assumption the difficulty level had really nothing to do with the physical demands or obtaining the cache or surrounding geography of GZ, but was rather the difficulty of actually finding the cache, required time (i.e. is it a 6 or more stage cache?), or solving a puzzle associated with the cache - I would think difficulty would be a better place to include the "requires equipment" attribute. Equipment could be a variety of items - scuba, climbing gear, technology, etc. Plus, not all gear is the same "ease" to use. I wouldn't think much of slapping a ladder up against a tree to obtain a cache, but there's considerably more planning, training and expense involved with rigging an actual tree-climbing system to obtain a cache beyond reach of a ladder. I suppose that's the same for any "serious" gear associated with climbing, caving, scuba, or any other demanding challenges. It's not for the inexperienced and it ain't easy!

 

There's many 4.5 terrain caches that easily surpass the difficulty of many "5" terrain caches. But there are a lot of 5 terrain caches that are rightfully so. I have heard many caches we consider difficult in the US would be considered pretty weak in Europe.

 

There are some uh, "independent agencies" that verify high terrain or "extreme" caches: HERE is one.

[+Chokecherry]

I don't care how it's done so long as I know before driving out to find a cache and wasting gas and time that I need a ladder or canoe or whatever to actually physically get to the cache so I can come prepared.