New Cache Type Idea

February 4, 2012

I apologize if this has all ready been discussed. I searched the forums but could find no other threads on this topic.

First, let me start by saying, as an archeologist and teacher, I love Earth Caches. These caches not only take cachers to interesting places but also teach them about the environment around them. However there are many interesting places that are off limits to earth caches due to their lack of an earth science connection. Now I know that there are several earth caches that tie together earth science and history, but the history is only mentioned as an afterthought. What I am proposing is the creation of a new cache category, History Caches.

These caches would be set up in a similar fashion to the current earth caches but focus on showing cachers the history of a given place. These types of caches would also be great because they would allow for the placement of caches in more sensitive locations such as battlefields, national parks, and archeological sites. These locations are currently off limits to geocaches, with the exception of grandfathered virtuals, due to the fact that the governing bodies do not want visitors destroying the history of the site in the name of finding a container. By creating this new type of virtual, cachers would be able to introduce one another to many interesting places they might other wise never learn about.

These caches would also need to go through a similar review process as the one currently utilized for earth caches. A group of qualified, historians, teachers, archeologist, etc, volunteer reviewers would read through and fact check the listing before they are published to make sure all of the information listed for the site is correct and unbiased.

So now that I have said my piece, what do you all think? Good idea, bad idea, suggestions? I for one would be willing to volunteer my time to see this dream made into a reality!

February 4, 2012

I apologize if this has all ready been discussed. I searched the forums but could find no other threads on this topic.

First, let me start by saying, as an archeologist and teacher, I love Earth Caches. These caches not only take cachers to interesting places but also teach them about the environment around them. However there are many interesting places that are off limits to earth caches due to their lack of an earth science connection. Now I know that there are several earth caches that tie together earth science and history, but the history is only mentioned as an afterthought. What I am proposing is the creation of a new cache category, History Caches.

These caches would be set up in a similar fashion to the current earth caches but focus on showing cachers the history of a given place. These types of caches would also be great because they would allow for the placement of caches in more sensitive locations such as battlefields, national parks, and archeological sites. These locations are currently off limits to geocaches, with the exception of grandfathered virtuals, due to the fact that the governing bodies do not want visitors destroying the history of the site in the name of finding a container. By creating this new type of virtual, cachers would be able to introduce one another to many interesting places they might other wise never learn about.

These caches would also need to go through a similar review process as the one currently utilized for earth caches. A group of qualified, historians, teachers, archeologist, etc, volunteer reviewers would read through and fact check the listing before they are published to make sure all of the information listed for the site is correct and unbiased.

So now that I have said my piece, what do you all think? Good idea, bad idea, suggestions? I for one would be willing to volunteer my time to see this dream made into a reality!

I am mixed up on this subject. Earthcaches are too much like school. I do them when they are the only one close by even though I enjoy the enlightenment.

There are some history based multis nearby. I do them as they get convenient.

After all that --- good idea.

February 4, 2012

I love this idea... I have seen it come up before and I don't understand why it hasn't been implemented, other than it would be too much work to do it right. Earthcaches are monitored by someone outside of Groundspeak, aren't they? What organization could we approach to do the monitoring of History caches? I realize not everyone would enjoy them, but then I don't think there is a single cache type that EVERYONE enjoys. Hmmmmmm...

1.9k · February 4, 2012

Think it's a good idea, but it sounds an awful lot like a virtual cache and, sadly, that just isn't going to happen.

5.7k · February 4, 2012

This idea has been presented quite a few times. Most of my listings are history caches, and I have done the research myself. All we need is an attribute, not a new type of geocache because they already exsist. :anibad:

22k · February 4, 2012

If you can hide an actual cache and include a historical attribute, I'm all for it.

Edited February 4, 2012 by BlueDeuce

2k · February 4, 2012

The OP said this.."These caches would also need to go through a similar review process as the one currently utilized for earth caches. A group of qualified, historians, teachers, archeologist, etc, volunteer reviewers would read through and fact check the listing before they are published to make sure all of the information listed for the site is correct and unbiased."

Are the folks who publish the earth caches really making sure its fact checked? I just figured they were making sure it sounded good enough and sounded like it was based on one of the classifications they considered geology to be about. How would they even know what the correct answers the CO have in mind.

Sounds like a lot of work to fact check.

I am all for a new type of "earth" cache. Geology is becoming pretty limited, do not see a reason why history could not be a new kind.

5.7k · February 4, 2012

The OP said this.."These caches would also need to go through a similar review process as the one currently utilized for earth caches. A group of qualified, historians, teachers, archeologist, etc, volunteer reviewers would read through and fact check the listing before they are published to make sure all of the information listed for the site is correct and unbiased."

Exactly why I'm against the idea. EarthCaching is controlled by GSA and it's really a pain to list EC's now that the subjects are more limited to just geology many of us have gave up and quit attempting to list them. Geocaching is a game.

22k · February 4, 2012

The OP said this.."These caches would also need to go through a similar review process as the one currently utilized for earth caches. A group of qualified, historians, teachers, archeologist, etc, volunteer reviewers would read through and fact check the listing before they are published to make sure all of the information listed for the site is correct and unbiased."

Are the folks who publish the earth caches really making sure its fact checked? I just figured they were making sure it sounded good enough and sounded like it was based on one of the classifications they considered geology to be about. How would they even know what the correct answers the CO have in mind.

Sounds like a lot of work to fact check.

I am all for a new type of "earth" cache. Geology is becoming pretty limited, do not see a reason why history could not be a new kind.

Just a question.

Do we need another the cache type that doesn't require a container?

I would prefer expanding on the historical cache finds that would still maintain signing a logbook.

3.9k · February 4, 2012

Sounds educational. I can see lots of highway historical marker submissions.

Edited February 4, 2012 by Moose Mob

22k · February 4, 2012

The OP said this.."These caches would also need to go through a similar review process as the one currently utilized for earth caches. A group of qualified, historians, teachers, archeologist, etc, volunteer reviewers would read through and fact check the listing before they are published to make sure all of the information listed for the site is correct and unbiased."

Are the folks who publish the earth caches really making sure its fact checked? I just figured they were making sure it sounded good enough and sounded like it was based on one of the classifications they considered geology to be about. How would they even know what the correct answers the CO have in mind.

Sounds like a lot of work to fact check.

I am all for a new type of "earth" cache. Geology is becoming pretty limited, do not see a reason why history could not be a new kind.

Just a question.

Do we need another the cache type that doesn't require a container?

I would prefer expanding on the historical cache finds that would still maintain signing a logbook.

I would love to see something like this if they were to be short and sweet and educational, but I am also concerned that they would turn into the excessively lengthy pages that won't fit on a GPS.

That's fine but even listing historical caches is limited. Over-saturation seems to me to be the next step to justify clarification. I'm not sure how to find Historical much less showing that it needs improvement.

Edited February 4, 2012 by BlueDeuce

8k · February 4, 2012

I apologize if this has all ready been discussed. I searched the forums but could find no other threads on this topic.

apology accepted

In fact this has been discussed many times - usually in connection with bring back virtuals.

There is no doubt that there is a fairly good sized segment of the geocaching community who will say they like virtuals. Some like the ability to have caches at locations where a physical cache cannot be hidden. Others like the fact that given the wow requirement that virtuals be novel, of interest to other players, and have a special historic, community or geocaching quality that sets it apart from everyday subjects; virtuals were in interesting and often educational places. Seeing that EarthCaches are still published the suggestion has been made that History caches could be created along the same lines.

EarthCaches exist because the Geological Society of America established the EarthCache.org program and got Groundspeak to list EarthCaches on Geocaching.com. For all intents and purposes, EarthCaches are entirely separate from other geocaches, with guidelines and review responsibility managed by EarthCache.org. Groundspeak merely provides a listing service for these caches.

So it is possible that if some national or international historic society proposed a similar History Cache program, Groundspeak may agree to it.

However, there are somethings that have changed since EarthCaches were created.

Virtual caches are no longer published and Groundspeak seems to be firm in their decision to limit new geocaches to being physical cache containers. The new Challenges have been provided to allow a way to bring people to an area for some challenge other than finding a cache. The soon to be released Discover Challenges will provide a mechanism that would work well for visiting an historic location and perform some educational task such as finding the answers to some questions from interpretive signs or other source.

In addition, Groundspeak also provides the Waymarking.com website. Waymarking has several history related categories. If you want to share an historic site there are many options in Waymarking. I suspect that if an outside organization were were propose something like History Caches today, they would be directed to Waymarking.com.

That said, there are geocachers who are interested in history. Many physical caches are hidden at historic sites, or are offset caches that use information you find a the historic site to compute the coordinates of the final cache. It would be nice if there were an attribute that cache owners could use to identify these caches. Then premium members, at least, could search for caches with the History attribute.

5.7k · February 4, 2012

Sounds educational. I can see lots of highway historical marker submissions.

That's one of the draw backs. As a waymarker I have listed and found quite a few. The problem I have with historical listings being reviewed by a group similar to GSA with the EarthCache listings is local history. I can write up a historical listing about the local history of my area that educated reviewers have no source of information on, so how would they review my listings accurately? There is lot's of history that are worthy, but not published in books or listed on the internet to referance. Just give us an attribute.

2.6k · February 4, 2012

I love Earthcaches. I do them anytime I can. I also have one listed and sumitted another last night. I have at least 5 more in mind. I sure I'll have many more than that.

Also I have a BA in history and I'm working on my masters. I love history based caches and have 3 series in the works that all highlight the history of the area. However, as a cacher and a historian I would not like to see this type of caches.

I think there should be a container at the cache site or multi. Also I would hate to see alot of spew thrown around just to get another hide type on their stats.

More caches that hilight history. YES!

A new cache type for history. NO

February 4, 2012

More caches that hilight history. YES!

A new cache type for history. NO

5.7k · February 4, 2012

I love Earthcaches. I do them anytime I can. I also have one listed and sumitted another last night. I have at least 5 more in mind. I sure I'll have many more than that.

Also I have a BA in history and I'm working on my masters. I love history based caches and have 3 series in the works that all highlight the history of the area. However, as a cacher and a historian I would not like to see this type of caches.

I think there should be a container at the cache site or multi. Also I would hate to see alot of spew thrown around just to get another hide type on their stats.

More caches that hilight history. YES!

A new cache type for history. NO

Totem Clan. I would like to invite you to view my profile and look at my geocaches. You will see that they are indeed historical caches that highlight history and are placed in the location where these historical events have unfolded. I think that we should lobby for a new attribute, and not a new cache type.

Take a look at my Waymarks also, I'm quite proud of my listings. :anibad:

2.6k · February 4, 2012

Totem Clan. I would like to invite you to view my profile and look at my geocaches. You will see that they are indeed historical caches that highlight history and are placed in the location where these historical events have unfolded. I think that we should lobby for a new attribute, and not a new cache type.
Take a look at my Waymarks also, I'm quite proud of my listings.

I think the attribute would be a great thing. I would use it for my cache and to sort caches to find.

Maybe we should.

5.7k · February 4, 2012

Totem Clan. I would like to invite you to view my profile and look at my geocaches. You will see that they are indeed historical caches that highlight history and are placed in the location where these historical events have unfolded. I think that we should lobby for a new attribute, and not a new cache type.
Take a look at my Waymarks also, I'm quite proud of my listings.

I think the attribute would be a great thing. I would use it for my cache and to sort caches to find.

Maybe we should.

Yes, we can use the attribute to run PQ's with. This is a long standing request for that attribute, and truthfully it thought it would be implemented already. I belive that it soon will be, so we should lobby just a little harder. I think it is a very good idea and that Groundspeak will support it. They talk about the benefits of being a PM, and I could use that attribute for my listings and PQ's. Looks like a win, win to me.

8k · February 4, 2012

This is a long standing request for that attribute, and truthfully it thought it would be implemented already. I belive that it soon will be, so we should lobby just a little harder. I think it is a very good idea and that Groundspeak will support it. They talk about the benefits of being a PM, and I could use that attribute for my listings and PQ's. Looks like a win, win to me.

The one issue with a history attribute that it will lead to request for other attributes. Why not a cemetery attribute, or a fast food attribute. Cache are placed in many different kinds of place for many different reasons.

One can always create a bookmark list for whatever class of cache they like and add caches to this list as they discover them. Thus you might find bookmark lists for caches in cemeteries or caches hidden at fast food joints or anything else you can think of.

Perhaps a case can be made for history as many cachers seem to have an interest in visiting these locations. Unlike bookmark list, attributes are controlled by the cache owner. There will no doubt be cache owners who hide caches at historic spot who won't use the attributes and others who will put the attribute on caches that have little historic value. Whether or not an attribute will be useful is doubtful.

Finally, whenever the topic come up I always come back to the example of the following two caches:

This cache has a nice write up about the history of the location.

This cache says it was placed to help increase the cache density in the area.

These two cache are essential the same LPC in the same location with only difference being the write up. I'd love to see the history attribute to tell them apart <_<

5.7k · February 5, 2012

This is a long standing request for that attribute, and truthfully it thought it would be implemented already. I belive that it soon will be, so we should lobby just a little harder. I think it is a very good idea and that Groundspeak will support it. They talk about the benefits of being a PM, and I could use that attribute for my listings and PQ's. Looks like a win, win to me.

The one issue with a history attribute that it will lead to request for other attributes. Why not a cemetery attribute, or a fast food attribute. Cache are placed in many different kinds of place for many different reasons.

One can always create a bookmark list for whatever class of cache they like and add caches to this list as they discover them. Thus you might find bookmark lists for caches in cemeteries or caches hidden at fast food joints or anything else you can think of.

Perhaps a case can be made for history as many cachers seem to have an interest in visiting these locations. Unlike bookmark list, attributes are controlled by the cache owner. There will no doubt be cache owners who hide caches at historic spot who won't use the attributes and others who will put the attribute on caches that have little historic value. Whether or not an attribute will be useful is doubtful.

Finally, whenever the topic come up I always come back to the example of the following two caches:

This cache has a nice write up about the history of the location.

This cache says it was placed to help increase the cache density in the area.

These two cache are essential the same LPC in the same location with only difference being the write up. I'd love to see the history attribute to tell them apart

I'm all for the Cemetery attribute also, but I did overlook the fact that attributes can be abused. You know, like the watch for livestock in urban mall parking lots and boat required in the desert kind of stuff.

We already have a attribute for food.

6k · February 5, 2012

it is still a virtual and should be posted in Waymarking.

2.4k · February 5, 2012

A local cacher has quite a few history caches - the title makes it plain. Name of town + History. They are very informative. We have found a few caches near historical markers, and come home to expand our knowledge on more than one occasion.

5.7k · February 5, 2012

it is still a virtual and should be posted in Waymarking.

You lost me. What are you referring to? :unsure:

February 7, 2012

OK. First off, thanks for all the feedback. As for those who do not like the idea simply because it seems like work, like earthcaches, all I can say is that no one is forcing you to find every cache. If you do not like it simply skip the cache.

As for those who think this would cause a bunch of caches near historic markers, you have missed the point. These would be caches that would be placed in places were traditional caches with a physical container are not allowed, such as battlefields, national parks, and archeological sites. If people want to place a cache near a marker that is not on land that has rules against physical caches then they can currently do so without the need of a special cache.

Now for the fact checking questions. Earth caches are indeed fact checked by the reviewers, that is why they have a different set of reviewers. When you submit a new earth cache you are required to submit a list of sources as well as the answers to your questions. As for local history, this is not as difficult a thing to check out as one might think. You would be required to submit a list of sources. The reviewer could check those as well as online information. You would be surprised what one can find out about local history if you consult the proper academic journals on sites like jstor.org. In addition you would also have to submit the answers you are expecting to receive from other cachers. Most people who know anything about history can tell the difference between true history and BS, lol. A review board would not have to necessarily be comprised of members of one particular organization. The Frog could approve, qualified reviewers on a case by case basis.

Finally as to the fact that these would be like virtuals, I point you to earth caches. These would be just like earth caches which do not have physical containers with log books. To those who suggest just going to waymaking, I ask, why not just move earth caches there too? All I ask is a way to introduce fellow cachers to some history. I do not know about other cachers, but I do not bother with the waymaking site or most of the challenges for that matter.

5.7k · February 7, 2012

I have listed Challanges, EarthCaches, and Waymarks. I also once had a historical caches bookmark. I think that I should make that book mark public again and only use my own listings in it. That may be the best option for how I want to present my listings. :unsure: Thanks to the OP for starting this thread.

6.5k · February 7, 2012

I'm in favor of an attribute rather than an additional cache type.

I own several caches that offer some local history to anyone who wants to bother reading the page. If you want to just find the cache-do just that.

I enjoy doing both myself.

February 8, 2012

I'm in favor of an attribute rather than an additional cache type.

I own several caches that offer some local history to anyone who wants to bother reading the page. If you want to just find the cache-do just that.

I enjoy doing both myself.

The reason I am asking for a new cache type is for areas where a traditional cache is not allowed. This idea is not for local history areas where a regular cache can be placed. This is for those areas where we are not allowed to hide an actual cache because the land is protected. In these areas an attribute would do nothing to help because a physical cache is outlawed.

5.7k · February 8, 2012

You want a cache listing without a physical cache. The basic rule is that this is a virtual cache, and new virtual caches have not been allowed for over five years now.

The exception to this is earth caches, which the Geological Society of America spearheaded and still basically runs in a partnership with Groundspeak.

I'm not against your idea, I think it's good. But this isn't going to happen because you or I would support it. It might happen if a larger historical organization worked with Groundspeak. If you want it to happen, find a group of historians that would back it, contact Groundspeak, and make the pitch.

3k · February 9, 2012

I've love HistoriCaches to complement Earthcaches. But to make that happen I think we need a historical group to get onboard as a Groundspeak partner the way the Geological Society Of America is a partner in Earthcaches and handles reviewing them for content rather than the regular Groundspeak Reviewers.

3.7k · February 9, 2012

Love the idea! Like others have said, it would take a large collaborative effort to get off the ground. I"m all for it!

February 9, 2012

it is still a virtual and should be posted in Waymarking.

I agree, however, i think the whole concept of Waymarking should be tossed and virtuals brought back.

9k · February 9, 2012

It is a neat idea, but I don't see it happening as long as virtual-style caches other than Earthcaches are no longer allowed.

I also like the idea of perhaps an "Educational" attribute, for people who want to find caches (of any type) that actually provide interesting or educational information about a location... that would address most of the above, except for the where-no-physical-container-is-allowed thing. Alas, at this point EC's are still the only resolution for that.

Make it a geological/historical mix EC and you're set

February 16, 2012

Ok... Here's my two cents. Why don't we form a group, get together and come up with a few ideas for who might help us sponsor this. Maybe the History channel? Or some sort of conservancy? I love the idea, and really believe it just needs some elbow grease. Who's with me? We can do some sort of facebook group to keep things coordinated.

New Cache Type Idea

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation