Jump to content

Rejuvenate the Geocache Maps with NEW Caches Galore!


Recommended Posts

Rejuvenate the Geocache Maps with NEW Caches Galore!

 

I have noticed a few problems these days with the Geocaches in my (NE Ohio, USA) or any given area. Infact I am willing to Bet, this scenerio is the SAME all over the World. When Geocaching first started, it was great, now, everytime you check your map, It is the same ol' same ol'. Caches that have been sitting out for 3+ years, some way longer. Everyone who Caches in the area have already hit them, except for a few passer by vacationers or newbies. so they sit and sit. Some Geocachers have not the gas to venture more than 50 miles to cache or want to stay close by, but to have stuff to do with the kids, on a weekend. Plus allot of the Caches that have been out there, are empty or close it, maybe a few moldy stickers, probably no pen, just a disappointment. I have been attempting to Revitalize my area, by making an example, and trying get other CO's enthused, to archive any cache older than 2 years, and put out NEW ones. Rejuvenate the Area, and raise the bar and add more than 2-3 swag, really FILL it. Make this an exceptional year for Geocaching, bring back the FUN! esp since so many folks cannot afford vacations this year and get rid of all to Old Stagnate Caches just sitting and rotting and rusting. SO far, the response from other Cachers, in NEO have not been very enthusiastic, saddly. I think CO's have become lazy, and unmotivated...not only towards putting new ones out, replacing the old, but even with maintenance. I couldn't believe when I reported a cache was empty of swag and no pen, this year the CO commented, "gee there was stuff in there when I put it out" goes to show you my case in point. We need to not only Archive those old not longer frequently hit caches an put out new exciting ones, and generously fill them and make a extra effort to keep on top of them. And I am not just talking the easy Micro dash and cache. I mean fun ones for kids with lots of swag. Time to Rejuvenate the Geocaching Maps with Re-Populate it with hundreds NEW Caches in EVERY AREA around the world...get rid of the OLD! ..what do you say? Let's go for it make 2012 a Super Caching Year.

Link to comment

In my area, though I cached it out, I would much rather see a small number of good quality caches that bring somewhere worth seeing than 100's of arbitrary caches. I like the older caches as well because it's fun to see the new people finding them.

 

I agree. I don't want to see caches placed for the sake of placing a cache. Many of the oldest caches around here are also the best ones around. I'd hate to see an old ammo box placed near a scenic waterfall replaced with a hide a key in the guardrail 500 feet away.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I have been attempting to Revitalize my area, by making an example, and trying get other CO's enthused, to archive any cache older than 2 years, and put out NEW ones.

Like the others said, some of the best caches out there were hidden as long as 10 years ago. The general trend over the past few years has been that the overall size and quality of caches has gone down. Why would we want an old, fun, large cache to be archived only to be replaced with what will likely be a micro on a lamp post?

 

If you want to revitalize your area, hide a bunch of fun, well-stocked caches.

Link to comment

I'm sympathetic with the idea of adding something to the more bland side of things... it's not that much of a problem here though.

We simply don't have that many caches yet or a shortage of great places to hide them.

 

That said, there are some everywhere that suffer from abandonment, lack of maintenance and so forth. THOSE would be good targets for 'renewal' projects. Either get them maintained or archived. Others are simply older caches that have become classics and need some local help to stay available, with the cooperation of the CO's. I do maintenance for a couple of those near here, simply because I wish to keep them more or less the same as they were always. People still find them, suffer through them (a bit of anguish is fun) and mostly enjoy the experience. Swag doesn't enter in to it because they are micros, but the kids often find better than the adults and enjoy the locations as breaks on the way to elsewhere or home.

 

Point is there are many ways to raise the bar without annoying people or laying waste to established caches for no reason.

 

I'm a bit annoyed that one cacher is archiving some of his puzzles that I haven't had the opportunity to find yet though I solved them way back. (That travel cost thing again) However in retrospect, I did have the fun of solving them, and since the replacements will be more fun puzzles, I simply have to be quicker to seek them in the field, I guess! I too would be really ticked if they were replaced by film cans as traditionals.

 

Doug 7rxc

Link to comment

When Geocaching first started, it was great, now, everytime you check your map, It is the same ol' same ol'. Caches that have been sitting out for 3+ years, some way longer. Everyone who Caches in the area have already hit them, except for a few passer by vacationers or newbies. so they sit and sit. Some Geocachers have not the gas to venture more than 50 miles to cache or want to stay close by, but to have stuff to do with the kids, on a weekend.

There are over 5,000 caches within 50 miles of Wadsworth, Ohio. During the past four years, you've found 82 caches. I don't think you have to worry about hitting them all.

 

If you want to find better quality caches, then you might want to search for those with numerous "favorite points" and avoid those with a "needs maintenance" attribute.

Link to comment

I live in one of the most heavily saturated areas in the country. Every week, I still get an email listing dozens of new caches within 50 miles of home. And as far as I can tell, there isn't any significant churning (archiving caches just to hide a new one in the same area).

 

This may come as a shock to you, but some of us value a rarely visited old cache more than a new one crammed full of trade items. And some of us don't think a cache owner should be obligated to restock the trade items in a cache as part of normal maintenance either.

Link to comment

I live in one of the most heavily saturated areas in the country. Every week, I still get an email listing dozens of new caches within 50 miles of home. And as far as I can tell, there isn't any significant churning (archiving caches just to hide a new one in the same area).

 

This may come as a shock to you, but some of us value a rarely visited old cache more than a new one crammed full of trade items. And some of us don't think a cache owner should be obligated to restock the trade items in a cache as part of normal maintenance either.

+1

 

The only thing I want to see in a cache is a dry logbook with room to sign. Travelers are a plus.

 

Some of my caches out on the tree farms only get a couple visits a year. That is fine with me and the folks that visit them seem to enjoy them. I see no need to archive them and replace them with a film can.

Link to comment

While I agree with part of your concerns about COs maintaining caches so they are clean and in good condition, swag and a pen are nice but not necessary.

 

I see nothing wrong with old caches. If anything, old caches often indicate the location was well chosen and the container durable - or at least a CO that performs maintenance. Such caches often have some history to them in the physical and/or online logbook.

 

I don't think the "all the locals have found all the local caches" is a serious issue either. A quick PQ indicates there are over 500 caches within 10 miles of my home coords and over 1000 within 15 miles. And that's living about 5 miles from the ocean so when caching I can only really travel in 3 of the 4 possible directions.

 

I see you've only found 82 caches. If there are only 82 caches within 50 miles of your home then surely there are plenty more places to hide new ones without archiving any.

Edited by Joshism
Link to comment

.get rid of the OLD! ..what do you say?

Since all but two of my 29 active caches are more than two years old, "what I say" is that you've qualified for "most offensive post of the month." My old caches were placed at special locations I wanted to share with other geocachers. Regardless of swag content or damp logs, visitors are taken to a cool spot. I own no caches located in a parking lot or otherwise within sight of a business.

 

I will stack up my tired old caches against any random selection of 29 new caches any day of the week. At least half of those 29 new caches will not take me to any interesting place. They will take me to a parking lot, or to a random spot chosen principally because it's 529 feet from the next cache.

 

I will say the same thing of the pioneers who hid the early caches in your area, many of whom I am privileged to count as friends.

Link to comment

...My old caches were placed at special locations I wanted to share with other geocachers.

<snip>

I will stack up my tired old caches against any random selection of 29 new caches any day of the week. At least half of those 29 new caches will not take me to any interesting place. They will take me to a parking lot, or to a random spot chosen principally because it's 529 feet from the next cache.

 

 

That about sums it up for me.

 

Except to say that I will archive my old cache(s) when that location becomes not worth visiting, and not so I can put out another cache for the same people who found the first one to come back and visit again just for another smilie. (Not that many of them would even consider that)

Link to comment

I don't see the point in archiving caches "just because".

 

This might work for you and the caches you've hidden (and archived), but it doesn't necessarily hold true for all caches or all cache owners or all areas in the world.

 

And as someone already mentioned, I am not interested in swag, as a cache finder or owner. I don't maintain my caches just to keep children amused.

 

Not everyone places caches for kids, thank goodness. Some of us just want to find a clean, dry container with a dry logbook to sign.

 

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

I have been attempting to Revitalize my area, by making an example, and trying get other CO's enthused, to archive any cache older than 2 years, and put out NEW ones.

 

Translation: trying to get everyone to think the same as you do.

 

SO far, the response from other Cachers, in NEO have not been very enthusiastic, saddly.

 

That's understandable. Your idea only merits people who want to pump their find counts by finding the same location over and over and over again.

 

I think CO's have become lazy, and unmotivated...not only towards putting new ones out, replacing the old, but even with maintenance.

 

Of course, this attitude might also be part of the problem. :rolleyes:

 

It's hardly a good way to make an entrance to a group of folks you don't know.

 

I couldn't believe when I reported a cache was empty of swag and no pen

 

Hardly something to get your knickers in a knot about, is it?

 

We need to not only Archive those old not longer frequently hit caches an put out new exciting ones

 

A.) People like finding the older, less frequented caches. Who are you to say those caches should be archived?

 

B.) How do you know a new cache will be "exciting"? What's stopping the newer cache from being emptied of swag in a short time? What's swag got to do with a cache being properly maintained? (Nothing.)

 

When Geocaching first started

 

You've been an occasional cache finder/hider for only 4 years + / - . How do you know what caching was like when it first started?

 

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

:drama:

:mmraspberry:

The responses are predictable. The suggestion comes in from someone who likely only caches within a small distance from home - perhaps the cost of gasoline or lack of transportation limits their caching area. They also are likely more interested in urban style hides then getting out on the trail - perhaps for the same reasons then stay close to home.

 

The truth is for such people once you find all the caches in your area then you only get to see new caches rarely. For many who cache this way, it makes perfect sense to archive caches after a couple years. By then, all the locals have had a chance to find them and new cache provide an opportunity to keep playing the game. In addition, those caches placed by the one weekend wonders - those who try geocaching, hide some caches, and then move on to something else - are by this time in need of some maintenance. Rather than trying to keep them going, let them get archived so new players have their opportunity to hide caches.

 

On the other side you have people are able to travel much farther to find caches. They may also include those who geocache less frequently. For these people there in never a shortage of caches to find. This group is also more likely to use the mantra "quality over quantity" and even see the placement of large numbers of urban hides that the other group favors as likely to be a lower quality cache.

 

Rather than looking a the OP as a call to archive all old caches, I prefer to read is as more limited request. For those who are local, urban, cachers who have hidden caches mainly to provide caches for others like you to find; consider archiving your caches after a year or two to allow for new caches to be placed. Furthermore, if you see cache like this that no longer have active users, rather than maintaining them, consider posting a need archive so they can be archived and the area opened for new caches. On the other hand if you have hidden a hide to bring visitors to a special place or perhaps where there is something special about the cache that would not work in a different place, there is no reason to feel the OP was address at your cache.

 

Of course you have the issue of someone who may have hidden a large number of hides, monopolizing an area, who will insist that all of their hides are special and should not be archived. On top of these add so-called historic caches like the A.P.E. caches or Mingo an you start to realize that keeping a cache around just because it is old, even if it is in a cool location, isn't always the best thing. If the purpose is to bring someone to neat spot, a new cache in the spot can work just as well. And it has the advantage that if someone had found the original cache they now have an excuse to go back and visit the area again.

 

.get rid of the OLD! ..what do you say?

Since all but two of my 29 active caches are more than two years old, "what I say" is that you've qualified for "most offensive post of the month." My old caches were placed at special locations I wanted to share with other geocachers. Regardless of swag content or damp logs, visitors are taken to a cool spot. I own no caches located in a parking lot or otherwise within sight of a business.

 

I will stack up my tired old caches against any random selection of 29 new caches any day of the week. At least half of those 29 new caches will not take me to any interesting place. They will take me to a parking lot, or to a random spot chosen principally because it's 529 feet from the next cache.

 

I will say the same thing of the pioneers who hid the early caches in your area, many of whom I am privileged to count as friends.

"Wow".
Link to comment

Rather than looking a the OP as a call to archive all old caches, I prefer to read is as more limited request.

 

Wow, that's not even close to what the OP stated.

 

archive any cache older than 2 years

 

We need to not only Archive those old not longer frequently hit caches an put out new exciting ones

 

Time to Rejuvenate the Geocaching Maps with Re-Populate it with hundreds NEW Caches in EVERY AREA around the world...get rid of the OLD!

 

 

B.

Link to comment

Rather than looking a the OP as a call to archive all old caches, I prefer to read is as more limited request.

 

Wow, that's not even close to what the OP stated.

 

archive any cache older than 2 years

 

We need to not only Archive those old not longer frequently hit caches an put out new exciting ones

 

Time to Rejuvenate the Geocaching Maps with Re-Populate it with hundreds NEW Caches in EVERY AREA around the world...get rid of the OLD!

 

 

B.

 

Ya Toz, while what you said makes sense, it's a bit of a stretch to reach that conclusion from the OP, at least from this spot in the valley.

 

K, back to my snacks :omnomnom:

Link to comment

I was looking at some of my listings recently. I got to thinking that some of them could stand to be archived and replaced with something new. A change in style of hide and container. Something to give the local cachers a chance to return to an area and find a new cache. A new experience in an old location. Then again, some of them are special to me and some to others who have found them.

 

Some of the locations that I archive I will leave open for other cachers to use their creative muse. Others I will lace something myself. Those that I replace myself are the ones where I don't want to see a well loved cache replaced with a micro on a guardrail or some such.

 

So yes, I think most cache sites can stand an occasional renewal. But that doesn't mean they all need to be archived on some schedule. Just take some time to look at your caches and think about which ones could be considered classics and which ones you could replace and give your fellow cachers something new and exciting to find and enjoy.

Link to comment

The suggestion comes in from someone who likely only caches within a small distance from home - perhaps the cost of gasoline or lack of transportation limits their caching area. They also are likely more interested in urban style hides then getting out on the trail - perhaps for the same reasons then stay close to home.

Within 25 miles of a cache hidden earlier this month by the OP, there have been exactly 580 caches hidden within the past twelve months that remain active today. Lower the radius from 25 miles to 10 miles and there are 98 active caches less than a year old - eclipsing the OP's find count since the OP started geocaching.

 

Sorry to sprinkle facts on your tl;dr.

Edited by The Leprechauns
Link to comment

I definitely like the idea of adding new caches to an area, because it gives us all another reason to visit. But I definitely do not like the idea of archiving older caches simply because they are older caches. I just started diving into Geocaching a few months ago, so if we were to archive older caches, I'd be missing out on some great finds. I say add to the flavor of your local caching scene: create some memorable, fun, and interesting caches that play off of the surrounding area. Surely there are some historical hides that you can do. =)

Link to comment
I have been attempting to Revitalize my area, by making an example, and trying get other CO's enthused, to archive any cache older than 2 years, and put out NEW ones.

 

No thanks. If there is a cache there I've already seen that location and don't particularily feel the need to visit it again and again just so I can collect more smileys. I'd much rather see cachers put out new caches in new locations and not archive old ones just so I can go back to where I've already been.

 

If an area is spectacular I'll go back whether there is a cache or not. If it isn't good enough to revisit with no cache, then it likely doesn't need a new cache.

Link to comment

I definitely like the idea of adding new caches to an area, because it gives us all another reason to visit. But I definitely do not like the idea of archiving older caches simply because they are older caches. I just started diving into Geocaching a few months ago, so if we were to archive older caches, I'd be missing out on some great finds. I say add to the flavor of your local caching scene: create some memorable, fun, and interesting caches that play off of the surrounding area. Surely there are some historical hides that you can do. =)

 

Never fear--there have been quite a few memorable, fun and interesting caches that play off the surrounding area in the last year or two. We've got some awesome new puzzles and multis, there are newer folks in this neck of the woods who are making some cool containers, and quite a few new EarthCaches have sprung up. Now I admit, a few of them are mine (not the cool containers, not my forte), but I'm not trying to brag or look for a pat on the back--I'm only one semi-new cacher--lots of others who have been caching less than 2 years like me have also added to the variety around here. We are also blessed with old-time cachers who make very fun and imaginative new hides, and frankly I can't imagine a friendlier community than the cachers around here who welcome all newbies with open arms. It might be true that we don't have all that many ammo cans in the woods filled with swag--but part of the problem is that in Portage County, at least, caches have to be within 10 feet of the trail. The OP has fewer than 20 finds since I started caching, and none of them are mine. I do appreciate the OP's--I have found four of theirs, and will probably go after another today or tomorrow. I appreciate caches with lots of swag--but I love other kinds of caching, too.

Link to comment

Rejuvenate the Geocache Maps with NEW Caches Galore

I have noticed a few problems these days with the Geocaches in my (NE Ohio, USA) or any given area. Infact I am willing to Bet, this scenerio is the SAME all over the World.

 

I'm not sure what leads you to this conclusion. From what I've seen from finding caches in 13 different countries and 23 different U.S. states there is a lot of diversity in the geocaching environments in different areas. Perhaps you might find some areas that are similar to NE Ohio in other U.S. States, some areas in Europe and perhaps some of the bigger cities in Australia, but I doubt you'll find anything similar in Africa, Asia, South America, or Antarctica.

Link to comment

When maintenance becomes a chore - visiting the same place 2-3 times a year to keep up the quality of the cache gets difficult or tiresome, then I tell myself it's time to archive our cache, even if it's a nice spot and we're getting good feedback. For me, 3-5 years is usually the breaking point. Each time we've archived a cache I've been pleasantly surprised with the hides that have taken their place. In each case the replacement has been a good quality swag size container in a good hiding spot.

 

Of course, then we end up in the position of new hiders and have trouble finding a nice spot to hide a cache because all the good spots are taken. This Spring I found 2 promising spots but they were both a little too close to old caches - one of which seriously needs to be archived (rock pile, very poor coordinates, frustrated online comments), but the owner is active. The last time I posted an NA on an active owner he got really angry, threw a hissy fit and archived all his caches without retrieving them.

 

I think Toz has some good points, especially:

 

Rather than looking a the OP as a call to archive all old caches, I prefer to read is as more limited request. For those who are local, urban, cachers who have hidden caches mainly to provide caches for others like you to find; consider archiving your caches after a year or two to allow for new caches to be placed. Furthermore, if you see cache like this that no longer have active users, rather than maintaining them, consider posting a need archive so they can be archived and the area opened for new caches. On the other hand if you have hidden a hide to bring visitors to a special place or perhaps where there is something special about the cache that would not work in a different place, there is no reason to feel the OP was address at your cache.

 

Of course you have the issue of someone who may have hidden a large number of hides, monopolizing an area, who will insist that all of their hides are special and should not be archived. On top of these add so-called historic caches like the A.P.E. caches or Mingo an you start to realize that keeping a cache around just because it is old, even if it is in a cool location, isn't always the best thing. If the purpose is to bring someone to neat spot, a new cache in the spot can work just as well. And it has the advantage that if someone had found the original cache they now have an excuse to go back and visit the area again.

Link to comment

Why archive a perfectly good cache just because it's old?

Say they get archived, and new ones are placed. Then what? You find them again and after a while, run out of caches to find again?

 

I don't know, maybe I'm missing the point, but I'd be quite happy if my caches lived to be a few years old, and I certainly wouldn't archive it because the locals had already found it and is rendering the 0.1 miles surrounding it as a no-new-cache zone.

 

Personally, I'd try to get more people into the game. More caches will be placed soon enough. :ph34r:

Link to comment

The suggestion comes in from someone who likely only caches within a small distance from home - perhaps the cost of gasoline or lack of transportation limits their caching area. They also are likely more interested in urban style hides then getting out on the trail - perhaps for the same reasons then stay close to home.

Within 25 miles of a cache hidden earlier this month by the OP, there have been exactly 580 caches hidden within the past twelve months that remain active today. Lower the radius from 25 miles to 10 miles and there are 98 active caches less than a year old - eclipsing the OP's find count since the OP started geocaching.

 

Sorry to sprinkle facts on your tl;dr.

 

Just out of curiosity how many of those are LPCs? Scenic dumpster vistas? Guardrails in trash heaps?

Link to comment

There could be a lot of PMO caches around that OP can't see. :ph34r:

There are 806 caches within 15 miles of zip code 44281 (Wadsworth, Ohio).

 

734 of those 806 caches (91%) are available to everyone.

 

296 of those 734 caches are small, regular, or large.

 

257 of those 296 caches do not need maintenance.

 

31 of those 257 caches have at least 3 favorite points.

 

That's 12 more caches than the OP has found during the past 2.5 years.

Link to comment

Clearing out your own home area is the motivation to get on yer horse and go some fun and exciting place where there are caches you haven't seen.

 

While there are a smattering of new caches within five miles of my lair, I regularly venture out to other areas. Quite rewarding, especially as how wildflowers are coming in.

Link to comment

The suggestion comes in from someone who likely only caches within a small distance from home - perhaps the cost of gasoline or lack of transportation limits their caching area. They also are likely more interested in urban style hides then getting out on the trail - perhaps for the same reasons then stay close to home.

Within 25 miles of a cache hidden earlier this month by the OP, there have been exactly 580 caches hidden within the past twelve months that remain active today. Lower the radius from 25 miles to 10 miles and there are 98 active caches less than a year old - eclipsing the OP's find count since the OP started geocaching.

 

Sorry to sprinkle facts on your tl;dr.

 

I have cached in the small towns about 6-10 miles west of her 2nd newest hide, although no where near the newest and 3rd newest. You have quite a placing range there, Luv-me-Jeep. So yeah, limited experience in your area, but I have looked at the maps there before, and I just have again. Not too shabby. And to be totally honest, you have well under 100 finds in 4 years? I really am somewhat confused as to why you feel this way.

Link to comment

I live in one of the most heavily saturated areas in the country. Every week, I still get an email listing dozens of new caches within 50 miles of home. And as far as I can tell, there isn't any significant churning (archiving caches just to hide a new one in the same area).

 

This may come as a shock to you, but some of us value a rarely visited old cache more than a new one crammed full of trade items. And some of us don't think a cache owner should be obligated to restock the trade items in a cache as part of normal maintenance either.

+1

 

The only thing I want to see in a cache is a dry logbook with room to sign. Travelers are a plus.

 

Some of my caches out on the tree farms only get a couple visits a year. That is fine with me and the folks that visit them seem to enjoy them. I see no need to archive them and replace them with a film can.

 

Reiviewers tend to snarl and bare their fangs at this, anyway. They'd want to know just what in thunder you are doing archiving a cache and then putting a brand new one smack dab on top of where old one was -- they're volunteers, after all, their own time is precious, they'd much rather not be playing musical caches with you.

Link to comment
Reiviewers tend to snarl and bare their fangs at this, anyway. They'd want to know just what in thunder you are doing archiving a cache and then putting a brand new one smack dab on top of where old one was -- they're volunteers, after all, their own time is precious, they'd much rather not be playing musical caches with you.

Well, the obvious solution to all this is to allow people to go back and revisit a cache they last logged 3 years ago and log another "Found it", provided they drop off some good swag :ph34r:

Link to comment

The suggestion comes in from someone who likely only caches within a small distance from home - perhaps the cost of gasoline or lack of transportation limits their caching area. They also are likely more interested in urban style hides then getting out on the trail - perhaps for the same reasons then stay close to home.

Within 25 miles of a cache hidden earlier this month by the OP, there have been exactly 580 caches hidden within the past twelve months that remain active today. Lower the radius from 25 miles to 10 miles and there are 98 active caches less than a year old - eclipsing the OP's find count since the OP started geocaching.

 

Sorry to sprinkle facts on your tl;dr.

I'm not going to look at the OPs finds. So I'll admit up front that in this particular case I may be wrong. However I have seen lots of younger cachers who basically are limited to a radius of 10 miles or less. These kids cache where they can get to on their bicycles. Perhaps their parents take them out occasionally to find caches further afield, but this is a special occasion and for hiding and most finding they are limited to where they can go. Even adults may limit most of their geocacheing to places near home or work they may pass when when running errands. Longer trips are few and far apart but if some of the 50 or 100 closest caches keep turning over they have an opportunity to cache more.

 

Now I'm not agreeing that all cache locations need to be recycled. But we know that in some area the cache density is so high that cachers complain there is no place left to hide cache. If they come to the forums, they get the usual response from the people with cars who can afford to drive miles to cache in new areas (and who will go on about how geoacching is for discovering new areas and not visiting the same parking lots over and over).

 

Sorry but not everyone caches like that. There those for whom it makes a difference if there are spots for new caches opening up in nearby dense areas. I will usually point out that these occur at some natural rate. Urban hides tend to go missing pretty regularly, and many urban hiders get tired of replacing missing caches, and archive them. On top of this, if an urban cache is missing it will generally attract a needs maintenance and eventually a needs archive.

 

But for some people this natural turnover does not come fast enough. It makes sense to me to ask people to voluntarily recycle cache locations on a regular basis or if they are no longer getting found regularly (adjusting for cache type as well as terrain and difficulty). Those who prefer to spend $3.98 per gallon to drive 50 miles to go caching, probably don't care that that there are will be more opportunities for new caches nearby. They may even feel that there are already too many caches. But for other people, having new caches to find is a good thing.

Link to comment

Well, next time just look at the OP's finds. They have fewer than 100 in 4 years. Cache saturation is not the issue in this case.

 

And whatever you do, don't look at the event count. She is from Ohio, after all. Also Toz, last two hides are about 25-30 miles apart. Oh, I'm such a stalker, but I do have another point. To quote a much earlier post:

 

I was looking at some of my listings recently. I got to thinking that some of them could stand to be archived and replaced with something new. A change in style of hide and container. Something to give the local cachers a chance to return to an area and find a new cache. A new experience in an old location. Then again, some of them are special to me and some to others who have found them.

 

Some of the locations that I archive I will leave open for other cachers to use their creative muse. Others I will lace something myself. Those that I replace myself are the ones where I don't want to see a well loved cache replaced with a micro on a guardrail or some such.

 

So yes, I think most cache sites can stand an occasional renewal. But that doesn't mean they all need to be archived on some schedule. Just take some time to look at your caches and think about which ones could be considered classics and which ones you could replace and give your fellow cachers something new and exciting to find and enjoy.

 

So as you can see, there are people who are advocates of MOST of their caches being renewed. And I've found many of this guy's caches, there are no dud's. I also know of another advocate, next region over from myself and GOF, (we're from the same area). I guess the OP didn't word the OP itself, or the title of the thread very well. Kind of gives you the impression of a mass overhaul of everyone's caches.

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

There could be a lot of PMO caches around that OP can't see. :ph34r:

There are 806 caches within 15 miles of zip code 44281 (Wadsworth, Ohio).

 

734 of those 806 caches (91%) are available to everyone.

 

296 of those 734 caches are small, regular, or large.

 

257 of those 296 caches do not need maintenance.

 

31 of those 257 caches have at least 3 favorite points.

 

That's 12 more caches than the OP has found during the past 2.5 years.

What's your point?

Link to comment

There could be a lot of PMO caches around that OP can't see. :ph34r:

There are 806 caches within 15 miles of zip code 44281 (Wadsworth, Ohio).

 

734 of those 806 caches (91%) are available to everyone.

 

296 of those 734 caches are small, regular, or large.

 

257 of those 296 caches do not need maintenance.

 

31 of those 257 caches have at least 3 favorite points.

 

That's 12 more caches than the OP has found during the past 2.5 years.

What's your point?

 

I think the point is that the OP already has plenty of nice caches to hunt within close range, and therefore no reason to 'complain' or throw out wild suggestions about 'old' caches needing to be archived based on age alone.

Link to comment

There could be a lot of PMO caches around that OP can't see. :ph34r:

There are 806 caches within 15 miles of zip code 44281 (Wadsworth, Ohio).

 

734 of those 806 caches (91%) are available to everyone.

 

296 of those 734 caches are small, regular, or large.

 

257 of those 296 caches do not need maintenance.

 

31 of those 257 caches have at least 3 favorite points.

 

That's 12 more caches than the OP has found during the past 2.5 years.

What's your point?

 

I think the point is that the OP already has plenty of nice caches to hunt within close range, and therefore no reason to 'complain' or throw out wild suggestions about 'old' caches needing to be archived based on age alone.

But I agreed with your argument.

OP said she's hit all the caches close to her, I said there's probably some PMO's she can't get. :huh:

Link to comment

I think I've discovered why the OP has zeroed in on the "3 year" lifespan for a cache.

 

The OP has gone to the effort of placing caches within the Medina County Parks and they require a permit for such activity. Those permits expire after 3 years, and you need to re-apply to place new caches.

 

If the OP had only mentioned this in the first place, then it would have been clear that this issue is somewhat regional.

 

Medina County Park page about geocaching:

http://www.medinacountyparks.com/Pages/GeocacheEvents.html

 

Permit application, which has very pretty specific rules for hiding geocaches/letterboxes:

 

pdf:

http://www.medinacountyparks.com/uploads/GeocacheRules.pdf

 

Finding this Park's incredibly strict rules has been enlightening for me.

 

 

B.

Link to comment

There could be a lot of PMO caches around that OP can't see. :ph34r:

There are 806 caches within 15 miles of zip code 44281 (Wadsworth, Ohio).

 

734 of those 806 caches (91%) are available to everyone.

 

296 of those 734 caches are small, regular, or large.

 

257 of those 296 caches do not need maintenance.

 

31 of those 257 caches have at least 3 favorite points.

 

That's 12 more caches than the OP has found during the past 2.5 years.

What's your point?

I think the point is that the OP already has plenty of nice caches to hunt within close range, and therefore no reason to 'complain' or throw out wild suggestions about 'old' caches needing to be archived based on age alone.

But I agreed with your argument.

OP said she's hit all the caches close to her, I said there's probably some PMO's she can't get. :huh:

About 9% of the nearby caches are PMOs. Even without paying for a Premium Membership, it's very unlikely that she has hit all the close caches. Not even all the good, close caches.

Link to comment

There could be a lot of PMO caches around that OP can't see. :ph34r:

There are 806 caches within 15 miles of zip code 44281 (Wadsworth, Ohio).

 

734 of those 806 caches (91%) are available to everyone.

 

296 of those 734 caches are small, regular, or large.

 

257 of those 296 caches do not need maintenance.

 

31 of those 257 caches have at least 3 favorite points.

 

That's 12 more caches than the OP has found during the past 2.5 years.

What's your point?

I think the point is that the OP already has plenty of nice caches to hunt within close range, and therefore no reason to 'complain' or throw out wild suggestions about 'old' caches needing to be archived based on age alone.

But I agreed with your argument.

OP said she's hit all the caches close to her, I said there's probably some PMO's she can't get. :huh:

About 9% of the nearby caches are PMOs. Even without paying for a Premium Membership, it's very unlikely that she has hit all the close caches. Not even all the good, close caches.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just going off what OP said.

I don't know, maybe some of them are beyond her skill level. Who knows. :blink:

Link to comment

Not sure why all the fuss about whether the OP has a lot of caches available for her to find. (I'm hoping that all the sleuthing about how many caches are in the area to find exclude the OP's owned caches.)

 

I think I discovered the root of the OP's concerns as a cache hider and posted about it back on post #45.

 

If you stop looking at it from a cache finder's perspective, and look at if from the cache hider's viewpoint, as I believe the OP intended, then maybe you will see the original post in a different light.

 

 

B.

Link to comment

I think I've discovered why the OP has zeroed in on the "3 year" lifespan for a cache.

 

The OP has gone to the effort of placing caches within the Medina County Parks and they require a permit for such activity. Those permits expire after 3 years, and you need to re-apply to place new caches.

 

If the OP had only mentioned this in the first place, then it would have been clear that this issue is somewhat regional.

 

Medina County Park page about geocaching:

http://www.medinacountyparks.com/Pages/GeocacheEvents.html

 

Permit application, which has very pretty specific rules for hiding geocaches/letterboxes:

 

pdf:

http://www.medinacountyparks.com/uploads/GeocacheRules.pdf

 

Finding this Park's incredibly strict rules has been enlightening for me.

 

 

B.

 

That does make some sense, and I'll take that as the tone of the OP. My counter to that then, is go find new locations. A quick peek at the map centered on the OP's latest hide shows a very large area of untapped space for new caches. Find new places for new, quality caches instead of recycling the old locations strictly for the purpose of recycling them. Nice catch though PP.

Link to comment

I think I've discovered why the OP has zeroed in on the "3 year" lifespan for a cache.

 

The OP has gone to the effort of placing caches within the Medina County Parks and they require a permit for such activity. Those permits expire after 3 years, and you need to re-apply to place new caches.

 

I respect what you are saying here, but I can't see how you can conclude that from what the OP originally said. This just seems like the OP had this not well conceived idea. They then posted it on the forum, it was not well received, and they retreated. In particular, they seemed to be complaining about a CO who didn't maintain their cache well (at least in the OP's opinion), even when asked.

 

It seemed to me that the OP doesn't understand the value the community at large seems to place on older caches.

 

Perhaps you are right though - and perhaps the OP will return and explain what they meant, although I suspect they've been scared off...

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...