Guidelines For Your First Hide

[+Cute&Cuddly]

Hiding a geocache provides another whole dimension to the game. The thrill of hiding a cache is comparable to the thrill of finding one. Having just had our 100th cache published gave me the opportunity to reflect on what we’ve encountered in the process.

GC.com certainly has some excellent guidelines to the art of hiding a geocache, specifically here. There are some other realities however to planting a cache - realities that may refine how I approach future hides. In retrospect, would I have changed any of our hides? Not likely. Some have been a part of the learning curve, while others have just been outright fun. Here are some “guidelines” that we’ve gleaned.

 

1. As much as they pretend to, there are cachers that do not respect the environment. I suppose that for some it salves their conscience to play an “eco-friendly” game, and that’s fine. The reality however is that trees will be damaged, plants will be destroyed, geotrails will be created, and human imprints will be left. Therefore, have a close look at the area around your prospective hide. Determine what, if anything, will be damaged. If the resulting impact will be too severe, think twice about the placement.

 

2. Even though you may have secured permission from a landowner and/or property management for your hide, bear in mind that there are enough cachers that will not respect private property. How you think cachers will treat private property is not likely the reality of what will happen. The adrenaline flowing from the hunt will overrule common sense. So have a look around GZ – What could be broken? Is there anything that’s irreplaceable? Most of us would treat private property like we would treat our own. Well, come to think of it, therein may lay the problem.

 

3. If you’re going to hide a “Night Time” cache, make sure it’s in the middle of nowhere. Cachers like to grab the smiley’s on these by traveling in large groups. A loud and boisterous hullabaloo may be the result. They’ll forget that it’s “night time”. Understandably so. We’ve done night time caching and I have to admit that it does get very exciting. But in an urban setting it will cause a scene. In our suspicious society, the police may well be on their way.

 

4. Realize that your hide will be criticized. You will get some honest appreciation, but don’t plant a cache needing that. If you can’t handle criticism, don’t plant a hide. It is important to note that some are truly trying to be helpful in seeing you grow as a cache hider, but I’m separating that from being critical. Have a thick skin, and love your hide.

 

5. Make sure you keep this a game, and keep it fun. Exclusively playing for the find sees the game through rose colored glasses. Once you place a hide, you open yourself up to those that take the game way too seriously. Of course, that’s their own prerogative, and they can choose to play however they wish. But if that style of play bothers you, put your blinders on and plant your hide for the pleasure it brings you. In connection with Guideline #4, it’s a challenge not to take things personally, but don’t let it drive you from the game. It seems that the people who put the most effort into cache hiding are the ones targeted the most. Don’t give up! Have fun!

 

6. The “Stealth” attribute is valueless. Cachers have no concept of stealth. Unless the individual cacher has an inborn tendency to be shy, nervous, or timid, in which case they’ll employ stealth at every cache, whether it’s needed or not. If stealth is an absolute requirement for your hide, think twice about placing it. Until, that is, you get some experience as a hider, in which case you can have some fun with that reality.

 

7. If your cache goes missing, do not hastily conclude that it has been sabotaged by a fellow cacher. Although it does happen, it’s more unlikely to. The majority of cachers will replace the cache as it was found, or better. They have as much, or more, respect for the cache than they do other variables and factors surrounding the hide. Go figure.

 

8. There’s no such thing as a lazy hide, especially for your first few attempts. There are however, lazy cachers. But that’s another post. Everyone who hides a cache volunteers their time and resources for the greater caching community, and we should all applaud that. So even the lock-n-lock thrown in a bush cost somebody something. If geocaching was one of the "big-time" sports with million dollar athletes, than yeah, a lock-n-lock thrown in a bush might be considered lazy by some, and he/she would probably get benched. But in our "sport" there's no development program per se, no coaching staff squeezing the best out of their players, and no fans demanding better performances. Everybody is out there just doing what they know how to do and having fun doing it. There are some days when it's miserable outside, but I still want to get out and cache, so I go and grab some easy ones. On any particular day I choose off the buffet what I want to eat. I like that. If there are complaints about "lazy caches", I think a certain onus falls upon those that are complaining. Get out there and plant some really cool caches yourself. Show the rest by example how to do things. Don't gripe in found logs, don't email a CO with complaints. Just go out and plant an awesome cache that says: "Here's another side to hiding a cache." As an aside, if something on the buffet table doesn’t appeal to your tastes as a finder, you’re not obligated to put it on your plate. Just keep on walking.

 

9. Appreciate that your container will naturally be manhandled. Build that into your concept, and expect maintenance. If you’ve created a beautiful handcrafted cache, give it to your kid to play with for a day. If it can survive that, it just might make it out in the wilds.

 

10. Don’t agonize over assigning the Attributes. Do your best, but don’t obsess. No one reads them anyway.

 

Well, there are my ten post facto guidelines for hiding a cache. My wife and I love creating and hiding caches. Despite the bumps and disappointments we’ve encountered along the way, will we continue planting caches? You bet!!! In fact, we have several in the works right now.

Play safe. Play respectfully. Play to have fun.

[+geodarts]

I would probably add that you should place a cache that you would want to find. In my case that would mean not placing a cache simply to place a cache. It would be one that would bring people to someplace I like to go. I generally ask myself why I would want to bring people to the cache location. If you enjoy the hide or the location then others will too.

Edited January 19, 2013 by geodarts

[+CanadianRockies]

Well, there are my ten post facto guidelines for hiding a cache.

Wise advice indeed. Thanks for putting those thoughts down on pixels.

[Keystone]

A fabulous post, and one which you should consider getting published as an article on a blog somewhere. I wish all cache hiders were as thoughtful as you. It would make the reviewer's job far easier.

 

To your observations, I'd add "don't overthink it." New hiders often dream up incredibly complicated ideas for their first cache. They want to make a big splash, show they're better than the average lamp post, or express their newbie enthusiasm. Too often, these elaborate designs violate a listing guideline, become maintenance nightmares, or don't work as intended.

[+Mudfrog]

Nice post!

 

I know i am in the minority here but i wanted to add to #9, something i like to do.

 

Besides knowing that alot of cachers will be rough on the cache itself, try to also think ahead about what can go wrong with the container and it's surroundings.

 

I can't tell you how many times we've come across a cache that was placed in a low lying area or beside a river where high water or flooding would likely occur, but wasn't tied off. Or a spot where the cache could be dropped down a hole, down a storm drain, or off the side of a bridge or cliff, again, not tied. Even if these scenarios aren't evident, i still like to tether many of our caches to at least help keep them from migrating from their original hiding spot..

[+captnemo]

Great post and your comments are well taken. If I ever get up your way I will look for some of your hides.

[+Don_J]

You were doing so good, then you got to #10. I would think that you would want others to use proper attributes. Planting the idea that no one reads them really defeats the whole purpose. People tend to not read them because they are misused, such as a "no Snowmobiles" for a urban cache in Downtown LA. I would advocate, "use them and use them properly". All of my 184 caches have proper and useful attributes on them.

 

I would also add in there somewhere to try your best to use the established D/T rating system from the web site. If we could get the D/T closer to something that everyone understands, than from that of pure subjectivity on the CO's part, the system might become more useful.

 

I like that you wrote this out. My experience hasn't been exactly the same, but a lot of this rings true. It seems that every community has that one guy that will step on the bush instead of over it, every single time.

[+Cute&Cuddly]

I would also add in there somewhere to try your best to use the established D/T rating system from the web site. If we could get the D/T closer to something that everyone understands, than from that of pure subjectivity on the CO's part, the system might become more useful.

 

Great point Don_J. The D/T rating system is a very important consideration in comprising one's hide listing. You've hit upon the reality of the matter however when you state that it's based on "pure subjectivity". That subjectivity is born from the cacher's experience, both in number of finds and type of finds. The caching experience of the CO is transferred into how they rate their hide on the D/T scale. When we approach a hide we also take into consideration who the cacher is, and skew the D/T ratings accordingly. An inexperienced CO means we can usually knock the D value down a notch or two.

We have a small series of hides that target the beginner cacher, and I tried to have the D/T ratings reflect that. We also have some hides that try to challenge the more experienced cacher, and as a result try to have the ratings reflect that. I remember a local 5/5 that we attempted to find when we had less than 100 finds, and we certainly thought it was all of that. We didn't find it BTW. We attempted it again with over 1700 finds, and would have probably rated it a 3/3 now. That's true with some of our hides as well. In looking back, I wouldn't have rated some of our earlier hides as high on the scale. But for the sake of everyone's D/T grid I'm leaving them as they are. The result is a hodge-podge of ratings that don't make sense until you take into consideration our caching development.

My advice to a new CO then, based on the above, is to rate your hide according to your level of ability and experience. Another new cacher will likely agree with your ratings, while an experienced cacher will take note of where you're at in your caching career and make any adjustments. The experienced cacher will also hopefully have enough respect not to point out his opinion in their log with a critical edge. Helpful and constructive advice though is always welcome.

You talk about the rating system becoming "more useful". I'm just spit-balling here, but what about a rating system from 1-10. There's such a degree of difference between each D stop on a 1-5 scale. Would a 1-10 scale help to refine the true state of the hide? The reality of even that however is that it would still be based on "subjectivity".

[+CanadianRockies]

You talk about the rating system becoming "more useful". I'm just spit-balling here, but what about a rating system from 1-10. There's such a degree of difference between each D stop on a 1-5 scale. Would a 1-10 scale help to refine the true state of the hide?

Including the half-stars, the current difficulty rating system provides owners with 9 possible ratings. Effectively, it's a 1-9 scale. Changing it to a 1-10 scale wouldn't really be very different.

[nonaeroterraqueous]

You talk about the rating system becoming "more useful". I'm just spit-balling here, but what about a rating system from 1-10. There's such a degree of difference between each D stop on a 1-5 scale. Would a 1-10 scale help to refine the true state of the hide? The reality of even that however is that it would still be based on "subjectivity".

 

With any rating system, the more imprecise the measurement, the fewer the gradations. If there's no practical way to objectively identify ten gradations, then you don't use a scale like that. Because cache difficulty is so subjective, much more so than terrain level, five stars is really being generous. To be realistic, we could say that a cache is easy, average or hard (a three-star rating system), but we throw in two extra stars, plus some half-stars, for good measure.

[+hydnsek]

Excellent post, and more good advice in the comments. Have posted a link on the WSGA Facebook page; all newbie hiders should read this.

[+Cute&Cuddly]

With any rating system, the more imprecise the measurement, the fewer the gradations. If there's no practical way to objectively identify ten gradations, then you don't use a scale like that. Because cache difficulty is so subjective, much more so than terrain level, five stars is really being generous. To be realistic, we could say that a cache is easy, average or hard (a three-star rating system), but we throw in two extra stars, plus some half-stars, for good measure.

 

You're all correct. That last paragraph was written as I was headed out the door, and on my way to our destination I realized that a new rating scale is not a good idea. I've just finished my 81 grid and don't want to start all over with that. It would also mean every cacher re-rating their hides. Not good.

[+simpjkee]

11. Not all interactions with your cache are documented in online logs so don't rely on online logs to tell the whole story of your cache. Cache visits are DNF'd but never logged. Caches can be found by muggles and never logged online. Caches can be found by muggles right after the muggles saw a cacher find the cache. Animals may have 'found' the cache. If a cache is 'not replaced correctly' you can not assume it was because the last person to log a find was careless. My brother has visited caches with me and subsequently visited them again without me, but since he has no account... he posts no logs.

[+murrayegger]

I would think that you would want others to use proper attributes

 

I would encourage this as well, specifically the winter-friendly attribute for places that get any snow or ice.

[+L0ne.R]

I would think that you would want others to use proper attributes

 

I would encourage this as well, specifically the winter-friendly attribute for places that get any snow or ice.

 

I agree. I use them extensively, especially the 'attributes to exclude' section. The PQ I use most often excludes 8 attributes:

 

 

In the winter I also set up a Winter Friendly PQ which then includes the 'winter friendly' attribute and excludes the 'not winter-friendly' attribute.

Edited January 20, 2013 by L0ne R

[+briansnat]

Excellent overall. A must read for new cache hiders. I agree with everything there but #8. I've encountered some very lazy hides.

Edited January 20, 2013 by briansnat

[+L0ne.R]

Well written article but I'm not comfy with #8. "There’s no such thing as a lazy hide, especially for your first few attempts.". My feelings are, as a community, we should encourage a quality hide right from the first hide. Perhaps use Briansnat's quote " When you go to hide a geocache, think of the reason you are bringing people to that spot. If the only reason is for the geocache, then find a better spot." Hide a cache everyone can enjoy - pleasant location, well-maintained water-tight container, swag size (big enough for a couple of travelbugs) so kids and kids-at-heart can have some fun too.

[+simpjkee]

12. If you hide a cache in front of your house, consider putting the house number in the description or hint just to make sure people go in the right yard and don't go in the wrong yard.

[+Don_J]

I would think that you would want others to use proper attributes

 

I would encourage this as well, specifically the winter-friendly attribute for places that get any snow or ice.

 

I agree. I use them extensively, especially the 'attributes to exclude' section. The PQ I use most often excludes 8 attributes:

 

 

In the winter I also set up a Winter Friendly PQ which then includes the 'winter friendly' attribute and excludes the 'not winter-friendly' attribute.

 

A good majority of my hides have the Dangerous Animal, (rattlesnakes), and Poisonous Plants attributes, as well as the No Water and No Restrooms. I want people to be prepared. Most of those caches also have the Scenic View attribute as well.

[+The_Incredibles_]

12. If you hide a cache in front of your house, consider putting the house number in the description or hint just to make sure people go in the right yard and don't go in the wrong yard.

 

+1 million.

 

It's hard enough creeping around some stranger's yard only to find out later that you were creeping around the WRONG yard. Been there, done that.

[+NeverSummer]

On the subject, I wrote something about D/T and hint use, as well as some other stuff for the Minnesota GCA back in 2011.

 

I almost replied with something right after this was posted, but held off. I think saying that attributes don't really matter is wrong. Attributes, when used carefully, really do matter in pocket queries, and for some extra help with finding a cache in the field. I read them, so one can't say "nobody reads them"...

 

Also, calling the stealth attribute "worthless" is a tad extreme. It is a nice reminder if a location might be teeming with muggles, or that the hide might be in a visible area. Knowing that ahead of time gives me a better understanding of what a cache might be, or where it might be found. Sometimes the description is lacking some context, and a map view doesn't help clear up what I might expect for "traffic" once I'm near GZ.

 

Nicely put, otherwise. It's a good op-ed piece that needs to be addressed from time to time.

[+OZ2CPU]

I just started a new family group up as geocachers,

I spend two days with them, explaining a lot there is to know about the game,

they found 10 caches during the 2 days, most of them I helped a bit,

I also tried to show what D and T ratings means, and what hints can do for them.

They also find a few compleetly on their own, I observed what they did,

it is VERY interesting to see what beginners do,

after each find, I gave them a few tricks and suggestions,

this way they did not get too much information, when not needed, but the right type of help when needed,

it is easier to remember this way I think.

 

now they start to talk about making their own cache..

I really try to say : please wait.. learn alot more first,

two days is too fast, take it easy, wait, hopefully they accept this,

it was a bit hard to explain them, if they try to make a new cache as compleetly new started,

it most likely it will be bad in many ways.

I also offered my assistance if they want it.

Edited January 21, 2013 by OZ2CPU

[+NYPaddleCacher]

A fabulous post, and one which you should consider getting published as an article on a blog somewhere. I wish all cache hiders were as thoughtful as you. It would make the reviewer's job far easier.

 

To your observations, I'd add "don't overthink it." New hiders often dream up incredibly complicated ideas for their first cache. They want to make a big splash, show they're better than the average lamp post, or express their newbie enthusiasm. Too often, these elaborate designs violate a listing guideline, become maintenance nightmares, or don't work as intended.

 

I was going to add something similar to this and am glad that it was suggested by a reviewer first.

 

The forums are full of posts by potential first time hiders asking about creating a complex idea for a first cache, often a many stage multi or unknown cache variation. While I appreciate the enthusiasm my advice has always been to start simple for the first hide to get a feel for what cache ownership is all about. For a first cache, it's enough that it follows all guidelines, uses a container which can withstand the environment, is hidden someplace "interesting", and is maintained if there are any issues. If you find that you enjoy cache ownership after the first there is no reason why you can't place another and develop something more complex.

[+Oxford Stone]

I'm still in the mulling stage for putting out a cache. Next week I'm moving house and there's a nearby cacheless meadow to explore for a good hiding place (interesting, pretty, muggleproof). I've noted it can flood so it'll be an off-the-ground job. I'm going to visit garden centres, DIY stores and stationers for an interesting container. And I've thought of a not overly elaborate puzzle but not one I can see even referred to as being used before. All the above info taken on board - many thanks!

[+gpicard]

I always look at the attributes.

 

Got to have 'winter friendly' in Northern New England for those snowshoe hikes!

[+The_Incredibles_]

13. Don't hide a cache where there's lots of dog poop or garbage.

 

14. When you send your cache off for review, make sure you cache is THERE. Don't be surprised if your cache is published within 1/2 hour of submission. Also, don't be impatient if it takes 3 days.

[Mr.Yuck]

Well written article but I'm not comfy with #8. "There’s no such thing as a lazy hide, especially for your first few attempts.". My feelings are, as a community, we should encourage a quality hide right from the first hide. Perhaps use Briansnat's quote " When you go to hide a geocache, think of the reason you are bringing people to that spot. If the only reason is for the geocache, then find a better spot." Hide a cache everyone can enjoy - pleasant location, well-maintained water-tight container, swag size (big enough for a couple of travelbugs) so kids and kids-at-heart can have some fun too.

 

I just looked at a couple of the OP's newer hides (1 of 9, 2 of 9, etc., those ones), and I was shocked to see a smiley face on the map in the middle of them. Turns out I had found 2 caches along that rural rail trail North of Brampton in 2008; one is now archived. Small world, I suppose.

 

Yes, it is an excellent post, that I agree with about 95% of. Of course I'm going to say what I don't agree with, and I will jump on the "not comfy with #8" bandwagon. That point has too much of a "every cache is a gift to the Geocaching community" feel for me. I feel there are lazy hiders. And I've also felt that for years that "lead by example" has no effect. You can place nothing but quality containers in scenic/interesting locations, and it's not going to stop anyone from spewing parking lots with film canisters.

 

And of course I disagree with "no one looks at attributes anyways". I do, and occasionally even filter by them.

[+dprovan]

1. As much as they pretend to, there are cachers that do not respect the environment.

I seriously doubt that much environmental damage is done through disrepect by seekers. In my experience, environmental damage is done because the CO hasn't imagined a search. It's easy to be gentle on the environment when you know exactly where the cache is. But hiding a cache is telling people to look for the cache, and that involves tromping around the area. If the hide is particularly clever, then that will result in an even more intense search. And if the cache goes missing, the search with be extended.

 

Your recommendation is fine, I just think the point would be better expressed not by blaming the problem on some hypothetical cachers that don't respect the environment, but rather by placing the responsibility for GZ's environment on the CO no matter what ends up causing the environmental impact. It's a complicated issue that can't really be covered in a paragraph, so I'd be tempted to limit the suggestion to something like, "You can't tell in advance what might happen when someone looks for your cache, so don't hide you cache where the environment would be damaged by the hunt."

[+Ambrosia]

Nice post!

 

I know i am in the minority here but i wanted to add to #9, something i like to do.

 

Besides knowing that alot of cachers will be rough on the cache itself, try to also think ahead about what can go wrong with the container and it's surroundings.

 

I can't tell you how many times we've come across a cache that was placed in a low lying area or beside a river where high water or flooding would likely occur, but wasn't tied off. Or a spot where the cache could be dropped down a hole, down a storm drain, or off the side of a bridge or cliff, again, not tied. Even if these scenarios aren't evident, i still like to tether many of our caches to at least help keep them from migrating from their original hiding spot..

This is important. I placed a cache on a little island on the Columbia River in 2003. Even though I couldn't remember flooding being so bad as to cover the island in the past, and the Columbia River is dam controlled, I made the cache a micro in a tree. Just in case. Never had a problem until the past two springs where we've had huge amounts of flooding and the island has become a part of the river each time. Finally felt justified in my placement.

[+Don_J]

12. If you hide a cache in front of your house, consider putting the house number in the description or hint just to make sure people go in the right yard and don't go in the wrong yard.

 

+1 million.

 

It's hard enough creeping around some stranger's yard only to find out later that you were creeping around the WRONG yard. Been there, done that.

 

Won't do that. I apply the "I don't have to find every cache" rule. It works well for me.

[GPS-Hermit]

Great contribution to publish!

I also agree with D/T ratings, and attributes being taken seriously since that is important to me!

I am a believer in interesting caches and support a having a good reason to place the cache there.

Learn why some caches have great logs and others have TFTC. Great logs indicate great caches!

Risk is up to the finder - but I support warning when risks is not obvious, planting caution is always a good thing!

I also believe it is a negative thing to go to a great deal of trouble to reach the cache and can't do it for reasons that

could have been explained in the description.

Learning that lousy containers are a bad thing needs to happen first time out! Teeth Proof and Water Proof!

A chewed up cache usually has something Tasty/Smelly inside.

Trade items that people might want are a great contribution to the game. Be creative and think about it everywhere you go!

Edited January 22, 2013 by GPS-Hermit

[+bflentje]

1. As much as they pretend to, there are cachers that do not respect the environment. I suppose that for some it salves their conscience to play an “eco-friendly” game, and that’s fine. The reality however is that trees will be damaged, plants will be destroyed, geotrails will be created, and human imprints will be left. Therefore, have a close look at the area around your prospective hide. Determine what, if anything, will be damaged. If the resulting impact will be too severe, think twice about the placement.

 

The majority of the time I see damage to an area is when a geocacher, experienced or not, hides an inappropriate sized cache in an inappropriate area (in my opinion). ie Micro in the woods usually with poor coordinates to boot.

[+mobywv]

nice guidelines! I particularly liked # 8.

[+The_Incredibles_]

1. As much as they pretend to, there are cachers that do not respect the environment. I suppose that for some it salves their conscience to play an “eco-friendly” game, and that’s fine. The reality however is that trees will be damaged, plants will be destroyed, geotrails will be created, and human imprints will be left. Therefore, have a close look at the area around your prospective hide. Determine what, if anything, will be damaged. If the resulting impact will be too severe, think twice about the placement.

 

The majority of the time I see damage to an area is when a geocacher, experienced or not, hides an inappropriate sized cache in an inappropriate area (in my opinion). ie Micro in the woods usually with poor coordinates to boot.

 

That, and good camo jobs.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC23PD0

[+AutisticMajor]

Thanks for the advice. Possibly OT, but is/was there a cache that uses ALL the attributes? Maybe not the two specials, but still...

[+DragonsWest]

If I'd add anything, it would be in summary of points 1 through 3:

Never be afraid, when looking at a prospective location, to just tell yourself, "No, this one won't work" and move on. Caches do not need to be everywhere.

 

1. As much as they pretend to, there are cachers that do not respect the environment.

I seriously doubt that much environmental damage is done through disrepect by seekers. In my experience, environmental damage is done because the CO hasn't imagined a search. It's easy to be gentle on the environment when you know exactly where the cache is. But hiding a cache is telling people to look for the cache, and that involves tromping around the area. If the hide is particularly clever, then that will result in an even more intense search. And if the cache goes missing, the search with be extended.

 

Recently a friend and I were caching around an area at night and came across a tree with a broken branch. The tree was on private property, which compounds this issue. Tenants and landlord will view this as an act of vandalism. I don't think anyone meant to break the tree, but the placement of the cache possibly required a short seeker to put some weight on it for a boost and down went the limb. Not a pretty sight.

 

Not the first time I've seen foliage damaged by cachers. If a cache is in place for 50 or 75 to seek it out there will likely be visible impact.

 

I adopted a location after a fellow cacher abruptly retired (he archived everything and just left the game, no retrieval.) I knew the cache and retrieved the old container, knowing the tree it was in had suffered considerable damage, just by people reaching in for the Beach Safe hanging among the low branches and leafs. A prominent hole was bored through and I was determined not to use the same hide. I opted for the good ol' fake rock across the trail, just on the ground in plain sight. It has served well over the years, rewarding the keen of eye and confounding a few others, all without resulting in any impact upon its surroundings. It can be retrieved and replaced all while standing upon a paved path. As a CO its one of my favorites.

Edited January 30, 2013 by DragonsWest

[+NeverSummer]

1. As much as they pretend to, there are cachers that do not respect the environment. I suppose that for some it salves their conscience to play an “eco-friendly” game, and that’s fine. The reality however is that trees will be damaged, plants will be destroyed, geotrails will be created, and human imprints will be left. Therefore, have a close look at the area around your prospective hide. Determine what, if anything, will be damaged. If the resulting impact will be too severe, think twice about the placement.

 

The majority of the time I see damage to an area is when a geocacher, experienced or not, hides an inappropriate sized cache in an inappropriate area (in my opinion). ie Micro in the woods usually with poor coordinates to boot.

Micro in the woods with a bad hint. Or no hint. Actually, caches with no hints or bad hints. No/bad hint and not using D/T consistently. (Boo)>

 

Understanding the purpose of the tools at our disposal in the cache listing is important. Knowing if you're trying to hide the cache from other cachers, or just from muggles is something that should be addressed with cache placements. If you are trying to place a "difficult" hide, be aware that, without a hint or clues in the name or description, you are likely inviting suspicion if in a muggle-rich area, or collateral damage if placed in a more natural setting. Look hereat what might be a good addition to the OP's list on this subject.