+Ma & Pa Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 province ...................caches ............per 100,000 population NL 513,555 ............ 5717 .................1113 PE 146,205 ...... ...... 5849 ................ 4000 NS 947,831 ........... 14361................ 1515 NB 755,346 ........... 10842................. 1435 QC 8,076,828 ........... 30580............... 378 ON 13,546,112 ........... 36312.............. 268 MB 1,270,646 ........... 5445 ................. 428 SK 1,086,564 ........... 5881................. 541 AB 3,906,839 ........... 17085................. 455 BC 4,638,825 ........... 29976................ 646 Quote Link to comment
+THE RED FOX RAIDERS Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Very interesting,thank for the post. Quote Link to comment
+Ma & Pa Posted February 8, 2013 Author Share Posted February 8, 2013 Looking at # of caches per 1000 sq kms, give even more proof that the best caching holidays might be in the maritimes ......sq KM..........caches.....#per 1000 sq km NL..405,212..........5717.........14.1 PE ..5,660...........5849........1033.4 NS ..55,284...........14361..........259.8 NB ..72,908...........10842.........148.7 QC ..1,542,056.........30580.........19.8 ON ..1,076,395.........36312.........33.7 MB ..647,797.........5445..........8.4 SK ..651,036 .........5881.........9.0 AB ..661,848.........17085.........25.8 BC ..944,735.........29976.........31.7 Quote Link to comment
+Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat Posted February 8, 2013 Share Posted February 8, 2013 Interesting to see that a higher population does not necessarily mean a higher cache density. Thanks for posting this! Quote Link to comment
+northernpenguin Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 I would imagine the higher the population density for a given area, the harder it is to maintain a geocache per population ratio. Places like downtown Toronto with 942 people per square kilometer, the places to hide a geocache get saturated pretty quick. Very rough calculation of 1000m2/162m2 gives about 38 cache spots available per square kilometer (yes that's a box not a circle, I'm not a mathematician). Halifax has a population density of 71 persons per square kilometer, Moncton is 56 persons per square kilometer. Granted Algonquin Park is like 1.2 persons per square kilometer but caches aren't allowed in our Provincial Parks. The Toronto and Ottawa factors (and Vancouver/Montreal) are interesting as these are cities where large parts of the population don't own a vehicle, so these people are not roaming out an hour outside the city and that's where the population density thing starts to skew the Province a bit. Also most of Ontario (and Quebec) land area are sparsely populated but still involved in the calculation for area of province/hide. I'd like to see these stats broken down by county instead of by Province - I suspect if Southern Ontario was separated from Northern Ontario the numbers would come out a bit different for the land area calc. Quote Link to comment
+Ma & Pa Posted February 15, 2013 Author Share Posted February 15, 2013 (edited) The fact that there is so much isolated wilderness in the large provinces explains why the figures are so low for QC and ON. I know that explains why the figures for PEI are so high compared to large provinces like QC and ON. However, if you want to go on a caching vacation, you would like to go to an area where there are caches wherever you travel. A look at PEI geocaching map will certainly show tons of caches. If you are looking for numbers, they have more than 1 cache per sq km. If you want to bike the Confederation Trail I think there are over 1500 caches. If you are looking for scenery, well you get that too. If all the caches in QC were hidden on 5% of the territory, there would be 400 caches per 1000 sq km. In ON there would be about 675. This compares to 1033 in PEI. PAul Edited February 15, 2013 by Ma & Pa Quote Link to comment
+northernpenguin Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 The fact that there is so much isolated wilderness in the large provinces explains why the figures are so low for QC and ON. I know that explains why the figures for PEI are so high compared to large provinces like QC and ON. However, if you want to go on a caching vacation, you would like to go to an area where there are caches wherever you travel. A look at PEI geocaching map will certainly show tons of caches. If you are looking for numbers, they have more than 1 cache per sq km. If you want to bike the Confederation Trail I think there are over 1500 caches. If you are looking for scenery, well you get that too. If all the caches in QC were hidden on 5% of the territory, there would be 400 caches per 1000 sq km. In ON there would be about 675. This compares to 1033 in PEI. PAul The statistics are not as simple as that. The numbers can be skewed in many ways very easily. Caches per population density, caches per land area, caches of what type in what area. I'd still like to see the numbers per county to see where the actual "hot spots" are. When I did the numbers for Ontario a few years back the cache density was highest in Barrie and Ottawa, not Toronto or Niagara for example. Another interesting statistic to lookup is nevermind the Provincial boundaries, where's the area with the highest cache density per square kilometer - perhaps it's along the Ottawa River so the numbers are divided between Ontario and Quebec. Perhaps it's Sackville NB. That would be an interesting stat for the numbers cachers. But also, this is only one aspect of geocaching. I take a geocaching vacation about once a year - normally it involves hiking or paddling for a few days to get one or two geocaches. Last year I spent 5 days visiting a specific group of geocaches on the east side of Algonquin Park. If I was to geocaching vacation (again) in the Maritimes I would likely target the Fundy Challenge caches in NB or hike Cape Breton Island. Others I know will fly to places like the ET highway. When I was in PEI geocaching last December, my target was the oldest in the Province, just outside Charlottetown. I will say this, it is great to see a vibrant, active geocaching community in the Atlantic provinces, as with the rest of Canada. Today Groundspeak released stats showing Canada is ranked third worldwide for number of caches placed overall. Quote Link to comment
wwjd7 Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 Any reason why Yukon, NWT and Nunavut were left out? Given the low population and large land area, those stats would have been interesting. Quote Link to comment
Andronicus Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I know that NB was very high. The area around Fredericton is almost like a 161m grid. Quote Link to comment
+Dr. House Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Since the question was posed, I sat down to crunch the numbers for Ontario cache distribution by County. For the purposes of this list, I used the counties as listed here. --County-----------------Population-------------Active Caches 01. Ottawa-------------(pop. 812,129)---------------2880 02. Simcoe-------------(pop. 422,204)---------------1997 03. Durham------------(pop. 561,258)---------------1683 04. Niagara------------(pop. 427,421)---------------1609 05. Middlesex----------(pop. 422,333)---------------1406 06. Peel--------------(pop. 1,159,405)---------------1278 07. York----------------(pop. 892,712)---------------1124 08. Waterloo-----------(pop. 478,121)---------------1097 09. Halton--------------(pop. 439,256)---------------1096 10. Hamilton-----------(pop. 504,559)---------------1078 11. Frontenac----------(pop. 143,865)---------------1042 12. Essex---------------(pop. 393,402)---------------1021 13. Thunder Bay-------(pop. 149,063)----------------982 14. Hastings------------(pop. 130,474)---------------936 15. Algoma-------------(pop. 117,461)----------------919 16. Toronto----------(pop. 2,503,281)----------------910 17. Leeds&Grenville-----(pop. 99,206)----------------909 18. Muskoka-------------(pop. 57,563)----------------842 19. Wellington---------(pop. 200,425)----------------750 20. Peterborough-------(pop. 133,080)---------------742 21. Lambton------------(pop. 128,204)---------------732 22. Lennox&Addington---(pop. 40,542)--------------707 23. Brant--------------(pop. 125,099)----------------656 24. Elgin---------------(pop. 85,351)------------------630 25. Kenora--------------(pop. 64,419)----------------624 26. Renfrew-------------(pop. 97,545)----------------608 27. Parry Sound---------(pop. 40,918)----------------512 28. Grey----------------(pop. 92,411)-----------------508 29. Northumberland------(pop. 80,963)--------------504 30. Kawartha Lakes------(pop. 74,561)---------------503 31. Greater Sudbury----(pop. 157,909)---------------494 32. Stormont, D&G------(pop. 110,399)--------------475 33. Nipissing-----------(pop. 84,688)-----------------468 34. Bruce---------------(pop. 65,349)-----------------446 35. Cochrane------------(pop. 82,503)----------------441 36. Norfolk-------------(pop. 62,563)-----------------406 37. Oxford-------------(pop. 102,756)----------------366 38. Prescott&Russell----(pop. 80,184)----------------359 39. Haliburton----------(pop. 16,147)-----------------330 40. Haldimand-----------(pop. 45,212)----------------326 41. Timiskaming---------(pop. 33,283)----------------324 42. Huron---------------(pop. 59,325)-----------------302 43. Chatham-Kent-------(pop. 108,589)--------------277 44. Dufferin------------(pop. 54,436)------------------257 45. Lanark--------------(pop. 63,785)-----------------242 46. Sudbury-------------(pop. 21,392)----------------195 47. Perth---------------(pop. 74,344)-----------------189 48. Prince Edward-------(pop. 25,496)---------------150 49. Manitoulin----------(pop. 13,090)-----------------77 50. Rainy River---------(pop. 21,564)-----------------44 (Apologies for the horrible alignment ) Quote Link to comment
+coman123 Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Looks like were doing just fine in L&A Quote Link to comment
+ToonAl Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Wouldn't it best to have the stat for lamp posts per square kilometre to find the best caching area? Just saying. Quote Link to comment
+coman123 Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Wouldn't it best to have the stat for lamp posts per square kilometre to find the best caching area? Just saying. We would be still doing fine in L&A then LOL Very few LPC's Quote Link to comment
+Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 (edited) Another interesting fact I found today at http://project-gc.com/Home/Overview Was it because of the weather? Edited March 24, 2013 by Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat Quote Link to comment
+northernpenguin Posted March 24, 2013 Share Posted March 24, 2013 Was it because of the weather? I would say "yes". At least in Ontario, 2012 was the year winter skipped us altogether. Based on the caching I did in Edmonton last weekend .... well nothing. But wow the snow in Edmonton seems much colder than our sub tropical Ontario snow. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.