Cacher Dominating area

[+xipotec]

Ok, admittedly , I am fairly new to this. So I am sure this post will ruffle a few feathers, but hey, that what I am good at.

 

I recently visited a southern city and took at day to cache. The problem was , a single cacher, by his own admission, was "dominating" the city with his own caches. He had over 20 in the city, which effectively blocked any new caches from being placed. Most of the caches were metro-micro, simple tins or containers. Some were very cleaver others were not.

 

My question is this, is there a rule stopping a single cacher from taking up entire areas? Another cacher in the area was clearly putting a cache in a drain to "get a spot" near the new park being built. The cache was in a construction zone!!!! But I believe it was put in this spot to "claim" the area for themselves.

 

As someone new to this, its a bit discouraging to find a single person with 20 cache's in a single area , effectively prohibiting the placement of a cache by a newer member.

 

With the 0.1 mile rule in effect I believe I am starting to see a pattern of cachers placing caches to intentionally prevent new caches in the area.

 

Does this happen???

 

If so , GeoCachers need to address this or we risk killing our hobby for new people in certain areas. My thought is along with the 0.1 mile rule, there should also be a rule preventing a single cacher from placing more that 3 caches in a certain area, say 1.0 mile.

 

What say you veterans?

[+BlueDeuce]

From what I've seen, 20 caches is nothing. As far as I'm concerned it's first come first serve but I've yet to also see a prolific cacher be a responsible owner.

 

Give it time and just search for a new location to place your non-LPC cache.

Edited March 19, 2013 by BlueDeuce

[+Manville Possum]

Only one geocacher? What about a league of geocachers? These geocachers have some real nice geoart. http://www.geocaching.com/profile/?guid=5afb6142-0ddc-4c62-885a-15e39029e3a5&wid=5b8c5b1f-9943-4a8f-aca4-e2ae7d2d631b&ds=2

[+TheWeatherWarrior]

"dominating" huh....his name isn't Reed Timmer by chance....hahahah.

 

unfortunately I don't think it is against the rules. Rather selfish, but if anything you may have to bite the bullet.

 

Are the caches lame or creative?

[+xipotec]

Yup, its one person as far as the profile suggests. I just wonder about the thougth process in someone putting so many in one area and "dominating" it. Its sort of counter productive to the growth of geocaching to put so many micros down that no one else can.

 

Isn't it?

 

I would be all for it if they were really good. But about half of them were micros with a log book, in a fairly un-interesting location. I stopped marking them found after a while when I realized they were all the same person, with same MO.

[+The Leprechauns]

That's nothing. I just checked the ten mile radius from my home coordinates. In that area, a single geocacher owns 282 caches -- none of which are part of a "power trail." That's about 25% of all active caches placed by everyone in this same area.

 

If I felt like it, I could go hide 20 caches tomorrow in spots I've scouted out. You just have to know where to look and how to plan a cache placement. You can also wait for a spot to open: caches come and go, all the time.

 

In the meantime, I'm grateful for all the caches hidden by others. Whenever someone hides a cache in a spot I've scouted out, I thank them in my log: "I'd much rather have one to find!"

[+OHail]

In addition to the other comments, maybe few cachers really want to put any caches in downtown Charlotte for whatever reason including the inability to adequately maintain a hide there.

 

If one cacher "dominating" an area is not your cup of tea, then you should avoid several state parks if you are ever in Alabama (though you will be missing quite a treat if you pass them up).

[+cerberus1]

My small Town has over twenty caches.

Most Cities in my area would be in the hundreds.

It's first-come with this hobby. Sorry others joined late...

I'd think the further out you go from Town, the more options one would have for a decent cache placement. Drains aren't.

Hopefully the putapillbottleanywhereitllfit crowd will eventually burn themselves out, look for a new hobby and then you may have some spots to hide in a nice area with a quality container.

- But placing a limit on how many hides one can place in a given area will never work.

If they really wanted to place more, they'd simply sign up for another account and place again.

[+xipotec]

LOL , Well its a double edged sword isn't it?

 

I love having a bunch of caches to find in a particular area, but it would suit me more if they were from a variety of people, not just one person.

 

I have seen the state park issues already too. I guess I am wondering if the caches are really there for the purpose of pointing out interesting and unique places, or just a power trip?

 

Do cachers do that? Place caches just to "claim" real estate? (Rather then place on to actually point out something valuable or interesting, which I thought was the point..)

[+BlueDeuce]

Dear cacher, just to let you know that you have placed X numbers of caches within an X area and you are required to leave the area open to X number of cachers. Should those cacher actually sign up one day, or the existing cachers decide to place a cache.

[+xipotec]

Dear cacher, just to let you know that you have placed X numbers of caches within an X area and you are required to leave the area open to X number of cachers. Should those cacher actually sign up one day, or the existing cachers decide to place a cache.

Well more like ...dear cacher, try not to be obsessive and place a cache every 3 blocks for no good reason?

 

I wonder how long a smart "A" comment would take.

Edited March 19, 2013 by xipotec

[+BlueDeuce]

Dear cacher, just to let you know that you have placed X numbers of caches within an X area and you are required to leave the area open to X number of cachers. Should those cacher actually sign up one day, or the existing cachers decide to place a cache.

Well more like ...dear cacher, try not to be obsessive and place a cache every 3 blocks for no good reason?

 

I wonder how long a smart "A" comment would take.

 

You've obviously missed my point.

 

 

bd

Edited March 19, 2013 by BlueDeuce

[+StarBrand]

I own 50 of 75 caches that exist within 15 miles of my house. But those took 11 years to place. I've sort of slowly 'dominated' my area I guess. I don't feel bad. Without me there would only be 25 caches within 15 miles is the way I look at it.

 

First come, first serve. I've no issues with that.

[+tozainamboku]

I guess I am wondering if the caches are really there for the purpose of pointing out interesting and unique places, or just a power trip?

 

Do cachers do that? Place caches just to "claim" real estate? (Rather then place on to actually point out something valuable or interesting, which I thought was the point..)

The concept that a cache should be placed to point out an interesting or unique area is not universally accepted, despite the quotation from briansnat in the guidelines

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. – briansnat

 

Whether you like it or not, some people are into the "numbers". They appreciate nearly any cache as another opportunity to find one. In addition some people hide caches because they like to give people the chance to find more caches. Perhaps they enjoy the pure joy some people get in finding a cache even it it is not in the most spectacular location or even if it is a typical hide that we've seen before.

 

Rarely can someone so dominate an area that nobody else is able to place a cache. Perhaps a prolific hider has a cache near a spot that you think is more worthy of a cache. You are always welcome to ask them to move or archive the cache, and surprisingly they often will.

 

The guidelines don't specify that caches have to be in interesting or unique areas. This was tried once - for virtual caches. Reviewers did not like being in the position of being the arbiters of what was interesting or unique enough for a cache. It was one of the reasons that virtual caches are no longer permitted.

 

Those who enjoy finding caches in new and interesting areas soon learn that they can ignore lots of caches. There are plenty of "good" ones left to find. Often, when some is "dominating" an area this is a code word for them placing uninteresting caches.

 

You may have picked out a location because it had lots of caches, not realizing they were all by the same person. But think about it. If you are really interested in finding unique and interesting places shouldn't you be choosing another method of selecting where you are going to go caching. You can certainly go to another city that may have a lot of caches, but you might want to concentrate on caches with lots of favorite points or on ones in parks or greenbelts rather than in suburban strip malls.

Edited March 19, 2013 by tozainamboku

[+Condorito]

Anyway, how small is your town? 20 caches .1 of a mile apart leaves heaps of space even if the town you live in is miniature

 

I live in a town that has less than 200,000 people and we have around 400 caches. Some have hidden 50 and some have hidden 1... I don't think 20 will cover the while city... .1 of a mile isn't that big a distance IMHO

[+BlueDeuce]

Since we no longer know the rationale behind the saturation guidelines, perhaps it's time to review them.

[+kunarion]

But about half of them were micros with a log book, in a fairly un-interesting location. I stopped marking them found after a while when I realized they were all the same person, with same MO.

What would a different cacher have done differently in the uninteresting location?

 

There's a local cacher who's by no means “dominating”, but they're prolific with the bad-idea caches. Questionable containers in poorly thought-out places. I don't have that cacher on Ignore, but when I approach one of their caches, and it's an LPC in the middle of another of the World's Busiest Parking Lots, I move on. It wouldn't matter if a hundred people made those caches, or one made a hundred. They're forgettable caches, they aren't occupying space that a great cache could be, and they don't last anyway.

Edited March 19, 2013 by kunarion

[+StarBrand]

Anyway, how small is your town? 20 caches .1 of a mile apart leaves heaps of space even if the town you live in is miniature

 

I live in a town that has less than 200,000 people and we have around 400 caches. Some have hidden 50 and some have hidden 1... I don't think 20 will cover the while city... .1 of a mile isn't that big a distance IMHO

ummmmm - my town has about 1300 souls. 20 caches would dominate but 1 mile later there would be plenty of room.

[+Anonymike7]

As far as I'm concerned it's first come first serve but I've yet to also see a prolific cacher be a responsible owner.

 

In my (admittedly small) state, it's fair to say that at least 50% of the caches are owned by fewer than 10 people, all of whom I trust as responsible. There's regular maintenance and a real pride in ownership among our most prolific COs.

 

As for "dominating" an area, there are spots around here that "belong" to certain cachers, although there's often room to place one's own hides. I've even got a couple of areas that I call 'mine.' That said, it's hard for me to imagine people placing hides just to prevent others from doing so. While that's possible, it doesn't seem to me like that's the case. You live in an historic city that surely has plenty of interesting locations for hides, and a glance at the map shows a lot of open areas, parks, and green spaces.

 

Moving out to a wider radius, there are plenty of cache groupings that are largely owned by a single person. With respect, OP, when you say that one person's efforts are "effectively prohibiting the placement of a cache by a newer member," I respond by encouraging you to take a broader look at your local map; there's plenty of room left to hide caches in your area. It also looks like the cacher in question has earned plenty of favorite points; he's got to be doing something right to be getting that kind of feedback.

 

And please keep in mind that when you propose limiting people to a certain number of hides, you're also proposing the limiting the creativity of your local cachers. Cache tours of historic locations, themed cache series, linked puzzles, and more often owe their success and popularity exactly because of their geographical density.

[+ByronForestPreserve]

What would a different cacher have done differently in the uninteresting location?

 

There's a local cacher who's by no means “dominating”, but they're prolific with the bad-idea caches. Questionable containers in poorly thought-out places. I don't have that cacher on Ignore, but when I approach one of their caches, and it's an LPC in the middle of another of the World's Busiest Parking Lots, I move on. It wouldn't matter if a hundred people made those caches, or one made a hundred. They're forgettable caches, they aren't occupying space that a great cache could be, and they don't last anyway.

 

But if you were polite about it, you'd put your pill bottle under a skirt on one side of the Wal-Mart parking lot, so that I can put mine on the other side of the Wal-Mart parking lot!

 

We had one of those guys in a nearby town, only his hides were evilly clever and fun. I am more annoyed by the person who lives in another state who has dozens of micros in our area that are, uhm, not so fun. Fortunately if one gets a NM log he just archives it.

[+dprovan]

What say you veterans?

I'd say, "Wow, thanks for putting out 20 caches for us to find."

 

You seem to be implying he's doing it to be mean. Perhaps you should decide that he's doing it to be nice.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

The flipside to a cacher dominating his home turf with hides is that he/she will have to travel further if they want to find caches. It's fine to smother an area with your own caches (it is first come-first serve in geocaching) but it is also nice to occasionally get a notification of a new cache published close to home that you can go out and find.

[+Condorito]

Anyway, how small is your town? 20 caches .1 of a mile apart leaves heaps of space even if the town you live in is miniature

 

I live in a town that has less than 200,000 people and we have around 400 caches. Some have hidden 50 and some have hidden 1... I don't think 20 will cover the while city... .1 of a mile isn't that big a distance IMHO

ummmmm - my town has about 1300 souls. 20 caches would dominate but 1 mile later there would be plenty of room.

 

Exactly... Move down the road 1 mile and hide a cache there. That's what legs(or cars,or bikes, etc.) are for.

[+stijnhommes]

Since we no longer know the rationale behind the saturation guidelines, perhaps it's time to review them.

I don't know who "we" is, but I still know why the saturation guideline exists.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

LOL , Well its a double edged sword isn't it?

 

I love having a bunch of caches to find in a particular area, but it would suit me more if they were from a variety of people, not just one person.

 

Think of it this way, the person that saturated the area with their own hides won't get to find any caches for themselves in the area.

Edited March 19, 2013 by NYPaddleCacher

[+ras_oscar]

Perhaps the cacher that is "dominating" the area is mobility impared, only has access to a bycicle for transportation or otherwise caonnot or does not venture beyond this town.

[+L0ne.R]

It irks me that this happens to rail-to-trails in our area. One person (or one group) takes over miles and miles of a nice trail blocking everyone else out. I especially don't like it when the containers are cheap leaky containers.

 

It sometimes feels like some COs consider geocaching as a form of pseudo land ownership.

Edited March 19, 2013 by L0ne R

[+L0ne.R]

Perhaps the cacher that is "dominating" the area is mobility impaired, only has access to a bicycle for transportation or otherwise cannot or does not venture beyond this town.

 

Like 13 year old boys.

[+wimseyguy]

Agreed, 20 caches by one hider is nothing, unless it is a very small town with only a few 'cacheworthy' locations.

A quick scan of your recent finds shows that you are in the Charlotte area, so I am really surprised at your comments.

I thought you would be referring to an area that was fairly bereft of caches.

 

In my mind the metro Charlotte area has the most active hive of NC activity right now, and some of the more creative hides being placed. If you are simply in one of the smaller suburban areas that someone has carpet bombed, drive 15 minutes to another part of town. There are nasty puzzles, creative multis, and interesting woodsy walks all over the area.

 

Your first hides are in the Triad area, so perhaps you are there instead? True that there are 2-3 prolific hiders in that area who are more interested in quantity over traditional quality hides. But there are thousands of caches within a 30 minute radius of either region that should provide you with whatever type of cache hunt you want.

 

My advice-attend a few events, meet a few cachers who share your likes, and then go on some adventures with them.

[4wheelin_fool]

Ok, admittedly , I am fairly new to this. So I am sure this post will ruffle a few feathers, but hey, that what I am good at.

 

I'd say you are off to a bad start. I only see 17 finds on your account, most with logs admitting that you didn't have a pen to sign the log. Posting a snarky log like:

 

Maybe time to leave some room for other cachers downtown instead of dominating it?

Tftc

 

is not going to get you anywhere, especially if you are not planning to hide anything specific in the area. Many cachers who have multiple hides will give up a few areas if you ask nicely, but I don't see that happening here.

 

In most cases these areas would have zero hides without someone first taking the initiative to draw people there.

[+Fiver1]

Personally I don't care who hides caches or how many they hide in my area. We have one cacher here that hid 365 caches in one year of all different types. One of these years I might find them all. I'm glad he did it. The way I look at it, it just gives me more to find.

 

If I want to place a cache, I'll find a place and hide it. I'm not sure what your area is like, but there are always empty places to put a cache in my area. They might not be exactly where I would like to place one, but if not, I'll find another place. If there weren't any close by places left, I still wouldn't worry about it.

[+Oxford Stone]

Quantity / quality equilibrium. I've been wondering to myself if there should be a max imum number of caches a CO can own, for the sake of maintaining - but how long's a piece of string? Some people's lifestyles may allow them to look after a huge number of caches. I don't want to put out more than 3 or 4; some people may have more time to dedicate to maintaining caches.

Whether someone would really put out caches to "mark their territory" is debatable. Having the decency to archive caches they can't maintain is surely a minimum courtesy (don't know if caches in OP are well maintained or not? - if they are, enjoy the caches and hide yours somewhere else) as blocking that 0.2 mile diameter circle with a wet 35mm film pot / non-existent cache that no-one's been brave enough to click as Needs Archived, is "just not cricket" as we say over here.

I actually like it when I come across a prolific CO whose caches are also witty / original. Thinking of one S of where I work who specialises in home-made caches (drilled-out logs and such); one to the north with some excellent puzzles; a trail along the Oxford Canal where every cache was different. Jury's out on a CO W of London who puts out caches by the hundred but is notorious for not maintaining. From what I see on Facebook there is a feeling of "archive and let someone else have a go" out there in his case, plus they're all very sameish.

[+learnincurve]

Am I being very naive in suggesting that people drop the prolific casher a line and asking if you can take over one of their spots? You could sweeten the deal with a geocoin as a thank you or something.

[+ngrrfan]

Am I being very naive in suggesting that people drop the prolific casher a line and asking if you can take over one of their spots? You could sweeten the deal with a geocoin as a thank you or something.

IMHO.... that is being naive. It is one thing to volunteer to adopt a cache and another to ask to take one over. In the first instance the CO is indicating that they can not maintain their cache for one reason or another so they would like someone to have it. In the other case, to me, it comes across as "Hey you've got a neat spot and I'd like to have it." Uh No.

[+bflentje]

I am one that is considered to dominate a specific area. I've been slowly hiding caches in a fairly undiscovered area over a span of 6 years. Besides a cache here and there, no one else has had the motivation or energy to hide any significant caches in the area. After the six years had lapsed I was more or less the only hider in the area. A new cacher enters the picture out of the blue last year, feeling entitled, and proclaims I am a hog. Said cacher is too belligerent to negotiate me giving up some space. Time for everyone to grow up.

[4wheelin_fool]

I am one that is considered to dominate a specific area. I've been slowly hiding caches in a fairly undiscovered area over a span of 6 years. Besides a cache here and there, no one else has had the motivation or energy to hide any significant caches in the area. After the six years had lapsed I was more or less the only hider in the area. A new cacher enters the picture out of the blue last year, feeling entitled, and proclaims I am a hog. Said cacher is too belligerent to negotiate me giving up some space. Time for everyone to grow up.

 

Well, the OP of this thread has only 17 finds logged, and many of them do not have a signature in the logbook. They do not seem to want to hide any caches in said area, but are complaining because one cacher has too many. It sounds like a similar situation as you, and I cannot understand his perspective with very little experience. Some areas have nothing at all, then when they get filled up someone comes along and complains about it.

[+ben-socha]

Hi guys,

 

I see also a different problem connected to the subject. Some caches are placed in totally unattractive spots - at the busy roads full of muggles, where you can't even park your car and everyone is looking at you suspiciously, while there are beautiful places not far away, full of greenery and trees, and no one can place a cache there because of "160 meters distance rule". I came across a few such situations and I tell you, my blood was boiling... Well, lack of imagination appears to be part of the problem, I think...

[+bflentje]

Hi guys,

 

I see also a different problem connected to the subject. Some caches are placed in totally unattractive spots - at the busy roads full of muggles, where you can't even park your car and everyone is looking at you suspiciously, while there are beautiful places not far away, full of greenery and trees, and no one can place a cache there because of "160 meters distance rule". I came across a few such situations and I tell you, my blood was boiling... Well, lack of imagination appears to be part of the problem, I think...

 

Why would you let something so lame boil your blood?

[+learnincurve]

Am I being very naive in suggesting that people drop the prolific casher a line and asking if you can take over one of their spots? You could sweeten the deal with a geocoin as a thank you or something.

IMHO.... that is being naive. It is one thing to volunteer to adopt a cache and another to ask to take one over. In the first instance the CO is indicating that they can not maintain their cache for one reason or another so they would like someone to have it. In the other case, to me, it comes across as "Hey you've got a neat spot and I'd like to have it." Uh No.

 

Depends how polite/British you are in the mail, I can't see offence been taken to "excuse the intrusion but I would like to set up a cashe in X area but the distance rule would put it too close to a couple of yours, would you mind if I took over one of your spots? Any suggestions as to an alternate location would also be greatly appreciated, thank you for taking the time to read this mail"

[+ben-socha]

Why would you let something so lame boil your blood?

 

It was only the figure of speech I just deplore that some great places are wasted, that's all

[+xipotec]

It irks me that this happens to rail-to-trails in our area. One person (or one group) takes over miles and miles of a nice trail blocking everyone else out. I especially don't like it when the containers are cheap leaky containers.

 

It sometimes feels like some COs consider geocaching as a form of pseudo land ownership.

Yeah this sort of captured the vibe I got......

Why would you let something so lame boil your blood?

 

It was only the figure of speech I just deplore that some great places are wasted, that's all

 

I am un-interested in a cache pointing out a grey hound station.......near a overpass....and a parking lot....saturated in beer bottles and trash...

 

When near by there were some nice places to visit. IMO

 

BTW my duration in the hobby ( number of finds or hides) has nothing to do with my ability to bring up a topic or question, does it? (as many posters seem to point out). A CO with 1000 finds and 300 cache's does not own the hobby or have a more valid opinion (perhaps more informed)

 

I have been slowly feeling out the community and making my choices slowly and carefully before I involve myself with it. and I personally am not that into "logging on paper" and its sort of become a joke in our family. I just cannot write on small paper. I am finding it much more enjoyable to log virtually on the logs. I have found MANY more caches , but not logged them all. As a point of interest I am slowly catching up with all my finds now that I have gone premium.

 

Currently working on getting my own 1st publish, and 2 and 3 are coming soon after once I get a feel for the process. I am having trouble publishing due to inactive and saturation problems, so I guess my frustration is showing. I find myself driving around looking for good cache placements (what I consider interesting and not just available). I am fanning out because I want my caches to be quality NOT quantity.

 

and maybe that's the rub.....Quality VS quantity??

Edited March 19, 2013 by xipotec

[+Don_J]

Ok, admittedly , I am fairly new to this. So I am sure this post will ruffle a few feathers, but hey, that what I am good at.

 

I recently visited a southern city and took at day to cache. The problem was , a single cacher, by his own admission, was "dominating" the city with his own caches. He had over 20 in the city, which effectively blocked any new caches from being placed. Most of the caches were metro-micro, simple tins or containers. Some were very cleaver others were not.

 

My question is this, is there a rule stopping a single cacher from taking up entire areas? Another cacher in the area was clearly putting a cache in a drain to "get a spot" near the new park being built. The cache was in a construction zone!!!! But I believe it was put in this spot to "claim" the area for themselves.

 

As someone new to this, its a bit discouraging to find a single person with 20 cache's in a single area , effectively prohibiting the placement of a cache by a newer member.

 

With the 0.1 mile rule in effect I believe I am starting to see a pattern of cachers placing caches to intentionally prevent new caches in the area.

 

Does this happen???

 

If so , GeoCachers need to address this or we risk killing our hobby for new people in certain areas. My thought is along with the 0.1 mile rule, there should also be a rule preventing a single cacher from placing more that 3 caches in a certain area, say 1.0 mile.

 

What say you veterans?

 

It looks like you are talking about downtown Charlotte, and yes, it does seem to have a good saturation of caches. The thing is, as soon as you escape downtown it's starting to look pretty empty. One of the reasons to place new caches it to bring people to new places. Downtown Charlotte probably doesn't need any new caches.

 

As far as one cacher dominating the hides. It looks like if that one cacher hadn't done that, there would be no caches to find.

[+xipotec]

Ok, admittedly , I am fairly new to this. So I am sure this post will ruffle a few feathers, but hey, that what I am good at.

 

I recently visited a southern city and took at day to cache. The problem was , a single cacher, by his own admission, was "dominating" the city with his own caches. He had over 20 in the city, which effectively blocked any new caches from being placed. Most of the caches were metro-micro, simple tins or containers. Some were very cleaver others were not.

 

My question is this, is there a rule stopping a single cacher from taking up entire areas? Another cacher in the area was clearly putting a cache in a drain to "get a spot" near the new park being built. The cache was in a construction zone!!!! But I believe it was put in this spot to "claim" the area for themselves.

 

As someone new to this, its a bit discouraging to find a single person with 20 cache's in a single area , effectively prohibiting the placement of a cache by a newer member.

 

With the 0.1 mile rule in effect I believe I am starting to see a pattern of cachers placing caches to intentionally prevent new caches in the area.

 

Does this happen???

 

If so , GeoCachers need to address this or we risk killing our hobby for new people in certain areas. My thought is along with the 0.1 mile rule, there should also be a rule preventing a single cacher from placing more that 3 caches in a certain area, say 1.0 mile.

 

What say you veterans?

 

It looks like you are talking about downtown Charlotte, and yes, it does seem to have a good saturation of caches. The thing is, as soon as you escape downtown it's starting to look pretty empty. One of the reasons to place new caches it to bring people to new places. Downtown Charlotte probably doesn't need any new caches.

 

As far as one cacher dominating the hides. It looks like if that one cacher hadn't done that, there would be no caches to find.

Or perhaps no one can/or tries get one approved due to the saturation rule?

[+Don_J]

Ok, admittedly , I am fairly new to this. So I am sure this post will ruffle a few feathers, but hey, that what I am good at.

 

I recently visited a southern city and took at day to cache. The problem was , a single cacher, by his own admission, was "dominating" the city with his own caches. He had over 20 in the city, which effectively blocked any new caches from being placed. Most of the caches were metro-micro, simple tins or containers. Some were very cleaver others were not.

 

My question is this, is there a rule stopping a single cacher from taking up entire areas? Another cacher in the area was clearly putting a cache in a drain to "get a spot" near the new park being built. The cache was in a construction zone!!!! But I believe it was put in this spot to "claim" the area for themselves.

 

As someone new to this, its a bit discouraging to find a single person with 20 cache's in a single area , effectively prohibiting the placement of a cache by a newer member.

 

With the 0.1 mile rule in effect I believe I am starting to see a pattern of cachers placing caches to intentionally prevent new caches in the area.

 

Does this happen???

 

If so , GeoCachers need to address this or we risk killing our hobby for new people in certain areas. My thought is along with the 0.1 mile rule, there should also be a rule preventing a single cacher from placing more that 3 caches in a certain area, say 1.0 mile.

 

What say you veterans?

 

It looks like you are talking about downtown Charlotte, and yes, it does seem to have a good saturation of caches. The thing is, as soon as you escape downtown it's starting to look pretty empty. One of the reasons to place new caches it to bring people to new places. Downtown Charlotte probably doesn't need any new caches.

 

As far as one cacher dominating the hides. It looks like if that one cacher hadn't done that, there would be no caches to find.

Or perhaps no one can/or tries get one approved due to the saturation rule?

 

I live at the edge of a valley surrounded by mountain ranges. Just to west of me at the base of the mountains is a large city park bordered on an even larger state park. There is probably over 25 miles of hiking trails criss-crossing the area. When I started this in '05, there were only a handful of caches in the entire area, despite the fact that Geocaching was was well established and there were probably two dozen geocachers well involved in the area. I started placing caches in the parks which is an area that I grew up and knew well. Over the years, I have continued to place caches there and if you were to join today and have no idea of the history, you could easily conclude that I was hoarding the real estate.

 

So, I guess if you were that new person, you could whine and pout and declare that it's unfair, and try to get a guideline placed that restricts MY hiding abilities. Or, perhaps you could attend a few Geocaching Events, maybe join the local group's message board, get in on a couple of hikes and learn why things are as they are. Then, you could go and hide some unique caches in the unique spots that you know about so that we can share in your discoveries.

[+xipotec]

Ok, admittedly , I am fairly new to this. So I am sure this post will ruffle a few feathers, but hey, that what I am good at.

 

I recently visited a southern city and took at day to cache. The problem was , a single cacher, by his own admission, was "dominating" the city with his own caches. He had over 20 in the city, which effectively blocked any new caches from being placed. Most of the caches were metro-micro, simple tins or containers. Some were very cleaver others were not.

 

My question is this, is there a rule stopping a single cacher from taking up entire areas? Another cacher in the area was clearly putting a cache in a drain to "get a spot" near the new park being built. The cache was in a construction zone!!!! But I believe it was put in this spot to "claim" the area for themselves.

 

As someone new to this, its a bit discouraging to find a single person with 20 cache's in a single area , effectively prohibiting the placement of a cache by a newer member.

 

With the 0.1 mile rule in effect I believe I am starting to see a pattern of cachers placing caches to intentionally prevent new caches in the area.

 

Does this happen???

 

If so , GeoCachers need to address this or we risk killing our hobby for new people in certain areas. My thought is along with the 0.1 mile rule, there should also be a rule preventing a single cacher from placing more that 3 caches in a certain area, say 1.0 mile.

 

What say you veterans?

 

It looks like you are talking about downtown Charlotte, and yes, it does seem to have a good saturation of caches. The thing is, as soon as you escape downtown it's starting to look pretty empty. One of the reasons to place new caches it to bring people to new places. Downtown Charlotte probably doesn't need any new caches.

 

As far as one cacher dominating the hides. It looks like if that one cacher hadn't done that, there would be no caches to find.

Or perhaps no one can/or tries get one approved due to the saturation rule?

 

I live at the edge of a valley surrounded by mountain ranges. Just to west of me at the base of the mountains is a large city park bordered on an even larger state park. There is probably over 25 miles of hiking trails criss-crossing the area. When I started this in '05, there were only a handful of caches in the entire area, despite the fact that Geocaching was was well established and there were probably two dozen geocachers well involved in the area. I started placing caches in the parks which is an area that I grew up and knew well. Over the years, I have continued to place caches there and if you were to join today and have no idea of the history, you could easily conclude that I was hoarding the real estate.

 

So, I guess if you were that new person, you could whine and pout and declare that it's unfair, and try to get a guideline placed that restricts MY hiding abilities. Or, perhaps you could attend a few Geocaching Events, maybe join the local group's message board, get in on a couple of hikes and learn why things are as they are. Then, you could go and hide some unique caches in the unique spots that you know about so that we can share in your discoveries.

Certainly seems like the attitude is "I was first, you were not, you lose....."

 

After all, with rules restricting locations you can place, distance to another cache etc etc, it is obvious that many places will be saturated quickly. Its not rocket science.

 

I again question the simple fact that one cacher, having multiple caches in a small area, limits new caches by new people. Its a fact and not really arguable. Ask yourself this. If the hobby really explodes, as I expect it will, what happens ten years from now?

 

The only place the newer people will have to cache will be distant places from population. (Or to wait for a cache to be abandoned.)

Most areas in my local, which meet cache guidelines, already have many caches.

 

This is an issues that geocachers will eventually have to face as reality.

 

Ask yourself this, if you were just starting out, and viewed all the caches you have, would you now be discouraged that all the places you knew were taken up by 1 or two cachers?

 

Really there is no need to get upset, I am not upset, I am just new to this and looking at it form a new perspective. As a searcher, its great, I can find caches everywhere, as someone who is trying to place, its difficult.

[4wheelin_fool]

Uh, if you don't sign the logs, other cachers will get annoyed and may delete your finds, especially since you have admitted that it is intentional. Complaining about someone saturating an area without wanting to hide something there is just sour grapes.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I again question the simple fact that one cacher, having multiple caches in a small area, limits new caches by new people. Its a fact and not really arguable. Ask yourself this. If the hobby really explodes, as I expect it will, what happens ten years from now?

 

The only place the newer people will have to cache will be distant places from population. (Or to wait for a cache to be abandoned.)

Most areas in my local, which meet cache guidelines, already have many caches.

 

This is an issues that geocachers will eventually have to face as reality.

 

Ask yourself this, if you were just starting out, and viewed all the caches you have, would you now be discouraged that all the places you knew were taken up by 1 or two cachers?

 

I guess that I'm not understanding the problem. How large an area are we talking?

I live in the most densely poplulated state. I have caches in four of the five most densely populated muicipalities in the country. (Guess I need to hide one in Hoboken to make it five of five.) Of course in three of those five, I have the only caches. Minority population areas, so there are probably fewer geocachers. But I will be putting out several more soon.

I mostly cache and hide my caches within a 35 mile radius, which covers North Jersey and NYC. I have never had a problem hiding a cache. Lots of beautiful places without caches.

There is a nice little park where I have ten of the twelve caches. No one has complained about me dominating the area. I have ten of the fifteen caches within two miles of where I live. That hasn't stopped other cachers.

So, I do not understand what your problem is!

[+tozainamboku]

The number one complaint about the saturation guideline has always been, "I've found the perfect place to hide a cache but someone with a lame micro is preventing me from putting it there."

 

Certainly one can move a few blocks outside of downtown Charlotte and find a place to hide a cache. But what if you have found the most interest and unique site in Charlotte - maybe a small park or an old antebellum house or maybe some unique public artwork. Now the cache in the newsrack or bus bench or lamppost is blocking what you consider a much better location for a cache. Had not some insensitive jerk place all those caches, others could hide a cache there.

 

One of the original reasons given for the saturation guidelines was to limit any one hider from domintating an area. But this (and other) rationale have been dropped from the guidelines. I think this is in part due to reviewers not wanting to arbitrarily decide what is too many caches in an area and whether or not these caches are less deserving than some other cache. Instead they prefer a simple .1 mile separation between caches. If someone decides to place a cluster of 20 caches (or a power trail of 2000 caches), TPTB have decided to allow this. In both cases this in not preventing anyone from hiding other caches. It may only prevent someone from using a particular place because there is already a cache less than 528 ft away.

[+xipotec]

The number one complaint about the saturation guideline has always been, "I've found the perfect place to hide a cache but someone with a lame micro is preventing me from putting it there."

 

Certainly one can move a few blocks outside of downtown Charlotte and find a place to hide a cache. But what if you have found the most interest and unique site in Charlotte - maybe a small park or an old antebellum house or maybe some unique public artwork. Now the cache in the newsrack or bus bench or lamppost is blocking what you consider a much better location for a cache. Had not some insensitive jerk place all those caches, others could hide a cache there.

 

One of the original reasons given for the saturation guidelines was to limit any one hider from domintating an area. But this (and other) rationale have been dropped from the guidelines. I think this is in part due to reviewers not wanting to arbitrarily decide what is too many caches in an area and whether or not these caches are less deserving than some other cache. Instead they prefer a simple .1 mile separation between caches. If someone decides to place a cluster of 20 caches (or a power trail of 2000 caches), TPTB have decided to allow this. In both cases this in not preventing anyone from hiding other caches. It may only prevent someone from using a particular place because there is already a cache less than 528 ft away.

Yeah this is very well stated, THX!

[+TheWeatherWarrior]

dominating, dominating, dominating ;-)