Jump to content

Challenge or chore?


Recommended Posts

Challenge caches - love 'em or hate 'em?

 

I'm surprised by the inventiveness of some folk in coming up with quite different geocaching challenges - just when you think you've seen it all someone comes up with a new idea. Even so I'm drawn to complete very few of them.

 

The idea of driving hundreds of miles in a single day in order to log caches in several different counties, for example, to qualify for a not-out-of-the-ordinary cache doesn't really attract me - it's just not my idea of fun or even what geocaching is all about.

 

And the question that's always at the back of my mind is does anybody - Groundspeak included - consider the environmental inmpact of a challenge before hitting the publish button?

Edited by Team Microdot
Link to comment

Some Challenges I work toward, some I check to see if I've qualified accidentally, and some I ignore. It just depends on whether I think the Challenge is worth it.

 

And the question that's always at the back of my mind is does anybody - Groundspeak included - consider the environmental inmpact of a challenge before hitting the publish button?

 

If environmental impact was included then Power Trails would not be published (think of the gas and exhaust). But that's not the Reviewers' job.

 

That said, getting N number of counties in one day or N states isn't that unreasonable. Sure, the average cacher might need to go out of their way to get it, but they can also be gotten on a vacation.

 

For example, I know of a Challenge Cache requiring 4 caches of different types in 4 states in one day. I made sure to stop for the appropriate caches in FL, GA, SC, and NC during a trip to VA that was not caching related. Other Challenge Caches here in FL require you to get a cache in every county in the state (we have 67) although not in any particular time frame. Some folks clean up the FL panhandle in a single weekend, often finding the first easy cache they can in each county before heading to the next. I took a week's vacation so I could better see a part of the state where I had barely even gone before and quite enjoyed myself, including visits to 20 state parks. IMO that kind of exploration is the point of geocaching in general, and County/Delorme-based Challenge Caches in particular.

Link to comment

A challenge involving caches I already love (remote, hiking, seldom-found, etc) = great.

 

A challenge that requires me to change the way I cache = not good.

 

I did a 100-day challenge once. It turned geocaching into a dreaded daily chore where I was hunting caches that I didn't particularly enjoy and would otherwise have skipped. I won't do that again.

Link to comment

And the question that's always at the back of my mind is does anybody - Groundspeak included - consider the environmental inmpact of a challenge before hitting the publish button?

 

It's just another cache. Why would the "environmental impact" be any different for a challenge cache container than for a non-challenge cache container?

 

The environmental impact I see is when herds of people rush out to find a cache as soon as it's published. In populated areas, or during events, the impact is noticeable by the creation of "geo trails".

 

Or are you thinking more along the lines of air pollution due to all those cachers driving all over the place? Again, I don't see how a challenge cache would create any more problems than non-challenge caches.

 

See the post above about power trails regarding whether reviewers consider environmental impact.

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

I was actually pretty excited when I started to see challenge caches pop up. I enjoy them but choose ones that fit my style of caching. I can't be bothered with every day for x amount of days. I did 2 weeks in a row and that was enough for me. It wasn't fun when I 'had' to do it.

 

But others such as municipalities is fun...gets me to places I wouldn't have gone and I can plug away in my own time frame. I think it enhances my game. And always look forward to a new challenge popping up to see if it change the game up for me.

Link to comment

Or are you thinking more along the lines of air pollution due to all those cachers driving all over the place?

 

Yes - exactly that

 

Again, I don't see how a challenge cache would create any more problems than non-challenge caches.

 

You don't?

 

Speaking personally, I probably wouldn't normally make a 150 mile round trip by car in a single day, spending most of that time sat in the car, just so I could find and log a bog-standard cache three miles from my house.

 

I grant you that's just one example but many of the challenge caches I've seen require a lot more vehicular travel than I would normally engage in with a primary objective of logging just one cache.

 

See the post above about power trails regarding whether reviewers consider environmental impact.

 

I'm assuming you're referring to the post about power trails?

 

I don't see any proof one way or the other about whether reviewers consider environmental impact when publishing power trails. Not that I imagine they have much say in the matter - as far as I can see, TPTB don't allow it :ph34r:

 

I'm actually more interested in what consideration TPTB themselves give to the environmental impact of power trails... :unsure:

 

On the other hand - what constitutes a power trail? On here I seem to hear mostly about many-cache trails which are completed entirely by car. In my part of the world there are many-cache trails which cannot be driven - rather they have to be done on foot - so I imagine the environmental impact of those is quite a bit less.

Link to comment
Challenge caches - love 'em or hate 'em?
Yes. ;)

 

Okay, so I don't really hate (any of) 'em. But the only caches on my ignore list are challenge caches that I'll never qualify for, that are within my "blast radius" around home.

 

And I'm working on only one challenge cache (Bay Area Quadrangle Challenge), and I'm not working on it very actively. But if I'm going to be in an area away from home with time for geocaching, I make sure to choose geocache(s) that qualify for quad(s) that I haven't gotten yet.

 

I completed my 366-day grid last year. However, I did that just for fun. The nearest 366-day grid challenge cache is some distance away, and I have no idea when I'll be in the area to actually find it. And I'm working on maintaining a streak for August (although I'd prefer a single Souvenir rather than 31 Souvenirs, and I haven't posted any of the online logs yet), even though I have no idea where a nearby challenge cache for maintaining a 31-day streak might be.

 

And the question that's always at the back of my mind is does anybody - Groundspeak included - consider the environmental inmpact of a challenge before hitting the publish button?
When The Rat completed Bay Area Quadrangle Challenge, he tried to avoid using gasoline as much as possible (driving his Nissan Leaf). In the end, the charging infrastructure wasn't in place to support his attempt, and he ended up using gasoline to complete the challenge and to find the cache.

 

I generally avoid making special trips for geocaching, instead finding caches near places that I'm going to be at anyway. But that's a matter of my own cheapness frugality, rather than consideration of the environmental impact.

Link to comment

Or are you thinking more along the lines of air pollution due to all those cachers driving all over the place?

 

Yes - exactly that

 

Again, I don't see how a challenge cache would create any more problems than non-challenge caches.

 

You don't?

 

Speaking personally, I probably wouldn't normally make a 150 mile round trip by car in a single day,

 

I guess I see things differently.

 

Our "usual" cache hunting grounds are far from home, as evidenced by our mileage stats:

 

< 1 km 4 (1.1%)

1 km to 10 km 30 (8.22%)

10 km to 25 km 26 (7.12%)

25 km to 50 km 50 (13.7%)

50 km to 100 km 135 (36.99%)

100 km to 250 km 112 (30.68%)

500 km to 1000 km 1 (0.27%)

1000 km to 2500 km 7 (1.92%)

 

Those numbers are a little skewed because of the trip to Manitoba, but our usual range is 50 kms from home or more.

 

So I guess if there was a challenge cache 50 kms or more away that we qualified for, we wouldn't think much of going for it. (Mind you, we would try to pick up more than just the one cache.)

 

The folks I know of that have completed their 81 grids (at least once) spent a couple of years doing it. They completed numerous road trips across Canada and the US to find the more uniques D/T combos. They were often accompanied by other cachers.

 

So whether it's cross-border shopping (rampant consumerism) or geocaching, there's an environmental impact every time we use a vehicle. I still don't think that challenge caches have any more impact than anything else we do.

 

 

B.

Link to comment
On the other hand - what constitutes a power trail? On here I seem to hear mostly about many-cache trails which are completed entirely by car. In my part of the world there are many-cache trails which cannot be driven - rather they have to be done on foot - so I imagine the environmental impact of those is quite a bit less.
Yeah, it can be confusing when the term "power trail" is used for such different things.

 

I tend to use "power trail" to describe the old-school power trails, with closely spaced geocaches along a hiking/cycling trail. The caches are not identical to each other, and are often placed by different cache owners. They tend to evolve naturally in parks that require caches to be within a certain distance of an established trail. There's a power trail around here that is still used by a local parks district for their geocaching classes, because beginners can experience several diverse geocaches on a 2-3 mile hike, taking only 2-3 hours.

 

I tend to use "numbers run trail" to describe the new trails like the ET Highway trail and the Route 66 trail. These have fungible containers spaced almost exactly 528ft/161m apart along a highway, and are designed to be found as quickly as possible while driving along the highway.

Link to comment

...there's an environmental impact every time we use a vehicle.

 

Which is pretty much the basis of my concern.

 

I still don't think that challenge caches have any more impact than anything else we do.

 

Perhaps not - but does that mean the subject isn't deserving of some thought? Some effort to minimise that impact? Isn't there a question of how essential / justifiable / worthwhile all of those things you do are that's worthy of consideration? Surely there's some value in that consideration?

 

If distance caching can be incorporated into other necessary trips then there's less net impact than if caching trips are made in addition to those other, necessary trips.

 

Otherwise it's a bit like saying I may as well eat that tenth slice of cake - because I'll only gain the same amount of weight I gained from eating each of the previous nice slices.

Link to comment

 

And the question that's always at the back of my mind is does anybody - Groundspeak included - consider the environmental inmpact of a challenge before hitting the publish button?

 

Do you really care? The environmental impact is minimal. Instead of geocaching they could be riding quads and dirtbikes ripping up natural lands, driving drunk and end up crashing on a mountain and have all the chemicals from a car leak into the water usplly for hundreds and thousands of plants and animals. Or even better, and it's only one word. NASCAR. Or what about all the fuel burned everytime a spacecraft is launched. No, per user, a geocacher has way less impact than other passtimes. Come to think of it a group of 5 or 10 cachers going out once a month probably impacts the environment less than the transport of one NASCAR racecar, once.

Link to comment

Challenges. Hmm... I've done a few. Either they interested me, or I already qualified.

The New Jersey County Challenge came out at the start of a week's vacation. Off we went. NJ is small, and we only have 21 counties... Took us almost a week. We had a fun tour through south and central Jersey. (We seldom go that far afield.) We enjoyed it a lot! Certainly no worse impact on the environment than any other week's vacation. (There was a little concern. We had hidden or found all the caches in Hudson County. There were only 12 at that point in time. But the bylaws said that we could substitute a find in an adjoining county.) FTF & STF.

Then a while later, the New Jersey DeLorme challenge came out. Another week's vacation to repeat out trip. Saw different places that time. Loved it!

North and Central Jersey Checkpoint challenges. Find 26 caches (a-z) set out for the challenge. Worked at those two for a while. Enjoyed very much. (The Hudson County cache was ours. Hide or find.)

A few that I've qualified for that are near places I frequent. Logged one so far concerning numbers of different cache types that I've found. Would not have worked at it, but I qualified, so I went for it. Two more concerning the total D/T points accumulated in one day. Would not work at them, but qualified.

Working on the Fizzy and Jasmer Challenges. Need four months for the Jasmer. Was hoping to get two last week, but it did not turn out. Maybe next year...

Working on the PA County Challenge. But not going too far out of my way. I have 21 of 67 counties. (Was hoping to get a few more going to SGL #109. But that was not to be, this year. Oh well.)

Impact on the environment? No worse that any other vacation.

Link to comment

I'm not interested in challenge caches in general. We will complete a couple this year or next, by normal caching. Whether I try to claim them will just depend if it can be done easily.

Actually, just geocaching has a negative impact on the environment, just as every other activity of us bipeds. As an outdoor recreational activity, it has a less negative impact, in my opinion, than many other things one may do.

Link to comment

 

And the question that's always at the back of my mind is does anybody - Groundspeak included - consider the environmental inmpact of a challenge before hitting the publish button?

 

Do you really care? The environmental impact is minimal. Instead of geocaching they could be riding quads and dirtbikes ripping up natural lands, driving drunk and end up crashing on a mountain and have all the chemicals from a car leak into the water usplly for hundreds and thousands of plants and animals. Or even better, and it's only one word. NASCAR. Or what about all the fuel burned everytime a spacecraft is launched. No, per user, a geocacher has way less impact than other passtimes. Come to think of it a group of 5 or 10 cachers going out once a month probably impacts the environment less than the transport of one NASCAR racecar, once.

 

Of course I care - or I wouldn't have raised the point, would I?

 

And the extreme examples you cite, presumably to try to prove your point, do nothing to make me feel less of a duty to act responsibly.

 

Pointing to some dramatic excess by others to justify our own excesses is just lazy.

Link to comment

I guess I have to say I love them, in general. I liked them even more when I only had a few hundred caches, though. Now that I have nearly 4K caches, almost all challenges fall into two categories: they're either something impossible I'll never do or something I've already done. Very few actually challenge me to do something since challenges can't rule out what I've already done. I miss the days when a challenge to cache for a month straight actually got me out looking for caches for 31 days in a row.

Link to comment

 

And the question that's always at the back of my mind is does anybody - Groundspeak included - consider the environmental inmpact of a challenge before hitting the publish button?

 

Do you really care? The environmental impact is minimal. Instead of geocaching they could be riding quads and dirtbikes ripping up natural lands, driving drunk and end up crashing on a mountain and have all the chemicals from a car leak into the water usplly for hundreds and thousands of plants and animals. Or even better, and it's only one word. NASCAR. Or what about all the fuel burned everytime a spacecraft is launched. No, per user, a geocacher has way less impact than other passtimes. Come to think of it a group of 5 or 10 cachers going out once a month probably impacts the environment less than the transport of one NASCAR racecar, once.

 

Of course I care - or I wouldn't have raised the point, would I?

 

And the extreme examples you cite, presumably to try to prove your point, do nothing to make me feel less of a duty to act responsibly.

 

Pointing to some dramatic excess by others to justify our own excesses is just lazy.

You are making an assumption that a road trip has only one purpose, and that is to get the caches. As several people have alrready stated, they incorporated their caching into a week long vacation trip, that they would have taken anyway albeit maybe not to those specific areas.

 

If it bothers you that much, IMHO, you should do your part and stop caching altogether so that the rest of us can use your carbon footprint points for ourselves.

Link to comment

Love all challenges! Love the "chore" as some of you are calling it to get qualified for it. Love everything about them! If any of you enjoy some good challenges check out the occt near valparaiso Nebraska, 13 miles long bike trail, 102 challenges, not a power trail, the hides are not easy, but you'll love it! In 8 months since its release we've had cachers from apprx 20 states come!

Link to comment

Love all challenges! Love the "chore" as some of you are calling it to get qualified for it. Love everything about them! If any of you enjoy some good challenges check out the occt near valparaiso Nebraska, 13 miles long bike trail, 102 challenges, not a power trail, the hides are not easy, but you'll love it! In 8 months since its release we've had cachers from apprx 20 states come!

Yep... one of my caching partners did that bike ride. She said it was a hoot.

Link to comment

I honestly cannot see the impact of a challenge cache worse than a bushwhack cache or a power trail in the desert, sure a challenge cache may cause more bookmark lists or more gas mileage, but I do not see any adverse action on the environment for the cache itself than any others?

 

As far as challenge caches go, as someone who has bookmarked them, listed them and done a lot of them, I like them, but to a point. I have seen many unimaginative and downright arbitrary challenges out there. I like ones that make sense, that you are not pigeon holed to find only caches by a single owner and ones that make you find or explore places you may not have done.

 

I used to like blackout challenges but unless its a very small scale, I have grown utterly sick of those now.

 

I think challenges are great and I have more enjoyment on a challenge cache than any other as a whole. Challenge caches have longer logs than most caches and usually have a good favorite percentage, especially if a well done challenge. In our state, we have the 100 mile hike challenge, 50,000 feet elevation challenge, all the Thomas Guide ones, the Washington History, Washington Delorme, the Washington State Parks Challenge and many other ones which make folks explore more parks, mountains, parts of a county than they ever would have done better. I can see why some folks can be annoyed at them, especially in some areas, but I am glad they are around.

Link to comment

The first challenge I did was a 50 day streak. It was a real chore by the end and I was awful glad to be done.

 

Now I haven't got much interest in challenges. If I happen to meet the requirements and the cache is not too far out of my way, I will definitely go find it. However, I'm not going to bend over backwards like some people do to complete one.

Link to comment

You are making an assumption that a road trip has only one purpose, and that is to get the caches. As several people have alrready stated, they incorporated their caching into a week long vacation trip, that they would have taken anyway albeit maybe not to those specific areas.

 

No - I'm not making that assumption at all.

 

If you read back through the thread you'll see that I've already referred to the idea that many people will indeed combine caching trips with other trips they would have made anyway - and that I advocate that as a way of reducing the net impact on the environment.

 

And then of course there will be those challenges which preclude that method of caching i.e. find caches in X number of counties in 24 hours.

 

Hey, I have an idea for a challenge for you!

 

Spend a single day not worrying about how other people have fun. Take it to enjoy life, to live and let live, and to feel free of the tremendous burden of judging everyone else.

 

Give it a try.

 

Just one day? Sounds a bit mean :(

 

Unless of course you're actually suggesting following your advice in perpetuity, as some kind of mantra for a happy life?

 

In which case - the irony is that if you followed the advice you're so generously handing out, you probably wouldn't have felt motivated to post at all - or in fact to even read this thread in the first place :)

Link to comment

You are making an assumption that a road trip has only one purpose, and that is to get the caches. As several people have alrready stated, they incorporated their caching into a week long vacation trip, that they would have taken anyway albeit maybe not to those specific areas.

 

No - I'm not making that assumption at all.

 

If you read back through the thread you'll see that I've already referred to the idea that many people will indeed combine caching trips with other trips they would have made anyway - and that I advocate that as a way of reducing the net impact on the environment.

 

And then of course there will be those challenges which preclude that method of caching i.e. find caches in X number of counties in 24 hours.

 

Hey, I have an idea for a challenge for you!

 

Spend a single day not worrying about how other people have fun. Take it to enjoy life, to live and let live, and to feel free of the tremendous burden of judging everyone else.

 

Give it a try.

 

Just one day? Sounds a bit mean :(

 

Unless of course you're actually suggesting following your advice in perpetuity, as some kind of mantra for a happy life?

 

In which case - the irony is that if you followed the advice you're so generously handing out, you probably wouldn't have felt motivated to post at all - or in fact to even read this thread in the first place :)

I am going to go with my initial response to your OP. In my opinion, NO. We don't bother to think about the trivial perceived environmental aspects of our game. It doesn't seem you want to see responses such as this. We are all going to find caches and hopefully enjoy them. I am not going to be keeping track of my carbon footprint while I cache.

Link to comment

We like puzzles and challenges; at least to read about and see what some folks are doing. This gives us a different view on how others play the game. It also helps us to create some goals for ourselves based on the ideas of others.

 

We know things like the Jasmer challenge have helped enrich our caching experience by showing us how things used to be done.

 

The Delorme and county challenges inspired us to see parts of states we would not have gone to previously.

 

Milestone challenges (100 puzzles, 100 multis, all of the webcams in a state, etc.) have creatively pushed us to check out new cache types and expand our knowledge base.

 

Are all challenges for everyone? No. Are they all good. No. Are they at least something to be curious about? Sure, but how much you like them just depends on how you want to play the game.

Link to comment

 

And the question that's always at the back of my mind is does anybody - Groundspeak included - consider the environmental inmpact of a challenge before hitting the publish button?

 

Do you really care? The environmental impact is minimal. Instead of geocaching they could be riding quads and dirtbikes ripping up natural lands, driving drunk and end up crashing on a mountain and have all the chemicals from a car leak into the water usplly for hundreds and thousands of plants and animals. Or even better, and it's only one word. NASCAR. Or what about all the fuel burned everytime a spacecraft is launched. No, per user, a geocacher has way less impact than other passtimes. Come to think of it a group of 5 or 10 cachers going out once a month probably impacts the environment less than the transport of one NASCAR racecar, once.

 

Of course I care - or I wouldn't have raised the point, would I?

 

And the extreme examples you cite, presumably to try to prove your point, do nothing to make me feel less of a duty to act responsibly.

 

Pointing to some dramatic excess by others to justify our own excesses is just lazy.

 

While I don't buy into the whole spiel about global warming (that's a separate discussion), if you're worried about environment impact, there are several things more damaging to the environment than cars- air conditioning for one. Should those people in a Southern environment suffer through the heat and discontinue the use of their A/C for an overall impact that is almost immeasurable?

 

Do you consider the “environmental impact” of everything that you do? Washing dishes uses up valuable water- PBS is always after my kids to conserve water (never mind that it’s a renewable resource). However, using paper plates is killing trees. Each article of clothing you buy supports factories which pump more pollution into the air than one car could ever hope to. Practically everything you do can be related to some detrimental impact to the environment.

 

They key point is that those impacts are miniscule and practically immeasurable. Do you really believe that we should entirely change our way of life and reduce our enjoyment of the earth because of these impacts? Perhaps you do, and that’s OK- feel free to join greenfleet and ease your conscious a bit.

 

The consensus seems to be not to push the way you enjoy the game onto other people. I don’t feel my driving to and from a cache, or two, or ten, has an overall negative effect on the environment. Why limit my enjoyment of the game or tell me what I can (and can’t) do just to fit with your beliefs? If you feel strongly about the issue, don’t do that challenge. You’re free to enjoy the game as you see fit, so let others do the same.

Link to comment

Do you consider the “environmental impact” of everything that you do?

 

I guess I do. Not in a very scientific or detailed or onerous fashion but just simple things like avoiding waste by turning off electrical appliances that aren't being used, combining multiple errands into a single car journey, walking rather than using the car, keeping warm by adding a layer of clothing or a blanket - just simple, basic, entirely non-threatening, basic common-sense things like that.

 

Washing dishes uses up valuable water- PBS is always after my kids to conserve water (never mind that it’s a renewable resource). However, using paper plates is killing trees. Each article of clothing you buy supports factories which pump more pollution into the air than one car could ever hope to. Practically everything you do can be related to some detrimental impact to the environment.

 

Yep, yep, yep, yep, yep....

 

Everything we do has an impact on the environment. I'm not some avid campaigner for this sort of thing - I just like to effect simple changes that reduce my miniscule impact whenever I can - sometimes purely from a mercenary point of view because it often saves me money too :)

 

They key point is that those impacts are miniscule and practically immeasurable.

 

And you're sure of that?

 

A world population of 7 billion people impacting on the planet in various ways - miniscule per capita - when combined is completely immeasurable?

 

Do you really believe that we should entirely change our way of life and reduce our enjoyment of the earth because of these impacts? Perhaps you do, and that’s OK- feel free to join greenfleet and ease your conscious a bit.

 

Do you think we should just do whatever we please and then try to walk away when it's all turned bad? I don't see a new, fresh planet popping up any time soon that we can all move to. And I think you mean conscience.

 

The consensus seems to be not to push the way you enjoy the game onto other people. I don’t feel my driving to and from a cache, or two, or ten, has an overall negative effect on the environment. Why limit my enjoyment of the game or tell me what I can (and can’t) do just to fit with your beliefs? If you feel strongly about the issue, don’t do that challenge. You’re free to enjoy the game as you see fit, so let others do the same.

 

And now we're back to caching :)

 

The concensus seems to be that asking questions and sharing views is a bad thing - and yet this forum exists for those very purposes - weird huh? :blink:

Link to comment
The concensus seems to be that asking questions and sharing views is a bad thing - and yet this forum exists for those very purposes - weird huh? :blink:
Really? I don't get that impression at all. I regularly see people posting their views, and other people posting their (different) views. Disagreement doesn't mean that the original posts were "a bad thing", or that the subsequent replies expressing different views were "a bad thing".
Link to comment

 

And the question that's always at the back of my mind is does anybody - Groundspeak included - consider the environmental inmpact of a challenge before hitting the publish button?

 

Do you really care? The environmental impact is minimal. Instead of geocaching they could be riding quads and dirtbikes ripping up natural lands, driving drunk and end up crashing on a mountain and have all the chemicals from a car leak into the water usplly for hundreds and thousands of plants and animals. Or even better, and it's only one word. NASCAR. Or what about all the fuel burned everytime a spacecraft is launched. No, per user, a geocacher has way less impact than other passtimes. Come to think of it a group of 5 or 10 cachers going out once a month probably impacts the environment less than the transport of one NASCAR racecar, once.

 

Of course I care - or I wouldn't have raised the point, would I?

 

And the extreme examples you cite, presumably to try to prove your point, do nothing to make me feel less of a duty to act responsibly.

 

Pointing to some dramatic excess by others to justify our own excesses is just lazy.

 

Every time you breath it adds to your carbon output. Everytime you fire up the PC or smart phone, it too adds to your carbon foot print. I'd suggest turning off all the gadgets and stop emitting your own carbon if you were a serious environmentalist.

Link to comment

Every time you breath it adds to your carbon output. Everytime you fire up the PC or smart phone, it too adds to your carbon foot print. I'd suggest turning off all the gadgets and stop emitting your own carbon if you were a serious environmentalist.

 

More lazy use of ridiculous extremes :laughing:

 

There's a difference between a Conservationist and an Environmentalist. One really cares about the environment with common sense and tested science and the other is an indoctrinated and brainwashed whacko. I am a true Conservationist. Guess which some of us suspect you to be? :ph34r:

Link to comment

Every time you breath it adds to your carbon output. Everytime you fire up the PC or smart phone, it too adds to your carbon foot print. I'd suggest turning off all the gadgets and stop emitting your own carbon if you were a serious environmentalist.

 

More lazy use of ridiculous extremes :laughing:

 

There's a difference between a Conservationist and an Environmentalist. One really cares about the environment with common sense and tested science and the other is an indoctrinated and brainwashed whacko. I am a true Conservationist. Guess which some of us suspect you to be? :ph34r:

 

Yeah - you're right - there's nothing whacko about suggesting someone stop breathing in order to cut their carbon emissions :rolleyes:

Link to comment

Every time you breath it adds to your carbon output. Everytime you fire up the PC or smart phone, it too adds to your carbon foot print. I'd suggest turning off all the gadgets and stop emitting your own carbon if you were a serious environmentalist.

 

More lazy use of ridiculous extremes :laughing:

 

There's a difference between a Conservationist and an Environmentalist. One really cares about the environment with common sense and tested science and the other is an indoctrinated and brainwashed whacko. I am a true Conservationist. Guess which some of us suspect you to be? :ph34r:

 

Ooh boy, talk about using a painted brush to label people and avoid discussions yourself. Sure there may be folks who take their stuff too far, but the definition of environmentalist or muslim or tea party activist are not extreme in itself and to brandish such negatives with any term does disservice to any discussion for any of their beliefs.

Link to comment

Every time you breath it adds to your carbon output. Everytime you fire up the PC or smart phone, it too adds to your carbon foot print. I'd suggest turning off all the gadgets and stop emitting your own carbon if you were a serious environmentalist.

 

More lazy use of ridiculous extremes :laughing:

 

There's a difference between a Conservationist and an Environmentalist. One really cares about the environment with common sense and tested science and the other is an indoctrinated and brainwashed whacko. I am a true Conservationist. Guess which some of us suspect you to be? :ph34r:

 

Yeah - you're right - there's nothing whacko about suggesting someone stop breathing in order to cut their carbon emissions :rolleyes:

 

No, it was nothing more than an example of practice what you preach, in every aspect of your life. I equate it to the vegan animal rights activist that still wears leather shoes and a leather belt.

Link to comment

Every time you breath it adds to your carbon output. Everytime you fire up the PC or smart phone, it too adds to your carbon foot print. I'd suggest turning off all the gadgets and stop emitting your own carbon if you were a serious environmentalist.

 

More lazy use of ridiculous extremes :laughing:

 

There's a difference between a Conservationist and an Environmentalist. One really cares about the environment with common sense and tested science and the other is an indoctrinated and brainwashed whacko. I am a true Conservationist. Guess which some of us suspect you to be? :ph34r:

 

Yeah - you're right - there's nothing whacko about suggesting someone stop breathing in order to cut their carbon emissions :rolleyes:

 

No, it was nothing more than an example of practice what you preach, in every aspect of your life. I equate it to the vegan animal rights activist that still wears leather shoes and a leather belt.

 

And if at any point I had suggested ridiculous extremes - like encouraging people to stop breathing for example - you might have had a point.

Link to comment

Every time you breath it adds to your carbon output. Everytime you fire up the PC or smart phone, it too adds to your carbon foot print. I'd suggest turning off all the gadgets and stop emitting your own carbon if you were a serious environmentalist.

 

More lazy use of ridiculous extremes :laughing:

 

There's a difference between a Conservationist and an Environmentalist. One really cares about the environment with common sense and tested science and the other is an indoctrinated and brainwashed whacko. I am a true Conservationist. Guess which some of us suspect you to be? :ph34r:

 

Yeah - you're right - there's nothing whacko about suggesting someone stop breathing in order to cut their carbon emissions :rolleyes:

 

No, it was nothing more than an example of practice what you preach, in every aspect of your life. I equate it to the vegan animal rights activist that still wears leather shoes and a leather belt.

 

And if at any point I had suggested ridiculous extremes - like encouraging people to stop breathing for example - you might have had a point.

 

IF you were TRULY committed.. you would at the very least power off all of the devices and stop emitting CO2. Until then, lay off the geocaching community about the driving required for challenges.

Link to comment

Do you consider the “environmental impact” of everything that you do?

 

I guess I do. Not in a very scientific or detailed or onerous fashion but just simple things like avoiding waste by turning off electrical appliances that aren't being used, combining multiple errands into a single car journey, walking rather than using the car, keeping warm by adding a layer of clothing or a blanket - just simple, basic, entirely non-threatening, basic common-sense things like that.

 

What's "common-sense" for you, isn't for another person. I live in the middle of nowhere, literally. There's not a store in walking distance and I work an hour away. Could I move closer to my job to lessen my carbon footprint? Sure. Am I going to? NO WAY! I built a log cabin in the woods with no neighbors because I wanted a log cabin in the woods with no neighbors. I don't see anything wrong with the way I choose to live.

 

Washing dishes uses up valuable water- PBS is always after my kids to conserve water (never mind that it’s a renewable resource). However, using paper plates is killing trees. Each article of clothing you buy supports factories which pump more pollution into the air than one car could ever hope to. Practically everything you do can be related to some detrimental impact to the environment.

 

Yep, yep, yep, yep, yep....

 

Everything we do has an impact on the environment. I'm not some avid campaigner for this sort of thing - I just like to effect simple changes that reduce my miniscule impact whenever I can - sometimes purely from a mercenary point of view because it often saves me money too :)

 

If I'm doing any reducing, it's to save money, so we can agree there. I don't tell my kids to turn off the lights because PBS says I should, I do it because my electric bill is three digits long. However, I don't believe that in doing so, I'm having any sort of impact on the environment.

 

They key point is that those impacts are miniscule and practically immeasurable.

 

And you're sure of that?

 

A world population of 7 billion people impacting on the planet in various ways - miniscule per capita - when combined is completely immeasurable?

 

I figure it's a game of averages. All of your conservations efforts are zeroing out my non-efforts, so we come out flush in the end :)

 

Do you really believe that we should entirely change our way of life and reduce our enjoyment of the earth because of these impacts? Perhaps you do, and that’s OK- feel free to join greenfleet and ease your conscious a bit.

 

Do you think we should just do whatever we please and then try to walk away when it's all turned bad? I don't see a new, fresh planet popping up any time soon that we can all move to. And I think you mean conscience.

 

I believe the planet has ways to renew itself. While enough of any activity can certainly have an effect, I don't believe we've hit the level where we are seriously damaging the planet yet. I don't dispute that it's possible we could get there, but I think that as a whole, the small changes companies have made along with some major conservation efforts are what's going to keep us afloat, not my turning off the tap water when I brush my teeth.

 

The consensus seems to be not to push the way you enjoy the game onto other people. I don’t feel my driving to and from a cache, or two, or ten, has an overall negative effect on the environment. Why limit my enjoyment of the game or tell me what I can (and can’t) do just to fit with your beliefs? If you feel strongly about the issue, don’t do that challenge. You’re free to enjoy the game as you see fit, so let others do the same.

 

 

And now we're back to caching :) Didn't we have to get here eventually? Isn't that what this site is about?

 

The concensus seems to be that asking questions and sharing views is a bad thing - and yet this forum exists for those very purposes - weird huh? :blink:

 

It's not a bad thing and I don't think anyone has presented it as so. I'm simply giving you my point of view which differs from yours. We've having a friendly, computerized discussion. No one has run either of us out of town for expressing our opinions. Just because I disagree with you, doesn't mean it's a bad thing. We'd have nothing to talk about if we all agreed...

Link to comment

It's not a bad thing and I don't think anyone has presented it as so. I'm simply giving you my point of view which differs from yours. We've having a friendly, computerized discussion. No one has run either of us out of town for expressing our opinions. Just because I disagree with you, doesn't mean it's a bad thing. We'd have nothing to talk about if we all agreed...

 

Something we agree on at least :)

 

BTW - you misquoted me - think you managed to include your own response as if it were something I'd said - I'd appreciate it if you could fix that? :)

Link to comment

...there's an environmental impact every time we use a vehicle.

 

Which is pretty much the basis of my concern.

 

I usually cache on a bicycle so my environmental impact is minimal. If I'm away from home (i.e. outside of cycling range) I'll drive to an area and then hike. If a challenge cache requires me to drive all over the place to qualify I ignore it, I've got better things to do.

Link to comment

...there's an environmental impact every time we use a vehicle.

 

Which is pretty much the basis of my concern.

 

I usually cache on a bicycle so my environmental impact is minimal. If I'm away from home (i.e. outside of cycling range) I'll drive to an area and then hike. If a challenge cache requires me to drive all over the place to qualify I ignore it, I've got better things to do.

 

I routinely ignore challenges that make me go out of my way to do anything in particular. There is one locally that requires you to find caches in six western states on the same day. One person has actually done it. But apart from the fact that it would simply be a chore, I would think about both the environmental impact and how much I was missing along the way.

 

I try to be conscious of my environmental impact. I think about that when I drive. I do not place caches where people might act as carriers for Sudden Oak Death. I think about whether a cache will result in an area being torn up by searchers. But there is always a trade off. I have gone significantly out of my way to visit a virtual cache at the Toroweap overlook at the Grand Canyon (60 miles from anywhere) or to visit ancient ruins, geological wonders, or even explore abandoned buildings. We are planning a trip to Scotland that will involve not only flying there, but driving to various sites. Undoubtedly there is an environmental impact to all of this. But to do that for a challenge cache? It comes down to the chore part as much as the environmental part.

Edited by geodarts
Link to comment

And the question that's always at the back of my mind is does anybody - Groundspeak included - consider the environmental inmpact of a challenge before hitting the publish button?

 

It's just another cache. Why would the "environmental impact" be any different for a challenge cache container than for a non-challenge cache container?

 

The environmental impact I see is when herds of people rush out to find a cache as soon as it's published. In populated areas, or during events, the impact is noticeable by the creation of "geo trails".

 

Or are you thinking more along the lines of air pollution due to all those cachers driving all over the place? Again, I don't see how a challenge cache would create any more problems than non-challenge caches.

 

See the post above about power trails regarding whether reviewers consider environmental impact.

 

 

B.

 

The question wasn't if reviewers consider it. It was if Groundspeak does. Reviewers don't make the guidelines, Groundspeak does. Groundspeak would be the one to determine if challenge caches contribute to air pollution any more than any other cache.

 

At any rate, there sure are a lot of cars out there on the highway, all the time. Is an extra geocacher or two going to make that much of a difference?

Link to comment

Every time you breath it adds to your carbon output. Everytime you fire up the PC or smart phone, it too adds to your carbon foot print. I'd suggest turning off all the gadgets and stop emitting your own carbon if you were a serious environmentalist.

 

More lazy use of ridiculous extremes :laughing:

 

There's a difference between a Conservationist and an Environmentalist. One really cares about the environment with common sense and tested science and the other is an indoctrinated and brainwashed whacko. I am a true Conservationist. Guess which some of us suspect you to be? :ph34r:

 

Yeah - you're right - there's nothing whacko about suggesting someone stop breathing in order to cut their carbon emissions :rolleyes:

 

No, it was nothing more than an example of practice what you preach, in every aspect of your life. I equate it to the vegan animal rights activist that still wears leather shoes and a leather belt.

 

Or the one that won't show up to the protest at the coal fired power plant until they are done blow drying their hair.

Link to comment

And the question that's always at the back of my mind is does anybody - Groundspeak included - consider the environmental inmpact of a challenge before hitting the publish button?

 

It's just another cache. Why would the "environmental impact" be any different for a challenge cache container than for a non-challenge cache container?

 

The environmental impact I see is when herds of people rush out to find a cache as soon as it's published. In populated areas, or during events, the impact is noticeable by the creation of "geo trails".

 

Or are you thinking more along the lines of air pollution due to all those cachers driving all over the place? Again, I don't see how a challenge cache would create any more problems than non-challenge caches.

 

See the post above about power trails regarding whether reviewers consider environmental impact.

 

 

B.

 

The question wasn't if reviewers consider it. It was if Groundspeak does. Reviewers don't make the guidelines, Groundspeak does. Groundspeak would be the one to determine if challenge caches contribute to air pollution any more than any other cache.

 

At any rate, there sure are a lot of cars out there on the highway, all the time. Is an extra geocacher or two going to make that much of a difference?

 

Oh, does Groundspeak consider it. I'd say no. They are holding a big party this weekend that will have cachers coming from all over the globe.

Link to comment

I don't lurk here normally but I've just seen this as its my challenge which you are referring to. I place Challenge caches for something a bit different for cachers to find and aim to satisfy. Just the same as you place puzzle caches which aren't possible for everyone to solve. And do you think of the environment when you drive miles for one puzzle FTF miles away? and not out of the ordinary? Are you saying the challenge cache is rubbish? Its at a great spot up a hill with a view and a walk and isn't a micro! What else do you want?

Edited by The Magna Defender
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

The first challenge I did was a 50 day streak. It was a real chore by the end and I was awful glad to be done.

 

Now I haven't got much interest in challenges. If I happen to meet the requirements and the cache is not too far out of my way, I will definitely go find it. However, I'm not going to bend over backwards like some people do to complete one.

 

It's pretty much a non-issue for me as there are effectively no challenge caches within 50 miles of me. There are only three caches within 50 miles which are labeled as challenges. One of them is to find at least one cache in each of eight designated gorges. Another is to find a small number of caches from a list of the oldest caches in the area. Challenges are very much a regional thing and in many places where there are very few caches to be found they just don't exist.

 

 

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...