Jump to content

People building trails to your cache


Followers 4

Recommended Posts

I just want to hear some opinions out there. I'm not quite sure how to feel about this. Breech of etiquette or acceptable? Imagine if you thoughtfully placed a geocache a mile or so away from the nearest parking area in a remote yet scenic area with a nice wide shaded path to the cache, with the purpose of getting cachers out for a nice leisurely walk in a scenic area.

Now imagine that someone else comes along and, starting at the parking coordinates, proceeds to place a cache every 600 feet (or similar short interval) to your cache, in order to "make the trip worthwhile" or "lure more cachers". I've had this happen a few times. Should I be letting this bother me?

Link to comment

I just want to hear some opinions out there. I'm not quite sure how to feel about this. Breech of etiquette or acceptable? Imagine if you thoughtfully placed a geocache a mile or so away from the nearest parking area in a remote yet scenic area with a nice wide shaded path to the cache, with the purpose of getting cachers out for a nice leisurely walk in a scenic area.

Now imagine that someone else comes along and, starting at the parking coordinates, proceeds to place a cache every 600 feet (or similar short interval) to your cache, in order to "make the trip worthwhile" or "lure more cachers". I've had this happen a few times. Should I be letting this bother me?

 

Place it 10 miles from packing. at least it'll be a heck of a lot of your for them.

 

Better yet, beat them to it an you be the one to place all the caches.

Edited by Roman!
Link to comment

I just want to hear some opinions out there. I'm not quite sure how to feel about this. Breech of etiquette or acceptable? Imagine if you thoughtfully placed a geocache a mile or so away from the nearest parking area in a remote yet scenic area with a nice wide shaded path to the cache, with the purpose of getting cachers out for a nice leisurely walk in a scenic area.

Now imagine that someone else comes along and, starting at the parking coordinates, proceeds to place a cache every 600 feet (or similar short interval) to your cache, in order to "make the trip worthwhile" or "lure more cachers". I've had this happen a few times. Should I be letting this bother me?

Well you can do a couple things. One you can take a deep breath and exhale slowly and move on. Of course the nice logs you might have gotten are going to be just another cut'n'paste power trail log since your cache is now part of trail. The other thing you can do is archive your cache. But don't forget to do the power trail caches on the way to pick up your archived cache.

Link to comment

I just want to hear some opinions out there. I'm not quite sure how to feel about this. Breech of etiquette or acceptable? Imagine if you thoughtfully placed a geocache a mile or so away from the nearest parking area in a remote yet scenic area with a nice wide shaded path to the cache, with the purpose of getting cachers out for a nice leisurely walk in a scenic area.

Now imagine that someone else comes along and, starting at the parking coordinates, proceeds to place a cache every 600 feet (or similar short interval) to your cache, in order to "make the trip worthwhile" or "lure more cachers". I've had this happen a few times. Should I be letting this bother me?

Well you can do a couple things. One you can take a deep breath and exhale slowly and move on. Of course the nice logs you might have gotten are going to be just another cut'n'paste power trail log since your cache is now part of trail. The other thing you can do is archive your cache. But don't forget to do the power trail caches on the way to pick up your archived cache.

 

If you do the latter you'd better hurry or you'll be picking up a film canister :laughing:

Link to comment

Yet another compelling reason to hide multis.

...with a lot of physical stages. I agree.

 

From the first lines of the thread starters posting I would say "grin and ignore it". But if it really happens more and more to your caches (last part of the posting), I would develop counter strategies. A long hiking multi, with physical stages blocking the descripted behaviour, is most probably the only working acceptable solution if you still want to place remote caches in your area.

 

If it's just one owner who does this trail thing to your caches, maybe a friendly talk may help, too. But that's not sure.

Edited by Ben0w
Link to comment

Can you give us an example?

 

I was bored, *I* will give you an example. :laughing:Black Cat Bottom

 

All the caches "on the way" (placed this year) are micros. Most by one cacher, but a different cacher dropped another one. Here is the entire cache description for one of them:

 

Just another smiley on your walk on the waterway.

 

Additionally, they are sequentially named, implying they're on the way to his cache. I'm an old school, old time cache in the woods guy, and I've been known to have strong opinions. And maybe this one here is too strong. But if this were me,

I would absolutely archive my cache in disgust. :blink:

Link to comment

I just want to hear some opinions out there. I'm not quite sure how to feel about this. Breech of etiquette or acceptable? Imagine if you thoughtfully placed a geocache a mile or so away from the nearest parking area in a remote yet scenic area with a nice wide shaded path to the cache, with the purpose of getting cachers out for a nice leisurely walk in a scenic area.

Now imagine that someone else comes along and, starting at the parking coordinates, proceeds to place a cache every 600 feet (or similar short interval) to your cache, in order to "make the trip worthwhile" or "lure more cachers". I've had this happen a few times. Should I be letting this bother me?

 

"Make the trip worthwhile" suggests your cache in isolation isn't worthwhile, which is a bit of a poke in the eye. I don't suppose there's anything you can do about it, unless the new trail owner is willing to archive their caches. You could always let the new trail owner know that you don't particularly want to "lure more cachers", you'd rather people willing to make the walk to enjoy the views visited and people who want a dozen smileys for every outing aren't your preferred seekers.

 

Maybe the thing to do is just archive your cache, and maybe list a new one that's obviously so totally different to the trail that it's clearly nothing to do with the trail. If you do that, make sure your cache isn't a film pot and make it very clear on the listing that anyone who signs a log inside a film pot will have their log deleted because they haven't found the cache.

Link to comment
Should I be letting this bother me?

 

I don't know about "should", but I understand that it does bother you. The experience of cache seekers and the logs to your listing are vastly different since the powertrail. You feel what you feel about that.

 

My oldest cache was overrun with a powertrail; when I started getting #42 of 87 logs, I was unhappy. I got a "TFTC" log and spontaneously chased it to the cache page and archived the listing; walked out and picked up my cache. I did not find any of the hides along the way.

 

I have not regretted that decision, I thought I might.

 

Another old cache of mine was similarly overrun by powertrail I've left out. I'm used to the logs and resigned to the "another smiley along the trail" aspect.

 

One of the effects of the both powertrails is to cut down sharply on finds of the scattered not-a-powertrail caches in the adjacent state forest

(one of mine, about 1/2 mile off the powertrail has been found once while the closest powertrail cache has been found 191 times). I'd guess this is typical of powertrails everywhere.

Link to comment
1401612125[/url]' post='5386771']
1401604212[/url]' post='5386755']

Can you give us an example?

 

I was bored, *I* will give you an example. :laughing:Black Cat Bottom

 

All the caches "on the way" (placed this year) are micros. Most by one cacher, but a different cacher dropped another one. Here is the entire cache description for one of them:

 

Just another smiley on your walk on the waterway.

 

Additionally, they are sequentially named, implying they're on the way to his cache. I'm an old school, old time cache in the woods guy, and I've been known to have strong opinions. And maybe this one here is too strong. But if this were me,

I would absolutely archive my cache in disgust. :blink:

 

I absolutely agree. And it's a shame, because the power trail mentality wins again. The rare time a trail opens up around here, I place 2 to prevent a power tail from taking over. I space them out so that it's no longer attractive to the power trial types - they won't want to place just one or two in between and they won't want to start at the PT furthest away (most PTs like to start at a trailhead). If they do start after the 2nd cache, at least visitors will get two non-PTs before they begin the spew.

Link to comment

I won't quote Lone R, since it's long enough already, and some quotes are broken. I found another one of the OP's cacheswhere this happened. A guy dropped 7 micros and a small on the way to the OP's nice regular. At least he didn't name his caches implying they were on the way to your like the first two people.

 

I dunno man, this must be a Mississippi thing. I think it's as rude as someone farting in your cubicle. This isn't a cache here, a cache there by different people, it's just what the thread title says; people purposely dropping a trail of micro turds specifically on the way to one of his caches.

 

Funny they never go PAST your caches, eh? Or maybe that's coming in the future. :P

Link to comment

I know I'm in the minority here but I'll give it a go.

Firstly, our favorite caching experience is a long hike in the woods. That said we enjoy looking for caches, all types. I can't understand how a cacher would feel that looking for additional caches along the way somehow destroys the experience....nothing wrong with hiking if thats what you want to do, and we do ,but I like finding caches along the way. Had I hidden the original I would have probably seeded a few along the way. IMO a long multi would not be good but then I've never liked long multi's.

I believe I've met the CO and I sympathize with what can happen re the logs to the cache. I will say though that last week we found two of my favorite caches smack in the middle of a monster power trail and they took some getting to ( I told my wife in the old days I would have made the 8 hr round trip just to find these caches.....again, I was glad there were others to find along the way). They both received nice logs, favorite points, and will get posted pictures where caches found on the PT got a cut/paste.

These days you can get a TFTC log on just about anything you put out.

Link to comment

I have not looked at the CO's hides, but have done many cache hikes where I had a destination cache at the end whether its the end of the hike or summit, a very old cache, or both. Some of these caches, say like GC17 still have few to no caches on the way. Some like GCD have many before it, obviously hidden there because likely folks are going to find it on the way. I do not think they take away from the final cache, in fact, I think its nice to have some caches to find on the way. If your cache is cool enough on its own due to a nice summit, or the cache being unique, or its an old cache....then folks will remember yours most and then remember they were lucky to get some bonus caches on the way.

Edited by lamoracke
Link to comment

I know I'm in the minority here but I'll give it a go.

Firstly, our favorite caching experience is a long hike in the woods. That said we enjoy looking for caches, all types. I can't understand how a cacher would feel that looking for additional caches along the way somehow destroys the experience....nothing wrong with hiking if thats what you want to do, and we do ,but I like finding caches along the way. Had I hidden the original I would have probably seeded a few along the way. IMO a long multi would not be good but then I've never liked long multi's.

I believe I've met the CO and I sympathize with what can happen re the logs to the cache. I will say though that last week we found two of my favorite caches smack in the middle of a monster power trail and they took some getting to ( I told my wife in the old days I would have made the 8 hr round trip just to find these caches.....again, I was glad there were others to find along the way). They both received nice logs, favorite points, and will get posted pictures where caches found on the PT got a cut/paste.

These days you can get a TFTC log on just about anything you put out.

 

I don't think you're in the minority, I am known to be grumpy. My name is Mr.Yuck for pete's sake. It's just in this specific case, I don't know, people personally creating all micro trails specifically to his caches (gee, you think they would ever put all regular trails?) just rubs me the wrong way. I've never heard of anything like it. Sure, I've seen caches build up on trails to once lonely caches over time, but this, no. I vote rude. :P

 

Hey, at the risk of being banned, there's a points centered smartphone game where something like this is common, and downright accepted. One person will place the first few gamepieces in a certain park, and others place many more while finding the original ones. Maybe all these people doing this to the OP's caches play such a game. :ph34r:

Link to comment

I can't help but read all this as, "I told everyone about this really great spot, and I'm really annoyed that now everyone actually goes there."

 

More like, "i told everyone about this really great spot, and I'm really annoyed that someone went out there and placed a bunch of micros that are only there because they were on the trail to my cache,"

 

Which now will start getting logs more consistent with a pose trail, since it is now essentially the last stop of one, save for one more cache that was just placed on the trail over a mile past my original, though I'm guessing that one will get skipped a bit...

Link to comment

Only you can decide if it should bother you. It probably wouldn't bother me, but it has not happened to me. I have yet to do a proper power trail, so I have not had to resort to copy and paste logs yet, but I will bear this in mind when I encounter them and log appropriately (meaning well thought out caches on the trail will not get copy and paste logs).

Edited by Chrysalides
Link to comment

People who place power trails around existing caches are one thing; cachers who lump existing caches into their cut-and-paste power trail logs are another. It's the latter that sounds like the issue.

 

If it were my cache, I would start with a giant note both in the container (it is a good-sized container, right?) and in the description telling people that my cache is not part of the series and if they enjoyed finding it, that I would appreciate hearing about it in their log. After that, if I wasn't getting individualized logs most of the time, I'd probably archive it.

Link to comment
I would absolutely archive my cache in disgust.
If an old-school power trail had developed naturally, with a dozen other caches appearing along the trail, hidden by various owners in various styles, I wouldn't mind. But as it has been described, with the original "Nice Cache at a Great Location" being subsumed into someone else's NCGL trail, becoming merely the final cache after completing NCGL-01 through NCGL-20, I think I agree. The cache would no longer be fulfilling my original purpose, so it is time to archive it.

 

Of course, before I archived it, I might prepare a replacement cache. Something within about 400ft of my original cache would be nice, and perhaps a 5-star puzzle to get the coordinates. Better yet, it could be a physical stage for a 5-star puzzle multi-cache, just to make sure they still have to solve the puzzle, and can't brute-force the final as easily.

Link to comment

I understand how you feel! We have a few EarthCaches. One of them suddenly became part of a powertrail with several hundreds of caches. Sure we did get a lot of logs, but it were all the same copy-paste logs and there was a big lack of answers emailed to us. We were quite happy when that PT was archived :P

Link to comment

Of course, before I archived it, I might prepare a replacement cache. Something within about 400ft of my original cache would be nice, and perhaps a 5-star puzzle to get the coordinates. Better yet, it could be a physical stage for a 5-star puzzle multi-cache, just to make sure they still have to solve the puzzle, and can't brute-force the final as easily.

Of course that's the the key. You need to place your puzzle just far enough beyond your original cache so that someone can't squeeze in another micro. I have a puzzle that was the first cache on the trail it's on. Over time that trail got filled in with other caches. Now people will brute force the puzzle looking for spots that match the hint in the short section where there is room for another cache.

 

As far as the OP. I can sympathize because my caches tend to be among the first on a trail or in an area. In the past, the area filled in over time with others leaving at most a few caches when the went to explore. Nowadays, if you find a new trail and share it with one cache, the next person gobbles up the rest of the trail with a power trail. But I think of the serenity prayer. I accept that I have no power over how others play the game. If someone thinks "Cool, a new trail with only one cache, I can create a powertrail here and all the numbers cachers will get buckets of WIGAS's" there isn't anything I can do to stop this.

 

While I like the long logs when someone has done extra effort to find my cache, I'm certainly not hiding caches to get long logs. Sometimes, I get logs from someone leaving cut and paste logs and when they get to my cache will say "This was our main goal for today" followed by the cut and paste part. It's not a long log, but he extra sentence makes it all worth it.

Link to comment

I can't help but read all this as, "I told everyone about this really great spot, and I'm really annoyed that now everyone actually goes there."

 

More like, "i told everyone about this really great spot, and I'm really annoyed that someone went out there and placed a bunch of micros that are only there because they were on the trail to my cache,"

 

Which now will start getting logs more consistent with a pose trail, since it is now essentially the last stop of one, save for one more cache that was just placed on the trail over a mile past my original, though I'm guessing that one will get skipped a bit...

 

You might have noticed over the years (I see you joined the year after me), that these forums are often frequented by "old timers". Not that every old timer has an opinion such as me on this matter. But the people doing this are the Geocaching mainstream, not us. I notice one of them has 4,500 finds in just over 2 years of Geocaching. The masses in the mainstream certainly have no problem with this. :P

Link to comment
1401612125[/url]' post='5386771']
1401604212[/url]' post='5386755']

Can you give us an example?

 

I was bored, *I* will give you an example. :laughing:Black Cat Bottom

 

All the caches "on the way" (placed this year) are micros. Most by one cacher, but a different cacher dropped another one. Here is the entire cache description for one of them:

 

Just another smiley on your walk on the waterway.

 

Additionally, they are sequentially named, implying they're on the way to his cache. I'm an old school, old time cache in the woods guy, and I've been known to have strong opinions. And maybe this one here is too strong. But if this were me,

I would absolutely archive my cache in disgust. :blink:

 

I absolutely agree. And it's a shame, because the power trail mentality wins again.

 

Hardly a power trail. There were 5 micros placed in March 2014. The OP's cache was placed in December 2012 and has only been found 11 times. The quality of the logs hasn't changed since the cache was hidden. I would think more caches on the way to your cache would mean more people would seek your cache out and this is a *good* thing. Again, I don't see the problem. I try to place caches with swag myself, but there's no need to have a box full of swag every 161 meters. People come for the walk, not to go shopping.

Link to comment

Which now will start getting logs more consistent with a pose trail,

 

Wait. This hasn't happened yet. The logs are fine. You are agonizing about something that *may* happen?

You made me look. If it is the one I'm seeing, it's not your copy and paste power trail.

 

Edit : I found two, but they may not be the caches that the OP is referring to.

 

Anyway, my purpose for hiding a traditional cache is two-fold :

 

1) to bring people to a spot and point out something interesting to them, and / or

2) to give other geocachers another geocache to hunt for.

 

So a trail leading to where I want to bring people out to would actually be in my interest.

 

I appreciate nice logs, but I do not hide a cache to solicit nice logs. I'm not telling anyone to change their expectations, but I'd like to point out that trying to control something that you ultimately have no control over will only lead to disappointment and frustration.

Edited by Chrysalides
Link to comment
1401612125[/url]' post='5386771']
1401604212[/url]' post='5386755']

Can you give us an example?

 

I was bored, *I* will give you an example. :laughing:Black Cat Bottom

 

All the caches "on the way" (placed this year) are micros. Most by one cacher, but a different cacher dropped another one. Here is the entire cache description for one of them:

 

Just another smiley on your walk on the waterway.

 

Additionally, they are sequentially named, implying they're on the way to his cache. I'm an old school, old time cache in the woods guy, and I've been known to have strong opinions. And maybe this one here is too strong. But if this were me,

I would absolutely archive my cache in disgust. :blink:

 

I absolutely agree. And it's a shame, because the power trail mentality wins again.

 

Hardly a power trail. There were 5 micros placed in March 2014. The OP's cache was placed in December 2012 and has only been found 11 times. The quality of the logs hasn't changed since the cache was hidden. I would think more caches on the way to your cache would mean more people would seek your cache out and this is a *good* thing. Again, I don't see the problem. I try to place caches with swag myself, but there's no need to have a box full of swag every 161 meters. People come for the walk, not to go shopping.

 

micros in the woods, so to speak. Cheap and easy. We don't even know what the containers are, maybe they're pill bottles (the new free micro container, since film canisters are becoming rare). They're not hiding 5 ammo boxes or lock-n-locks in the woods, are they? And, I sound like a broken record, but they are specifically being hidden on the way to his caches. I've not seen that before. Broken record, again. :P

 

Could 4,500 find in 2 years number hounds leave us and our 2 mile round trip hikes to a regular sized containers alone, and not turn them into numbers grabs? For crying out loud, at least ask the guy if he's OK with it. Can it be done under the guidelines? Of course. The original question was if it was a breach of etiquette. I believe it is. Do not come into my cubicle to ask me a question, and fart in it, please. :o

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

Can you give us an example?

 

I was bored, *I* will give you an example. :laughing:Black Cat Bottom

 

All the caches "on the way" (placed this year) are micros. Most by one cacher, but a different cacher dropped another one. Here is the entire cache description for one of them:

 

Just another smiley on your walk on the waterway.

 

Additionally, they are sequentially named, implying they're on the way to his cache. I'm an old school, old time cache in the woods guy, and I've been known to have strong opinions. And maybe this one here is too strong. But if this were me,

I would absolutely archive my cache in disgust. :blink:

 

I absolutely agree. And it's a shame, because the power trail mentality wins again.

 

Hardly a power trail. There were 5 micros placed in March 2014. The OP's cache was placed in December 2012 and has only been found 11 times. The quality of the logs hasn't changed since the cache was hidden. I would think more caches on the way to your cache would mean more people would seek your cache out and this is a *good* thing. Again, I don't see the problem. I try to place caches with swag myself, but there's no need to have a box full of swag every 161 meters. People come for the walk, not to go shopping.

 

If there has to be a micro every 161m to the cache at least the CO could make it interesting. For many cachers the swag size caches mean that each one will be unique in their own way. Each container having different items to paw through. A micro every 161m is usually the same-old-same-old - strips of paper in some form of tiny container.

 

And as has been pointed out, often when there's a PT situation, even a small PT, finders assume the same person planted all of the caches and thank that PT CO for their effort. I have one cache near a PT and often got logs thanking the PT owners. I eventually put a note in our cache listing (at the top of the description) saying it is not part of the nearby power trail and belonged to us, not the PT owner. Thankfully around here, most cachers appear to read the cache listing and thank you notes do not mention the power trail.

 

Anyway, the next time the OP plants a cache on an empty trail, it might be useful to plant 2 - one about 100m from the trailhead and then the final one. That should increase traffic to his final cache and deter PT-type-owners from flooding the trail.

 

Link to comment

micros in the woods, so to speak. Cheap and easy. We don't even know what the containers are, maybe they're pill bottles (the new free micro container, since film canisters are becoming rare). They're not hiding 5 ammo boxes or lock-n-locks in the woods, are they?

 

Yes --- this ^^

Link to comment

 

micros in the woods, so to speak. Cheap and easy. We don't even know what the containers are, maybe they're pill bottles (the new free micro container, since film canisters are becoming rare). They're not hiding 5 ammo boxes or lock-n-locks in the woods, are they?

 

Preform soda bottles.soda-bottle-preforms-756436.jpg

Link to comment

I can't help but read all this as, "I told everyone about this really great spot, and I'm really annoyed that now everyone actually goes there."

More like, "i told everyone about this really great spot, and I'm really annoyed that someone went out there and placed a bunch of micros that are only there because they were on the trail to my cache,"

I'm honestly not seeing how those two are significantly different. You told your friends -- the geocaching community -- about a great place you've discovered, and now you're upset that there was someone there the next time you looked. What did you expect?

 

Which now will start getting logs more consistent with a pose trail, since it is now essentially the last stop of one, save for one more cache that was just placed on the trail over a mile past my original, though I'm guessing that one will get skipped a bit...

"How dare they actually believe me when I suggested this would be a good place to geocache!"

 

I'd just be honored that they agreed with me, and I'd expect many more visits to my cache, which I'd think was great. Instead, you're complaining because they're having fun wrong. And the other responder gets extra credit for taking it all the way to "I had to leave. They were having fun wrong." You haven't threatened to archive yet, I don't think, but if you do, I'd just shrug and decide you didn't really think that was such a great place for a cache, after all.

Link to comment

If there has to be a micro every 161m to the cache at least the CO could make it interesting. For many cachers the swag size caches mean that each one will be unique in their own way. Each container having different items to paw through. A micro every 161m is usually the same-old-same-old - strips of paper in some form of tiny container.

 

I usually try to do something different with each of my caches. I have a number of creative micros with cache guardians. However, I don't think it's necessary that every cache be like that. I went for a nice walk the other day in a nice area and found a series of pill bottles. It would have been nice for the occasional one to be larger so I could dump some travel bugs, but other than that, I had a great time.

Link to comment

Yet another compelling reason to hide multis.

 

Exactly. Multis are a great way to reduce the proliferation of mindless power trails.

 

And a related issue.. Perhaps the original cache was rated a 3.5 terrain due to the remote location, but now it is only 529 feet from another cache. So is it now a simple 1.5x1.5?

Edited by edscott
Link to comment

I know I'm in the minority here but I'll give it a go.

Firstly, our favorite caching experience is a long hike in the woods. That said we enjoy looking for caches, all types. I can't understand how a cacher would feel that looking for additional caches along the way somehow destroys the experience....nothing wrong with hiking if thats what you want to do, and we do ,but I like finding caches along the way. Had I hidden the original I would have probably seeded a few along the way. IMO a long multi would not be good but then I've never liked long multi's.

I believe I've met the CO and I sympathize with what can happen re the logs to the cache. I will say though that last week we found two of my favorite caches smack in the middle of a monster power trail and they took some getting to ( I told my wife in the old days I would have made the 8 hr round trip just to find these caches.....again, I was glad there were others to find along the way). They both received nice logs, favorite points, and will get posted pictures where caches found on the PT got a cut/paste.

These days you can get a TFTC log on just about anything you put out.

 

I don't think you're in the minority, I am known to be grumpy. My name is Mr.Yuck for pete's sake. It's just in this specific case, I don't know, people personally creating all micro trails specifically to his caches (gee, you think they would ever put all regular trails?) just rubs me the wrong way. I've never heard of anything like it. Sure, I've seen caches build up on trails to once lonely caches over time, but this, no. I vote rude. :P

 

Hey, at the risk of being banned, there's a points centered smartphone game where something like this is common, and downright accepted. One person will place the first few gamepieces in a certain park, and others place many more while finding the original ones. Maybe all these people doing this to the OP's caches play such a game. :ph34r:

 

I agree, i don't think Bamboozle is in the minority. Power trails are the game of choice for many out there since quantity is what they crave. Quality is out the window for most.

 

Imo, it is rude but i'm not sure i would archive my cache if this happened. One thing is for sure, i'd have no problem ignoring and walking right by the pt caches that littered the trail while on the way to the nice looking cache towards the end. ;)

Link to comment

snipped...

 

And a related issue.. Perhaps the original cache was rated a 3.5 terrain due to the remote location, but now it is only 529 feet from another cache. So is it now a simple 1.5x1.5?

 

If it's a three mile trek from the parking to the cache, it's still three miles to the cache even if there's another cache 0.1miles away...

 

Who's to say a cacher will or won't look for/find the caches on the way? (Or on the way back? :laughing: )

Edited by Bear and Ragged
Link to comment

I absolutely agree. And it's a shame, because the power trail mentality wins again. The rare time a trail opens up around here, I place 2 to prevent a power tail from taking over. I space them out so that it's no longer attractive to the power trial types - they won't want to place just one or two in between and they won't want to start at the PT furthest away (most PTs like to start at a trailhead). If they do start after the 2nd cache, at least visitors will get two non-PTs before they begin the spew.

 

A nice long multi with stages 1000' apart helps prevent powertrails as well. :)

Link to comment

snipped...

 

And a related issue.. Perhaps the original cache was rated a 3.5 terrain due to the remote location, but now it is only 529 feet from another cache. So is it now a simple 1.5x1.5?

 

If it's a three mile trek from the parking to the cache, it's still three miles to the cache even if there's another cache 0.1miles away...

 

Who's to say a cacher will or won't look for/find the caches on the way? (Or on the way back? :laughing: )

 

So why do we have all these power trails of 1.5x1.5x1.5x1.5x1.5x1.5 ad nauseam when the ones in the middle are further from parking than the ones at each end?

Link to comment
So why do we have all these power trails of 1.5x1.5x1.5x1.5x1.5x1.5 ad nauseam when the ones in the middle are further from parking than the ones at each end?
My guess is that the owner is creating copy-and-paste cache descriptions for the copy-and-paste caches. The ones close to the parking lot might be T1. The ones a couple miles away might be T2, or even higher. But they all get a T1.5 as part of their copy-and-paste cache descriptions.
Link to comment

 

micros in the woods, so to speak. Cheap and easy. We don't even know what the containers are, maybe they're pill bottles (the new free micro container, since film canisters are becoming rare). They're not hiding 5 ammo boxes or lock-n-locks in the woods, are they?

 

Preform soda bottles.soda-bottle-preforms-756436.jpg

 

These are about the best micro container there is.....indestructible and water tight.

Link to comment

I just want to hear some opinions out there. I'm not quite sure how to feel about this. Breech of etiquette or acceptable? Imagine if you thoughtfully placed a geocache a mile or so away from the nearest parking area in a remote yet scenic area with a nice wide shaded path to the cache, with the purpose of getting cachers out for a nice leisurely walk in a scenic area.

Now imagine that someone else comes along and, starting at the parking coordinates, proceeds to place a cache every 600 feet (or similar short interval) to your cache, in order to "make the trip worthwhile" or "lure more cachers". I've had this happen a few times. Should I be letting this bother me?

 

Ok, i know the caches well, I have done them all. I am the offending party that placed 1 of the caches. I really didn't think about it like that when i placed it. Mine was more of a little jab at the other hider that she missed a spot,lol. Matter of fact we were planning to do your original one that same weekend when the others popped up. Personally it wouldn't bother me if a trail was placed to a cache of ours, it has happened and finds on the cache did pick up. But I can also see your point too. Like I said the single one I placed was really just a little poke. If you would like me to archive it I will without a thought. It would not offend me or cause any bad feelings at all. Now i just ask that you go tie a ribbon on the rock revenge, lol

Link to comment

 

micros in the woods, so to speak. Cheap and easy. We don't even know what the containers are, maybe they're pill bottles (the new free micro container, since film canisters are becoming rare). They're not hiding 5 ammo boxes or lock-n-locks in the woods, are they?

 

Preform soda bottles.soda-bottle-preforms-756436.jpg

 

These are about the best micro container there is.....indestructible and water tight.

 

That's exactly what they all are

Link to comment

I just want to hear some opinions out there. I'm not quite sure how to feel about this. Breech of etiquette or acceptable? Imagine if you thoughtfully placed a geocache a mile or so away from the nearest parking area in a remote yet scenic area with a nice wide shaded path to the cache, with the purpose of getting cachers out for a nice leisurely walk in a scenic area.

Now imagine that someone else comes along and, starting at the parking coordinates, proceeds to place a cache every 600 feet (or similar short interval) to your cache, in order to "make the trip worthwhile" or "lure more cachers". I've had this happen a few times. Should I be letting this bother me?

 

Ok, i know the caches well, I have done them all. I am the offending party that placed 1 of the caches. I really didn't think about it like that when i placed it. Mine was more of a little jab at the other hider that she missed a spot,lol. Matter of fact we were planning to do your original one that same weekend when the others popped up. Personally it wouldn't bother me if a trail was placed to a cache of ours, it has happened and finds on the cache did pick up. But I can also see your point too. Like I said the single one I placed was really just a little poke. If you would like me to archive it I will without a thought. It would not offend me or cause any bad feelings at all. Now i just ask that you go tie a ribbon on the rock revenge, lol

 

A local has heard about the thread! I'm glad you don't seem to feel "called out", or being talked about behind your back. Your cache is pretty funny the way you call it "minus 1". :) You notice I'm probably one of the loudest mouths in the thread. Basically, yes, I feel it's a breach of etiquette to create a "mini power trail" trail to someone's hiking cache. I think it would be proper to email the hiking cache owner and ask if they mind. Yes, they don't "own" the trail, but again, I mean proper etiquette. Pork King came here because he thought this was unusual, the fact the trails were placed specifically to his caches, and I think it is. I've never seen nor heard of anything like it in 11 years of caching. I believe it's a highly regional case. I don't know, who's the first one to do it in the area? Everyone else probably just followed suit, and rolled that way. That is AFTER power trails were allowed, that's only been 5 years at the most.

Link to comment

I miss the days when getting to the cache at the end of the trail was the accomplishment and "made it worthwhile". Chalk one up for the numbers crowd, I guess.

Nothing is different about the original cache. Anything you think makes it no longer worthwhile is entirely in your head. There's no one else to blame your disappointment on but yourself, so stop pretending it's all "the numbers crowd's" fault.

 

I admit that I can't sympathize with the OP, but what bothers me is the fact that they feel entitled to dictate what caches are placed in that area just because they placed the first one. Complain about power trails if you must, complain about bad hides or poor containers if appropriate, but I really have no patience for this "not on my trail!" attitude. I'm kinda surprise the consensus is so heavily supporting it.

Link to comment

I just want to hear some opinions out there. I'm not quite sure how to feel about this. Breech of etiquette or acceptable? Imagine if you thoughtfully placed a geocache a mile or so away from the nearest parking area in a remote yet scenic area with a nice wide shaded path to the cache, with the purpose of getting cachers out for a nice leisurely walk in a scenic area.

Now imagine that someone else comes along and, starting at the parking coordinates, proceeds to place a cache every 600 feet (or similar short interval) to your cache, in order to "make the trip worthwhile" or "lure more cachers". I've had this happen a few times. Should I be letting this bother me?

 

Ok, i know the caches well, I have done them all. I am the offending party that placed 1 of the caches. I really didn't think about it like that when i placed it. Mine was more of a little jab at the other hider that she missed a spot,lol. Matter of fact we were planning to do your original one that same weekend when the others popped up. Personally it wouldn't bother me if a trail was placed to a cache of ours, it has happened and finds on the cache did pick up. But I can also see your point too. Like I said the single one I placed was really just a little poke. If you would like me to archive it I will without a thought. It would not offend me or cause any bad feelings at all. Now i just ask that you go tie a ribbon on the rock revenge, lol

 

For heavens sake, don't archive your cache. Place more! That looks like a nice long trail. I'm sure people would love to explore more of it.

Link to comment

I just want to hear some opinions out there. I'm not quite sure how to feel about this. Breech of etiquette or acceptable? Imagine if you thoughtfully placed a geocache a mile or so away from the nearest parking area in a remote yet scenic area with a nice wide shaded path to the cache, with the purpose of getting cachers out for a nice leisurely walk in a scenic area.

Now imagine that someone else comes along and, starting at the parking coordinates, proceeds to place a cache every 600 feet (or similar short interval) to your cache, in order to "make the trip worthwhile" or "lure more cachers". I've had this happen a few times. Should I be letting this bother me?

 

Ok, i know the caches well, I have done them all. I am the offending party that placed 1 of the caches. I really didn't think about it like that when i placed it. Mine was more of a little jab at the other hider that she missed a spot,lol. Matter of fact we were planning to do your original one that same weekend when the others popped up. Personally it wouldn't bother me if a trail was placed to a cache of ours, it has happened and finds on the cache did pick up. But I can also see your point too. Like I said the single one I placed was really just a little poke. If you would like me to archive it I will without a thought. It would not offend me or cause any bad feelings at all. Now i just ask that you go tie a ribbon on the rock revenge, lol

 

A local has heard about the thread! I'm glad you don't seem to feel "called out", or being talked about behind your back. Your cache is pretty funny the way you call it "minus 1". :) You notice I'm probably one of the loudest mouths in the thread. Basically, yes, I feel it's a breach of etiquette to create a "mini power trail" trail to someone's hiking cache. I think it would be proper to email the hiking cache owner and ask if they mind. Yes, they don't "own" the trail, but again, I mean proper etiquette. Pork King came here because he thought this was unusual, the fact the trails were placed specifically to his caches, and I think it is. I've never seen nor heard of anything like it in 11 years of caching. I believe it's a highly regional case. I don't know, who's the first one to do it in the area? Everyone else probably just followed suit, and rolled that way. That is AFTER power trails were allowed, that's only been 5 years at the most.

 

No i don't feel "called out" at all. Some of the other hiders might, lol But that's their problem. I know Pork King and he's a stand up guy. I understand where he's coming from because this has happened on several of his hides. I guess i really don't have a opinion one way or the other. It wouldn't bother me on mine, but that's just me. Every man is entitled to his own thoughts. I didn't go in there with the thought of placing a cache. But when i saw the open spot she left, i couldn't resist. I guess to understand that you would have to be from around here,lol But i would archive it in a heartbeat if Pork asked me to.

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...
Followers 4
×
×
  • Create New...