Jump to content

Few New Cape Cod Caches


edexter
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

I've been noticing a change in the number and type of new caches placed on Cape Cod over the past few years. Starting about 5 years ago, micros became the majority of new caches being placed and currently caches listed as "micro, other and not chosen" make up 45% of the active caches (353 of 795). At the same time the number of new caches placed increased 7 fold, going from an annual average of 20 per year from 2001-7 to 138 from 2008-13. So far in 2014 there are been only 20 caches placed (9 are micro or other)

751a22c5-61a4-4414-914d-99e293687ef7.jpg

 

In reviewing who placed the caches in the past, I notice that just 8 cachers accounted for more than half of the currently placed caches (401 of 775 placed and still active from 2001-13) and in 2014 only two of the eight have placed caches (6 of the 20 placed so far, or 30%) while the others have apparently given up the cache placing game. There appears to be a changing of the guard in process as more caches have been archived than placed this year...I'm wondering if this is the case elsewhere as well?

edexter

Link to comment

I have about 125 cape cod finds. I noticed a lot of maintenance issues with CC Caches in the last couple of years. I know that if there were the same type of wet log, lousy container, missing container issues locally, the locals would be screaming. Of the 4 I looked for in August, one was missing, two were okay, but not memorable and one---was very challenging , I DNFd about 5 times and it went to archive immediately after labor day.

 

It has always been a disproportionate type of thing, few hiders hid the bulk of the caches.

 

Locally, due to local issues the best hiders stopped hiding. There was a lot of local political upheaval and many people stopped hiding and some have actually stopped caching. I personally hope to have all my caches out of the field within a year. Some other cachers have started to follow my archivals and have placed new caches.

 

People move, people lose interest, I think one of the reasons why the numbers of hides had dropped is due to the idea that caches are too long in the field, inventory should be rotated.

Link to comment

I do not mean any disrespect by what I say that follows: GC20TJG is the type of cache that should have been replaced with something other. And it should have been killed off a lot sooner than it was.

 

You have GC18QC7, which really should be archived. I get what you are trying to do, it is a nice area for a hike, it is picturesque, but someone is just out there trying to mess with either you or with finders. That cache is out of sorts more than it is in. I DNF'd in 2009 and have checked it since. Somebody is messing with that cache for whatever reason and really when you go caching you want to be able to find.

 

I think part of the reason why there are fewer hides is that there probably are fewer participants and frankly caching on Cape Cod by comparison to other areas leaves a little to be desired, it is just not all that much fun

Link to comment

 

I think part of the reason why there are fewer hides is that there probably are fewer participants and frankly caching on Cape Cod by comparison to other areas leaves a little to be desired, it is just not all that much fun

 

I have to disagree, caching on the cape is a lot of fun. I have slowed way down due to my job getting much busier, the fact I don't have a lot left on the cape left to find and the land we used to camp on in NH has changed hands. As for the lack of new caches, there really hasn't been very many new names popping up on the cape since I joined in 2011. When life gets busy it is much harder, as I am sure you know and that makes both finding and maintaining harder. I haven't placed any new ones because I am having trouble finding time to maintain the ones I have. I hope for that to change and I get to them as I can but why place more if I cannot handle what I have.... As for cache types, to each their own. I like them all I am not 'type specific or prejudiced to any type or size and cannot see why I should give anyone a hard time for playing the game as they see fit.

 

One can only hope more are placed so we can all continue the hobby but since I am unable to find them anyhow I am actually enjoying the fact my numbers 'to find' are climbing no matter how fast or slow.

 

I have even been neglecting the website but the only good thing about winter for me is that it brings more time for all of it.

 

You really can't worry about the things in life that you cannot control or you'll drive yourself mad.

 

Mike

Abby's Followers

http:geocaching-capecod.com

Edited by Abby's Followers
Link to comment

Nope, but that's what I'm wondering: is the decline more wide spread or a local phenomena? In the past month an additional 6 caches have been placed on Cape bringing the YTD total to 26. Four of the new caches were placed by two of the 8 prolific caches mentioned above: the other 6 have yet to place any this year.

Link to comment

I have about 125 cape cod finds. I noticed a lot of maintenance issues with CC Caches in the last couple of years. I know that if there were the same type of wet log, lousy container, missing container issues locally, the locals would be screaming. Of the 4 I looked for in August, one was missing, two were okay, but not memorable and one---was very challenging , I DNFd about 5 times and it went to archive immediately after labor day.

 

It has always been a disproportionate type of thing, few hiders hid the bulk of the caches.

 

Locally, due to local issues the best hiders stopped hiding. There was a lot of local political upheaval and many people stopped hiding and some have actually stopped caching. I personally hope to have all my caches out of the field within a year. Some other cachers have started to follow my archivals and have placed new caches.

 

People move, people lose interest, I think one of the reasons why the numbers of hides had dropped is due to the idea that caches are too long in the field, inventory should be rotated.

 

"is due to the idea that caches are too long in the field, inventory should be rotated."

 

There is a prolific hider in the Medford, Oregon who does a great job with inventory rotation ... about every 14-16 months it seems he archives all of his caches lets the area stay vacant for a while to let others have a chance at hiding. Then gets his hiding MoJo on once again.

 

His rationale is "keeping things fresh"

Link to comment

His rationale is "keeping things fresh"

 

I have always subscribed to this rationale, I have also long felt that if the hides are being placed disproportionately by too few players , it was something of an indicator that the local game was unhealthy in some respect. The old hide to find ratio is an indicator of sorts. A 5000 + finder with no hides, who at every event would announce that he was a finder not a hider kind of turned off the local hiders for they felt that they were being played rather than the game being played.

 

I also believe that the keeping things fresh goes a long way to eliminating a great deal of the maintenance issues that crop up in older abandoned caches. I can PQ, 500 caches with the needs maintenance attribute within 5 miles of my home. that tells me that there is a problem. It has seemed to be over the course of the last couple of years while vacationing on Cape Cod that there were an inordinate number of poorly maintained caches.

Link to comment

I do not have historical data for other areas (If you query for caches geographically you get a current snapshot but nothing about the archived caches so the data is skewed by "survivor bias") but the

2014 Cache Placing Slump link above suggests it is more than a local phenomena. I doubt it's a maintenance issue (and saying that there are 500 caches with a NM log within a 5 mile radius of you is just silly). At any given moment a certain % of caches NM and that might affect hunters but not placers. "Rotating the stock" is a good way for someone who likes to place caches to keep the number they have to maintain manageable. It would increase the number of new placements while keeping the total number of caches level. I'm seeing a decline in both on the Cape. Only a small fraction of cachers place many caches and this is the group, locally at least, that has dropped out this year. These folks have "rotated out" of the placing game. I'm wondering if that is happening on a wider basis. Declining placements elsewhere may indicate that or it could be other factors. Anyone else noticing this in their area?

edexter

Link to comment

The year end total of new Cape caches, thru 12/26/14 is 28. Of these, 5 are puzzles, 4 are multis, and 19 are single stage caches. 11 of the 19 are either P&Gs (6) or walks of 50 yards or less (5). This is the lowest annual total since 2005 when there were 27 caches placed. The average number of caches placed since 2001 is 71. The average of the previous five years is 137. This years' total represents a 75% decline from that...

Link to comment

His rationale is "keeping things fresh"

 

I have always subscribed to this rationale, I have also long felt that if the hides are being placed disproportionately by too few players , it was something of an indicator that the local game was unhealthy in some respect.<snip>

 

I also believe that the keeping things fresh goes a long way to eliminating a great deal of the maintenance issues that crop up in older abandoned caches. <snip>

 

The other side of this coin are the well maintained older caches. I routinely get thanks for keeping 10+ year old hides active. Granted, Raleigh NC isn't the vacation hot spot that Cape Cod is, so the dynamics are a bit different.

Link to comment

The year end total of new Cape caches, thru 12/26/14 is 28. Of these, 5 are puzzles, 4 are multis, and 19 are single stage caches. 11 of the 19 are either P&Gs (6) or walks of 50 yards or less (5). This is the lowest annual total since 2005 when there were 27 caches placed. The average number of caches placed since 2001 is 71. The average of the previous five years is 137. This years' total represents a 75% decline from that...

 

Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Link to comment

I'm sitting at home dealing with a chest cold, so I decided it would be a good time to revise the 2014 stats and update this topic for 2015 (not that many folks are actually interested in basic statistics, but they do help you see the forest for the trees).

With a little over three weeks left in 2015, there have been 43 new physical caches placed on the Cape this year, compared to 37 in 2014 and 138 per year for the previous six years (2008-2013). This is a 71% decline. The "old guard" consisting of 8 cachers who had previously placed a total of 401 caches (51% of the total at the time) placed 10 caches in 2014 and only 1 in 2015. This is a 98% decline and confirms that they no longer play an active role in the game. There are currently 768 active caches on the Cape, down from 861 in 2014, a decline of 11% which tends to hide the actual pace of decline (42 caches placed, 82 archived or currently disabled in 2015). Of the existing active caches, half were placed prior to 2009, but the caches placed after that accounted for 72% of the archived/disabled caches.

So on the Cape, the most prolific cache placers have left the game, leading to a gradual decrease in the number of caches which appears likely to accelerate in the near future. (Cache Quality is another matter, far more important to my thinking, but clearly not something the average smilie seeker is much interested in). Anyway,that's what's happening here. What's up in your neck of the woods?

edexter

Edited by edexter
Link to comment

Here's an update from the first week in April 2016. The final tally for 2015 was 49 new caches, compared to 37 in 2014 and 138 per year for the previous six years (2008-2013). So far in 2016 there are 10 new caches, 6 of them placed by cacher, none by the old guard. There are now 743 caches on the cape, compared to 768 at the end of the 2015 and 861 at the end of 2016.

edexter

Edited by edexter
Link to comment

With the end of summer, driving to the Cape to hunt for Tupperware is once again a reasonable activity. Here's a brief update on this year's changes. Year to date 32 new caches have been placed (half by two cachers) while 21 have been archived for a net gain of 11 caches. Only 5 (15%) of the new ones are listed as micros, so I see that as an improvement as the micro percentage had been running north of 50% in recent years. 60% of the new cape caches are P&Gs with 7 of those actually on or above pavement, but nearly a third of will take you out of sight of your car; one is even on an island. Off Cape, within a 50 mile radius of my home, many more new caches have been placed (462 YTD) but fully 80% are P&Gs and more half are micros or "other"...

edexter

Link to comment

End of the year summary: 39 new caches (below replacement level) were placed by 21 different caches, most placed only one, but two cachers accounted for 16 of the placements. Continuing the trend of "I'm just in it for just the numbers", none of the caches were multis and 18 of the 39 caches (46%) were P&Gs less than 50 feet from parking. Once a hiking activity, geocaching is now mainly drivebys...While there are any number of interesting caches on the Cape, it's mighty slim pickings for those of us who have been around for a while and like to walk about in the woods, as only about a dozen of the caches require even a short hike...

edexter

Link to comment

Few folks seem to be interested in the decline in Cape caches, which certainly fits. As of the first week of April, I count a total of 613 caches on Cape Cod proper (east of the Canal, excludes the Islands) and since I last checked near the end of 2016, 6 new caches have been placed and despite the low terrain ratings onlt a couple appear to be park and grabs. On the other hand, 13 caches have been archived, so the decline continues.

edexter

Link to comment

As of Mid-May 2017 there are 601 active caches on the Cape (10 are disabled, 5 for 6 months or more) as the number of new caches continues to be slightly below the "replacement rate". The newer caches have about the same d/t ratings as the older ones but are decided larger: only 8 of the last 50 caches (16%) have been micros or "other" and they now represent "only" 47% of the placements. Cache quality also seems to be improving with 36% of the 41 caches placed since 1/1/16 having 3 or more fav pts. Compare this with the 577 caches in the 5 mile radius from the center of Providence RI where micros and others total 56% of all caches placed since 2016 (and 56% overall as well) and where only 16% of caches have 3 more more fav pts. despite a much high average number of finds per cache.

Link to comment

     Interest in caching on Cape Cod appears to be reaching a new multi year low as both the number of new caches and the total number of  caches continue to decline.  Thru August 22nd only 13 new caches have been placed with two of them currently disabled.  Meanwhile 96 caches have been archived.  This brings the total number of available caches down to 520 (not including the 14 currently disabled caches).  The primary reason for the archiving of caches appears to be the CO not having the time or interest to maintain them. Since almost all of the archived caches were P&Gs with terrain ratings of 1.5, the maintenance requirements are minimal but real and tend to confirm that just because a cache is easy to place and easy to find doesn't mean it will be maintained.  Though many of the archived caches had been placed by one team, a total of 20 different cachers archived caches and NONE of that group placed ANY caches on the Cape this year.  

    Geocaching, which used to be an activity related to hiking is now essentially a driving activity and more akin to picking up mail at the post office than a walk in the woods.  Indeed, only one of the "non puzzle" caches placed this year appear to require a walk of more than 100 yards while two appear to be in parking lots and most of the rest within 30 feet of parking.  It's clear that all of the new caches placed on the Cape could be found in one day and more than 95% of your time would be spend driving...

     

Link to comment

Well, it's nearly the end of 2017 and the number of active caches on the Cape continues to decline and now stands at 536.  Perhaps of more concern for those of us who are still actively chasing plastic is, as the old crowd drops out of the game, the new folks are not placing many caches.  So far in 2017, with about three weeks to go, only 17 caches have been placed while 106 have been archived, a net loss of 89 caches.  The requirements of ache maintenance appears to be one factor.:  there are limits on how many caches a person can or will maintain so the "caches placed per year" by individuals typically declines, and without new folks getting interested in placing caches, a decline is inevitable.  Since 2015, the number of active caches (that is caches that were placed and have been maintained since) has been falling.  By year the numbers are:  2015:  43  2016:  35 and 2017:17 .  

Of the 17 caches were placed by nine different folks and consist of 6 micros and 11 smalls; 13 traditionals, 3 puzzles and a multi with an average d/t of 1.8/1.7.  Thirteen of the caches appear to be Park&Grabs, and of the four that don't, two have been disabled most of the year.  

Link to comment

The number of new caches placed on the Cape has increased rather dramatically this year with 81 caches placed so far.  While this is a major uptick, it has to be acknowledged that 75% of the caches (57) were placed by one CO (Boxcar 37).  The total number of active caches on the Cape  (actually a 23.7 mile radius from a point just north of Barnstabie) is currently 576, so up 40 (7%) from last year's total of 536.  The new caches are primarily in Nickerson State Forest and require you to hike around which is nice.  A dozen of the caches are currently disabled:  2%  (and most of these will be archived due to lack of timely maintenance if history is any guide.   The number of tiny caches (micros, other and not chosen) continues to decline but they still make up 42% of all placements (75% of the disabled caches are micros).   It's fair to say that a typical Cape Cache "is a bison tube hanging in a cedar tree within 200 feet of the parking"  but that's pretty much true everywhere these days...

Edited by edexter
clarification
Link to comment
On 6/28/2018 at 1:13 PM, edexter said:

The number of new caches placed on the Cape has increased rather dramatically this year with 81 caches placed so far.  While this is a major uptick, it has to be acknowledged that 75% of the caches (57) were placed by one CO (Boxcar 37).  The total number of active caches on the Cape  (actually a 23.7 mile radius from a point just north of Barnstabie) is currently 576, so up 40 (7%) from last year's total of 536.  The new caches are primarily in Nickerson State Forest and require you to hike around which is nice.  A dozen of the caches are currently disabled:  2%  (and most of these will be archived due to lack of timely maintenance if history is any guide.   The number of tiny caches (micros, other and not chosen) continues to decline but they still make up 42% of all placements (75% of the disabled caches are micros).   It's fair to say that a typical Cape Cache "is a bison tube hanging in a cedar tree within 200 feet of the parking"  but that's pretty much true everywhere these days...

 

Glad to see an uptick for once in the Cape Cod area... I lived out in Newport from 2015-2017 and spent some time caching up and down the cape... I definitely noticed an anecdotal trend that was supported by your data.

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 2
×
×
  • Create New...