Terrain Rating

[JFowlerGreene]

I just hid a geocache that is up in a tree. It is hard to maneuver up, with strange footholds, and is about 15 feet off the ground. Is this a qualifier to be a 5/5 cache?

[+Team Microdot]

I'd say no.

 

If you can climb the tree without specialist equipment such as ropes or ladders then it's not going to be a T5.

 

It would only be a D5 if, once you were in the right place, the cache was still very difficult to find.

[+The A-Team]

I just hid a geocache that is up in a tree. It is hard to maneuver up, with strange footholds, and is about 15 feet off the ground. Is this a qualifier to be a 5/5 cache?

Based on your description, no. From the Help Center:

D5: The most extreme mental challenge. Requires specialized knowledge, skills, tools, or significant effort to find, solve, or open.

T5: Requires specialized equipment such as scuba gear, a boat, rock climbing gear, or similar.

Your cache doesn't seem to match either of these. You haven't described how difficult it is to locate, but I assume it isn't "the most extreme mental challenge", so it likely isn't a D5. Also, if there are footholds already there, then specialized equipment isn't required and it likely isn't a T5.

[+narcissa]

Typically, tree climbs around here are 4-ish.

[+J Grouchy]

I'd say no to a T5, but would also recommend throwing in clear "CYA" warnings in the description explaining the potential hazard or, at the very least, clearly pointing them to the terrain rating. I have one hidden in side of a cliff in an old quarry. It doesn't require special equipment, but the danger is real...so I made sure to make note of that first thing in the description.

[+wmpastor]

I agree with a 4.0 rating, maybe 3.5. It's a true climb, not way up high but tricky and difficult nevertheless. However, no special equipment is needed, so that probably eliminates 4.5 or higher. So likely 4.0 for terrain.

 

Difficulty is a completely different animal. It's based on searching difficulty once you're at GZ. For example, if it's easily visible from the ground or when up in the tree, it could have a *terrain* rating of 4.0, but a *difficulty* rating as low as 1.0 or 1.5.

 

People sometimes forget that the two ratings are completely independent of each other.

[+Voltgloss]

Also, regardless of D/T rating, I'd suggest making sure to add the "tree climb" attribute.

[+The A-Team]

As a side note, many of the 5/5 caches I've seen really aren't 5/5. Usually the difficulty is far lower in reality, and sometimes specialized equipment isn't required to get to the cache, negating the T5. I've seen a case where a cache rated as a 5/5 would more accurately be rated as a 2/3.5 at worst, though I think that may have been a "liar cache" and/or one hidden specifically to enable their friend to fill in their Fizzy grid.

[+colleda]

And be prepared for "I found it but couldn't reach it" logs. Hence log not signed but still claimed a find instead of DNF.

[+narcissa]

And be prepared for "I found it but couldn't reach it" logs. Hence log not signed but still claimed a find instead of DNF.

 

And also the take it down, pass it around logs. Nothing you can do about those!

[+niraD]

I just hid a geocache that is up in a tree. It is hard to maneuver up, with strange footholds, and is about 15 feet off the ground. Is this a qualifier to be a 5/5 cache?

My first thought was that it sounds like a T3 cache I found a while back. But that might have been less than 15 feet up, and the footholds weren't particularly "strange" (whatever that means). So maybe yours is a T3.5 or even T4.

 

But nothing in your description makes it sound like it's T5, and certainly not D5.

[+Touchstone]

Special equipment kind of defines a Terrain 5 in my mind. Difficulty is somewhat arbitrary IMO. If I can't find it, it's automatically a D5

[+NYPaddleCacher]

And be prepared for "I found it but couldn't reach it" logs. Hence log not signed but still claimed a find instead of DNF.

 

And also the take it down, pass it around logs. Nothing you can do about those!

 

Apparently a friend that is willing and able to climb trees is special equipment. There is, of course, nothing anyone can do about someone watching someone else do all the work and claim the T5 find, but it seems pretty cheesy to claim to have done something that is supposed to be difficult when you haven't earned it.

[+WearyTraveler]

 

Apparently a friend that is willing and able to climb trees is special equipment. There is, of course, nothing anyone can do about someone watching someone else do all the work and claim the T5 find, but it seems pretty cheesy to claim to have done something that is supposed to be difficult when you haven't earned it.

 

Im with you on that.

 

Would you then equate that with the groups in which 3 people search and the first one to locate the cache holds it up and says "Woo who, we found it!" And everyone scurries to that person and signs the log?

[+cerberus1]

I just hid a geocache that is up in a tree. It is hard to maneuver up, with strange footholds, and is about 15 feet off the ground. Is this a qualifier to be a 5/5 cache?

No.

- What do you mean by "strange footholds"?

 

15' isn't that high for a tree climb, and if it has "footholds", it definitely isn't a 5 Terrain.

Might be a 4...

 

As an aside, since you ask if it's "5/5", if you can see the cache in the tree from the ground, it's a 1 in Difficulty.

If you can see it while climbing, D is often a 1.5-3, sometimes depending on how far you're climbing until you can spot it.

Rope climbs/rappels are my favorite, but we've never seen a cache that (though rated as such...) was actually a 5 in Difficulty.

Good luck.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Apparently a friend that is willing and able to climb trees is special equipment. There is, of course, nothing anyone can do about someone watching someone else do all the work and claim the T5 find, but it seems pretty cheesy to claim to have done something that is supposed to be difficult when you haven't earned it.

 

Im with you on that.

 

Would you then equate that with the groups in which 3 people search and the first one to locate the cache holds it up and says "Woo who, we found it!" And everyone scurries to that person and signs the log?

 

Generally, no. In that scenario, generally everyone involved is actively participating in the search and it's just a matter of circumstance that the person that locates the container is almost always the one that retrieves it from it's location. In that sort of scenario, each person might search a different spot at GZ, and the one that finds the container just happens to be the one that searched the right spot.

 

There is a local tree cache that was published the day before a local event (which I did not attend). The first 12 logs were from attendees at the event and indicate that only one of them went up into the tree. Even if held a ladder that was used to climb the three or someone gave a boost the person that went up into the tree, I doubt the others 10 did anything other than shout encouragement. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter, but it's not just "we found it", but each users profile shows that they "found" a T5 cache and didn't expend T5 amount of effort to do so.

Edited May 18, 2017 by NYPaddleCacher

[+MartyBartfast]

Pretty much what others have said. The fact that it's up a tree and the footholds are tricky should only affect the terrain, not the difficulty so there's nothing in what you've described which would justify a D5. I have a similar cache which I placed as 2.5/3.5 the first couple of finders said they thought the T rating was too low so I upped it to 2.5/4 It's definitely not a 5.

 

IMO a tree climb could be a T5 even if it's possible to climb it without equipment, but it would have to be high and a very difficult free climb to rate it as T5.

[+dprovan]

Apparently a friend that is willing and able to climb trees is special equipment.

It makes perfect sense to me to think of someone else as equipment. I see no reason to scoff at using a friend to get the cache but accept using a grabber to get the cache. In my area, most of the "big boys" use grabbers if the tree climb isn't too high, and often use ladders if it is, so in many cases I'm not sure whether anyone, CO or seeker, has ever actually climbed the tree. Nevertheless, the ratings are normally set based on what it would take to climb the tree.

 

There is, of course, nothing anyone can do about someone watching someone else do all the work and claim the T5 find, but it seems pretty cheesy to claim to have done something that is supposed to be difficult when you haven't earned it.

You can't prevent it, nor do I see any reason to try and prevent it. But I don't mind you thinking it's cheesy. I'll do it, anyway.

 

As an aside, since you ask if it's "5/5", if you can see the cache in the tree from the ground, it's a 1 in Difficulty.

Wow, I've never heard anything like that. What I see is that the difficulty normally takes into account mainly how complicated the climb is, with "you have to realize you need to climb the tree" already raising the difficulty to 1.5. I can see taking the visibility into account, too, although in my area it's very rare for a tree climb to not be visible from the ground because of how annoying it is to climb the wrong tree, and how important it is for the individual to be be able to judge whether they're up to the effort.