So many caches, map trolling?

[criddopher]

I literally just signed up with a minor interest in geocaching.  I pulled up the map for my area, harrisburg PA area, and found theres a TON of em.  My question, is map trolling a thing?  It seems like there is way too many caches for them to all be real.  Do people mark caches on the map and they don't really exist?

[+briansnat]

Though it can't be guaranteed that all of those caches are in place, the vast majority of them likely are.   The Groundspeak volunteer team makes a concerted effort to archive listings for chronically missing caches.  If you have doubts read the logs.  If you see a lot of recent DNFs (Didn't find it), then there is a chance that it's missing, though it just may be hard to find.  If you see recent Found It logs, it is most likely there. 

[+niraD]

1 hour ago, criddopher said:

I literally just signed up with a minor interest in geocaching.  I pulled up the map for my area, harrisburg PA area, and found theres a TON of em.  My question, is map trolling a thing?  It seems like there is way too many caches for them to all be real.  Do people mark caches on the map and they don't really exist?

There are occasions where there is a cache listing but no actual cache in the field. Generally, they fall into two categories: caches that have gone missing, and caches placed by new owners who didn't realize that the cache needs to be in place before the listing is submitted.

 

In the first case, caches that have gone missing, there is a process for reporting them: When a cache needs maintenance

 

In the second case, newbies who submit a listing before placing the cache, the situation is usually fixed fairly quickly. The people who try to find the cache right after it's published will post DNF (Did Not Find) logs, and the owner will apologize for not realizing how quickly the cache would be published and how quickly people would start searching for it. Then the owner will place the cache, and life goes on.

 

But perhaps more to the point, yes, all those caches exist. There are areas that are quite saturated with geocaches.

[+NanCycle]

1 hour ago, criddopher said:

I literally just signed up with a minor interest in geocaching.  I pulled up the map for my area, harrisburg PA area, and found theres a TON of em.  My question, is map trolling a thing?  It seems like there is way too many caches for them to all be real.  Do people mark caches on the map and they don't really exist?

No,  people don't just mark locations  on the map and not place caches, although as mentioned above, the caches may have gone missing since they were placed.

[RuideAlmeida]

Along with the previous answers, there are also caches without any physical container in place, like Virtuals (old and Reward), Webcams, Earthcaches and Events.

[+cerberus1]

1 hour ago, criddopher said:

I literally just signed up with a minor interest in geocaching.  I pulled up the map for my area, harrisburg PA area, and found theres a TON of em.  My question, is map trolling a thing?  It seems like there is way too many caches for them to all be real.  Do people mark caches on the map and they don't really exist?

 

That area is chock-fulla hides, and that's with most spaced .1 miles apart by guidelines.    

 - Add in what RuideAlmeida said of caches that don't have the ,1 proximity rule, and you're busy a while.    

 

There's a    GOTCHA  (Geocachers of the  Central Harrisburg Area)  meet n greet event on June 12th, if you'd like to learn more about the hobby.

Edited May 24, 2018 by cerberus1
dyslexic day I guess...

[+Lynx Humble]

At the moment of the post there are 3,050,410 geocache listing in the world (I removed event and disabled cache) so you have plenty to play.

 

Its impossible to map trolling because a bunch of DNF (did not find) will come and they will archived them.

[+niraD]

16 minutes ago, Lynx Humble said:

Its impossible to map trolling because a bunch of DNF (did not find) will come and they will archived them.

DNFs alone do not mean that a cache is missing (or non-existent), and DNFs alone will not get it archived. Case in point:

7 years, 327 DNFs, 2 Finds — A Real Challenge (GC1764C) Lives Up to Its Name

[+The A-Team]

4 hours ago, criddopher said:

Do people mark caches on the map and they don't really exist?

People can't just mark a cache on the map. They have to submit their cache listing for review, and a team of volunteer reviewers then reviews the listing to ensure it meets all of the required guidelines before they then "publish" it, which makes it visible on the map for everyone to see and hunt. If there was any hint that it might be a bogus cache listing, the reviewers wouldn't publish it. However, the reviewers don't actually go out and physically check the cache location, so it's possible that the occasional bogus listing could slip through the cracks and get published. If that happened, those who went to look for it would quickly determine what had happened and the listing would either be retracted (completely pulled from public view) or archived (permanently disabled, but still visible).

 

This review process does a good job of preventing bogus listings, so you can reasonably assume that any cache you can see on the map is legitimate.

[+hzoi]

5 hours ago, criddopher said:

I pulled up the map for my area, harrisburg PA area, and found theres a TON of em.

 

If you think Harrisburg has a lot, then Germany will blow your mind.

 

 

[+Touchstone]

8 hours ago, criddopher said:

My question, is map trolling a thing? 

Not as much as you might think.  In urban areas, that sort of behavior is revealed pretty quickly, and brought to the attention of the Volunteer Reviewers.  If it's a rural or more remote location, it might take some time, and to be honest, if I had a suspicion, I'd probably take an extra container along and place it nearby and submit my own Listing to encourage people to attempt it as well.  Sort of a "troll-the-troller" if you will

[+Lynx Humble]

17 hours ago, niraD said:

DNFs alone do not mean that a cache is missing (or non-existent), and DNFs alone will not get it archived. Case in point:

7 years, 327 DNFs, 2 Finds — A Real Challenge (GC1764C) Lives Up to Its Name

Your case is a little extreme its from a D5 from a really really really active CO with 105 000 finds WOW that a lot.

 

For info it now have 4 founds and 499 DNF  I don't understand how that could be possible with all the hints the CO give but I don't live in Illinois to be the 500th DNF lol.

[+niraD]

41 minutes ago, Lynx Humble said:

18 hours ago, niraD said:

DNFs alone do not mean that a cache is missing (or non-existent), and DNFs alone will not get it archived. Case in point:

7 years, 327 DNFs, 2 Finds — A Real Challenge (GC1764C) Lives Up to Its Name

Your case is a little extreme its from a D5 from a really really really active CO with 105 000 finds WOW that a lot.

Sure. But even less extreme examples rack up more DNFs than Finds. Some of my Favorites are high-difficulty hidden-in-plain-sight caches that routinely get DNF logs, and almost as routinely get "must be missing" NM logs, followed by an OM log from the owner saying "it's right where it's supposed to be". My record so far is 6 DNFs on one of those caches before I finally found it on my 7th visit.

[criddopher]

Alright thanks for all the good responses guys.   And thanks for the tip on the harrisburg meet!      I love hiking and exploring places so I figure having an extra reason to be out there would be fun as well.  It would be fun to meet other people who enjoy being outdoors as well, as it stands I don't personally know many people into it.  

 

And yeah,  this blows my mind that all these cashes are likely real.   After I started reading about this I realized that I had found, and signed a log in two caches thinking it was just the park service or something.  One on a trail by where I live (horseshoe trail) and another at the top of humphreys peak in flagstaff AZ.     

 

  I'm going to read up more on how this works. I like the Idea of the challenge caches where the terrain is hard to cover.  I need to learn a bit more of the lingo and understand what some of the shorthand things on these maps mean.   

 

Thanks again!

[+cerberus1]

1 hour ago, criddopher said:

I'm going to read up more on how this works. I like the Idea of the challenge caches where the terrain is hard to cover.  I need to learn a bit more of the lingo and understand what some of the shorthand things on these maps mean.   

 

For the basics, there's  Geocaching 101, and for more info, there's the Help Center  too. 

[+AKDisneyPirates]

You would be surprised. This is a incredible fun game for adults(and kids), and it really doesn't cost anything to be part of it(or a minimal cost to get the premium membership if decide you want extra options). Hiding them is quite fun, and reading the finder posts when they are discovered is just as fun. As it becomes more and more popular and more people discover geocaching its going to continue to get bigger and more caches will get planted.

[+Jayeffel]

471 in a ten mile radius of Harrisburg- and I was going to say I only have 470 more to go, but the one I got in the area was just east off the limit I guess, off Bullfrog Valley Road at RT 322.So I guess 471 it is for me too!

 

Plenty to keep a person busy.

[+BugLuv]

On 5/25/2018 at 7:45 AM, Lynx Humble said:

Your case is a little extreme its from a D5 from a really really really active CO with 105 000 finds WOW that a lot.

 

For info it now have 4 founds and 499 DNF  I don't understand how that could be possible with all the hints the CO give but I don't live in Illinois to be the 500th DNF lol.

 

 

Ugh, this is relatively close to me!!  I guess I will have to go torture myself.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

On 6/5/2018 at 7:44 PM, Jayeffel said:

471 in a ten mile radius of Harrisburg- and I was going to say I only have 470 more to go, but the one I got in the area was just east off the limit I guess, off Bullfrog Valley Road at RT 322.So I guess 471 it is for me too!

 

Plenty to keep a person busy.

Coincidentally, I'm in Harrisburg this morning, but will be heading further south in a couple of hours.   The original question has me curious though.  I wonder where the highest density of caches in a 10 mile radius is located.  I'm going to guess that "this area" might be a candidate.