Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8
Gary&Vicky

Power trails in the suburbs are bad for “Geocaching”.

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

This wouldn't have worked as well as a couple of traditionals, firstly because the location of the waypoint has no great merit other than being the point where you leave the track to head up the hill

 

But if you do not care about the quality you could pebble the whole route from the car park to the final with similar traditional caches and they will follow the route as Hansel and Gretel did when they followed the trail back home. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Back to the original topic,  In some of his cache descriptions, he's stated that he'll archive any of his caches to allow someone else to place one. ("If you want to put a cache here that is more clever just let me know.")  In July, I put together a puzzle cache and one of the CO's caches was located about 100 ft. away from where I wanted to place the final.  I contacted the CO, and he quickly and kindly archived his cache, so I could place mine.

Edited by CarlottaP
  • Upvote 4
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, dacoma said:

The CO has always been clear that he would vacate a spot if someone else wanted it. 

 

That won't work. Anyone placing their cache in the middle of a PT becomes part of that PT. That owner will almost certainly get cut n paste logs thanking katdude for the hide. There's little incentive to hide a cache at the spot the PT owner gives to you. No real point to place anything of better quality. The people searching aren't looking for quality, they are looking for quantity. They won't remember the hide after finding50+ that day. 

 

 It's also a weird form of land acclamation. The PT owner gets to play benevolent landowner. Granting space on the trail or roadside to those who come cap in hand. 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

 

That won't work. Anyone placing their cache in the middle of a PT becomes part of that PT. That owner will almost certainly get cut n paste logs thanking katdude for the hide. There's little incentive to hide a cache at the spot the PT owner gives to you. No real point to place anything of better quality. The people searching aren't looking for quality, they are looking for quantity. They won't remember the hide after finding50+ that day. 

 

 It's also a weird form of land acclamation. The PT owner gets to play benevolent landowner. Granting space on the trail or roadside to those who come cap in hand. 

I understand what you mean. I have a cache out in the countryside. When I placed it there (spot picked to mark something) it didn't get many visitors, but then someone laid a power trail down the quite country road. Now it's just part of the power trail and needs more maintenance than I expected it to have. I maintained it only a month ago; now I need to make another 60km round trip to maintain it again. I'm not saying it needs maintaining regularly that often, but the extra visitors are giving me more work. Fortunately it's a good sized small cache (the size beginners would rate as regular, but it's a small), with a proper log book that's big enough that it hasn't needed changing yet.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

Right!  I am very keen to hear that it doesn't matter which way it is constructed because the only difference is the number of finds you are going to earn.

 

The probability, for a 10-stage multi, that one of the stages will be missing is extremely high.  So the number of finds is not the only difference.

 

ETA:  I am not endorsing either kind of cache; I am only pointing out that pretending that the two situations are the same except for the number of finds is Just Plain Wrong.  That said, I am by no means a power trail fan; indeed, this upcoming week I am going to bypass almost the entire ET Trail.

Edited by fizzymagic
  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, fizzymagic said:

The probability, for a 10-stage multi, that one of the stages will be missing is extremely high.  So the number of finds is not the only difference.

 

In both cases you are missing only one find if one stage is missing from a powertrail or a multi-cache. :D

 

There is a way to prevent this happening. You can use visible waypoints for all stages of the multi-cache and the hint you collect is a password for a geochecker. If you miss one letter you can still guess the correct answer easily.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, CarlottaP said:

Back to the original topic,  In some of his cache descriptions, he's stated that he'll archive any of his caches to allow someone else to place one. ("If you want to put a cache here that is more clever just let me know.")  In July, I put together a puzzle cache and one of the CO's caches was located about 100 ft. away from where I wanted to place the final.  I contacted the CO, and he quickly and kindly archived his cache, so I could place mine.

 

That IS actually very cool!

No, I'm still not a fan of trails and mass caches but this way there's a lot of cache for people who like it this way, and other people still get a chance to hide own/more complicated/different caches. Nothing wrong with that.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, thebruce0 said:
On 8/13/2019 at 1:13 PM, L0ne.R said:
On 8/13/2019 at 9:39 AM, p0cy said:

one of my favorite quotes

"When you go to hide a geocache, think of the reason you are bringing people to that spot. If the only reason is for the geocache, then find a better spot."

briansnat, Charter Member

 

That quote should come up every time someone looks at the submit-a-cache form. 

 

What about gadget caches? Often placed only in a location where it would be feasible, rarely about the location.  It's a great quote, but I would never use it to presume that it's fundamental to every cache placement. It's something to keep in mind, but sometimes yes, the reason you bring people to a spot is the geocache.  Better would be to consider that your bringing someone there either for the location, or the geocache. :)

 

Agreed. What does that have to do with power trails?   Typically,  power trails are not about the location or the cache.  They're simply the easiest way possible for finders to increase their find count.   When a CO considers the location or a  creates unique or interesting container,  their focus is on quality.  When a CO creates a PT, more often then not, their focus is on quantity.  When a PT mentality becomes pervasive, as it has in may areas, how that the over quality of the game not be degraded.

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

 

That won't work. Anyone placing their cache in the middle of a PT becomes part of that PT. That owner will almost certainly get cut n paste logs thanking katdude for the hide. There's little incentive to hide a cache at the spot the PT owner gives to you. No real point to place anything of better quality. The people searching aren't looking for quality, they are looking for quantity. They won't remember the hide after finding50+ that day. 

 

 It's also a weird form of land acclamation. The PT owner gets to play benevolent landowner. Granting space on the trail or roadside to those who come cap in hand. 

 

Couple points here that run counter to your claims here, as they pertain to the OP as well as geocaching in general.

 

1.  While they'll get cut and paste logs (it is a PT), there's a better chance that a better quality cache will get noticed more amidst all the chaff that's out there.  If they're all pill bottles and this one is a small lock n lock or ammo can placed in a nice area along the trail, it will get noticed.  As to the logs, that would remain to be seen, but I would venture to guess that if it's different, it would get noticed and the logs would show that more frequently than the others along the PT.  While PTs are certainly there for numbers type of cachers, that doesn't mean that those types of cachers don't appreciate quality caches that are well maintained.  They're not mutually inclusive - if you only cache PTs, then you don't care about quality. I know some high numbers cachers who frequently point out quality caches amidst their numbers day.  I see their posts frequently on FB.

 

2.  Aren't you the one advocating for better quality containers? Yet here you are saying there's no reason to do so because it won't get noticed in the logs.  If you really wanted to place your first hide and a spot along this trail made the most sense since it was close to home and therefore easy to maintain, you're advocating that they use a crappy/cheap container.  I understand that the logs will be mostly cut and paste but that shouldn't affect the quality of the container as well as the maintenance actions of someone who wants to place a hide along this stretch.  Seems to me that you're actually condoning the very type of hides that you discourage elsewhere by saying that it's not worth the effort.

 

3.  Your issue with PT COs being benevolent landowners is condescending to them.  THEY were the ones that took the initiative to place caches first, not those who were late to the dance.  In this case, the CO has stated that they're willing to archive caches so that others could place them if they wanted to.  Seems to me that this CO isn't so wrapped up in the numbers aspect and is cognizant of the fact that he's part of the community and willing to work with other geocachers to make things work.  I'd even bet that he'd archive two caches if there was a better place along the trail that was between two caches and someone wanted to place one there.

 

4.  If enough other cachers contact this CO and get the opportunity to place caches amidst this area, it won't resemble a power trail anymore, as there would be multiple COs, multiple types of hides, and multiple types of containers.  It would still be a saturated area and look like a PT on the map, but once cachers started caching, they'd realize that it's not, even though the caches are spaced every .10 miles apart.  Again, it might attract numbers cachers due to the saturation and you might still get those cut and paste logs, but it won't be a true power trail.

 

The OP posted something that bears mention as well.  I bolded the two parts that apply to this particular discussion.

 

"If these were imaginative geocaches that put a smile on your face or take you to a cool location, I would not say anything.  They are not.  I know, I am free not to looks for these caches.  For the record, we worked one of the early trails deployed by this cache owner.   But there is a negative impact to the quality of our geocaching.  We have to wade through the long lists of geocaches placed by this cache owner before we see a cache placed by any other geocacher.   If we have an idea for clever new cache,   Unique placement locations are  squandered by thoughtless power trails.  New geocachers may find these power trails fun for a while, since the prize is so easy to find.  But when new geocachers go to place their first geocache, they have these lousy caches as role models.  I used to say that new geocachers should find 25 to 50 caches before they hide their first cache.  Thanks to these local power trails in the suburbs, a new geocacher may never see a geocache with multiple favorite points before they abandon this new hobby. "

 

Some of the local cachers who actually live in the area of this specific case state that the caches, while not particularly creative or of a consistent quality container, are well maintained, diverse, and appreciated.  Another local has stated that the "...CO has made it clear that he will happily archive anywhere someone else would like to place a cache...." The bolded parts are what is addressed here.  If the OP wanted to place something, this particular CO is willing to work with them to do so and it would then remove the first complaint as well.  I wonder if the OP even reached out to the CO to see if they were willing to work together to place any of these unique types of places, if they were even considering the possibility of placing a cache, or just complaining about the placements of all these caches.  There wouldn't even be a need to find the cache.  All you'd need to do is find that location and then contact the CO to see if they were willing to archive any of their caches that might interfere in order to be able to place a desired hide.  Please keep in mind that in this particular instance, this CO appears willing to work with anyone who wants to place a cache and all they need to do is contact the CO to get the ball rolling.  This does not and will not work with every PT CO out there but in this case it can.  Complaining about these types of placements (PT or high saturation areas) doesn't actually do anything.  As @dprovan has stated, trying to work with them rather than complaining about them could prevent some of these issues and in this particular situation, it appears the CO is open to this type of compromise.

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

That won't work.

 

It did work.  You're so focused on the fact that they might get cut and paste logs that you completely missed the point about being able to place a new cache (a ? in this case) amidst all the traditional caches with what I assume to be a different type of container, although it appears this referenced CO isn't so much a PT hider as they are a saturation type hider.  That was a big part of the OP's problem, is that the area is senselessly saturated without thought or care to what others might want to hide.  The CO archived the hide, allowing @CarlottaP to place a cache.  Seems to me that this cache is doing just fine amidst all these assumed boring caches, with 13 finds and 12 FPs.  Of the 13 finders, they're all 5 digit finders (and a single 6 digit finder) but 3 (who are all 4 digit finders) , yet they still recognized the quality of the cache and all but one gave it a FP.

 

16 hours ago, CarlottaP said:

Back to the original topic,  In some of his cache descriptions, he's stated that he'll archive any of his caches to allow someone else to place one. ("If you want to put a cache here that is more clever just let me know.")  In July, I put together a puzzle cache and one of the CO's caches was located about 100 ft. away from where I wanted to place the final.  I contacted the CO, and he quickly and kindly archived his cache, so I could place mine.

 

Edited by coachstahly
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, L0ne.R said:
18 hours ago, dacoma said:

The CO has always been clear that he would vacate a spot if someone else wanted it. 

 

That won't work. Anyone placing their cache in the middle of a PT becomes part of that PT. That owner will almost certainly get cut n paste logs thanking katdude for the hide. There's little incentive to hide a cache at the spot the PT owner gives to you. No real point to place anything of better quality. The people searching aren't looking for quality, they are looking for quantity. They won't remember the hide after finding50+ that day. 

 

 It's also a weird form of land acclamation. The PT owner gets to play benevolent landowner. Granting space on the trail or roadside to those who come cap in hand. 

 

What won't work? The CO saying they're willing archive a PT cache to let someone else place (a better) one nearby?  eh?


You assume the person asking for the spot wants a spot on the trail but not to effectively become part of the PT. Well yeah that's not really a reasonable expectation.  But what if they want a spot NOT on the power trail but within proximity of the PT cache? That's the point - if someone wants the spot (anywhere within proximity) the CO would be willing to archive the PT cache.

You could look at it like, if a local hates PT caches, this would be a prime way to get them archived - place better caches nearby not on the PT and slowly make it disappear =P (of course that only helps if the PT has publicly accessible places for caches nearby that aren't on the trail)

 

 

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

That won't work. Anyone placing their cache in the middle of a PT becomes part of that PT.

This isn't a power trail, despite the OP's assertion to the contrary. A new cache will be one more cache in an area with many decent caches.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/18/2019 at 2:32 PM, SwineFlew said:

I see that you found some of the power trails that I found in the Midland area.  Yes it's in the middle of nowhere but I have people following me and asking me what I am doing out there.  One time it was almost at gunpoint.  There's people out there that don't want you close to their oil fields, period.  BTW, I know which CO you are talking about. It's not hard to figured that out if anyone found his caches in your area.

 

"Almost at gunpoint"???  Either it was or it wasn't at gunpoint. Which was it?

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, bflentje said:

"Almost at gunpoint"???  Either it was or it wasn't at gunpoint. Which was it?

I can't say what happen to SwineFlew , but when it happened to me, it was a guy in a pickup truck sporting a righteous indignation that made me think he was about to grab a gun off his gun rack and jump out to confront me. In retrospect, I suppose I shouldn't have laughed at him. But he never actually grabbed a gun, so I'd have to call it "almost at gunpoint".

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

In both cases you are missing only one find if one stage is missing from a powertrail or a multi-cache. :D

 

There is a way to prevent this happening. You can use visible waypoints for all stages of the multi-cache and the hint you collect is a password for a geochecker. If you miss one letter you can still guess the correct answer easily.

What you are missing is that one stage gone means NO find out of a possible 1, while one cache missing is 9 finds out of 10 possible.  Yes, both are one less - but one is nothing the other is 1/10 less.

 

Back to you original question, if the trail is local to me, I'd prefer the 10 caches, as I could pick up a couple every time I walk the trail - and the extra caches would encourage me to do more walking so I could get the others.  A single multi would encourage me to walk that trail once.  If the trail is a ways away, either would be fine as I would only be doing the trail once anyhow.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, The Jester said:

Back to you original question, if the trail is local to me, I'd prefer the 10 caches, as I could pick up a couple every time I walk the trail - and the extra caches would encourage me to do more walking so I could get the others.  A single multi would encourage me to walk that trail once.  If the trail is a ways away, either would be fine as I would only be doing the trail once anyhow.

I've done multi-caches a stage or two at a time, spreading them out over a period of days/weeks. You don't have to do all the stages at once.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, niraD said:

I've done multi-caches a stage or two at a time, spreading them out over a period of days/weeks. You don't have to do all the stages at once.

 

Especially if you can't find one waypoint you can try it again later.

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

Especially if you can't find one waypoint you can try it again later.

 

That's not so easy if the cache happens to be thousands of miles from home.  

Share this post


Link to post

I don't see much difference between multis and trads if I'm only looking for a walk

It might be different if "numbers" were needed for a nice day out, some exercise, and just a bit of "away" time ...

I'm waiting for over a dozen multis now for a stage to be fixed, all some distance (and a good distance away too). 

 - Just as many now archived , the COs unable/unwilling to fix 'em,  and no "smiley" for the effort.   I  don't  care.   :)

There's more-than-a-few trads on long walks that are missing or need maintenance as well.

Now that I'm heading out more because of the nice areas,  I wouldn't mind walking that same trail again.

How many times have folks walked the same trail because new ones are there ?   ;)

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎8‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 8:36 PM, L0ne.R said:

That won't work. Anyone placing their cache in the middle of a PT becomes part of that PT.

 - snip -

 It's also a weird form of land acclamation. The PT owner gets to play benevolent landowner. Granting space on the trail or roadside to those who come cap in hand. 

 

I feel anything other-than the same pill-bottle hide will work, if for no other reason than it's much different from the rest.    :)

 - But have seen more than a couple similar get the same "found while doing the..." logs as well.

We've witnessed the same "property acquisition" a few times, and have seen some micro-manage their areas, allowing a couple of the great-unwashed to reside within their domain.

But most we see cover an area simply because no one else has for some time. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

Now that I'm heading out more because of the nice areas,  I wouldn't mind walking that same trail again.

 

Sometimes I miss walking to some spectacular areas / trails but have no opportunity becase there is no space for new caches. :rolleyes:

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

I feel anything other-than the same pill-bottle hide will work, if for no other reason than it's much different from the rest.    :)

  - But have seen more than a couple similar get the same "found while doing the..." logs as well.

I've read about cases where the three cache monte was applied to different containers, and even applied to tethered containers. It seems that sometimes, nothing close to a numbers trail is safe.

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, arisoft said:

 

Sometimes I miss walking to some spectacular areas / trails but have no opportunity becase there is no space for new caches. :rolleyes:

 

I guess some geocache while walking/hiking, others walk/hike while geocaching. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

But most we see cover an area simply because no one else has for some time.

 

Yes, by default I've now become the only cache owner in and around the village of Patonga. There used to be a few others but they've been archived (or in one case disabled by the reviewer pending imminent archival) as the caches and their owners disappeared.

 

image.png.a452b76c82f640277761dc4d27edfca4.png

 

Not quite a power trail, I guess, although three of them make up my Dark Creatures of Patonga series, but those caches rarely get visited now and if someone was wanting to do something different in the area (perhaps even place a power trail) and asked me to archive them to make room, I probably would.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

if someone was wanting to do something different in the area (perhaps even place a power trail) and asked me to archive them to make room, I probably would.

How about "please clear this area of your caches so I can create some nice geo-art". :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

Sometimes I miss walking to some spectacular areas / trails but have no opportunity becase there is no space for new caches. :rolleyes:

 

 

Sometimes I don't  cache in some great areas because, not only is there no space for new caches, all the existing space is taken by caches that I'm not interested in finding.  

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, arisoft said:

 

Sometimes I miss walking to some spectacular areas / trails but have no opportunity becase there is no space for new caches. :rolleyes:

 

 

That's a personal choice you're making.  You could walk that trail/area any time you want because the opportunity is always there but because there are no new caches, you choose not to.  If an area is nice enough, I'll hike/walk it regardless of whether or not there are caches there (found or unfound).

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, coachstahly said:
On 8/21/2019 at 1:21 PM, arisoft said:

 

Sometimes I miss walking to some spectacular areas / trails but have no opportunity becase there is no space for new caches. :rolleyes:

 

 

That's a personal choice you're making.  You could walk that trail/area any time you want because the opportunity is always there but because there are no new caches, you choose not to.  If an area is nice enough, I'll hike/walk it regardless of whether or not there are caches there (found or unfound).

 

Right, and ironically, "I won't go to that great area because there are no new caches to find/space to place" makes it out to actually be all about the numbers (in that it's not about going to the location or having an experience).  If you cared more about the location than the numbers and you knew it's a great place, why would you be letting geocaches stop you from going there?  Go there anyway. Maybe find those geocaches that you detest so much on principle. It's not like they're going to bite your legs off. =/

Edited by thebruce0
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/20/2019 at 10:26 AM, bflentje said:

 

"Almost at gunpoint"???  Either it was or it wasn't at gunpoint. Which was it?

gun was in his hand but wasnt pointing at me

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

 

Right, and ironically, "I won't go to that great area because there are no new caches to find/space to place" makes it out to actually be all about the numbers (in that it's not about going to the location or having an experience).  If you cared more about the location than the numbers and you knew it's a great place, why would you be letting geocaches stop you from going there?  Go there anyway. Maybe find those geocaches that you detest so much on principle. It's not like they're going to bite your legs off. =/

 

I think I understand Arisoft's position. It's more about needing some motivation. A low-quality nearby powertrail in a nice trail is not motivating enough to get him to make the trek. And once in place, that trail will be filled with the PT caches for a very long time (in my experience it could go for many years with repeated throwdowns). There will likely be no new (potentially better quality) caches for a long time.   

 

He said in an earlier post:

 

 
 
 
1
Quote

I am not after numbers at all but I am a little bit lazy or I optimize things too much... For me, a low quality power trail near my home would have a negative effect on the quality of my experience for a long time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, L0ne.R said:

I think I understand Arisoft's position. It's more about needing some motivation. A low-quality nearby powertrail in a nice trail is not motivating enough to get him to make the trek. And once in place, that trail will be filled with the PT caches for a very long time (in my experience it could go for many years with repeated throwdowns). There will likely be no new (potentially better quality) caches for a long time.   

 

That's fine, if that's what he said, but it wasn't. Bruce and I were specifically addressing the quote below, not the earlier one you referenced.  I fully get what you're saying and would probably skip all the caches unless I felt like nabbing one or two to see if they were worth the time to find but would still go out to hike on the trail if it were nice.

 

On 8/21/2019 at 1:21 PM, arisoft said:

Sometimes I miss walking to some spectacular areas / trails but have no opportunity becase there is no space for new caches.

 

It seems he's looking forward to caching on the spectacular trail but won't because there are no new caches.

Edited by coachstahly

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

It's not like they're going to bite your legs off. =/

BadCacheNoNo-small.jpg.d78efc12b2467f81260a7a7bea91694f.jpg

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/22/2019 at 8:17 PM, SwineFlew said:

gun was in his hand but wasnt pointing at me

 

Sounds like a crime was possibly committed..  if true.

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, bflentje said:
On 8/22/2019 at 9:17 PM, SwineFlew said:

gun was in his hand but wasnt pointing at me

 

Sounds like a crime was possibly committed..  if true.

 

This is getting way off topic as it really would have to do with regional firearm laws. Let's keep it on topic.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm familiar with the caches that the OP objected to, and I've really appreciated them.  Between work and family, I don't always get a lot of time to cache during the week.  I've been caching since 2013 and my pace has been quite slow at times.  In fact, I was losing interest in this hobby (or game, however you define it) because it was getting too difficult to keep involved with my limited time.  But this CO's caches got me excited about caching again.  I appreciated the ability to grab one at lunchtime or a few while walking the dog in the evening.  While there might be similarities in some of his hides on a particular stretch, they certainly are not all the same -- different containers, different placements, different themes.  And, there are many other caches placed by many other owners in the mix.  And, the CO was responsive to my messages when I had questions or posted something that raised potential concerns.  I'm grateful for the CO for placing his caches in my area.   Perhaps when I've logged 10,000+ caches, I'll look down on my younger self for enjoying these now.  But, seriously,  quit "raining on the parade" for those that enjoy them now.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/13/2019 at 12:33 PM, niraD said:

Once upon a time, there was an ethic among cache owners that you shouldn't hide a cache in a park where someone else had hidden one. That was before my time though.

 

I remember that from my early days.  There was a park near me that I was going to place a cache in and someone else put one there and I remember thinking "Well, now I don't need to do it because that park has already been discovered."  It was almost rude to place another one there because you were piggybacking off someone else's effort.  

 

Then I remember the first time I saw two caches in the same Wal-Mart parking lot and I knew the game had changed, and not for the better.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎8‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 4:40 PM, barefootjeff said:

Not quite a power trail, I guess, although three of them make up my Dark Creatures of Patonga series, but those caches rarely get visited now and if someone was wanting to do something different in the area (perhaps even place a power trail) and asked me to archive them to make room, I probably would.

 

+1

 

I place a cache I'd like to find, sometimes hidden in a style I've never seen (sure, everybody else has seen that kind and are tired of them :rolleyes:).  AND I think of some new cache idea all the time, so I've pretty much packed one little park over the years. I hope people don't think I expect that they Gotta Get 'em All, and I certainly don't place caches to prevent others from hiding any.  Have a cool idea for a cache in that area?  Let me know!

 

I never place any caches along highway shoulders, where the challenge is figuring out how not to be hit by a car.  I hate that kind.

 

But if my cache wasn't there, it would be a prescription pill bottle with a soaking wet log sheet, in the crotch of a tree, muggled all the time. Because that was the cache that was there previously. :anicute:

 

 

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post

I have a series of caches along a walking/cycling trail and tried to place them about 400m apart to leave room for others. In six years since I placed them nobody has.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, colleda said:

I have a series of caches along a walking/cycling trail and tried to place them about 400m apart to leave room for others. In six years since I placed them nobody has.

I started a series along a cycling path and others have followed. This is the first cache in the series: 01 Majura Cycleway GC64K69 (And by far my most problematic cache here). Click on the map to see the series, now up to 44 caches, by different people. Most are traditional caches, but there are also multi, puzzle and Wherigo caches. I don't mind power trails when done by different people, as it's interesting to see who will add a cache next, and what they will add. Also, I like power trails on cycling paths. It's the endless drive-by ones done by one person I have a problem with. Many in the Majura Cycleway series are difficult to get to by car, so cycling or walking required. Most are not just drive-bys. Geocachers come from other places and bring their bikes so they can do this series. I only meant to have two caches in this series, but ended up with five caches, as I filled in gaps.

If you want to see an armchair logger with very 'believable' logs in action, check my maintenance log of 19/Dec/2017.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

I started a series along a cycling path and others have followed. This is the first cache in the series: 01 Majura Cycleway GC64K69 (And by far my most problematic cache here). Click on the map to see the series, now up to 44 caches, by different people. Most are traditional caches, but there are also multi, puzzle and Wherigo caches. I don't mind power trails when done by different people, as it's interesting to see who will add a cache next, and what they will add. Also, I like power trails on cycling paths. It's the endless drive-by ones done by one person I have a problem with. Many in the Majura Cycleway series are difficult to get to by car, so cycling or walking required. Most are not just drive-bys. Geocachers come from other places and bring their bikes so they can do this series. I only meant to have two caches in this series, but ended up with five caches, as I filled in gaps.

If you want to see an armchair logger with very 'believable' logs in action, check my maintenance log of 19/Dec/2017.

We've found that one and a few others along there. As you said it suited bikes and we didn't have ours with us so only grabbed a few from the car as time was limited and we didn't feel that it was a powertrail. I may have to make a return visit with a bike. Looks like there are lots of similar trails in your area.

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8

×
×
  • Create New...