+Tradboy Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 I am very new at this (two weeks, five caches) but I'm excited about this new hobby. Already I've subscribed and been active on the website. It has occured to me, though, looking at the mass amount of geocaches (especially in SoCal) that this movement might burn itself out after awhile....everyone wants to hide their own cache, but there's limited space. Three years from now, looking at the current rate of cache placement, I'm going to be tripping over a cache while grocery shopping at Albertson's. I know of several areas already that have caches within a quarter mile of each other, and I probably have only seen the tip of the iceberg. Any other thoughts on this? Any crazy ideas out there? Maybe a more strict review system of new caches? Even more controversial, a removal of caches that are deemed too close together by some governing body? Anyone think I'm absolutely idiotic, and I should love the idea of fifty caches within fifty yards? Tradboy [This message was edited by Tradboy on February 20, 2003 at 09:10 PM.] Quote Link to comment
WhatWhereWhen Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 While I see the fun of going to several caches within a very small area, I do see your point. Conservation issues aside, this would dilute the good geo-swag with the bad, horrid little trinkets I sometimes see. The cache I placed is in a park with three other cache sites, but due to the size of the park and each caches' relative location to each other I don't view this as a problem. If there were two other caches within a 1/4 mile along the same trail, I'd be a little upset. I don't plan on ever placing more than two or three caches at anyone time anyway. And, maybe that's what is needed, self-control. Within the sub-culture that we geocachers are, we should shun those who only place caches and do not hunt, if you apoclyptic visions come to be. Let's hope that's never the case. Quote Link to comment
+georgeandmary Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 While the number of caches has increased over the years they don't stay there for ever. Caches get archived and bad caches get archived quicker than anthing else. Don't worry about too many caches, right now I'm worried about too few. george Pedal until your legs cramp up and then pedal some more. Quote Link to comment
+JohnnyVegas Posted February 20, 2003 Share Posted February 20, 2003 While I do understand some one concern about there being to many caches. While I only statred geocaching about 2 months ago. I have been to one cache site in which the cache is not there anymore, but it is stilled listed, so my YL and I place a hew not to far from the site of the missing cache so people would not be disapointed in not finding the original cache.. I even had one of my caches vandelized and I had to relocate it. ANother one of mine has turned up missing twice, Both times after some one left money in it HMMMM. In the future if some one places money in this one, I am going to take it out. Quote Link to comment
+Tradboy Posted February 21, 2003 Author Share Posted February 21, 2003 quote:Originally posted by georgeandmary: Don't worry about too many caches, right now I'm worried about too few. Really?!? There are 1370 within a hundred mile radius of my dwelling. Looking at a map of all caches in the world, you have a right to be worried about Siberia. In the US, Eastern Montana seems to have the least dense population of caches. Check out Las Vegas; it's ridiculous. I'm not saying that we need to remove any geocaches, or even slow the current rate. My point is that said rate is climbing. Take an integral, and there's a little bit of popularity acceleration going on here. Although this isn't an issue *now*, it might be an issue in the future. Quote Link to comment
+georgeandmary Posted February 21, 2003 Share Posted February 21, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Tradboy: Really?!? There are 1370 within a hundred mile radius of my dwelling. Well, there are over 2000 caches within 100 miles of me, do you know how far I have to drive to find one that I haven't already found? george Pedal until your legs cramp up and then pedal some more. Quote Link to comment
+Tradboy Posted February 21, 2003 Author Share Posted February 21, 2003 You've found 800+ caches. (very impressive!) I would imagine that you have to drive at least 75 miles, maybe 85 to find a new cache. Well, honestly, you earned that right. I wouldn't be too worried about there not being enough caches, unless this is your livelihood ;-) Quote Link to comment
+TEAM 360 Posted March 5, 2003 Share Posted March 5, 2003 I eliminate micro caches and multi-caches from the list automatically. I am not hunting for hours to find an old button and a spool of thread in a cracked-up Tupperware container. I wonder how many that would leave worth looking for? The more, the better, I say. Quote Link to comment
blue_harley Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 in my area Colorado Springs,Colorado. there are only 83 caches. I find this a little low. Its due to the citys ban of caches in city parks, not the lack of interest. Oh well, Darius Have you hugged your GPS today? Quote Link to comment
+gophertrax Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Well from my perspective there can't be too many fun caches and the multi's, micro's and good virtuals are included. The contents of the cache can be great fun and I usually try to exchange something, but the real fun, to me anyway, is in the hike and the hunt whether it's easy or difficult. If I have spent my time doing something a little different or visiting a spot I haven't seen before or revisiting a great park or area then it's been a great day! I have been to a few caches that I consider lame..be it no thought to placement or a really boring virtual, but even those haven't wasted my time. Perhaps a time will come with too many in some areas, but for now I don't see it as a problem... Thanks to everyone who places them and to everyone who visits mine! [This message was edited by gophertrax on March 12, 2003 at 03:46 PM.] Quote Link to comment
+Justin Sane Posted March 31, 2003 Share Posted March 31, 2003 Well, you have to remember that this sport is pretty new, just starting a few years ago. As word spread, so did the availability of GPS receivers. Pretty soon, new caches were placed, more cachers came into the fold, etc. Heck, back when golfing became known here in the states, there was only 1 golf course in America. Now look at it. Has it become a bad thing? That depends on your perspective. Seeing as how this sport just started a few years ago, I'd say that it's grown more than any other sport in recent memory. Tennis, anyone? We evolve. The data is in the strata. Quote Link to comment
+aka Monkey Posted April 4, 2003 Share Posted April 4, 2003 I agree with Justin (sort of). I think at the moment the tremendous amoutn of caches in certain areas is probably due to the novelty of geocaching. It's quite a new sport, and like anything new people are attracted to it that otherwise might not be. Give it a few years, things will taper off, and the situation will even out a bit. Assuming of course that all the park services don't ban together before than abd ban it. Quote Link to comment
+Beefcider Posted April 6, 2003 Share Posted April 6, 2003 quote: Even more controversial, a removal of caches that are deemed too close together by some governing body? Only in SoCal would somebody find five caches then want to regulate it. Quote Link to comment
+Tradboy Posted April 6, 2003 Author Share Posted April 6, 2003 Way to be antagonistic, Beefcider. People like you really do a lot to enhance the Groundspeak forums. Kudos. Quote Link to comment
+Beefcider Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 Lighten up dude. I was just poking fun at you. videbo tu in caelum Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.