Downward Trend of Geocaching, and possible solutions!

[+Inmountains]

I just saw this today on Project GC:

Cachers

Active cachers from United States	2025	2024	Difference
Last week	19645	30943	-11298	-37%
Last month	49008	74472	-25464	-34%
1st January until today	91823	124952	-33129	-27%
Whole year	91829	523217	-431388	-82%
Active cachers in United States	2025	2024	Difference
Last week	22108	30958	-8850	-29%
Last month	53022	74998	-21976	-29%
1st January until today	103477	126450	-22973	-18%
Whole year	103504	537907	-434403	-81%
Active cachers in and from United States	2025	2024	Difference
Last week	19068	30298	-11230	-37%
Last month	47698	73236	-25538	-35%
1st January until today	89695	123053	-33358	-27%
Whole year	89696	519000	-4 29 304	-83%                       I know that I have been caching less, mostly because I moved away from my caching buddy and started doing other things in my past time such as bowling, golf, hunting and fishing.  Through the years, (I found my first cache in August, 2002), I have see the ebb and flow of caching interest.  I have seen HQ make some great changes and have seen them make some rather questionable changes, much like any business.  But, almost 23 years later, I am still surprised at how many people do NOT KNOW what Geocaching is!?  In business, that is due to a lack of marketing, advertising and publicity.  The advertising landscape has changed, but your business still needs to get it's name out there.  Maybe an occasional half page add in an Outdoor Magazine, sponsoring a few podcasts (but not on Geocaching, you already have that audience) and maybe a cable television spot every now and then.  What do you think?

Edited March 15 by Inmountains

[+barefootjeff]

I wouldn't read too much into those numbers. Firstly, the "Whole year" stats should be completely ignored since they're comparing all of 2024 with just 2.5 months of 2025. The shorter term find stats are also going to be impacted by those very active cachers who are often a month or more behind in their logging, so "this year" will always appear worse than "last year".

 

Weather can also have a big impact. From what I've been hearing from my American friends, it's been a pretty icy start to the year there. Here in eastern Australia we've had an above average number of wet days this summer and, when it hasn't been raining, it's been very hot and humid, so not ideal caching weather.

[+Sottiwotti]

10 hours ago, Inmountains said:

I am still surprised at how many people do NOT KNOW what Geocaching is!?

 

Oh god, I can't imagine how bad it would be if almost everyone would geocache. So many effortless hides, park & grabs would defintitely be all over the place, and caches would be so easy to find because they would definitely have trash all around them, therefore ruining the experience and the beatiful places it brings us to.

 

I barely cache during autumn and winter because of the weather, most of my finds are usually during the summer. We finally had our first nice week of weather here in Belgium, and that made many cachers go outside again to hunt for caches, including me.

[+Sottiwotti]

Less is more I guess? Bored people leave the game, and maybe only "serious" geocachers remain, which might result in a better experience for finders and hiders.

[+Inmountains]

4 hours ago, Sottiwotti said:

Oh god, I can't imagine how bad it would be if almost everyone would geocache.

I highly doubt if there were some volume of advertising that EVERYONE would start to geocache!  And to the other quote, I know the yearly stats are of no use, but the weekly ones are the ones I was alluding to.  But I think if we, as a community were to add 10-20K new cachers per year, it would keep the game growing.

[+JL_HSTRE]

15 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

I wouldn't read too much into those numbers.

 

Due to the formatting I couldn't read those numbers at all.

[+Sottiwotti]

2 hours ago, Inmountains said:

But I think if we, as a community were to add 10-20K new cachers per year, it would keep the game growing.

Yeahhhh no, way easier said than done. People hide caches because they want to, not because they have to. I prefer quality over quantity.

 

You worry too much, geocaching is fine and not going anywhere anytime soon.

[+x7Kevin]

On 3/15/2025 at 11:23 AM, Inmountains said:

But I think if we, as a community were to add 10-20K new cachers per year, it would keep the game growing.

 

I think there’s already that many new cachers joining each year? There’s apparently millions of active cachers so I would imagine at least 20k are joining each year. The Geocaching App was the iOS app of the day this last week, and I just saw yesterday a large outdoor magazine commenting on a social media post from HQ. I think they do a pretty good job of marketing. 

 

This past week there has been about 5-6 brand new cachers/families finding my caches, with a few saying mine was their first ever find. I think overall the game is doing great, there will always be ebbs and flows. Most who join will probably not stay long-term, same as anything else people sign up too. They might even have a lot of fun but just not make it one of their main hobbies. 
 

I saw in the Geocaching Shop they have a bumper sticker for $1. That’s probably a great way for an individual to promote the game if they wanted.

[+hukilaulau]

One thing that has negatively affected my caching experience was the introduction of power trails. There used to be a statement somewhere in the rules, "Don 't hide a cache every 510 feet just because you can." Then, that changed, partly because volunteers felt like they were being asked to judge quality, not just location.

Suddenly, the maps became covered with green slime trails. I stopped trying to introduce people to the game. It was too embarrassing trying to explain all thode roadside film cans. I also stopped putting much effort into locating caches on the maps when I was going on a trip. Too much chaff, not enough wheat. 

The worst thing I can think of to encourage the growth of the game is to encourage people to string 20 or 30 uninspired film cans along a couple of miles of country road. If that had been the way the game was played when I started I would have quit within a few months.

I'm glad I got into the game when I did.

[+JL_HSTRE]

10 hours ago, hukilaulau said:

The worst thing I can think of to encourage the growth of the game is to encourage people to string 20 or 30 uninspired film cans along a couple of miles of country road. If that had been the way the game was played when I started I would have quit within a few months.

 

I don't think Groundspeak needs to do anything to encourage power trails. There are enough people that like them that they propagate simply by being allowed at all.

[+kunarion]

10 hours ago, hukilaulau said:

One thing that has negatively affected my caching experience was the introduction of power trails. There used to be a statement somewhere in the rules, "Don 't hide a cache every 510 feet just because you can." Then, that changed, partly because volunteers felt like they were being asked to judge quality, not just location.

Suddenly, the maps became covered with green slime trails. I stopped trying to introduce people to the game. It was too embarrassing trying to explain all thode roadside film cans. I also stopped putting much effort into locating caches on the maps when I was going on a trip. Too much chaff, not enough wheat. 

The worst thing I can think of to encourage the growth of the game is to encourage people to string 20 or 30 uninspired film cans along a couple of miles of country road. If that had been the way the game was played when I started I would have quit within a few months.

I'm glad I got into the game when I did.

 

I've always ignored them.  An exception was when I attempted a friend's Power Trail, failed to find more than a couple of them, and then gave up.  These were a variety of Micros with various roadside hide styles, thus not boring.  But on both sides of the highway, and it was often hard to tell which upcoming cache was on the current side.  And opening a car door into speeding oncoming traffic is exciting.  Not in a good way.

 

These things are clutter, but most often not blocking the possibility of a big, fun cache.  So I go try to find a big, fun cache instead.

 

Edited March 17 by kunarion

[+bflentje]

On 3/14/2025 at 8:29 PM, barefootjeff said:

I wouldn't read too much into those numbers. Firstly, the "Whole year" stats should be completely ignored since they're comparing all of 2024 with just 2.5 months of 2025. The shorter term find stats are also going to be impacted by those very active cachers who are often a month or more behind in their logging, so "this year" will always appear worse than "last year".

 

Weather can also have a big impact. From what I've been hearing from my American friends, it's been a pretty icy start to the year there. Here in eastern Australia we've had an above average number of wet days this summer and, when it hasn't been raining, it's been very hot and humid, so not ideal caching weather.

 

 

Well said, and done without attaching picture. SWEET!!!

 

[+Om_and_Nom]

I wish I had access to some database, so what I am claiming is just based on personal observations.  In the DFW area I notice the same people, for the most part, finding and hiding cache's.  Someone hides a cache, a bunch of vets find said cache...and that's it.  

 

It's been difficult to introduce new people to the game because there are countless caches that are missing or in poor shape, where either the CO checked out of the game YEARS ago OR (even more odd) an active CO that doesn't respond to OAR or Reviewer logs.  

[+Goldenwattle]

Maybe geocaching would attract and then keep more people if caches were better quality and LARGER. Stop it with so many micros and nanos. Good condition, and having small sized and larger containers dominate. When I started it was ages before I saw my first nano for example. Now micros dominate and worse, those horror nanos👿, even where a bigger cache could be placed, which is often. There are places that only a micro will suit (yet though to find a place that only a nano will suit), but many micros are placed where a small would also suit. I have 19 active caches and 3 archived. I haven't placed a new cache for some time, as I don't want more than I can easily maintain, but when I placed them I looked first for a placement for a small sized cache, and only then when I couldn't find a safe hide for this, did I place a micro. Some of my micros (rated other) are part of a fun construction and the cache size might be as big as a regular. I have a few micros, but no nanos. I did look for a place for a small before placing them, but couldn't find such a place, as I prefer to place a small, as I think these are more attractive to people.

 

I think the game would be more attractive if where possible people placed small sizes and larger....... and then maintained them of course. This though does sometimes require the finders to let you know if there is a problem, which many don't do. Maybe less caches, but better quality. And only place a micro where absolutely no alternative. And regular sized caches would be even better. I have only one regular, although someone thought one of my smalls was too big to be called a small. I blame that comment on size distortion due to nanos.

 

 

 

 

 

[+barefootjeff]

8 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Maybe geocaching would attract and then keep more people if caches were better quality and LARGER. Stop it with so many micros and nanos. Good condition, and having small sized and larger containers dominate.

 

Around here there's a fair mix of urban micros and non-urban smalls and regulars (and a few genuine LARGE caches), with the smalls and regulars both actually outnumbering the micros, but if you look at the find rates and counts, it's really only the urban micros that attract any interest from finders these days.

 

The two caches I've hidden this year, both regular-sized, are a 2/2.5 multi GCB19H6 set in bushland a few hundred metres from the road, and a whimsical 2/4 puzzle cache GCB3489 at a scenic vantage point next to the Great North Walk in the Watagan Mountains, but they've each had just two finds. On the multi, the two finds were on the day of publication and a couple of weeks later in early February, and on the puzzle the two finders were a father and adult daughter team claiming joint FTF five days after publication in mid February. Okay, it's probably still early days on those two, but a nearby urban micro also published in mid February has already had 22 finds.

 

Going a bit further back, a 1.5/3 traditional I placed in mid 2023 (GCAB2PJ) at a scenic lookout not far from the Gosford City CBD (but at the end of a somewhat steep bushland hike along park service roads) has had just 5 finds, the most recent nearly a year ago. The container is a Duratech ABS instrument case with a proper bound logbook in it (and a pencil), so along with the nice view over Brisbane Water I think it's a reasonable cache, but it's unattractive to most players because they can't drive up to it.

 

Then there's Dead Stars GCA4AG7, a 2.5/3 astronomically-themed puzzle cache in Strickland State Forest just north of Gosford. Published in February 2023, it's had 6 finders, the most recent over a year ago. It's one I put a lot of effort into, with a small coffin container enclosing some star corpses along with its bound logbook, a black hole hiding place (flashlight needed) and a white dwarf (painted garden gnome) pointing the way, but while the six who've done it all said they enjoyed it, it's been an otherwise wasted effort as far as the greater caching community is concerned.

 

It's not just my dud caches either. GC9QR5W, a 1.5/3.5 regular-sized traditional, is set at a couple of impressive waterfalls close to the Great North Walk, with parking just 5 minutes drive from the M1 motorway's Somersby interchange. It was published in April 2022 but has had just 6 finds in its 3 years of life. I claimed FTF the day after publication but I needn't have rushed as the next finder came along 6 months later. It went on to get three finds in 2023 then only one last year and none so far this year.

 

It's not just the small number of finders on non-urban caches, if you look at the logs it's the same small group of cachers who are finding them, most of whom have been caching for at least a decade. By and large, the newer players have no interest in anything other than trails of roadside micros, I guess because they offer the most smileys for the least amount of time and effort.

Edited March 26 by barefootjeff

[+Goldenwattle]

barefootjeff, I found one of your caches. A pleasant walk; not too long or hard; even in street shoes*, but the main attraction for me was that the walk started from the train station. That's one reason I like SideTracked caches, as  when visiting Sydney I can catch a train to them. I have also found a few other caches accessible from a train station during my visits. Publish a SideTracked cache Sydney side of that river and I will come visit it. Not sure when, but whenever I visit Sydney again and stay with family. Please make it okay for street shoes 😄

 

*I have had a self imposed heel problem that can hurt in hiking shoes, so I am often forced to wear street shoes with their lower heel backs. Not as bad as it was, so time has healed it somewhat. I have now managed to walk up to 5 kms in the hiking shoes, before I want to wench them off. Before I couldn't even walk 100 m in them.

[+barefootjeff]

15 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

barefootjeff, I found one of your caches. A pleasant walk; not too long or hard; even in street shoes*, but the main attraction for me was that the walk started from the train station.

 

Glad you liked it. That's another one (GC9JDPF) that gets surprisingly few finds, as it's in Sydney and alongside a popular section of the Great North Walk. Yours is one of only two logs it's had since mid 2023.

Edited March 26 by barefootjeff

[+Mudfrog]

On 3/25/2025 at 8:46 PM, Goldenwattle said:

Maybe geocaching would attract and then keep more people if caches were better quality and LARGER. Stop it with so many micros and nanos. Good condition, and having small sized and larger containers dominate. When I started it was ages before I saw my first nano for example. Now micros dominate and worse, those horror nanos👿, even where a bigger cache could be placed, which is often. There are places that only a micro will suit (yet though to find a place that only a nano will suit), but many micros are placed where a small would also suit. I have 19 active caches and 3 archived. I haven't placed a new cache for some time, as I don't want more than I can easily maintain, but when I placed them I looked first for a placement for a small sized cache, and only then when I couldn't find a safe hide for this, did I place a micro. Some of my micros (rated other) are part of a fun construction and the cache size might be as big as a regular. I have a few micros, but no nanos. I did look for a place for a small before placing them, but couldn't find such a place, as I prefer to place a small, as I think these are more attractive to people.

 

I think the game would be more attractive if where possible people placed small sizes and larger....... and then maintained them of course. This though does sometimes require the finders to let you know if there is a problem, which many don't do. Maybe less caches, but better quality. And only place a micro where absolutely no alternative. And regular sized caches would be even better. I have only one regular, although someone thought one of my smalls was too big to be called a small. I blame that comment on size distortion due to nanos.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agree!

 

My opinion, part of the problem is the limiting factors of the geocaching app. No doubt a lot of people trying the app get discouraged fairly quickly when all  itgives them is easy to find boring, hidden similarly, lame o microcaches. Of course some do get excited at first but that excitement doesn't end up lasting long for very many. Some of those may place their own cache but then there's that 99% chance it's pretty much the same as the few they've found.

 

I realize there are negatives to letting people grab the app and go willy nilly. Weighing everything though, I feel it would be better for the app not to be so restrictive and let new people to get a taste of the vast variety of caches already placed. This would help to keep it interesting and also maybe inspire some to get creative themselves.

 

Power trails may be fun for people going after numbers but imo, that's not what geocaching is about. As mentioned above, it's a shame Groundspeak removed one of their original statements. The below was in their guidelines section back in 2004. 

 

"The approvers use a rule of thumb that caches placed within .10 miles (528 feet or 161 meters) of another cache may not be listed on the site. This is an arbitrary distance and is just a guideline, but the ultimate goal is to reduce the number of caches hidden in a particular area and to reduce confusion that might otherwise result when one cache is found while looking for another. On the same note, don't go cache crazy and hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. If you want to create a series of caches, the site approvers may strongly encourage you to create a multi-cache"

[+MNTA]

7 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

 

Agree!

 

My opinion, part of the problem is the limiting factors of the geocaching app. No doubt a lot of people trying the app get discouraged fairly quickly when all  itgives them is easy to find boring, hidden similarly, lame o microcaches. Of course some do get excited at first but that excitement doesn't end up lasting long for very many. Some of those may place their own cache but then there's that 99% chance it's pretty much the same as the few they've found.

 

I realize there are negatives to letting people grab the app and go willy nilly. Weighing everything though, I feel it would be better for the app not to be so restrictive and let new people to get a taste of the vast variety of caches already placed. This would help to keep it interesting and also maybe inspire some to get creative themselves.

 

 

Hmmm

 

So what about redefining the whole pay/membership structure. I have no idea what that would look like. Most of us think the cost benefit to premium is well worth it but that does not seem to be doing well enough to folks here. 

 

 

 

 

[+barefootjeff]

7 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

My opinion, part of the problem is the limiting factors of the geocaching app. No doubt a lot of people trying the app get discouraged fairly quickly when all  itgives them is easy to find boring, hidden similarly, lame o microcaches. Of course some do get excited at first but that excitement doesn't end up lasting long for very many. Some of those may place their own cache but then there's that 99% chance it's pretty much the same as the few they've found.

 

I realize there are negatives to letting people grab the app and go willy nilly. Weighing everything though, I feel it would be better for the app not to be so restrictive and let new people to get a taste of the vast variety of caches already placed. This would help to keep it interesting and also maybe inspire some to get creative themselves.

 

Most new players I see pop up around here have premium membership before they've even found their first cache, I guess that's how it's promoted in the app stores as they've also never visited the website, but they still only do the urban micros and ignore anything that's much higher than terrain 2. Part of this could be the way the app's designed, with a clear flow of pick a nearby cache on the map, tap Navigate, follow the arrow and then, when you get there, tap Log. Even if you go to the Geocaching 101 page on the website, this is what it says:

1. Open the app. Download and open the Geocaching® app to see geocaches near you. Then, select a geocache to find!
2. Navigate to the geocache. Once you select a cache, go outside, and use the app to navigate to it. And don’t forget to bring a pen so you can sign the logbook inside the geocache.
3. Look for the geocache. Once you navigate to the location, look at the recent activity and the hint for clues. Geocaches come in all shapes and sizes!
4. Find and log the geocache. Sign your username in the geocache’s logbook and place the geocache back where you found it. Log your find in the app or on Geocaching.com to see your find count increase!

This may be fine for those roadside micros, but not looking at the description or the attributes is likely to end in disappointment on anything a bit more challenging, especially when it comes to non-traditionals. Do they even know that caches have descriptions and attributes?

 

To let people get a taste of the vast variety of caches out there, they first have to start looking at descriptions and attributes and at least be aware of the different cache types and how they work. Heaven forbid, maybe they should even visit the website and see an actual cache page in all its glory, where all that information is laid out in one place.

[+barefootjeff]

This thread illustrates caching's perfect dichotomy: everyone here is lamenting the proliferation of roadside micros with soggy logs, while those of us who place good-sized rugged caches in interesting locations that you won't find in a tourist guide end up seeing no activity on them for months or years on end once the FTF honours have been claimed, because most players only want to do those quick and easy roadside micros.

[+Goldenwattle]

9 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

No doubt a lot of people trying the app get discouraged fairly quickly when all  itgives them is easy to find boring, hidden similarly, lame o microcaches.

Here in Canberra, most beginners appear to be Premium Members so they can get to see all caches, but as a high proportion are micros and nanos, that's what they think it is and as you say are likely to place themselves. Basically beginners coping other caches that might have been placed by other beginners and so on.

I have never understood why someone would join without testing the game first. (But good for GC financially.)That I've never understood, as I found quite a few caches before I joined. Maybe 80. I also didn't have a GPS or smart phone then either. My car GPS would get me to the parking, but then I had to find the cache with nothing. Obvious place, follow bent grass, etc. I joined when I finally bought a GPS. Still didn't have a smart phone. That didn't happen until my small basic phone stopped working.

[+barefootjeff]

4 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Here in Canberra, most beginners appear to be Premium Members so they can get to see all caches, but as a high proportion are micros and nanos, that's what they think it is and as you say are likely to place themselves. Basically beginners coping other caches that might have been placed by other beginners and so on.

 

On the New South Wales Central Coast, there are 525 caches now (up from about 490 a year or so back, so the game's growing here), of which 227 are Small, 134 are Regular and, still in third place, 126 are Micro. Other (17), Large (12), Virtual (6) and Not Chosen (3) make up the rest.

 

When I look at the finds logged on those caches this year, though, the numbers tell a different story:

• Micros: 466 logs, 3.7 logs per cache
• Smalls: 527 logs, 2.3 logs per cache
• Regulars: 111 logs, 0.8 logs per cache.

So micros are the clear winner when it comes to attracting finders, while regulars are mostly shunned.

[+niraD]

6 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

So micros are the clear winner when it comes to attracting finders, while regulars are mostly shunned.

Just a quibble: I doubt that regulars are being shunned per se. It's just the remote locations where you can hide a regular (and have it last) that are being shunned.

[+MNTA]

6 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

On the New South Wales Central Coast, there are 525 caches now (up from about 490 a year or so back, so the game's growing here), of which 227 are Small, 134 are Regular and, still in third place, 126 are Micro. Other (17), Large (12), Virtual (6) and Not Chosen (3) make up the rest.

 

When I look at the finds logged on those caches this year, though, the numbers tell a different story:

• Micros: 466 logs, 3.7 logs per cache
• Smalls: 527 logs, 2.3 logs per cache
• Regulars: 111 logs, 0.8 logs per cache.

So micros are the clear winner when it comes to attracting finders, while regulars are mostly shunned.

 

Most days I know for me I'd prefer to cache locally and if that means micros that is what is available. An hour drive to the forest is sometimes not in the cards.

 

3 minutes ago, niraD said:

Just a quibble: I doubt that regulars are being shunned per se. It's just the remote locations where you can hide a regular (and have it last) that are being shunned.

 

Yep 

 

On vacations specially when traveling with non-catchers like I am this week. The finds are usually opertunistic based upon where were are at so that means the touristy sites. Even one half a mile out of the way I am ignoring. So this trip has more virtual finds which is definitely not as satisfying to me. 

 

 

[+edexter]

I think it's pretty easy to understand the proliferation of road side micros and nanos and long line power trails versus traditional hiking caches.  They are easy to place, cheap, require (or at least get) little or no maintenance, and take just a few seconds to place.  For little effort, in a couple of months, you "get" many finds (and no favorite points).  Most new players think the point of the game is to get as many finds as possible in the shortest amount of time.  And who can blame them for thinking that?  The game is structured to award one virtual smilie for each find.  Eight stage two mile multi in the woods that takes two hours:  one smilie.  Twenty cache two mile power trail by the road that takes less time:  20 smilies.  As the late great Charlie Munger said:

"      "Incentives are what drive human behavior. Understanding incentives is the key to understanding people. Conversely, failing to recognize the importance of incentives often leads us to make major errors."  

   Some of us have different incentives than racking up the most points with the least amount of effort which is why there are still some decent caches being placed and found.  Most of us don't. It's as simple as that.  Want to change the quality of caches placed?  Add a quality component to game and promote it.   Reward quality caches being placed and found.  

edexter

   

[+Mudfrog]

18 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Most new players I see pop up around here have premium membership before they've even found their first cache, I guess that's how it's promoted in the app stores as they've also never visited the website, but they still only do the urban micros and ignore anything that's much higher than terrain 2. Part of this could be the way the app's designed, with a clear flow of pick a nearby cache on the map, tap Navigate, follow the arrow and then, when you get there, tap Log. Even if you go to the Geocaching 101 page on the website, this is what it says:

1. Open the app. Download and open the Geocaching® app to see geocaches near you. Then, select a geocache to find!
2. Navigate to the geocache. Once you select a cache, go outside, and use the app to navigate to it. And don’t forget to bring a pen so you can sign the logbook inside the geocache.
3. Look for the geocache. Once you navigate to the location, look at the recent activity and the hint for clues. Geocaches come in all shapes and sizes!
4. Find and log the geocache. Sign your username in the geocache’s logbook and place the geocache back where you found it. Log your find in the app or on Geocaching.com to see your find count increase!

This may be fine for those roadside micros, but not looking at the description or the attributes is likely to end in disappointment on anything a bit more challenging, especially when it comes to non-traditionals. Do they even know that caches have descriptions and attributes?

 

To let people get a taste of the vast variety of caches out there, they first have to start looking at descriptions and attributes and at least be aware of the different cache types and how they work. Heaven forbid, maybe they should even visit the website and see an actual cache page in all its glory, where all that information is laid out in one place.

 

On the bolded, people not reading cache descriptions has been an issue since geocaching began. Nothing new here. 

 

Of course things could be done with the app to help alleviate this issue. For instance, a tap on a cache listing could bring up a following page with cache type, size, difficulties, and minor details. Then at the bottom of that page, a tap to go back and proceed button. Color coding caches could be something to look into as well. I imagine there are many ways to make things easier for new cachers to get a grasp of our hobby.

 

As far as people signing up for premium right away, I'm not sure this is the case in our area. What I routinely see is a revolving door of people coming, staying for a moment, then leaving. 

Edited March 28 by Mudfrog

[+barefootjeff]

3 hours ago, Mudfrog said:

On the bolded, people not reading cache descriptions has been an issue since geocaching began. Nothing new here.

 

What's changed, though, is a decade ago most cachers would use the website for planning their caching, where everything, the description, attributes, D/T rating, size, etc., is all there right in front of you. You can choose not to read it, of course, but it's all there in plain view. In the app, though, the description and attributes are hidden away under the smaller buttons down the list, almost down amongst the legal notices. Top and centre are Navigate, Log and the hint. It's a design decision to relegate the description and attributes to being optional appendages, even on non-traditional caches where you can't just tap Navigate and expect to get to the cache.

[+kunarion]

1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:

 

What's changed, though, is a decade ago most cachers would use the website for planning their caching, where everything, the description, attributes, D/T rating, size, etc., is all there right in front of you. You can choose not to read it, of course, but it's all there in plain view. In the app, though, the description and attributes are hidden away under the smaller buttons down the list, almost down amongst the legal notices. Top and centre are Navigate, Log and the hint. It's a design decision to relegate the description and attributes to being optional appendages, even on non-traditional caches where you can't just tap Navigate and expect to get to the cache.

 

When using the App, I frequently switch to the web site for a cache page.  Can't find anything in The App.  Plus it gets Updated and now I can't find stuff again.  And the other Apps hide the same info in all kinds of other ways.  The web site is still very useful and still there and free to use, yet relegated to an afterthought by The App.

 

I'm not suggesting that people will be more excited about Geocaching by using the stuffy old-fashioned web site.  Just noting that we got this way cool trendy Pokeyman App AND this thread. 

 

Edited March 28 by kunarion

[+barefootjeff]

11 hours ago, niraD said:

Just a quibble: I doubt that regulars are being shunned per se. It's just the remote locations where you can hide a regular (and have it last) that are being shunned.

 

I guess it depends on what you consider "remote". Here's a map of all my regular-sized caches placed around Gosford City. The numbers alongside each one are the finds they've had in the last twelve months:

 

 

None of these are roadside P&Gs hanging on a fence post or poked into a guard rail, of course, but they're also mostly not ones you'd need to take a cut lunch for. Five of the nineteen have the "takes less than an hour" attribute and this is the distribution of their terrain ratings:

2.5 - 4

3.0 - 9

3.5 - 3

4.0 - 3

 

None are PMO but, perhaps tellingly, only three are traditionals, with the rest consisting of ten multis, five mysteries and an LBH. Maybe that's why modern-day app-only players don't like them.

 

Edited March 28 by barefootjeff

[+geodarts]

My non scientific observation locally is that the number of active cachers have gone down — the kind of people that once were part of the core group — but due to the efforts of one person in particular the number of caches increased in the past year.

 

However, I have never defined the game by the numbers on new caches.  I stopped getting notified when new ones are placed.   

 

For me, the game in its current version is somewhat non-intuitive. Some people at work knew I was an cacher and tried it without it sticking.  I was not surprised.  When I started I could trust that new caches were chosen for their location.  Now the game has to be introduced with a disclaimer — ignore most of the caches you see.
 

I have never used the official app and have always been a premium member, so I don’t know how easy it is to pick and choose caches as a beginner.  Those who join from the app seem to have a different set of expectations.  That affects new caches that are being placed and the caches they find, as well as the logs they write or interest in things like souvenirs or treasures.  Perhaps it has to do with age.  

 

 

 

 

[+Weber_and_Sons]

I don't think geocaching is dying, most people i talk too know what it is. in fact i started last year and am a new geocacher my self

[+cerberus1]

I don't know...  That 'covid' scare still has some folks worried about people, we're still seeing people with masks (that did nothing...), when some of us were playing outside with no crowds.    

'24 was a really crappy year for weather. and this is March where we're seeing 75-degree weather today, when it should be 50. Go figure...

I talk to quite a few who got into health issues the last coupla years.  So that might have a couple missing too.

The hobby is  25 years older, and we aged with it.     

I'm gonna be cleared to play some in a couple weeks.  A lot lighter now, so it'll be interesting to see how I fare.

Over the years it's always been kinda up n down in interest here. From May into Summer should give you a good idea on interest.

[+barefootjeff]

On 3/29/2025 at 9:53 AM, barefootjeff said:

Here's a map of all my regular-sized caches placed around Gosford City. The numbers alongside each one are the finds they've had in the last twelve months:

 

 

Out of interest, I've done a similar plot showing micros in the same area around Gosford City, also limiting it to traditionals with a D/T rating of 2 or lower so the sort of caches that everyone here is complaining about. Again the numbers alongside each cache are the number of finds in the last 12 months:

 

 

Curiously, the odd one out with zero finds, just west of Kariong, was last found in December 2023 but there's nothing in the logs to indicate any problem with it. Perhaps it's just because it's a bit over half a kilometre walk from the nearest parking so it's not a P&G.

 

I should also add that these aren't just new caches, some are quite old but still getting lots of finds. The one at Kincumber with 55 finds was placed in 2017 and the one at Woy Woy with 22 finds is now ten years old. The oldest one, the one right in Gosford with 23 finds in the last twelve months, was placed in 2006, so it's nearly two decades old and still going strong.

 

The contrast is so striking with the find counts on my regular-sized caches that I'm wondering whether I'm doing the game a disservice by continuing to place them. Maybe I need to go over to the dark side and start placing roadside micros.

[+Mudfrog]

On 3/29/2025 at 8:01 PM, barefootjeff said:

The contrast is so striking with the find counts on my regular-sized caches that I'm wondering whether I'm doing the game a disservice by continuing to place them. Maybe I need to go over to the dark side and start placing roadside micros.

 

Whoa,, you shouldn't be kidding around like that! 

 

Don't give in to the numbers game. The good quality caches you've placed give those finding them good memories and something to crow about. 

 

This comes back to my earlier replies that a lot of new people never get to experience those good caches that you've placed. Unless they pay, most haven't a clue the variety and adventure that awaits them. 

Edited March 31 by Mudfrog

[+Om_and_Nom]

My "gut" tells me that the game isn't growing as much as HQ leads us to believe.  Is an increase in # of caches useful?  I don't know.  How about # of "active" cachers?  What's an active cacher though?  Is it someone that found one cache like, 7 months ago?  

 

I think a useful data point would be something like, "# of players that crossed the 100 finds threshold" per year.  It weeds out the player that found a few and gave up, weeds out the goofy couch cacher that logged a bunch to be funny (have you guys seen the Antartica cache?), and is a better picture of game growth.  Maybe a data point on # of players per year that find at least 1 cache every month.  Something like that.  

 

# of active caches does *nothing* for me as far as game health and growth.  There are countless crappy caches out there because of inactive CO's and active veteran players that don't want to archive a crappy cache that's falling apart.  

Edited April 14 by Om_and_Nom

[+Inmountains]

I have read most of the posts on here and find them very good thoughts, ideas and experiences.  As for Power Trails, they can be an exciting adventure.  When I did the ET Highway, we were BUZZED by 2 US Air Force F-18's, wondering what we were doing to close to Area 51.  We also saw several herds of wild horses and herds of antelope.  I have also been on the other end where it took an entire day to find just ONE CACHE, driving from Durango, CO to Silverton, CO, and then Jeeping up 10 miles of mountain trails, finding the cache, having a picnic lunch and then driving back home.  From the 35mm cannister under a lamp post to the five gallon bucket sitting in an Oak Brush Thicket at 10,000 feet, they all have their place!

 

But I would still like to see more cachers join the game and getting these lazy folks off of Social Media.  As you can see from the date of the previous post, the only reason I am on the Geocaching site right now is I am working on a few Puzzle Caches.  Since my last post, I think I have a dozen or so finds, but it's still hard, we are getting 3 inches of snow as I type this!  Not fun to cache too long in the snow.

 

Thank you to all who answered my original post!