Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Guest cache_only

ridiculously difficult caches

Recommended Posts

Guest cache_only

I don't mean to be a whiner, but...it seems some people hide their caches with the intent for them NOT to be found. As if the person hiding the cache is on a mission for the seekers to be thwarted. What gives? The reason I believe this to be true is that the spoiler is supposed to reveal the location precisely in case of GPS coordinate position error. A spoiler should read something like, "Find the dead tree that is about 15 feet high and whose sole branch extends to the west. From this tree go 14 feet at an azimuth of 137 degrees. There beneath your feet is the cache." My wife and I drove an hour today to a cache. After some time fruitlessly searching, we decided to decipher the spoiler. It was very, very vague and did absolutely nothing for us. Are these people sadists? Do they get off on people not finding their cache? I can understand that if the cache is located in a heavy traffic area, the thing should be buried. There are people burying their caches when there is absolutely no reason to: it is located way, way off the beaten path where people don't normally travel. So then why bury the danged thing? Just throw some leaves and a branch over it so the thing can be found with a reasonable amount of searching. Just my two cathartic cents. Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Quinnow

cache you looked for just happened to be unique in the way it was placed and entered into the site.

Good luck out there on your future hunts! icon_smile.gificon_smile.gif

 

------------------

Quinn Stone

Rochester, NY.14616

www.Navicache.com

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Quinnow

cache you looked for just happened to be unique in the way it was placed and entered into the site.

Good luck out there on your future hunts! icon_smile.gificon_smile.gif

 

------------------

Quinn Stone

Rochester, NY.14616

www.Navicache.com

Share this post


Link to post
Guest cache_ninja

howdy,

hey, yeah, can be frustrating, especially if you travel far to find it..

a few things,perhaps might be obvious,

are you using WGS-84 as your datum? just make sure, this is the most common reason for people being slightly off/not finding caches(they have it set to somethign other than wgs-84)... also, I'm not suggesting this is what happened in your case, but its worth noting i think...people have e-mailed me in frustration after not finding one of my caches, after looking for it, for literally 10min. Expect to spend awhile looking for a cache!! I've spent much more than an hour looking for a cache once I get to the coordinates, its even more satisfying when you find it after spending so much time. And , of coure its always useful to think like someone who is hiding something in order to find a cache...

 

good luck! i hope your hunt was just a fluke and you'll have more sucessful cache finding trips soon.

 

c/n

Share this post


Link to post
Guest fiser

Which cache did you drive an hour to find?

(I'm hoping it's not one of mine in that area).

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Exocet

The very first cache a friend and I went after we failed to find.

 

I emailed the author of the cache (never got a response), asking if I was in the right area, etc.

 

After finding our official "first", we went back and searched for it again. We searched for about an hour. Three minutes after I had been standing two feet from the cache, a friend found it.

 

The cache was buried and well camoflauged. My GPS had been right on, I just couldn't see it.

 

Having said all of that, I wouldn't have the cache owner change anything, other than that it would have been nice to get a reply saying "you're in the right area, just keep looking."

 

I think that if a cache is very well camoflauged or buried, the owner of the cache needs to make that clear in the hints. I'm also a big advocate of many hints, IE: hint #1 [...] if you still can't find it ...hint #2 [...] if you still can't find it ...hint #3 and so on.

 

That way the hints get progressively closer to the cache but don't give it away too easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Farqhuarson

the first one i went looking for was out in west texas in the middle of nowhere. i got my legs torn to pieces hiking through an area that had no trails whatsoever, covered with sharp desert flora, to reach a mountain that they had camped on for a couple nights, i had the co ordinates wrong through my own stupidity, was about a 1/4 mile off, spent about an hour and a half looking for it and couldnt find any of the landmarks that he had talked about before spending another couple hours hiking back to the car. all in all we (me and two friends of mine) were out there for almost 6 hours and loved every second of it.

 

the ones that are hard are the ones worth doing. there's not supposed to be a big arrow and sign saying "here it is" in big red letters.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Moun10Bike

quote:
Originally posted by Farqhuarson:

there's not supposed to be a big arrow and sign saying "here it is" in big red letters.


 

According to some, there should be (I'm currently in a discussion on the email list with someone who thinks this way -- a bit frustrating!).

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Cape Cod Cache

I left my cache with my MOM A big puddle stoped us.took aleft, a fiberglass pole marks it

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Farqhuarson

well, i shouldnt have said "supposed", i should have said i prefer it to be difficult. to each their own, and i dont expect everyone to agree. i myself just do not enjoy walking up to the big red X. but if that floats your boat, search for the ones that are rated accordingly.

 

as for me and apparenlty some others (i never signed up for the mailing list, so i have no idea what has gone on in that discussion), we prefer it to be a challenge of some sort, to make a real game of it. and i suppose we'll stick to the ones that are also rated accordingly.

 

case in point, there are several caches here in Texas that i have been waiting to do, but wont for a while jsut because its going to be hard to get to them. case in point the failed cache i did near big bend (10 hours away), and a new one that has been placed out there. one in Palo Duro canyon somewhere and a couple others that match my outdoors intrests, which is why i started doing this in the first place.

 

so those of you out there that are hiding caches and are worried about them being too difficult, my opinion is dont worry. rate it accordingly, and there will be those of us who will enjoy the challenge even if fail. some of us are somewhat masochistic and that just makes us keep coming back for more.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Scout

To each his own, I suppose. I see a difference between a site being difficult to reach and a cache being difficult to find.

 

I prefer a bit of an effort to reach a spot, but once I am there, I don't want to spend an hour searching for the cache because it is buried or hidden under a pile of debris that requires a forklift to move. For those that like that sort of thing, OK I guess, even if I do think that kind of cache threatens the environment with unnecessary disturbance.

 

If the hint would give you enough information to find the cache with a minimum of rooting around, then both groups of people could be satisfied. Even if the hint is in the form of clues that require thinking to figure it out, instead of digging by hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Moun10Bike

quote:
Originally posted by cache_only:

But that is the reason for the spoiler. It's supposed to give away the location for those who can't find it


 

I agree, and I fully support adding hints/spoilers to the cache pages -- I always include them, as well as photos of the specific hiding location, on all of my caches. I just don't think that hiders should be *required* to give this information. In the discussion that I'm having with the gentleman on the mailing list, he is lobbying to have parking location and route to the cache included on each cache page. He has been frustrated with problems that he has had reaching cache sites when he is unfamiliar with the area in which they are hidden. When I said that that was part of the fun of the search, and that a little beforehand research could alleviate some of those obstacles (I pointed him to some resources that could have told him how to best approach some of those caches with which he had had trouble), he became a little upset with me. icon_smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Moun10Bike

quote:
Originally posted by cache_only:

But that is the reason for the spoiler. It's supposed to give away the location for those who can't find it


 

I agree, and I fully support adding hints/spoilers to the cache pages -- I always include them, as well as photos of the specific hiding location, on all of my caches. I just don't think that hiders should be *required* to give this information. In the discussion that I'm having with the gentleman on the mailing list, he is lobbying to have parking location and route to the cache included on each cache page. He has been frustrated with problems that he has had reaching cache sites when he is unfamiliar with the area in which they are hidden. When I said that that was part of the fun of the search, and that a little beforehand research could alleviate some of those obstacles (I pointed him to some resources that could have told him how to best approach some of those caches with which he had had trouble), he became a little upset with me. icon_smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Guest CaveToad

I've included parking info but only to make it more interesting, in the cases where I include it the reason was to make it less direct to get to the cache and more of an adventure. ( not too much )

Share this post


Link to post
Guest WrongWay

I feel that the true nature of the activity to to find a specific Lat/Lon, nothing else.

 

There is no requirement to provide directions.

 

That being said. I've tried to provide directions at least to the trail head which includes parking coordinates, I guess I do this because I would feel guilty if a person seeking the cache was unable to locate at least the trail head.

 

The next cache I place is going to be called "FIND THIS" no hints, no directions, just a Lat/Lon.

 

The more I participate in this activity the more I find enjoyment in researching the maps and history of the areas and determining my approach.

 

I don't understand the need to "require" more specific data. Get the X/Y and go for it.

 

If a cache description doesn't match your parameters...skip it.

 

regards,

 

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Guest fiser

I'll ask again.

 

Mr. Cache_Only, which cache prompted you to start this thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Scout

quote:
Originally posted by WrongWay:

I feel that the true nature of the activity to to find a specific Lat/Lon, nothing else.


 

I'm with you on that. And when you get to that Lat/Lon, you shouldn't have to root around and dig up a couple hundred square feet of wilderness looking for the cache. Either make the cache visible to the naked eye with only a small amount of searching, or provide hints that allow a hunter to go to it without any disturbance to the site.

 

 

[This message has been edited by Scout (edited 04-12-2001).]

Share this post


Link to post
Guest bob_renner

quote:
Originally posted by WrongWay:

... The more I participate in this activity the more I find enjoyment in researching the maps and history of the areas and determining my approach.

...


 

However, you can give descriptions on parking and still have seekers get lost or take the wrong trail. Right Jim icon_wink.gif

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Guest bob_renner

quote:
Originally posted by WrongWay:

... The more I participate in this activity the more I find enjoyment in researching the maps and history of the areas and determining my approach.

...


 

However, you can give descriptions on parking and still have seekers get lost or take the wrong trail. Right Jim icon_wink.gif

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Guest WrongWay

quote:
Originally posted by bob_renner:

However, you can give descriptions on parking and still have seekers get lost or take the wrong trail. Right Jim icon_wink.gif

 

Bob


 

Doh ! You got me on that one...it would have made a drill instructor blush if he heard the blue streak I swore up when I realized I'd been sucker'd by you...excellent cache by the way.

 

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Guest WrongWay

quote:
Originally posted by bob_renner:

However, you can give descriptions on parking and still have seekers get lost or take the wrong trail. Right Jim icon_wink.gif

 

Bob


 

Doh ! You got me on that one...it would have made a drill instructor blush if he heard the blue streak I swore up when I realized I'd been sucker'd by you...excellent cache by the way.

 

Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Farqhuarson

if finding a specific lat/lon is the primary goal, then why are you bothering to look for a cache to begin with? You know you are in the rough vicinity of that specific lat/lon with simply your GPS. so get there look around, take a picture (ie the virtual cache idea i suppose? im not to familiar with the details that are being suggested for this concept.) and then go home. why would someone then also need to make an easy to find box if that isnt your primary goal to begin with?

Share this post


Link to post
Guest xsintrik

quote:
Originally posted by WrongWay:

I feel that the true nature of the activity to to find a specific Lat/Lon, nothing else.

(snip)

There is no requirement to provide directions.

(snip)

The next cache I place is going to be called "FIND THIS" no hints, no directions, just a Lat/Lon.

(snip)

I don't understand the need to "require" more specific data. Get the X/Y and go for it.

 

If a cache description doesn't match your parameters...skip it.

 

 

Jim


 

If you only want to find the Lat/Long only, then go participate in the Confluence Project...

This sport is geoCACHING. That is you are trying to FIND something that someone else left for you to find.

Consider the inherant inaccuracy of the GPS units, and you are lucky if the coordinates get you with-in fourty feet of the cache. At that point, if you expect someone to find your cache, you have to give them some idea where it might be hidden. We can't have people running around and digging up holes in a 100 square foot area looking for your cache when you may have left it in a hollow log or dead tree. I know that I would be pissed if I spent an hour searching every dead tree and hollow log in the area only to find out that it was buried.

I don't like the idea of virtual caching, I enjoy finding a cache, even if it is only a log book.

Some people say they enjoy the search, well I personally don't enjoy walking in a circle around the same 100 square foot patch of forrest for an hour searching for a cache without a decent hint. I don't search for caches without a decent hints anymore.

I look at this sport as if I am hiding something for a friend to find, but don't want other people to find by accident. So besides the coordinates, I leave decent hints and I try to find a resonable hidding place to begin with.

 

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Guest cache_only

TO: FISER

 

The reason for starting this thread is that I want to see this sport not only survive, but flourish. I do not decipher the spoiler at home because, in natural human psychology, I will apply the spoiler upon immediately reaching the site: it will become an immediate "go-to" and the fun of the search will be non-existent. But, on the other hand, on two occasions my wife and I have searched well over an hour, decided to decipher the spoiler only to find out it was a lame, ambiguous hint that revealed absolutely nothing. And I'll tell you exactly what is going to happen to this sport if the spoilers don't become precise: The "family" seekers will be driven away. No man and woman with young children want to spend an entire morning or afternoon driving a long distance, searching for quite a while, only to repeat the long drive home empty handed. After a few of these episodes the children will get turned off and not want to participate any longer. Mom and Dad will follow if the children are not committed to the sport. And I do not want to see this sport, like many others, bequeathed to the exclusive teens and twenty-somethings who may not even be working and not concerned with time, or, have no children to lug into the forest to disappoint. It will end up a sport with the participants all knuckleheads and their caches will consist of porn mags and beer. So, in summation, the spoiler has to reveal the location of the cache in order to keep families involved. Sorry about the long treatise. Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Moun10Bike

quote:
Originally posted by cache_only:

So, in summation, the spoiler has to reveal the location of the cache in order to keep families involved.


 

I understand the need/desire to have such specific spoilers. I try to include them for all of the caches that I hide. However, I would suggest that rather than saying the spoiler must reveal the location, we should make sure that we rate caches accurately. That way, someone who wants to take the family out can select only those caches rated at 1 or 2 stars and be reasonably sure that they will be successful.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Nomad

I was beginning to side with you until you referred to my generation as knuckleheads.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest WrongWay

Farqhuarson, xsintrik,

 

You two are reading way too much into what I wrote, maybe I should have phrased it:

 

"I feel that the true nature of the activity is to find a CACHE AT A specific Lat/Lon, nothing else."

 

Granted, your definition of cache may differ from mine, but the underlying principle is the same...

 

As far as cache difficulty, it all comes down to the personal responsibility. The responsibility is the seekers alone in determining if a cache fits within their parameters.

 

If the cache does not fit your parameters...use your free will...skip it...

 

Unless the cache owner deliberately misleads, you have no justification for complaining about how a cache is placed or described.

 

It's all part of the game.

 

Jim

 

BTW: Please don't tell me what activity I should be participating in.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest fiser

All I asked for was the _name_ of the cache.

 

I'm not sure why Mr. Only addressed a message to me, yet answered every question but the one I posed.

 

I asked out of courtesy because I hid a cache within an hour radius of Trenton, and would have apologized had the frustrating cache been the one I hid.

 

Relax.

 

[This message has been edited by fiser (edited 04-13-2001).]

 

[This message has been edited by fiser (edited 04-13-2001).]

Share this post


Link to post
Guest brucebridges

hat I was trying to relay is what I believe is a valid concern that some people have about accidently parking, trespassing or whatever that could cause problems for the player. For the record I haven't had any problems in this game beyond a situation in which I had to park in an area that was the staging area outside of a private construction site. With no other option, I did park there and had a great hunt although I was a little concerned about getting ticketed or towed by county law while I was hiking. When the discussion was raised by another player I chimed in because I saw his point and thought it valid.

 

Most cache hiders do seem to include some parking information with the impression that the hunt really starts once you leave your car. I mean, I click on a link and get driving directions so I don't even think of that as part of the hunt. (am I not supposed to do that I wonder.)

 

I guess I am just trying to give another perspective on this issue.

 

BTW, If I am the person referred to, rest assured, I haven't gotten upset at any time in the discussion. I do try to be sensitive to showing respect to those I am debating with since I've seen so many debates (on other lists as well) spiral into namecalling etc. and i have no interest in that.

 

bb

Share this post


Link to post
Guest cache_only

OK. My fault. I have to make my point clearer because my last post was misinterpreted. If somebody states he/she buried a cache in a very difficult area, labeled it 4 stars, and posted no spoiler info, then I have absolutely no problem with this person because he/she is throwing out a very clear caveat to seekers that this is going to be a seriously difficult cache to find. I respect that. Faint of heart need not apply. But it grinds my a** when people rate a cache 1 or 2 stars, bury the cache, and then throw out a weak hint instead of a spoiler. If a cache is buried it should be clearly stated. We are way past the hint stage with a 1 star rating and a buried cache. It should be an all-out spoiler if the seeker cannot find it. This was my problem. If there is a microgroup out there that challenges the heck out of each other with super difficult caches, then more power to them. But they should clearly state that so John and Mary Average, with their four toddler children, aren't combing the countryside on a mission they cannot accomplish. In short, don't bury a cache, neglect to state as much, rate it 1 or 2 stars, then throw out a lame hint. Caveat Emptor! Let the [seeker] beware! A little courtesy goes a long way. Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Farqhuarson

well considering that i had said in my original post, that cache's should be rated accordingly i most heartedly agree with that point.

 

which is the main point i believe. as long as the ratings are correct then there shouldnt be much of a problem, case in point the family cachers, wont be driven off because they could then find the caches that would be appropriate for them.

 

and for the record i don't consider myself much of a knucklehead, and im also not sure how porn mags and beer entered the discussion. mainly because if you wanted beer and porn its alot easier to stay at home than wander around for several hours looking for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Kurt in MI

Here is a post I made that I think the debaters might want to read: Suggestion: Difficulty/Terrain Ratings

 

Perhaps we can come up with a detailed standard rating system that will be displayed on the screen when the cache stasher is entering a new cache into the database. I e-mailed the suggestion to Jeremy and he replied, stating he put it on his "things to do" list. If someone is willing to type up such a standard and post it for discussion, perhaps we can arrive at a suitable detailed standard for people to use.

 

I'd be willing to type up such a suggestion for a standard once I get more experience finding caches. If y'all don't want to wait for me to get around to it, by all means, go for it! icon_smile.gif

 

If we can agree on a detailed standard and submit it to Jeremy, I think he'd appreciate it.

 

------------------

Best regards,

 

Kurt in MI

Track your US currency's travels too at Where's George?! icon_smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Kurt in MI

Here is a post I made that I think the debaters might want to read: Suggestion: Difficulty/Terrain Ratings

 

Perhaps we can come up with a detailed standard rating system that will be displayed on the screen when the cache stasher is entering a new cache into the database. I e-mailed the suggestion to Jeremy and he replied, stating he put it on his "things to do" list. If someone is willing to type up such a standard and post it for discussion, perhaps we can arrive at a suitable detailed standard for people to use.

 

I'd be willing to type up such a suggestion for a standard once I get more experience finding caches. If y'all don't want to wait for me to get around to it, by all means, go for it! icon_smile.gif

 

If we can agree on a detailed standard and submit it to Jeremy, I think he'd appreciate it.

 

------------------

Best regards,

 

Kurt in MI

Track your US currency's travels too at Where's George?! icon_smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Guest bob_renner

quote:
Originally posted by Kurt in MI:

... Perhaps we can come up with a detailed standard rating system ...


 

Last August when I was planning my first cache, there was a detailed standard rating system on one of the other web sites. I think it was the GPS Stash web site, but I can't find it any more. It listed typical conditions for the 1-5 ratings for difficulty. Does anyone else remember seeing this?

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Moun10Bike

quote:
Originally posted by brucebridges:

Since I think I am the person that Mount10biker referred to, I guess I should clarify the point that I evidently did not properly convey


 

Hi Bruce -- I actually wasn't referring to you! I meant the person on the email list who started the discussion I mentioned. He was frustrated because he had problems finding parking for 3 different caches, and made a plea on the list to have parking instructions included. I took a look at the caches he mentioned having problems with and was able to figure out where he went wrong on at least one of them, and gave him some advice on the list. His reponse was not exactly the kindest.

 

I've now noticed that he is making a point of giving parking instructions, hints, and spoilers in the logs of the caches he visits.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest brucebridges

Talk about difficult Caches, this weekend we were stopped dead in our tracks by the very loud and very close growl of what we assume was a Mountain Lion. Since we didn't want the dogs to end up cat food, we decided to come back without them another day.

 

We wish we had seen it but it was in a very heavily covered area and that sound can chill your blood.

 

YIKES!

Share this post


Link to post
Guest JamesBR

My frustrations with my geocaching experience so far are opposite those of the original poster. All of the caches I have found so far have too easy...and I never decript the clues!

I think more caches should be placed with co-ordinates only...No descriptions of the site or visual clues like pictures and maps. It seems to me that the whole point of this game is to find the cache using only your GPS.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Guest mickyd

Maybe it is time that a site location scale be considered.Take for example a cache that is well hidden and requires a degree of concentrated searching vs. a cache whoes location is relatively obvious from the description and takes minimum effort to locate.The difficult cache would rate a five on the site locator scale while the more obvious cache would be rated a one.Alerted with type of information, a potential trekker could decide if he or she is up to the task of the potential difficulty required to locate the cache.

just a thought............

Share this post


Link to post
Guest cleenjeep

Oh man.. I hope it wasnt one of my caches.. he he. I am new at this, and have placed 6 recently, possibly one of the ones Cache Only went to. I would feel bad if one of my caches was so terribly placed/described that he couldn't find it. I had to start somewhere, since there isnt many caches around for me to go to, and I figured what the heck, place some for others, they might place some for me! Oh well. If it was me cache only, I apologize, and I might have to double check to make sure i mentioned bring a shovel on some of mine. Looks like I did though, so that's okay. I dont bury them super deep, just deep enough that they dont get trampled, or the like. They are accesible by small garden shovels, the old lady type that you bury little flowers with, and the military folding unit that I use as well.

Michael

 

------------------

Webmaster and List Admin for Southern Michigan Rockcrawlers

Personal Site is Cleenjeep's Site

Share this post


Link to post
Some things never change.

Look at that. RK whips out The nostalgia file. <_< Nicely done.

Share this post


Link to post

Why would anybody dredge up a 3+ year old post? <_<

 

Actually I find myself going back through old posts just for kicks and it's funny how things haven't changed much. Many of the issues that are brought up today were also being discussed 2-3 years ago. The same whining, calling for new rules, complaining about the TBTB (well before that name was used), etc...

 

All the "old timers" who long for the "good old days" of geochaching are really longing for something that didn't exist.

Edited by briansnat

Share this post


Link to post
Some things never change.

But "the numbers" certainly change ... 3 years ago, having 100 caches within 100 miles of one's home area was considered a "cache-rich" area. If 5% of those caches were "lame" or "poor quality" they amounted to only 5 caches.

 

But these days, several "cache-rich" areas have 2,000 - 3,000 (or more!) caches within 100 miles, so even if the percentage of poor quality caches has remained constant (which I do not believe to be the case), the current caches that amount to pure dreck would outnumber the total number of caches hidden in that same area 3 years ago by 50%. That's a fairly significant change.

 

In the discussion that I'm having with the gentleman on the mailing list, he is lobbying to have parking location and route to the cache included on each cache page. He has been frustrated with problems that he has had reaching cache sites when he is unfamiliar with the area in which they are hidden. When I said that that was part of the fun of the search, and that a little beforehand research could alleviate some of those obstacles (I pointed him to some resources that could have told him how to best approach some of those caches with which he had had trouble), he became a little upset with me.

 

And while people complaining about these things hasn't changed, more recently we have had people complaining about all the information they "need" that isn't included in their "PQ's." So, another significant change would be the amount of time people will waste complicating a really simple game. ... "Get coordinates, go find cache." Yep, those were the "good old days." Vague cache descriptions (if any). No clues. No parking coordinates. "Geocaching as it was meant to be."

Edited by Bassoon Pilot

Share this post


Link to post
And while people complaining about these things hasn't changed, more recently we have had people complaining about all the information they "need" that isn't included in their "PQ's." So, another significant change would be the amount of time people will waste complicating a really simple game. ... "Get coordinates, go find cache." Yep, those were the "good old days." Vague cache descriptions (if any). No clues. No parking coordinates. "Geocaching as it was meant to be."

 

Although I haven't been playing long enough to remember "the good old day", this is the way I normally play the game. Load the coords in my GPS and run out the door. Sometimes it takes longer to find the parking area than actually finding the cache. Often I don't even know what I'm looking for because all I have is the coords. It's all part of the game (or at least the way I choose to play it).

Share this post


Link to post

Caches aren't supposed to be buried in the first place.

 

From the website under "Off-limit (Physical) Caches":

 

"Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate."

 

Cache Listing Requirements/Guidelines

 

If this is, indeed, a buried cache, perhaps the owner should be contacted to be made aware of this so it can be adjusted accoridngly and if that doesn't work then the cache should be reported as not abiding by the guidelines.

Share this post


Link to post
Caches aren't supposed to be buried in the first place.

 

From the website under "Off-limit (Physical) Caches":

 

"Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate."

 

In the early days of geocaching, burying was fairly common. GC.COM eventually stopped listing buried caches for good reason. Note the date on the OP.

Share this post


Link to post

Amen to what Bassonpilot said. Punch the co-ord's, take the sheet, and find the cache. If their aren't any clues, find it anyway. Start with some 1/1's, they actually do make you better at this game. I can find micro's now that I'd never find 2 years ago.

 

People think the game is easy when I tell them about it. They think differently when we are out in the woods, and the GPS'er is fillping out. It's all about learning.

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 0

×
×
  • Create New...