Jump to content

Planting Your Next Cache


Followers 1

Recommended Posts

Just thought I'd start a new topic for the hell of it.

 

As of today, I have 27 finds and 1 hide. To some this might suggest its time I set up my next hide. A ratio of about 1 hide to 25 finds seems to be the popular view.

 

However, I don't actually agree with this doctrine. For a start, some caches take an awful lot of hiding. Take Stu and Sarah's 'Cut down cache' or Dave and Vicky's 'Wildcat' for example. Not the sort of hides you could arrange on a frequent basis.

 

Perhaps a ratio based on difficulty/location rating would be more realistic. a 5/5 may, for example, be the equivalent to 5 1/1s.

 

Then there is the visit ratio to take into account...i.e. the number of logs recorded on your caches. Would it not be more appropriate to hide a new one after (say) twenty visits to your last one? Some caches out there are lucky to get more than a few visits per year.

 

I think its great that so many new caches are being planted at such a furious rate and I wouldn't want to deter anyone from this. But don't be hard on yourselves!

 

What do you think?

Link to comment

My plan (and I'm sticking to it) is one hide per 25 finds.... however... I am making sure that all of my caches are there because they are good ones, not because they are just me making up my numbers. When it gets to the stage that I have put enough caches in this area, then I will stop. I suppose I may knock out some of my older caches by then and replace them with new versions, but I'm going to stay flexible. For now it is 1:25.

Link to comment

The ratio doesn't matter to me. People play Geocaching for many different reasons and some will hide more then 1:25 and others rarely hide at all - this shouldn't matter.

 

We started by spending most of our time finding caches but as other pressures removed the opportunity to find, we started to hide more.

 

I agree with Stuey that it is important to hide quality caches. We hide caches because we enjoy the feedback, which will demonstrate the quality of these hides.

 

We are still finding brand new locations to hide caches after 2 1/2 years, and we are now starting to re-use some existing locations in new multi-cache formats to add value and interest.

 

BTW, we have found 283 and hidden 64 so far.

Link to comment
The ratio doesn't matter to me.  People play Geocaching for many different reasons and some will hide more then 1:25 and others rarely hide at all - this shouldn't matter.

 

We started by spending most of our time finding caches but as other pressures removed the opportunity to find, we started to hide more.

 

I agree with Stuey that it is important to hide quality caches.  We hide caches because we enjoy the feedback, which will demonstrate the quality of these hides.

 

We are still finding brand new locations to hide caches after 2 1/2 years, and we are now starting to re-use some existing locations in new multi-cache formats to add value and interest.

 

BTW, we have found 283 and hidden 64 so far.

Top hider in the country I noticed! Very impressive as hiding can be much harder than finding! B)

MarcB

Edited by MarcB
Link to comment

Before I hide a cache I like to make sure of the environment in all seasons. I don't want to find that my well-hidden cache is clearly visible from half a mile away just because the shrubs have died off for the winter!. Or make an easy find absolutely impossible because i didn't think of the stinging nettles come the summer.

 

No it takes time and research to find secure places that don't change much over time. Plus there has to be a good reason for the location.

 

The other thing that worries me is my ability to service a large number of caches. I have a rule whereby I can get to a cache within 48 hours. With just my four, I have had to make three dashes in the past year. If I had, say, 50, statistically I could end up making one dash to fix a cache per week! I don't have that sort of time. So, rather than plant and then abandon caches, I would rather plant a few and look after them well.

 

1:25 is a good ratio, one that I seem to attain without trying.

Link to comment
88 finds, 25 hides (as of today)!

What a ratio!

MarcB

56 Found, 26 hidden. Ahem :)

 

What I enjoy about setting caches is sharing an interesting location with other cachers, and I guess over the years I've got out and about and explored a lot. Hence I have some very attractive or plain odd places to leave a cache. Childhood took me to some fun local spots (such as Claydon House and Tingewick Wood) and others I've discovered while cycling (like The Phoenix Trail) or otherwise poking about. As for numbers and ratios, I think it's good for anyone to put something back into the sport if they take something out of it (sounds familiar!) and so long as the location has appeal of one sort or another, and is an appropriate spot, then it's fair-game for a cache. I can see why 1:25 or 1:20 would look about right. Says he with a 1:2.15 H:F ratio, lol!

 

Happy caching, and roll-on-summer!

 

SP

Edited by Simply Paul
Link to comment

512 to 19 That gives a ratio of about 27:1 though that's coincidence not by design. They've mostly been set in 'bursts' rather than spread evenly along my caching 'career'. I've just finished setting a series of 5 and they were set over a period of about 3.1/2 weeks.

Link to comment
We hide a cache when we find a perfect spot to hide a cache.

All the perfect spots around here were snapped up by Dan&Pid months ago! I have to be a bit more creative and cunning. A lovely view is nice enough (Creature Feature) but a rude carving (PPC1-Rude Lady) is a joy forever!

 

I agree the ratio isn't very relevant, but it's been hard to take criticism about one of my caches from someone who's never set one themselves, and thus has little idea of the possible problems and demands of doing so. If they had placed one, they may have had more insight... Or have I gone off topic? :)

 

SP

Link to comment

Found: 300 Hidden: 69

 

I agree with the opinion that caches should be hidden when a good location comes up, for me its not trying to get numbers up, thats just how many places I felt were interesting in my area and other places I could maintain, that I wanted to share with fellow cachers, I have to admit a couple of them are pretty poor looking back but I was a newbie and the rest have been recieved well - and yes, apologies to Simply Paul who now has to search a lot harder for obscurities :)

Edited by Dan Wilson
Link to comment

86 found and 10 hidden this year.

I have about 6 caches ready to go, all of different sizes, but only 2 have locations ready for them, the others are just ready :)

 

If I find a location that i think is of intrest then I will place a cache after researching etc, but I won't place for the sake of it, no matter what the ratio

Link to comment

I don't think anyone hides a cache for the hell of it. I've visited great, good, average and bad, yet none of them struck me as being a 'pin in a map' effort. A dull cache isn't fun to do, fun to set or fun to write/read about, so why would anyone do it? More than that, it also hurts the hiders reputation and may discourage visitors from bothering to do another (hopefully better) cache of theirs in the future. I did suggest Dan add a 'Bucks best and worse caches' section to his site, but I think he was worried that his appearing in either category might i) seem egotistical and ii) draw attention to some of his early, not so developed placings. :)

 

Anyway, I hope I'm not a 'numbers man' when it comes to setting...Does anyone have a finger to point? It's been a dull Monday and I could use a good online row... :)

 

SP

Link to comment
I don't worry about the ratio or number of caches hidden.

 

If I want to hide one I go out and hide a cache, it as simple as that.

 

Andy.

I guess that is the best reason of all!

 

There are very few caches in my neck of the woods and even less geocachers by a huge margin, I have hidden probally about 50% or the caches in my home county and I could probally hide hundreds more without making the place over populated with them, but I wont. I hope to recruit some new cachers or let them recruit themselves to the game and let them hide caches in thier favourite spots without them seeing that I have already taken all the good ones. After all there are literally thousand and thousands of Gorse bushes in Caithness :) Just ask anyone that has found a few of my caches

(leather gauntlets required) :):)

Link to comment

60 something found.. 1 hid. God I feel like such a newbi..

 

But in all fairness I have a "good" micro (in a park near what could have been a nice virt. sadly no where to hide a reg cache) and a 50cal ammo box ready to go as soon as I can get the time to get them out there!

Link to comment

As we move house frequently and sometimes abroad (my husband's in the armed forces), we don't want to place too many caches as we know we will be moving on and will therefore find it difficult to maintain them.

 

We have currently found over 130 caches but have only hidden 2.

 

We have friends living locally to these 2 caches who could, in an emergency, check them out for us once we leave the area later this year. We have deliberately not hidden any more as we don't want to impose on the goodwill of our friends too much!

Link to comment

I do what my cache muse demands. Right now that has me at about 50 caches placed (A few were adopted out when I moved) a bunch of those are archived.

 

Projects:

 

Breeder Reactor: A cache generation machine.

Something Out There: A Skully and Mulder training mission. (Night Cache)

Confusion: An easy find and a hard find breaking one of the rules of GC and yet not.

Plus some TLC on some caches overdue to be brought back on line.

 

I've given up planting a cache just to do it though if my muse demands a lame urban micro then so be it.

Link to comment
Just thought I'd start a new topic for the hell of it.

 

As of today, I have 27 finds and 1 hide. To some this might suggest its time I set up my next hide. A ratio of about 1 hide to 25 finds seems to be the popular view.

 

However, I don't actually agree with this doctrine. For a start, some caches take an awful lot of hiding. Take Stu and Sarah's 'Cut down cache' or Dave and Vicky's 'Wildcat' for example. Not the sort of hides you could arrange on a frequent basis.

 

Perhaps a ratio based on difficulty/location rating would be more realistic. a 5/5 may, for example, be the equivalent to 5 1/1s.

 

Then there is the visit ratio to take into account...i.e. the number of logs recorded on your caches. Would it not be more appropriate to hide a new one after (say) twenty visits to your last one? Some caches out there are lucky to get more than a few visits per year.

 

I think its great that so many new caches are being planted at such a furious rate and I wouldn't want to deter anyone from this. But don't be hard on yourselves!

 

What do you think?

Dudeface and I have 103 finds and a combined 26 hides (We do all our hides together)

Link to comment

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...
Followers 1
×
×
  • Create New...