How Do I Get Quality Caches In My Area?

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Quit complaining...get off your duff....get some nice stuff....put in all in a great big watertight container......go find a fantastic spot that you know others would love.....hide.

 

That is how to get Quality caches in your area! PERIOD!

[+The GeoGadgets Team]

It is my opinion that the people responsible for the glut of lame finds aren't only the people hiding them, but some of the people who approve them.

 

Before you all start screaming for my lynching, please keep in mind how simple it is for the folks that approve these things to put their stamp of approval on a brainless magnetic micro lampost cache in the Wal-Mart parking lot. When someone puts a great deal of effort and/or thought into their cache placements, they are sometimes denied the stamp of approval due to some technicality that the approver doesn't understand. I have seen many caches "DENIED" because the approver just failed to grasp what was being done. There should be some kind of "higher power" or group to submit "questionable" caches to, not just one person in your immediate area who approves or denies with a broad stroke of their Sharpie.

 

I could use many examples, but don't wish to bore anyone.

 

RedwoodRed

[+sbell111]

I'm not sure if we really want the 'WOW' factor rule to be used for traditional caches, do we?

[just B0B]

What was the question again?

Somewhere in the thread it was suggested that micros equate to low quality.

Bull.

As a frequent business traveler, micros have taken me to neat city parks, landmarks, old cemeteries, historic sites, museums - the list goes on and on. That's not to say that I haven't been disgusted by an afternoon of urban caching in which 15 of 20 finds were found under a lamp post skirt or a candy tin under a trash can holder at a bus stop or city park - but even then I did find a nice park in a strange city. These "lame" finds simply inspired some personal groundrules for the micros I hide: #1 NO micros under a lamp skirt! #2 See #1. #3 Series can be great with one simple rule - every hide has to be different from the others. If your city has 10 WalMarts, find 10 different hiding spots (and the more muggles, the better). #4 Use micros to highlight areas of local interest. I get hits all the time from locals and out of towners, saying thanks for bringing me here. #5 Hide a few micros in the woods for the poison ivy/snake bite junkies. #6 I've hidden several micros and traditionals close to far reaching trail hides specifically designed to draw more people to a seldom visited site.

Bottom line, use you imagination and set a good example by hiding challenging, creative caches - and write a good 1st person posting narative to promote them.

Just my 2 cents.

[+Markwell]

Let's get it straight:

Micro ≠ Lame

 

I won't get into what is or is not lame, as that is a personal preference. Many people already know my personal preferences. That's not what this thread is about. Please do NOT let this degenerate into another thread like the DPM thread. Please stay on topic.

 

The question was: If you believe that there is a glut of less than desirable caches in your area (whatever that criteria might be) how do you best counteract that.

 

A recap of the suggestions so far:

• Hide good ones
  
• Hide more good ones
  
• Start a local geocaching association that can make suggestions or help cleanup unmaintained caches
  
• In some fashion, highlight the best caches and hold them up as an example
  
• Hide good ones
  
• Write good lengthy logs on the good ones
  
• Don't let micros count toward your finds
  
• Allow cachers to hide a cache only after a minimum number of finds
  
• Host events that discuss really good caches to inform newbies of the best around
  
• Don't worry about it
  
• Remove find counts I struck that one because it happened once and Jeremy got raked over the coals. It's doubtful that he'll do it again.
  
• Did I mention hide good ones?
  
• Welcoming new cachers to the area when they find your cache, and suggesting another favorite of your finds (if you liked my cache, you'll love this one)
  
• Get ideas from other areas and bring them back to your home region.
  
• Place Travel Bugs only in what you consider good caches (to encourage other visitors)
  
• Apply a "wow" factor to the approval process
  

Other suggestions? Keep it on topic. I've had to bite my tongue about 30 times this week to keep myself from describing good caches and why if believe certain ones aren't so good in my book. That's not what this topic is about.

 

No comment from me as to which ones will or won't work from the list. Just a recap.

Edited February 26, 2005 by Markwell

[Keystone]

It is my opinion that the people responsible for the glut of lame finds aren't only the people hiding them, but some of the people who approve them.

 

Before you all start screaming for my lynching, please keep in mind how simple it is for the folks that approve these things to put their stamp of approval on a brainless magnetic micro lampost cache in the Wal-Mart parking lot. When someone puts a great deal of effort and/or thought into their cache placements, they are sometimes denied the stamp of approval due to some technicality that the approver doesn't understand. I have seen many caches "DENIED" because the approver just failed to grasp what was being done. There should be some kind of "higher power" or group to submit "questionable" caches to, not just one person in your immediate area who approves or denies with a broad stroke of their Sharpie.

 

I could use many examples, but don't wish to bore anyone.

 

RedwoodRed

Thanks for the vote of confidence.

 

I think our experience with trying to apply the "unique object" and "can't hide a regular cache nearby" aspects of the guidelines for virtual caches illustrates just how cumbersome it would be if the volunteer cache reviewers needed to make a subjective judgment about whether a physical cache is cool or not.

 

I do see caches in the review queue that might be "lame" by my personal standards, which are of course different from others' personal standards. If they meet the published guidelines, my obligation is to shut my eyes, plug my nose and press the button to list them. I've also seen caches with terrible cache pages that have been an absolute delight to find once I got out to find them months later. I'm not in favor of a beauty contest where a picture of the hiding spot, container and general area would need to be submitted to a panel of judges.

 

If you do submit a cache that is close to the line with one of the guidelines, I encourage you to work with your volunteer reviewer through clear communication. If that doesn't work, follow the three-step appeals process that is clearly spelled out in the Geocache Listing Guidelines. Please read them again, Redwood Red, as you must have missed that section.

[+sbell111]

I can't think of two better posts to end this thread on than Markwell's and KA's.