Micro's ?

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

"Selling" religion in caches is a no-no.

 

I think that only pertains to cache listings if one wants to put religion, or business, or adgenda promoting things into caches more power too them. Are you saying I can't log with "Thank God I found the cache before I was eaten alive by the bugs"?

[+Pasha]

I may need something stronger than popcorn now that religion discussion is complementing the previously entertaining micro discussion.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

Sorry, just making a point to another comment, should I edit it out, since it's off the topic?

[+Pasha]

No, no, don't mind me. Just being flippant.

 

[+Camo-crazed]

Walk up on this thing from any direction other than the parking lot and it isn't even hid!! (How it's lasted as long as it has is beyond me!!)

One of the things about muggles is that they do not know about geocaching, therefore they will not notice piles of parallel sticks or film canisters where there are not usually piles of parallel sticks or film canisters.

[CoyoteRed]

You know, it's not the size of the cache, but where you hide it.

[+fishingfools]

You know, it's not the size of the cache, but where you hide it.

I agree with you 100%.

[+reveritt]

You know, it's not the size of the cache, but where you hide it.

...and how you disguise it. Micros offer an endless variety of hiding techniques--especially in an urban setting.

 

For a great example of a micro that gets rave reviews from finders, check this cache.

[Stony2008]

"Selling" religion in caches is a no-no.

I think that only pertains to cache listings if one wants to put religion, or business, or adgenda promoting things into caches more power too them. Are you saying I can't log with "Thank God I found the cache before I was eaten alive by the bugs"?

 

I think its important to be respectful of other peoples beliefs though even if you don't agree with them.

Edited March 18, 2005 by Stony2008

[+planetrobert]

if your account was less than a week old i would call you a troll, but since it isn't ill answer...

 

micros are placed in any little hole that a film canister can be shoved and by doing so removes the ability to hide a real cache.

 

hide an appropriate sized cache for the area(and don't just hide a cache cuz it is an un-cached area) and we all will quit hating micros

[Stony2008]

maybe they should reduce the amount of distance required between two caches.

[+Hemlock]

If anything, the distance should be increased.

 

(That is both my personal opinion and my reviewer opinion, in case you were curious.

[Stony2008]

increased? why? I would think decreasing the distance would keep micros from overtaking the other terrain to place caches.

[+Camo-crazed]

increased? why? I would think decreasing the distance would keep micros from overtaking the other terrain to place caches.

Like more micros

[+Hemlock]

Because more and more land managers across the country are banning or severely limiting caches in their parks due to over-saturation. This is not an exaggeration. It is happening today.

 

Read through this thread from last week for more info.

 

We need to police ourselves before the government does it for us.

 

Edit: Here's another post which illustrates my point.

If you don't like the .10 mile separation imposed by geocaching.com you won't be thrilled to learn the state parks require a .25 mile separation between caches.

Edited March 18, 2005 by Hemlock

[Stony2008]

oh I see I guess your right. man this sucks.

 

stuppid ill placed micros

[+Moose Mob]

increased? why? I would think decreasing the distance would keep micros from overtaking the other terrain to place caches.

I have to agree with Hemlock. I would think the results of decreased distance would be counter productive. By decreasing the distance, a fair size city park would more likely end up with 8-10 micros instead of 2 or 3. Being a city park, they would all be micros. It only takes one cache to get me into a park I didn't know about.

 

As far as the ratio of micros to regular or large sized caches, increasing the distance would be keep the ratio in better control (fit small in either side). In other words... out in the woods (or in my case, desert), caches are several miles apart. In the city, they are a few blocks apart. On a 2 mile mountain trail, a person would normally find a cache at the trailhead, then the next one 2 miles out.

 

So, if there were with a cache every the 528 ft on the mountain trail, there would be 20 caches along the way. Or 50 caches on a 5 mile hike. Some folks like that idea, others feel it is approaching litter.

 

Edit: added clarity

Edited March 18, 2005 by Moose Mob

[Stony2008]

Some folks like that idea, others feel it is approaching litter.

 

I see your point but litter usually doesn't have a name or coordinates posted on a web page or even a owner who went out and carefully placed it and posted hints on the web page (unless its a ill placed micro).

[+Moose Mob]

Some folks like that idea, others feel it is approaching litter.

 

I see your point but litter usually doesn't have a name or coordinates posted on a web page or even a owner who went out and carefully placed it and posted hints on the web page (unless its a ill placed micro).

Very true. That might be why I said "approaching" litter. Also, we also have a lot of caches that are not maintained in this area. Some are carefully and thoughtfully placed, others are not. Some are cared for, some are not.

 

I fear we are going on two tangents. One of the power trails (different thread) and the adoption of abandoned caches (yet another thread).

 

As far as the posted question... I agree with what the others said as far as the differnent philosophies. As far as Hemlocks idea, perhaps a larger distance between caches would help promote a larger quantity of quality caches, as least in teh perspective of percentage.

[+The Navigatorz]

[+JohnnyVegas]

Hows this for an idea

 

Micros must be 2 miles apart

Reg caches .10 miles apart

[CoyoteRed]

If anything, the distance should be increased.

 

(That is both my personal opinion and my reviewer opinion, in case you were curious.

Great, you see a problem in a few areas and would back a rule that adversely affects those areas that don't have a problem.

 

You mention later in this thread about some parks going to .25 mile seperation. That's fine, they have every right to do so. But don't go making the whole world fit their guidelines.

 

Besides, my take on the issue of micros is the fact many of them are being placed in inappropriate locations.

[Shoobie & the Sand Crabs]

If anything, the distance should be increased.

 

(That is both my personal opinion and my reviewer opinion, in case you were curious.

I agree but the Approvers should be allowed to make exceptionsif you ask them and you have a good cache that can't be placed anywhere else.

[+cache_test_dummies]

We need to police ourselves before the government does it for us.

I understand the pressure which is arising from new rules/restrictions/regulations being implemented by some land managers. But could you elaborate on how you think changing the general spacing guidelines for cache placements everywhere would help?

 

(not trying to snipe, just wanted to understand how this all fits together before I go and get all emotional about it. )

 

Also, were you speaking in general about all caches, or were you speaking specifically about micros (theme of this topic)?

[+sbell111]

oh I see I guess your right. man this sucks.

 

stuppid ill placed micros     

I'm confused as to how the thread referenced by Hemlock has anything to do with micros. It was regarding power trails in parks. The caches in question were not micros.

Edited March 18, 2005 by sbell111

[+AtoZ]

Micros are lame if they are place with NO IMAGINATION, aka in a rock pile. There is also a point where it is rediculas how they are hidden. I like the find, thought I had never thought of it that way or verbalized it as such. T send someone to an uninteresting place and tell them to find a micro takes no imignation. But to make the thing clever and to have some rhyme or reason then that is good. We have one here that is a 3 parter with a good story line that I was laughing at two days after wards and one of the hides was submicro. But it was so funny the story line it was worth the effort. But then one guy places a pill bottle in a pile of rocks UGH and the coordinates are off to boot.

O'well I guess each his own.

cheers

[+CYBret]

Micros are not my favorite caches, but I know they have a place. I like what Sax said earlier about letting the cache location dictate what size to use. Of course, I would have said it differently.

 

I recently found a micro that could have been a 35mm film canister tucked away in a tree and everyone would have said, "TFTC." But instead, the owners used a walnut shell, carefully varnished to preserve it and closed back up with velcro. They then took time to cut the back side of the shell to accommodate a zip tie and attached it to a well-concealed part of the tree. The logbook was inside a tiny plastic baggie inside the shell.

 

Yeah, a 35mm canister would have been cheaper and quicker, but I certainly appreciated the effort they went into to make it more than just a "TFTC."

 

Bret

[+CoasterKid]

I might just be wierd, but micros are my favorite caches. There are soooo many different ways to hide them, that they always are enjoyable. I like finding ammo cans too, but when I have to hike a mile, then bushwhack another half of one, just to find an ammo can leaning up against a tree with bright green geocaching.com stickers all over it, I come away disappointed. I also do not like the micros that are hidden under a light pole, in a parking lot, where i can pull my car up to the and log tham without even opening the door. Micros should only be used in urban/suburban area, not in woods, and regulars should only be used in woods or unmuggled area, or they will get taken. Where i live, it is hard to find a great spot in the woods, and mast of the park spots are taken, so urban micros are common. There are even two five-star difficulty caches that are urban micros. What matters isn't the size, it's the location AND the hiding style! The hiding style more than the location.

 

Links to the two five-star caches:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...7f-0d4767805a53

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...d6-15d557173ca0

[+flask]

size doesn't matter.

 

we always say it, but we're lying.

[+tands]

Here's my take on micros and I think there are others who share it. I like micros because I don't have to haul around a bag of stuff to trade. When I want knick-knacks I go to the Flea Market or Yard Sales. Lots of good trades going on there. Micros cut to the chase. I would love to find a log-only ammo box! Hope this raises somebody's hackles.

 

- T of TandS

[+tands]

Hey, about land managers and cache saturation: demonstrable facilities use is the best job security guarantee for anybody who manages a park. If a park manager says 'you can't do that because our park will be overused by foot traffic made up of families and such,' then that park manager needs to lay off the crack.

 

- T of TandS

[+Thot]

I'm coming in a little late on this topic but . . .

 

My only complaint with micros is coordinates that aren’t optimal. The further the coordinates are from the true location the area in which the cache can be increases exponentially – that is, as the square of the error. For example, a five foot error creates a 75 square foot area. If the coordinates are off by 10 feet rather than five the area of search increases four fold (300 sq-ft). If they are off by 20 feet it’s 16 times larger (1200 sq-ft), etc. By their nature, even ordinary micros can often be concealed in many possible locations, so as the error increases the number of possible hiding places expands rapidly, and thus the search time/task can become onerously great. Combine a modestly large error in coordinates with a very cleverly hidden micro and in an area with an abundance of possible hiding places and it can make for a stressful hunt. For this reason I tend to avoid micros. If I see from other logs the coordinates are good I’ll try them, but when I see some DNFs and comments like, “The coordinates put me in the middle of the street,” I leave them for the masochists.

 

My first hunt was a tiny camoed micro wired to a branch inside a hedge row, using a piece of green leafy plastic-coated wire. The hedge was 5 feet high, 5 feet wide and 100 feet long. The coordinates were off by 30-40 feet down the hedge. I nearly gave up geocaching, on my first time out.

 

I feel it's incumbent of micro hiders to take extra care and make sure they post good coordinates. It no trick to make a difficult micro by posting weak coordinates in an area with many hiding places.

Edited March 19, 2005 by Thot

[Stony2008]

I'm coming in a little late on this topic but . . .

 

there is no such thing as coming on to late I'm curious to hear what everyone thinks.

 

So did you ever find the cache in the bushes?

Edited March 19, 2005 by Stony2008

[+Thot]

So did you ever find the cache in the bushes?

Yes, but only after making a second trip sometime later after I had other caches under my belt, and using the hint. At first I thought it was cheating to use the hints so I refused to use them at first. Just the opposite of the way it should be -- newbies should use the hints 'til they get some experience then go cold turkey.

 

That cache with it's wad of DNFs was then and still is rated easy (one star difficulty). Kinda soured me on micros right off the bat.

 

Edited to add:

 

A short while later I went for a micro that was under a large shelter/metal cover where the GPSr would not work and the hint was a trick. It was false to mislead you.

Edited March 19, 2005 by Thot

[+TetrAmigos]

Maybe it's my wet-behind-the-ears status in caching, maybe it's my "still-new, still-excited" approach, but as far as I see it, caches of all sizes are welcome finds no matter how popular caching becomes. Let's face it, micros are just as valuable to a multitude of cachers as are regular ammo boxes.

 

As long as proper care, thought, and consideration with regards to placement and camo are given, micros are a fantastic niche and should be respected equally.

 

I LOVE GEOCACHING of ALL SIZES!

Edited March 19, 2005 by acPilot

[Stony2008]

Do you guys think micros in multis are OK and then having a bigger container at the end. I mean whats the point in having a whole container when you just need something to put a sheet of paper in.

[+JohnnyVegas]

Do you guys think micros in multis are OK and then having a bigger container at the end. I mean whats the point in having a whole container when you just need something to put a sheet of paper in.

That seems to be the way most are done, But I did see a new multi a few months ago in which the first part was the large cache and the second part was a mini micro with the log. The coordinates for the second part were bad, as a result there were people doing trades and then not being able to find log the find.

[+clearpath]

Do you guys think micros in multis are OK and then having a bigger container at the end.  I mean whats the point in having a whole container when you just need something to put a sheet of paper in.

Many, many geocachers have little or no problems at all with micros. Don't pay any attention to the 'micro whiners'. Incorporating a micro within a multi can be a very good idea.

[Pipanella]

Maybe it's my wet-behind-the-ears status in caching, maybe it's my "still-new, still-excited" approach, but as far as I see it, caches of all sizes are welcome finds no matter how popular caching becomes. Let's face it, micros are just as valuable to a multitude of cachers as are regular ammo boxes.

 

As long as proper care, thought, and consideration with regards to placement and camo are given, micros are a fantastic niche and should be respected equally.

 

I LOVE GEOCACHING of ALL SIZES!

I'm with you!

[+jimmyreno]

Ok I'm fairly new to geocaching and even newer to these forums but it seems like when it comes up, micro's have always been a topic that seems a little touchy.

 

I've heard mixed remarks about micros but I don't understand. whats the big deal?

Many micros are placed in or near parking lots,

that's a poor place to have fun.

[+Tidalflame]

I've never found one so I'm probably not the best person to be talking about this, but the only problem I see with micros is that they can be placed with very little effort, which could end up leading to "micro spam" - you know, hundreds of micros within a relatively small area - which would kind of detract from the game. There's a system in place to prevent this, of course, but you never know...

 

In short, I don't really have anything against them. My favorite part of caching is reading the logs and writing my own, so as long as there's room for a piece of paper, it's a legitimate cache in my mind.

[+JohnnyVegas]

the only problem I see with micros is that they can be placed with very little effort, which could end up leading to "micro spam" - you know, hundreds of micros within a relatively small area

 

Thar we all have to maintain a watch to protect geocaching from the Invasion of the Micors

 

 

 

[Stony2008]

Thar we all have to maintain a watch to protect geocaching from the Invasion of the Micors

 

yeah and thats coming from a guy who has hid 38 of em

[+Miragee]

I've never found one so I'm probably not the best person to be talking about this, but the only problem I see with micros is that they can be placed with very little effort, which could end up leading to "micro spam" - . . .

 

In short, I don't really have anything against them.  My favorite part of caching is reading the logs and writing my own, so as long as there's room for a piece of paper, it's a legitimate cache in my mind. 

I don't particularly care for micros myself, because I enjoy walking a good distance to locate a cache, I like to actually find the cache once I get to the location , and I don't care to be wandering around a parking lot or alley by myself.

 

However I found one of the neatest micros up in the Yucca Valley area last week that changed my attitude.

 

The pill container was camouflaged well and after I found the cache, I understood the double meaning of the cache name.

 

The log was a "sign-your-name-only" log, however. No room for long interesting stories . . .

[+sbell111]

I HATE macros. I can never figure out how to set them up correctly, so my data never gets filtered and converted correctly.

 

What's that? The threads not about macros? Micros? Microcaches? Well, I like those.

 

I like micros.

 

I like them alot.

Edited March 24, 2005 by sbell111

[+JohnnyVegas]

Thar we all have to maintain a watch to protect geocaching from the Invasion of the Micors

 

yeah and thats coming from a guy who has hid 38 of em

I think I have 29 micros, and none of them are in places that support a full size cache and some of them are in places in which i was not allowed to place virtuals.

 

Besides with the exeption of a few, mine are very strange containers or very hard to find. A few are just set up for those that want a quick find

on the way to another cache.

 

My first one was in the pariking lot were I use to work, we would all watch the local cachers try to find it, it still drives some people nuts.

 

MO

 

MO does not mean members only, it's the company initials

Edited March 25, 2005 by JohnnyVegas

[Stony2008]

Thats cool man. really have no problem with micros just as long as the owner put some thought into the cache and it doesn't occupy a space that could potentially have a bigger cache. My area doesn't have hardly any caches . My dad and I had to drive almost an hour and a half to go find the nearest cache so I really don't care what type of cache it is just as long as it doesn't take an overnight drive to find it .

[+Horsewomann]

I have to agree with the previous cacher who expressed frustration with Micro's being placed with apparently little forethought or effort. Especially when a larger cache could easily have been hid nearby. It's one of my pet peeves with a recent flood of caches in the VERY rural county that I live in (VanBuren county, Michigan). Nearly 90% of the caches here are micro's. And WHY??? Just a little bit more looking around after finding them yields several places that a larger cache could have been easily hid.

There just doesn't seem to be a good reason for hiding a micro there other than lazyness and being cheap while pumping up their stats. It's not like it's in town or there is no natural cover. Most of these are hidden in trees at Public access sites to a lake, and most access sites here have a small section of woods screening it from nearby houses. I'm not exactly made of money, but I've found that re-cycling plastic drink mix containers by covering them with camo tape makes for great, small cache containers. Some small trading items can easily be placed in them, along with the log book. And it's probably even cheaper than buying all those waterproof match containers.

Half the fun for me is trading TB's and just plain seeing what's in the cache, even if I don't trade. Waterproof match containers and log "books" of rolled paper get really old, really quick.

Edited March 25, 2005 by Horsewomann

[+briansnat]

Waterproof match containers and log "books" of rolled paper get really old, really quick.

 

hey, count your blesssings, at least they're waterproof. Half the micros I've found were in leaky film canisters with wet logs.

[+Kit Fox]

When I first started, I was short on cash, but high on ambition to hide caches. I hid five or six micro caches where larger caches would have worked better. I recently bought 10 Decon containers, 12 7.62 ammo cans, and five of the oversized 40mm ammo cans. I have now replaced all the micros with larger containers, so the caches are easier to find, and you can do trades.

 

All I have to do know is find a money tree so I can fill all the ammo cans.

 

Here are two examples of micros, both are Altoids tins, but one was fun and interesting, the other was not.

 

This cache took me to a cool and scenic spot.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...7f-9d44e1cab4aa

 

This cache took me to the back of a market, in a rough neighborhood, and was hidden underneath a newspaper rack. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...c3-d87a0f4b6da5

 

Needless to say, I enjoyed the Oasis cache better. Micros aren't the problem, the location is.

Edited March 26, 2005 by Kit Fox