Seasonal Trends In Geocaching Logs

[+BuckBrooke]

The number of benchmark logs/week is picking up on geocaching fairly quickly. It looks like it's more that the summer is coming on than that we have more people logging benchmarks. Is this what was seen last year?

[+rogbarn]

I'll handle this one.

 

I've kept track of the number of benchmarks found since 6/24/2002, almost since GC put them on their site. I take the count from "Overall, 63651 benchmarks" on the GC benchmarking front page. While I look it up almost every day; to be fair to the numbers, I track it on a rolling 7-day average (that is, the average for the past 7 days). Even this 7-day average jumps around quite a bit but here is a general sense for how the finds have been going:

 

high point around a daily average of 100 in Aug and again in Sept 2002.

steady decline to a low daily average of 35 to 40 in Dec. 2002.

gradual climb to a high daily average of 160 in July 2003.

At this point, there was a slow but steady decline all the way thru 2004. For some reason (unknown to me), the summer of 2004 did not show an obvious rebound in benchmark finds. The decline bottomed out in Jan. 2005 in the high 20s to low 30s. Since then, it has climbed back into the 60s where it is now.

[+Renegade Knight]

Perhaps Benchmarkers have to work harder for their finds than they did when the activity first started. Benchmarks tend to be static compared to geocaches. So to find more you have to go further and further away from home. Growth in Benchmarkers could make up for that but growth has to occure faster than finds.

[+Spoo]

Allow me to explain my sporadic hunting:

 

I began Benchmark hunting in April of 2004 and went like gang busters with it. By October I had reached 100 finds and had found nearly everything within a 20 mile radius. Then winter hit which slowed me down tremendously.

 

I have had a slow spring due to inclement weather and health problems although neither have deterred my desire to hunt.

 

Interspersed during all this time is my heavy work travel. Hence you will notice my logs have the occasional MISS, NJ or VA marks that appear out of nowhere. They are not typos.

 

My desire is still strong.......it is just harder to find time to range out and find them.

 

Edit note:

 

PS....does anyone else also find it harder to find marks the further one gets from familiar territory?

Edited June 1, 2005 by Spoo

[+seventhings]

I think Renegade Knight has made an excellent point. There are many factors affecting the variability of benchmarks logs, and the phenomenon of diminishing marginal returns is certainly one of them locally (where there are concentrations of hunters) and could become the dominant factor globally.

 

Spoo - I find it easier to find marks the farther I get from familiar territory. A large percentage of the marks in Northern Virginia/DC metro have been paved over. I'm generally much more successful when I'm well out of my home area. So much so that I seldom hunt within 50 miles of DC anymore. Besides the fact that many of the marks are unfindable, Black Dog Trackers and ArtMan have already found most of the surviving marks.

 

Will

[+ddnutzy]

My problem, like most of the serious benchmarkers is that we've found most of the stations within a long distance from home. Since I rarely look for any that have been found unless there very old or hard to get to, it cuts down on my local finds. Also I don't look for to many that are along the road or tanks or towers so my production has to drop down without a lot of traveling. As for Spoo's question, I don't have much more trouble finding them away from my home territory.

[+Renegade Knight]

...the phenomenon of diminishing marginal returns is certainly one of them locally...

You said it better.

[+bicknell]

From my own experience, it's easier to find the marks when there is no green stuff on the trees, and no white stuff on the ground. Green stuff makes some more difficult, but not impossible. Enough white stuff and it's not worth hunting (to me).

 

So, I would expect an uptick as winter ends, slowing down by the time all the green is out, picking up again in the fall, and then dropping off sharply as the white stuff comes down.

[ArtMan]

Rogbarn,

 

Any chance you could create a graphic illustrating the ups and downs of benchmark reports?

 

-ArtMan-

[+Me & Bucky]

PS....does anyone else also find it harder to find marks the further one gets from familiar territory?

 

This is an interesting thought. I have found that it is the caching and benchmarking that I do in unfamiliar places that makes an area better known to me. I have a better grasp of Flagstaff, Phoenix, Albuquerque, Denver, Cheyenne, and Salt Lake City now because I have worked in or nearby these places in the past couple years, and have been able to spend time exploring them through finding caches and benchmarks. Basically, turning the unfamiliar into the familiar!

 

As far as the difficulty of finding marks is concerned, I haven't found any difference between places I know well versus places I don't know. Basically, if the To Reach section of the Data Sheet is more or less up-to-date and reference items such as witness posts, telephone poles, or fence lines are still in place, then I figure I have a pretty good chance of finding the mark.

 

I've been wondering for awhile now when the Law of Diminishing Returns would set in, at least as far as unlogged benchmarks are concerned. As RK and Spoo have noted, folks who clean out their local areas have to go farther afield to find new marks.

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

I would almost bet this has to do with the prices of gas toooooooo.

I know it does for me,farther away and more expensive gas now day's.

[+BuckBrooke]

I had thought about but forgotten the diminishing returns issue, especially in some of the larger suburban areas. One can benchmark year-round in the Southwest, which took some getting used to as an ex-Yankee.

 

A brief report on benchmarking in my area. Here in Albuquerque, there are two main benchmarkers, Team Tuxuwuxa (500+ recoveries) and myself (240 recoveries). There are several benchmarkers with smaller but noticeable numbers, Team Simber (20) and cameo appearances from Me & Bucky. The rapid expansion of the city in the last 30 years, and even last 2 years, has prompted me to go and recover every feasible station in the city, including ones that have been recovered on Geocaching.com recently. This is because very few of them have recent NGS reports. I have a 45% recovery ratio, worse in the city.

 

There are still 30+ stations within the city limits that are unlogged probables or possibles, and an equal amount with "New sidewalk at the location" last NGS reports. After clearing most of the city I've left these for times when I have an hour or two total for benchmarking. Otherwise, there are still one or two lines along roads that require a half hour drive to get to, 100 stations along I-40 starting with a 10 minute drive, and the stations in Santa Fe, a 45 minute drive away.

 

Thus, the area around here is still fairly target rich, after our finds. I haven't had to drive more than 45 minutes one way to get to a station. This will probably change by the end of the year, when I'm over 500 finds.

[+BilboB]

Are you logging any and all finds? Do you keep track of multiple finds? I have come upon people that treat benchmarking like geocaching. If someone has "found" it, then they are not FTF, so they dont bother. I know a lot of my hunting is seasonal too. Gas $$ is not a factor...yet.

[+BuckBrooke]

BilboB,

I log everything I run across with NGS and Geocaching, FOUND, NOTFOUND, DESTROYED and POOR, even if someone has found it on Geocaching before. I log with NGS according to the stringent guidelines we've outlined in this forum.

 

As to my personal records, I have a spreadsheet that keeps track of FTFs, and various found vs. not found percentages. I'm currently at 75% FTF overall and 46% FOUND overall. I've been corrected on Geocaching on two PIDs, both that I incorrectly logged NOT-FOUND early in my benchmarking experience. I've fixed the reports on NGS.

 

I've been won over this spring to the non-gaming attitude of the forum here. I like the fact that people can choose which place to log and can set their own levels of success in benchmarking. Personally, I use my own spreadsheet to "log" my history, which more closely mirrors my NGS logging than my Geocaching logging. Both are fairly close, with a few Geocaching Destroyeds listed as NGS NOT-FOUNDs. FTFs aren't as important to me as logging any and all stations with NGS. Numbers do matter to me, but less so than accurate reporting.

Edited June 2, 2005 by BuckBrooke

[+rogbarn]

Rogbarn,

 

Any chance you could create a graphic illustrating the ups and downs of benchmark reports?

 

-ArtMan-

A chance, yes, but not right now. My ISP has my web area messed up, first no one could even display it, now that's fixed but I can't get to it via FTP. Plus, I'm taking a long walk this weekend (see my letter about my MS Challenge Walk for more information) and won't be back until Tuesday at the earliest to try it again.

[+rogbarn]

Rogbarn,

 

Any chance you could create a graphic illustrating the ups and downs of benchmark reports?

 

-ArtMan-

I couldn't figure out how to get the graph to post on the net. I just using Excel, if there are any easy hints, I'll give it another try. Meanwhile, I posted the raw data at My benchmark count webpage.

[evenfall]

Rog,

 

Make a Copy of your Excel Document, open the copy and save it as a Web Page. Then Publish it to your FTP site.

 

Rob

[+deimos444]

I started benchmarking a couple of months ago in the SF Bay Area.

Found 6 so far and with summer here I am going to focus on tidal recoveries. Next gift to self will be an optical ranging device.

[+Black Dog Trackers]

There's something odd in that data in early Feb. 2004.

I looked at the daily rate and a 7-day moving average.

The seasonality is rather overshadowed by the evolution of the process (we're going farther afield, as discussed). A graph of the data looks sorta like a ball bouncing, lower and lower, with a summer high in 2003 and a little summer high in 2005 and no summer high in 2004.

Currently, the rate is about 60 BM per day.

[Bill93]

Deimos, a while back we had a discussion of consumer grade ranging devices and I think the consensus is that they won't work very well for benchmarking. The objects you want to measure like posts, roads, trees, and only an occasional building, aren't good reflectors. Many of the low cost ranging gadgets have a laser to aim, but really measure sonically which requires a big flat surface to get a good reading.

 

Get a good 100 or 150 foot tape instead. Search the forum for other posts on what makes good equipment for this hobby.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Are you logging any and all finds? Do you keep track of multiple finds? I have come upon people that treat benchmarking like geocaching. If someone has "found" it, then they are not FTF, so they dont bother. I know a lot of my hunting is seasonal too. Gas $$ is not a factor...yet.

Okay, I'll admit it! I go for the FTFs first. After I've cleared them out of the way, then I'll go back for the ones that my neighbor Holograph has logged, and Seventhings, and Black Dog Tracker, and whoeven else has wandered through my area.

Hey, holograph, are you going to log Woodport into the NGS?!?

[holograph]

Okay, I'll admit it! I go for the FTFs first. After I've cleared them out of the way, then I'll go back for the ones that my neighbor Holograph has logged, and Seventhings, and Black Dog Tracker, and whoeven else has wandered through my area.

Hey, holograph, are you going to log Woodport into the NGS?!?

Harry,

 

I guess I could. I found it before I was regularly reporting to the NGS, and since it had been recovered in 1993, I just let it go since I had nothing of significance to add.

[+NorStar]

I'm noticing a whole new crop of people in the Boston area. Last year, there were maybe a handful of people who were benchmarking in the area. In the gallery, today, I noticed two new names I hadn't seen before and over the past couple of months there have been several more. So, I think that its picking up here. Welcome, all!

[holograph]

There were about 20 new first-timers spotted in the NGS recovery reports last month, too.

[Bill93]

I note that the count displayed on the GC benchmark top level page has passed 9% of the total marks recovered. At this rate by fall we would hit 10% which seems like a sort of magic value.

[+rogbarn]

I note that the count displayed on the GC benchmark top level page has passed 9% of the total marks recovered. At this rate by fall we would hit 10% which seems like a sort of magic value.

10% of the total marks is a magic value even if the total number of marks in the NGS database fluctuates. According to my estimate, we will reach 73,643 benchmarks found in early December.

[+BuckBrooke]

How many of those PIDs w/ logs do you think are in error? 5%(1/2% of the overall # of PIDs)? In that case the true number of stations found might not reach 10% until March or so.

 

Any bets on the percent we'll flatten out to? 15%? Very few of the Alaska PIDs are going to be logged, for example, and Alaska is 3% of the total.

 

Cheers,

Buckner

[+rogbarn]

Any bets on the percent we'll flatten out to? 15%? Very few of the Alaska PIDs are going to be logged, for example, and Alaska is 3% of the total.

That still leaves 97% down here that can be found!

[+rogbarn]

How many of those PIDs w/ logs do you think are in error? 5%(1/2% of the overall # of PIDs)? In that case the true number of stations found might not reach 10% until March or so.

Realistically speaking now, I expect that we can keep on going past 15%. We're right at 3 years now since benchmark hunting has been a part of GC so it will be close to 3 1/2 years when we hit 10%. It certainly will take more than that to get the next 10% but there's lots of urban and suburban areas that have not been covered much if at all. Plus, with the dedicated hunters here, some of us will go far and wide to add to the totals. So, my guess is that we'll get past 20% pretty easily, it just might take 4 or 5 years of slow but steady finds.