OK Old schoolers

[vtmtnman]

OK, I am totally new to Geocaching, but I have to ask:

 

1) What is this "change in direction" that people keep mentioning about geocaching? What was it like before as opposed to now? Ive only hunted down a few caches, but they seem to fall into 3 categories:

 

a - Caches that lead you to a cool (generally natural) place that you would have otherwise drove by.

b - Caches designed for the working guy out on lunch break, but jonesin for some caching

c - Themed caches

 

 

This post from this thread prompted this.If we've spent at least 5 minutes preusing these hallowed halls of the Geocaching forums,we've heard about "I don't like where the sport is heading","Oh he's old school,it was different back then",and so forth.So tell us and let's discuss here,where Geocaching is going,what you've seen along the way,and where we need to take it,or get it back to.

 

This is us new guys/gals reaching to you and looking for guidance to improve the sport,since we constantly here this all the time.Trust me,if I could've joined GC in July 2000 when I got my first Garmin GPS II unit I probably would have,and I could had the coveted charter membership,but until I perfect my time machine,I'll just have to suck it up and learn from the past.

 

I had a boss one time that told me,"A man don't learn nothin' if he don't ask no questions."Great advice.So here's my questions,give us the answers.

[+fox-and-the-hound]

We're relative newbies, but even we've seen the "change" in the caching world. Look at the dates of caches being set, what kind they are and where they are and you start seeing a trend. Caches used to actually be caches. You know, an actual cache as defined by the English language being...

 

cache: noun, verb, cached, cach·ing.

–noun 1. a hiding place, esp. one in the ground, for ammunition, food, treasures, etc.:

 

We look at the older caches and we see ammocans, lock-n-locks, 5 gallon pails and all manner of cool storage containers filled with cool stuff. We look at a large number of newer caches and see minis, micros and macros placed behind stores next to the dumpsters or on a roadside filled with debris and no view. It's enough to make you cry sometime.

 

We place both ammocans and micros. Our ammocans take you on nice walks and hikes and give you an excuse to enjoy the outdoors, exercise your body and exercise your brain. Our micros take you to unique places, historical landmarks, and great views that might be otherwise marred with large cache placement. But then again, we learned from the Old School.

[vtmtnman]

We're relative newbies, but even we've seen the "change" in the caching world. Look at the dates of caches being set, what kind they are and where they are and you start seeing a trend. Caches used to actually be caches. You know, an actual cache as defined by the English language being...

 

cache: noun, verb, cached, cach·ing.

–noun 1. a hiding place, esp. one in the ground, for ammunition, food, treasures, etc.:

 

We look at the older caches and we see ammocans, lock-n-locks, 5 gallon pails and all manner of cool storage containers filled with cool stuff. We look at a large number of newer caches and see minis, micros and macros placed behind stores next to the dumpsters or on a roadside filled with debris and no view. It's enough to make you cry sometime.

 

We place both ammocans and micros. Our ammocans take you on nice walks and hikes and give you an excuse to enjoy the outdoors, exercise your body and exercise your brain. Our micros take you to unique places, historical landmarks, and great views that might be otherwise marred with large cache placement. But then again, we learned from the Old School.

Exactly,but what I'm getting at here is that we've all heard the first generation cachers talk about the way it was,and that what I what them to dicuss with us new folks and tell us how to keep the game great,as they've been here from the begining.

 

From the looks of it,as usual,my thread will peter to the bottom in to forum oblivion.Just as well.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I think it's mostly forum hype and control issues.

 

My game hasn't changed in any intrinsic ways in the almost four years I have played it.

 

Sure, there are more caches and therefore more cachers - expand any group and the differences among them start to multiply.

 

In what is commonly referred to as 'the good old days' (before my time) the thesis is that caches were well-stocked, always maintained, in admirable locations, placed with adequate permission, and physically or mentally challenging. Cachers were stalwart rugged individualists who never cheated and would rather jump off a cliff than log an event twice for a lousy pocket cache.

 

Today we have a larger percentage of no-thought-required drive-ups in uninspiring locations.

 

Remember that the best thing about geocaching is that it is open to everyone, and the worst thing about geocaching is... that it's open to everyone!

 

Increase the numbers in any group and differences become more sharply divided.

 

Personally I have enough unfound caches in the 200 miles around me that my game isn't affected - I can seek whatever type of cache makes me happy.

 

In that respect the game hasn't changed and I don't believe that it will.

[vtmtnman]

I think it's mostly forum hype and control issues.

 

My game hasn't changed in any intrinsic ways in the almost four years I have played it.

 

Sure, there are more caches and therefore more cachers - expand any group and the differences among them start to multiply.

 

In what is commonly referred to as 'the good old days' (before my time) the thesis is that caches were well-stocked, always maintained, in admirable locations, placed with adequate permission, and physically or mentally challenging. Cachers were stalwart rugged individualists who never cheated and would rather jump off a cliff than log an event twice for a lousy pocket cache.

 

Today we have a larger percentage of no-thought-required drive-ups in uninspiring locations.

 

Remember that the best thing about geocaching is that it is open to everyone, and the worst thing about geocaching is... that it's open to everyone!

 

Increase the numbers in any group and differences become more sharply divided.

 

Personally I have enough unfound caches in the 200 miles around me that my game isn't affected - I can seek whatever type of cache makes me happy.

 

In that respect the game hasn't changed and I don't believe that it will.

You bring up a good point.It's also getting harder for folks to be original with their caches because alot of it has been done already.

[+wandererrob]

I think you've both (VTmtnman and Fox-and-the-hound) covered what geocaching "was" quite well actually in you posts.

 

I think a couple of factors effecting the current lackluster cache placement that is becoming more prominent is the increased number of people playing the game (it has grown VASTLY since I started in 2001) thus a decreasing number of available good places people are finding. I'm not saying they aren't still out there, but it's getting harder in harder in some areas to find a place worthwhile that hasn't already had a cache placed. And even when you do, how many caches does one state forest or something similar really need to have within it's boundaries before you're just finding other caches for the sake of doing so beacuse you're not new to the place at that point.

 

Going along those lines, the types of caches that were once unique and different over time have become more frequent and even commonplace. Not through any sort of lessening of the hide quality in many cases, but simply through frequent use. As such it then becomes harder and harder to come up with new and interesting ways of hiding caches that people haven't seen before.

 

All of this, IMO, has led to the continued evolution (and sometimes de-evolution) of caches from the old, straight-up tradtional caches where you went out and just found the container, to multis, micros (yes, they were new and cool once), then the now-defunct locationless and virtuals, and so on as people continue to try and find ways to keep it fresh and fun. Others, simply defer to what is out there, others just place caches for the sake of doing so. Both of which didn't exist so much in the early "old school" days. I guess it comes down to the sheer number of people playing and saturation of the area with caches. That saturation leads newcomers to believe that things like micros are what caching is and that then spreads into the woods and such. So some of it may simply be out of just not knowing any better as the majority of cachers probably never even come to this forum and hear any of this.

 

This is all from the perspective of a cacher that once had to drive at least 10 miles to find A cache. Now a search of even my now small-town home yields 10 PAGES of caches within 10 miles. While I lived in Woburn, that number was much higher.

Edited May 16, 2007 by wandererrob

[vtmtnman]

I think you've both (VTmtnman and Fox-and-the-hound) covered what geocaching "was" quite well actually in you posts.

 

I think a couple of factors effecting the current lackluster cache placement that is becoming more prominent is the increased number of people playing the game (it has grown VASTLY since I started in 2001) thus a decreasing number of available good places people are finding. I'm not saying they aren't still out there, but it's getting harder in harder in some areas to find a place worthwhile that hasn't already had a cache placed. And even when you do, how many caches does one state forest or something similar really need to have within it's boundaries before you're just finding other caches for the sake of doing so beacuse you're not new to the place at that point.

 

Going along those lines, the types of caches that were once unique and different over time have become more frequent and even commonplace. Not through any sort of lessening of the hide quality in many cases, but simply through frequent use. As such it then becomes harder and harder to come up with new and interesting ways of hiding caches that people haven't seen before.

 

All of this, IMO, has led to the continued evolution (and sometimes de-evolution) of caches from the old, straight-up tradtional caches where you went out and just found the container, to multis, micros (yes, they were new and cool once), then the now-defunct locationless and virtuals, and so on as people continue to try and find ways to keep it fresh and fun. Others, simply defer to what is out there, others just place caches for the sake of doing so. Both of which didn't exist so much in the early "old school" days.

 

This is all from the perspective of a cacher that once had to drive at least 10 miles to find A cache. Now a search of even my now small-town home yields 10 PAGES of caches within 10 miles.

Exactly bud.

[+Totem Clan]

All the "old" caches (those hidden before the summer of '03) I've found around here are leaking abandoned Tupperware, or worse garbage bags, shoved under a log or rock on private property. One was even hidden under an active railroad trestle. As for the urbans of that age they are, Altoids tins under a light pole next to a construction area or on a stop sing by the grocery store. The first ammo can hidden around here (and it's still active too) was hidden in a ditch in a graveyard where they dump all the lawn clippings, limbs and gardening waste along with the flowers, vases and other junk.

 

Caches have always been hidden by humans. Humans have always been flawed, therefore caches have always often ended up flawed.

 

Looking over the history of hides I think the one big change is the number of hides and the number of those that are now in urban areas. They have been there from almost the start but now there is more of them, because there are more cachers.

[+LivesWithMonkeys]

I am beginning to get a better picture of the old days. Allow me to comment on a couple things mentioned by my esteemed colleague.

 

In what is commonly referred to as 'the good old days' (before my time) the thesis is that caches were...physically or mentally challenging. Cachers were stalwart rugged individualists

 

Now, I cannot speak for anyone so I do not know if I am the exception to the rule, but I started caching not for me but for my children (aka the "Mad Heights Monkeys"). I wanted them to spend more time outdoors, in the fresh air, hopefully in natural settings, etc. One is a 9yr old boy and one is a 7yr old girl. Although intelligent and athletic enough for their age, I am not ready to drag them out to anyplace better suited for "stalwart rugged individualist" (read top of mountain peaks, dense swamps, jungles, etc.). Nor would I want to take them anywhere to find something that a full-grown adult would consider "physically or mentally challenging". At least not yet. In years to come, perhaps.

 

So, I guess I am thankful for the "good new days" with caches that I can take my kids to. The youth of today will become the rugged outdoorsmen of the future...but only if you give them the chance to grow first.

Edited May 16, 2007 by LivesWithMonkeys

[vtmtnman]

All the "old" caches (those hidden before the summer of '03) I've found around here are leaking abandoned Tupperware, or worse garbage bags, shoved under a log or rock on private property. One was even hidden under an active railroad trestle. As for the urbans of that age they are, Altoids tins under a light pole next to a construction area or on a stop sing by the grocery store. The first ammo can hidden around here (and it's still active too) was hidden in a ditch in a graveyard where they dump all the lawn clippings, limbs and gardening waste along with the flowers, vases and other junk.

 

Although I'm sure there's not alot of mountain views in that area is there?

[vagabond]

I think it's mostly forum hype and control issues.

 

My game hasn't changed in any intrinsic ways in the almost four years I have played it.

 

Sure, there are more caches and therefore more cachers - expand any group and the differences among them start to multiply.

 

In what is commonly referred to as 'the good old days' (before my time) the thesis is that caches were well-stocked, always maintained, in admirable locations, placed with adequate permission, and physically or mentally challenging. Cachers were stalwart rugged individualists who never cheated and would rather jump off a cliff than log an event twice for a lousy pocket cache.

 

Today we have a larger percentage of no-thought-required drive-ups in uninspiring locations.

 

Remember that the best thing about geocaching is that it is open to everyone, and the worst thing about geocaching is... that it's open to everyone!

 

Increase the numbers in any group and differences become more sharply divided.

 

Personally I have enough unfound caches in the 200 miles around me that my game isn't affected - I can seek whatever type of cache makes me happy.

 

In that respect the game hasn't changed and I don't believe that it will.

 

I guess you could call me an old school cacher, and I think I would have to pretty much agree with Ed.

My first find was a plastic sun tea container with the spigot broken off and it was wet and soggy inside and loaded with ants, funny thing though as I was signing the log here came 4 other cachers looking for it.

Yeah there was a lot of hiking and more hills and peaks, mainly because I thing the early cachers already had their gpsrs and had been using them for awhile. I know I had mine for almost 2 years before I found out about geocaching.

I had mentioned in an earlier thread that in my first year of caching I had found about 180 caches and maybe 3 or 4 caches were oh wow, the rest were leaky or rusty containers hidden under a pile of rocks or under the sticks or tossed under the bush.

Yes there are more urban caches now days, but as I get older and have problems doing those longer hikes I appreciate all those urban caches

[vtmtnman]

I'd like to point out that this topic is for us to learn from the old crew.Keep it coming.

 

I guess all of the regulars in General GC Topics and elsewhere have done this one to death...I'd have thought more of them would've posted.

[crtrue]

Re-read this entire thread.

 

The issue isn't that the game has gotten better or worse, but so diverse, with all of the new players and methods, that it will never be everything that everyone wants.

 

For example, the more I cache, the more I realize that I like the idea of the micro. I trade rarely, outside of coins, due to the frustration of the junk in caches around here. Obviously, a lot of people also detest micros and love heading out into the woods for a big ammo can hunt. I like this, too, but I'm a bit short of big, fat forests to cache in, so I enjoy my method.

 

I've said this before -- Geocaching.com is more or less a library now. You don't read all the books in a library. You find something that works, and go for it. The issue is really ensuring that everyone finds what they're looking for, or helps them discover something they weren't.

[+sbell111]

I think wanderrob made an important point that may be lost:

I think a couple of factors effecting the current lackluster cache placement that is becoming more prominent is the increased number of people playing the game (it has grown VASTLY since I started in 2001) thus a decreasing number of available good places people are finding. I'm not saying they aren't still out there, but it's getting harder in harder in some areas to find a place worthwhile that hasn't already had a cache placed. And even when you do, how many caches does one state forest or something similar really need to have within it's boundaries before you're just finding other caches for the sake of doing so beacuse you're not new to the place at that point.

 

Going along those lines, the types of caches that were once unique and different over time have become more frequent and even commonplace. Not through any sort of lessening of the hide quality in many cases, but simply through frequent use. As such it then becomes harder and harder to come up with new and interesting ways of hiding caches that people haven't seen before. ...

• The really good places may already have caches in them.
  
• Unique hides become old-hat
  

Edited May 16, 2007 by sbell111

[+egami]

We just need a cache category that has an elevated criteria so these people can stop whining in every thread.

[+StarBrand]

Here is my mostly non judgemental assesment of "then versus now":

 

Most (not all) caches used to be larger containers with trade items placed in cool or scenic natural places that I might have missed except for the cache placement.

 

Most (not all) caches these days are smaller containers less likely to have trade items and are placed to give cachers a "quick fix".

 

Cache density has increased. Going to a cache used to require planning and the expectation/understanding that you will only find 2 or 3 in a day long adventure across many miles. Now most cachers "expect" to find 15 - 20 in failrly rapid secession.

[+Team GeoBlast]

I am beginning to get a better picture of the old days. Allow me to comment on a couple things mentioned by my esteemed colleague.

 

In what is commonly referred to as 'the good old days' (before my time) the thesis is that caches were...physically or mentally challenging. Cachers were stalwart rugged individualists

 

Now, I cannot speak for anyone so I do not know if I am the exception to the rule, but I started caching not for me but for my children (aka the "Mad Heights Monkeys"). I wanted them to spend more time outdoors, in the fresh air, hopefully in natural settings, etc. One is a 9yr old boy and one is a 7yr old girl. Although intelligent and athletic enough for their age, I am not ready to drag them out to anyplace better suited for "stalwart rugged individualist" (read top of mountain peaks, dense swamps, jungles, etc.). Nor would I want to take them anywhere to find something that a full-grown adult would consider "physically or mentally challenging". At least not yet. In years to come, perhaps.

 

So, I guess I am thankful for the "good new days" with caches that I can take my kids to. The youth of today will become the rugged outdoorsmen of the future...but only if you give them the chance to grow first.

 

A lot of this is a matter of perspective and this why you will never have consensus on this topic. If you ask a family who caches together, an elderly or physically challenged cacher, or a cacher that just doesn't like to get off the beaten path, you are going to get a much different take on the evolution of geocaching than that of the old skool. However diluted the perceived quality of the final prize is, the changes have opened the game to more people. Even this is a debatable benefit to some.

 

I am considered old skool in a few things in life, but not in Geocaching. From this experience I will have to say that the memory of the old skooler is often selective too. Geocaching unquestionably has a honeymoon period that starts with your first find and it's quite possible that a few of the old skool disgruntled are remembering their own honeymoons.

 

All that said, the game is changing. A lot of the winds of change revolve around the acceptance, and even encouragement. of the "the quick, easy, and uninspired" cache placement." I've heard it said in these forums several times "every cache doesn't have to be amazing and merely the fact that there is a cache is good for the game." This is where my personal warning light goes on. It is this mentality that seems to be changing (or devolving) the game for me personally.

 

Two distinctly different types of players seem to be emerging: Type#1 Those who feel any cache is a good cache and Type#2 those who think every cache should be a good cache. To co-exist and for the game to flourish, GC.com has got to find better ways for these two camps to participate in the same game. The core of Geocaching (and the group responsible for it's creation) is Type #2 and the danger is losing them IMO.

[+briansnat]

think it's mostly forum hype and control issues.

 

That is nonsense. I can only speak for myself, but I think I have my finger on the pulse of those who feel as I do, and many of us honestly have concerns about the way the sport is heading, largely because it affects our ability to play the game they way we used to.

 

My game hasn't changed in any intrinsic ways in the almost four years I have played it.

 

Mine hasn't either, but my ability to play it the way I like to has been impacted to an extent.

 

In what is commonly referred to as 'the good old days' (before my time) the thesis is that caches were well-stocked, always maintained, in admirable locations, placed with adequate permission, and physically or mentally challenging. Cachers were stalwart rugged individualists who never cheated and would rather jump off a cliff than log an event twice for a lousy pocket cache.

 

I don't think anyone is saying that things were ever perfect; that every cache was an ammo box filled with gold hidden at a Grand Canyon-like view. But the first few years that I was a participant, I could go to a new area, feed in a bunch of cache coordintes into my GPS, hit goto and most of the time I would be taken to a place of some interest to me.

 

I'm pretty easy to please so that place didn't have to be one of majestic beauty or earthshaking historic importance. I don't need a "Wow Factor" for every cache, but I'd rather not bother with caches that have what I call the "Yuk Factor".

 

Anyway, to answer the OP's question, the issue I have with the direction the sport is taking is that the "Yuk Factor" caches are becoming the rule rather than the exception and it's becoming increasingly difficult for me to find the kinds of caches I like. My reasons for participating in this sport are disappearing, or at least becoming lost among the chaff.

 

When I complain about it here, I'm told "Tough, do more research before going out". Fiirst off research is not foolproof, but more importantly I don't want to do research, I want to be able to turn on my GPS and hit goto and I can't do that anymore.

[+wandererrob]

Cache density has increased. Going to a cache used to require planning and the expectation/understanding that you will only find 2 or 3 in a day long adventure across many miles. Now most cachers "expect" to find 15 - 20 in failrly rapid secession.

 

Good point. Numbers runs were an impossibilty in the earlier days.

[crtrue]

We just need a cache category that has an elevated criteria so these people can stop whining in every thread.

 

Harsh, but I agree. I would love to see something with stricter rules about placement, required land permission, relevance to the area, etc -- think similar to the qualifications of an Earthcache, only designated around longevity and importance as an actual container.

[+fox-and-the-hound]

We're relative newbies, but even we've seen the "change" in the caching world. Look at the dates of caches being set, what kind they are and where they are and you start seeing a trend. Caches used to actually be caches. You know, an actual cache as defined by the English language being...

 

cache: noun, verb, cached, cach·ing.

–noun 1. a hiding place, esp. one in the ground, for ammunition, food, treasures, etc.:

 

We look at the older caches and we see ammocans, lock-n-locks, 5 gallon pails and all manner of cool storage containers filled with cool stuff. We look at a large number of newer caches and see minis, micros and macros placed behind stores next to the dumpsters or on a roadside filled with debris and no view. It's enough to make you cry sometime.

 

We place both ammocans and micros. Our ammocans take you on nice walks and hikes and give you an excuse to enjoy the outdoors, exercise your body and exercise your brain. Our micros take you to unique places, historical landmarks, and great views that might be otherwise marred with large cache placement. But then again, we learned from the Old School.

Exactly,but what I'm getting at here is that we've all heard the first generation cachers talk about the way it was,and that what I what them to dicuss with us new folks and tell us how to keep the game great,as they've been here from the begining.

 

From the looks of it,as usual,my thread will peter to the bottom in to forum oblivion.Just as well.

 

To keep the game great? Simple...lead by example: 1) place good caches in good locations (you don't need mountain and valley views to find good locations) 2) Trade up or trade even 3) Maintain your caches and help others with theirs. 4) Teach new cachers to do the same.

[Mr.Yuck]

We're relative newbies, but even we've seen the "change" in the caching world. Look at the dates of caches being set, what kind they are and where they are and you start seeing a trend. Caches used to actually be caches. You know, an actual cache as defined by the English language being...

 

cache: noun, verb, cached, cach·ing.

–noun 1. a hiding place, esp. one in the ground, for ammunition, food, treasures, etc.:

 

We look at the older caches and we see ammocans, lock-n-locks, 5 gallon pails and all manner of cool storage containers filled with cool stuff. We look at a large number of newer caches and see minis, micros and macros placed behind stores next to the dumpsters or on a roadside filled with debris and no view. It's enough to make you cry sometime.

 

We place both ammocans and micros. Our ammocans take you on nice walks and hikes and give you an excuse to enjoy the outdoors, exercise your body and exercise your brain. Our micros take you to unique places, historical landmarks, and great views that might be otherwise marred with large cache placement. But then again, we learned from the Old School.

 

Great post by fox-and-the-hound here. And it illustrates that one needn't have joined in early 2001 to be a so-called "old schooler". Two of the biggest "old schoolers" I know in my area also started in 2005, as did fox-and-the-hound. By the way, Lackawanna County used to be my home away from home (for business purposes that no longer exist), so I know the caches you "learned from".

 

I think the biggest trend change from the old school caches (2004 and earlier in my area, your results may vary ) was the general placement of caches in parks, along hiking trails, and public greenspace in as opposed to uninspired (in my opinion, of course) hides thrown just about anywhere for a quick smiley, or a "fix" as many would say.

 

And before anyone repeats if for the umpteenth time, I know the first ever cache was buried off the side of the road on private property, and "Mingo" (oldest existing cache) is a half-buried bucket at an Interstate off-ramp. Keep in mind I'm talking about the general placement of caches (almost always with swag, or able to accomodate Travel Bugs) from that era.

[vtmtnman]

I think wanderrob made an important point that may be lost:

I think a couple of factors effecting the current lackluster cache placement that is becoming more prominent is the increased number of people playing the game (it has grown VASTLY since I started in 2001) thus a decreasing number of available good places people are finding. I'm not saying they aren't still out there, but it's getting harder in harder in some areas to find a place worthwhile that hasn't already had a cache placed. And even when you do, how many caches does one state forest or something similar really need to have within it's boundaries before you're just finding other caches for the sake of doing so beacuse you're not new to the place at that point.

 

Going along those lines, the types of caches that were once unique and different over time have become more frequent and even commonplace. Not through any sort of lessening of the hide quality in many cases, but simply through frequent use. As such it then becomes harder and harder to come up with new and interesting ways of hiding caches that people haven't seen before. ...

• The really good places may already have caches in them.
  
• Unique hides become old-hat
  

Lost within the thread or lost within the old school of players?

[+wandererrob]

When I complain about it here, I'm told "Tough, do more research before going out". Fiirst off research is not foolproof, but more importantly I don't want to do research, I want to be able to turn on my GPS and hit goto and I can't do that anymore.

 

Yeah, it's interesting how geocaching now takes less a planning and more planning at the same time. That is to say, in regards to the comment above about only finding 2-3 in a day long adventure, you had to plan on your adventure and take a day and go off geocaching. In that regard, finding caches doesn't involve much planning on that side. Hell, I can find 2-3 caches without leaving the neighborhood in some cases.

 

On the flip side it requires more planning from the point you mentioned. You can't just load up the GPS and go anymore. You need to run a PQ, sift throgh those results to filter out more caches of no interest, then hopefully what you have left will be worthwhile.

[+Renegade Knight]

First, I'm second generation, but it seems that generation creep has made me old school. I did find a lot old school caches and I did find a bunch of second generation caches...

 

What's different.

First there are a heck of lot more cachers. I went about 2 years before I ever met anyone on the trail. Now I can't hardly swing a noob around for a good toss without hitting another noob.

 

Next. Urbanization. There were urban caches back then...In parks, along the river. Cache sprawl had not yet taken place. Now you have cache sprawl. The parks filled up. But noobs still wanted to place caches so parking lots, strip malls, slag, and other spots started to creep into the landscapeing and cache sprawl started to take place.

 

Work. Then, 100 finds then meant 1000 miles on your rig. Not 100 as you made a quick loop over a couple of weekends. We all did the same caches because those were the only caches to be found. When we met at an event we already had a lot in common. We didn't have to work to figure out common caches. Now...you can cache for months in the same area and not actually find the same caches as anyone else.

 

Memory. Then I could recall all 100 finds. Now...I can't recall all 1000 finds. It makes it harder to talk shop when I can't recall the cache that didn't stick out.

 

Then, remote caches got found. If you wanted to go caching...you did the hike. Now even people who do like remote caches have so many to choose from that they get found less than before. Plus since you can't keep up in the urban world you have to make a point to go remote. Not a lot of people do that. So cachers themselves have become more urban than "the old schoolers". Even a lot of the old schoolers are now more urban. They just have roots that noobs don't have.

 

Respect. Then there was one or two caches in the area that if you did one or both, you got the respect of your fellow cachers. Especially if it was your first find. If you did 100 you got also got respect. Both meant that you did something extraordinary. Now noobs do 100 and think they have earned respect. They haven't. 100 means nothing now, but if you find some of those caches that the old schoolers are watching, they will notice and give you that respect. Along the way numbers no longer meant that you had had some grueling cache days and their value for earning respect was lost. Now you have to do the grueling caches for old school respect. Of course noobs are still able to impress other noobs with raw numbers.

Edited May 16, 2007 by Renegade Knight

[vtmtnman]

We're relative newbies, but even we've seen the "change" in the caching world. Look at the dates of caches being set, what kind they are and where they are and you start seeing a trend. Caches used to actually be caches. You know, an actual cache as defined by the English language being...

 

cache: noun, verb, cached, cach·ing.

–noun 1. a hiding place, esp. one in the ground, for ammunition, food, treasures, etc.:

 

We look at the older caches and we see ammocans, lock-n-locks, 5 gallon pails and all manner of cool storage containers filled with cool stuff. We look at a large number of newer caches and see minis, micros and macros placed behind stores next to the dumpsters or on a roadside filled with debris and no view. It's enough to make you cry sometime.

 

We place both ammocans and micros. Our ammocans take you on nice walks and hikes and give you an excuse to enjoy the outdoors, exercise your body and exercise your brain. Our micros take you to unique places, historical landmarks, and great views that might be otherwise marred with large cache placement. But then again, we learned from the Old School.

Exactly,but what I'm getting at here is that we've all heard the first generation cachers talk about the way it was,and that what I what them to dicuss with us new folks and tell us how to keep the game great,as they've been here from the begining.

 

From the looks of it,as usual,my thread will peter to the bottom in to forum oblivion.Just as well.

 

To keep the game great? Simple...lead by example: 1) place good caches in good locations (you don't need mountain and valley views to find good locations) 2) Trade up or trade even 3) Maintain your caches and help others with theirs. 4) Teach new cachers to do the same.

Outstanding examples.

[+wandererrob]

4) Teach new cachers to do the same.

 

This may be the hardest part. As I said earlier, many, perhaps even most cachers don't even come to the forums. They get into the game, they go out caching, they place caches and may never be involved in the community if you will.

 

Teaching depends largely on folks knowing the teachers exist. I'm not sure how much that really is the case. But I do agree that teaching new cachers about the game is important. I'm just not sure of how to do so effectively.

[+Renegade Knight]

Cache density has increased. Going to a cache used to require planning and the expectation/understanding that you will only find 2 or 3 in a day long adventure across many miles. Now most cachers "expect" to find 15 - 20 in failrly rapid secession.

 

Good point. Numbers runs were an impossibilty in the earlier days.

 

Back then a blip of 5 caches in a town was worth a road trip and downright exciting.

[vtmtnman]

Re-read this entire thread.

 

The issue isn't that the game has gotten better or worse, but so diverse, with all of the new players and methods, that it will never be everything that everyone wants.

 

For example, the more I cache, the more I realize that I like the idea of the micro. I trade rarely, outside of coins, due to the frustration of the junk in caches around here. Obviously, a lot of people also detest micros and love heading out into the woods for a big ammo can hunt. I like this, too, but I'm a bit short of big, fat forests to cache in, so I enjoy my method.

 

I've said this before -- Geocaching.com is more or less a library now. You don't read all the books in a library. You find something that works, and go for it. The issue is really ensuring that everyone finds what they're looking for, or helps them discover something they weren't.

This is a great observation.

[+fox-and-the-hound]

I think a couple of factors effecting the current lackluster cache placement that is becoming more prominent is the increased number of people playing the game (it has grown VASTLY since I started in 2001) thus a decreasing number of available good places people are finding. I'm not saying they aren't still out there, but it's getting harder in harder in some areas to find a place worthwhile that hasn't already had a cache placed. And even when you do, how many caches does one state forest or something similar really need to have within it's boundaries before you're just finding other caches for the sake of doing so beacuse you're not new to the place at that point.

 

I'm tired of hearing that there are no or few good places to put a cache anymore. There may be a few less places where you can reach one without getting out of your car, but that's about it. If you can't find a good place, ask an "old school" cacher to suggest some places for you. You might have to (goodness forbid) actually walk a couple hundred feet to find a decent spot, but they're still out there if you're willing to look. I say this as part of a caching family including a blind man so don't tell me it's tougher for some than others to get to those caches. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-micro, I'm just anti-uninspired locations. I travel. I travel a lot. I've lived all over the country and I've yet to find a place that was devoid of interesting points of interest. What bugs me is when I see six uninspired caches of any size right next to a big state park a mile or two away with multiple historical and natural points of interest, but no caches. I know there are some places that are just saturated and don't need more caches. What I don't understand is why anyone feels the need to place a perfectly good cache behind the CVS next to the dumpster.

[+sbell111]

I think wanderrob made an important point that may be lost:

I think a couple of factors effecting the current lackluster cache placement that is becoming more prominent is the increased number of people playing the game (it has grown VASTLY since I started in 2001) thus a decreasing number of available good places people are finding. I'm not saying they aren't still out there, but it's getting harder in harder in some areas to find a place worthwhile that hasn't already had a cache placed. And even when you do, how many caches does one state forest or something similar really need to have within it's boundaries before you're just finding other caches for the sake of doing so beacuse you're not new to the place at that point.

 

Going along those lines, the types of caches that were once unique and different over time have become more frequent and even commonplace. Not through any sort of lessening of the hide quality in many cases, but simply through frequent use. As such it then becomes harder and harder to come up with new and interesting ways of hiding caches that people haven't seen before. ...

• The really good places may already have caches in them.
  
• Unique hides become old-hat
  

Lost within the thread or lost within the old school of players?

Yup.

[vtmtnman]

I think wanderrob made an important point that may be lost:

I think a couple of factors effecting the current lackluster cache placement that is becoming more prominent is the increased number of people playing the game (it has grown VASTLY since I started in 2001) thus a decreasing number of available good places people are finding. I'm not saying they aren't still out there, but it's getting harder in harder in some areas to find a place worthwhile that hasn't already had a cache placed. And even when you do, how many caches does one state forest or something similar really need to have within it's boundaries before you're just finding other caches for the sake of doing so beacuse you're not new to the place at that point.

 

Going along those lines, the types of caches that were once unique and different over time have become more frequent and even commonplace. Not through any sort of lessening of the hide quality in many cases, but simply through frequent use. As such it then becomes harder and harder to come up with new and interesting ways of hiding caches that people haven't seen before. ...

• The really good places may already have caches in them.
  
• Unique hides become old-hat
  

Lost within the thread or lost within the old school of players?

Yup.

So both then.

[+wandererrob]

I'm tired of hearing that there are no or few good places to put a cache anymore.

 

What I mean is that the good places are getting harder to find. Dont' get me wrong, there are still plenty of places out there worth placing a cache in. You just have to find them.

 

I just don't know how much newer cache hiders, especially when led by the current numerous examples to the contrary, are willing to seek them out. But I think that speaks back to the point about educating new cachers you made earlier.

[+Miragee]

We're relative newbies, but even we've seen the "change" in the caching world. Look at the dates of caches being set, what kind they are and where they are and you start seeing a trend. Caches used to actually be caches. You know, an actual cache as defined by the English language being...

 

cache: noun, verb, cached, cach·ing.

–noun 1. a hiding place, esp. one in the ground, for ammunition, food, treasures, etc.:

 

We look at the older caches and we see ammocans, lock-n-locks, 5 gallon pails and all manner of cool storage containers filled with cool stuff. We look at a large number of newer caches and see minis, micros and macros placed behind stores next to the dumpsters or on a roadside filled with debris and no view. It's enough to make you cry sometime.

 

We place both ammocans and micros. Our ammocans take you on nice walks and hikes and give you an excuse to enjoy the outdoors, exercise your body and exercise your brain. Our micros take you to unique places, historical landmarks, and great views that might be otherwise marred with large cache placement. But then again, we learned from the Old School.

Exactly,but what I'm getting at here is that we've all heard the first generation cachers talk about the way it was,and that what I what them to dicuss with us new folks and tell us how to keep the game great,as they've been here from the begining.

 

From the looks of it,as usual,my thread will peter to the bottom in to forum oblivion.Just as well.

 

To keep the game great? Simple...lead by example: 1) place good caches in good locations (you don't need mountain and valley views to find good locations) 2) Trade up or trade even 3) Maintain your caches and help others with theirs. 4) Teach new cachers to do the same.

Lately I've been working on #1 with this cache, this one, this one, this one, and this one.

 

Now, getting people from the city to be more adventuresome and come out to find these caches is the next challenge . . .

[+Totem Clan]

First, I'm second generation, but it seems that generation creep has made me old school. I did find a lot old school caches and I did find a bunch of second generation caches...

 

<snipped for space>

 

Respect. Then there was one or two caches in the area that if you did one or both, you got the respect of your fellow cachers. Especially if it was your first find. If you did 100 you got also got respect. Both meant that you did something extraordinary. Now noobs do 100 and think they have earned respect. They haven't. 100 means nothing now, but if you find some of those caches that the old schoolers are watching, they will notice and give you that respect. Along the way numbers no longer meant that you had had some grueling cache days and their value for earning respect was lost. Now you have to do the grueling caches for old school respect. Of course noobs are still able to impress other noobs with raw numbers.

I would tended to agree with your basic point. Because there are more caches in most areas the numbers game becomes a big deal. In cache light areas like this on 100 or 200 caches is a year's work for an active cacher. In other areas it's a month's work for a "cherry picker." Numbers are too often used as an arbitrary measuring stick.

[+fox-and-the-hound]

4) Teach new cachers to do the same.

 

This may be the hardest part. As I said earlier, many, perhaps even most cachers don't even come to the forums. They get into the game, they go out caching, they place caches and may never be involved in the community if you will.

 

Teaching depends largely on folks knowing the teachers exist. I'm not sure how much that really is the case. But I do agree that teaching new cachers about the game is important. I'm just not sure of how to do so effectively.

 

How about inviting newbies to go caching along with you or to set new caches with you. Whenever we see someone new logging in one of our caches, we try to make a point of inviting them along or being a resource for them. It doesn't take much to make an impact. Even if it's just a small one, it's one of the things I love about caching. "Old School" cachers showed us a little love when we were newbies, we just need to pass it along.

[+sbell111]

I can only speak for myself, but I think I have my finger on the pulse of those who feel as I do ...

I think that each and every one of us has our finger on the pulse of those who feel as we do. After all, they agree with us.

[vtmtnman]

First, I'm second generation, but it seems that generation creep has made me old school. I did find a lot old school caches and I did find a bunch of second generation caches...

 

<snipped for space>

 

Respect. Then there was one or two caches in the area that if you did one or both, you got the respect of your fellow cachers. Especially if it was your first find. If you did 100 you got also got respect. Both meant that you did something extraordinary. Now noobs do 100 and think they have earned respect. They haven't. 100 means nothing now, but if you find some of those caches that the old schoolers are watching, they will notice and give you that respect. Along the way numbers no longer meant that you had had some grueling cache days and their value for earning respect was lost. Now you have to do the grueling caches for old school respect. Of course noobs are still able to impress other noobs with raw numbers.

I would tended to agree with your basic point. Because there are more caches in most areas the numbers game becomes a big deal. In cache light areas like this on 100 or 200 caches is a year's work for an active cacher. In other areas it's a month's work for a "cherry picker." Numbers are too often used as an arbitrary measuring stick.

This is true.

[+wandererrob]

How about inviting newbies to go caching along with you or to set new caches with you. Whenever we see someone new logging in one of our caches, we try to make a point of inviting them along or being a resource for them. It doesn't take much to make an impact. Even if it's just a small one, it's one of the things I love about caching. "Old School" cachers showed us a little love when we were newbies, we just need to pass it along.

 

Sounds like a dadgum fine idea to me

 

 

Just an aside: I think this may be the best thread I've come across in ages. Very good discussion going on here.

[vtmtnman]

4) Teach new cachers to do the same.

 

This may be the hardest part. As I said earlier, many, perhaps even most cachers don't even come to the forums. They get into the game, they go out caching, they place caches and may never be involved in the community if you will.

 

Teaching depends largely on folks knowing the teachers exist. I'm not sure how much that really is the case. But I do agree that teaching new cachers about the game is important. I'm just not sure of how to do so effectively.

 

How about inviting newbies to go caching along with you or to set new caches with you. Whenever we see someone new logging in one of our caches, we try to make a point of inviting them along or being a resource for them. It doesn't take much to make an impact. Even if it's just a small one, it's one of the things I love about caching. "Old School" cachers showed us a little love when we were newbies, we just need to pass it along.

THAT'S awesome.I just may do that someday.

[+fox-and-the-hound]

4) Teach new cachers to do the same.

 

This may be the hardest part. As I said earlier, many, perhaps even most cachers don't even come to the forums. They get into the game, they go out caching, they place caches and may never be involved in the community if you will.

 

Teaching depends largely on folks knowing the teachers exist. I'm not sure how much that really is the case. But I do agree that teaching new cachers about the game is important. I'm just not sure of how to do so effectively.

 

How about inviting newbies to go caching along with you or to set new caches with you. Whenever we see someone new logging in one of our caches, we try to make a point of inviting them along or being a resource for them. It doesn't take much to make an impact. Even if it's just a small one, it's one of the things I love about caching. "Old School" cachers showed us a little love when we were newbies, we just need to pass it along.

THAT'S awesome.I just may do that someday.

 

If you're new, don't hesitate to call on those Old Schoolers either. I can't even imagine what kind of disasters we would have gotten ourselves into if we hadn't been emailing up a storm that first year.

[vtmtnman]

 

Just an aside: I think this may be the best thread I've come across in ages. Very good discussion going on here.

Thank you.I wanted learning to take place...not angst as usual.The minute I see this thread start with the Micro/LPC/noob BS I'm gettin' her shut down.

[+Team GeoBlast]

I am beginning to get a better picture of the old days. Allow me to comment on a couple things mentioned by my esteemed colleague.

 

In what is commonly referred to as 'the good old days' (before my time) the thesis is that caches were...physically or mentally challenging. Cachers were stalwart rugged individualists

 

Now, I cannot speak for anyone so I do not know if I am the exception to the rule, but I started caching not for me but for my children (aka the "Mad Heights Monkeys"). I wanted them to spend more time outdoors, in the fresh air, hopefully in natural settings, etc. One is a 9yr old boy and one is a 7yr old girl. Although intelligent and athletic enough for their age, I am not ready to drag them out to anyplace better suited for "stalwart rugged individualist" (read top of mountain peaks, dense swamps, jungles, etc.). Nor would I want to take them anywhere to find something that a full-grown adult would consider "physically or mentally challenging". At least not yet. In years to come, perhaps.

 

So, I guess I am thankful for the "good new days" with caches that I can take my kids to. The youth of today will become the rugged outdoorsmen of the future...but only if you give them the chance to grow first.

 

A lot of this is a matter of perspective and this why you will never have consensus on this topic. If you ask a family who caches together, an elderly or physically challenged cacher, or a cacher that just doesn't like to get off the beaten path, you are going to get a much different take on the evolution of geocaching than that of the old skool. However diluted the perceived quality of the final prize is, the changes have opened the game to more people. Even this is a debatable benefit to some.

 

I am considered old skool in a few things in life, but not in Geocaching. From this experience I will have to say that the memory of the old skooler is often selective too. Geocaching unquestionably has a honeymoon period that starts with your first find and it's quite possible that a few of the old skool disgruntled are remembering their own honeymoons.

 

All that said, the game is changing. A lot of the winds of change revolve around the acceptance, and even encouragement. of the "the quick, easy, and uninspired" cache placement." I've heard it said in these forums several times "every cache doesn't have to be amazing and merely the fact that there is a cache is good for the game." This is where my personal warning light goes on. It is this mentality that seems to be changing (or devolving) the game for me personally.

 

Two distinctly different types of players seem to be emerging: Type#1 Those who feel any cache is a good cache and Type#2 those who think every cache should be a good cache. To co-exist and for the game to flourish, GC.com has got to find better ways for these two camps to participate in the same game. The core of Geocaching (and the group responsible for it's creation) is Type #2 and the danger is losing them IMO.

[vtmtnman]

4) Teach new cachers to do the same.

 

This may be the hardest part. As I said earlier, many, perhaps even most cachers don't even come to the forums. They get into the game, they go out caching, they place caches and may never be involved in the community if you will.

 

Teaching depends largely on folks knowing the teachers exist. I'm not sure how much that really is the case. But I do agree that teaching new cachers about the game is important. I'm just not sure of how to do so effectively.

 

How about inviting newbies to go caching along with you or to set new caches with you. Whenever we see someone new logging in one of our caches, we try to make a point of inviting them along or being a resource for them. It doesn't take much to make an impact. Even if it's just a small one, it's one of the things I love about caching. "Old School" cachers showed us a little love when we were newbies, we just need to pass it along.

THAT'S awesome.I just may do that someday.

 

If you're new, don't hesitate to call on those Old Schoolers either. I can't even imagine what kind of disasters we would have gotten ourselves into if we hadn't been emailing up a storm that first year.

I'm sorta new,yeah,but I did alot of learning on my own.Not the best way for somethings,but that's the way I've learned alot of things in my life.

 

Not to say I'm beyond asking for help.Quite the contrary.Would I have started this tread then?

[+sbell111]

I'm reminded of the fall of 2001. There were probably a dozen or so local cachers and not very many caches to go find. Both locally and in the national forums, there were strident requests for people to hide more caches. Many people argued for a find/hide ratio of no more than ten to one. These 'old schoolers' weren't requesting more 'wow' caches. They were requesting more caches.

 

The interesting thing is that when ho-hum caches were created back then, they were pretty much welcomed.

 

That's not to say that there weren't complaints about 'bad' caches. Remember those old threads about soggy caches, wrapped in black plastic bags and placed in ditches?

[vtmtnman]

I'm reminded of the fall of 2001. There were probably a dozen or so local cachers and not very many caches to go find. Both locally and in the national forums, there were strident requests for people to hide more caches. Many people argued for a find/hide ratio of no more than ten to one. These 'old schoolers' weren't requesting more 'wow' caches. They were requesting more caches.

 

The interesting thing is that when ho-hum caches were created back then, they were pretty much welcomed.

 

That's not to say that there weren't complaints about 'bad' caches. Remember those old threads about soggy caches, wrapped in black plastic bags and placed in ditches?

[+Totem Clan]

 

How about inviting newbies to go caching along with you or to set new caches with you. Whenever we see someone new logging in one of our caches, we try to make a point of inviting them along or being a resource for them. It doesn't take much to make an impact. Even if it's just a small one, it's one of the things I love about caching. "Old School" cachers showed us a little love when we were newbies, we just need to pass it along.

Every time a new cacher finds one of my caches I send them an email to welcome them to the sport. I invite them to the next local event and tell them about our local organization. When I first started, NorhtWes welcomed me. I lived in Alaska then. That made me feel like part of a community. It made me aware that I was interacting with other cachers every time I found or hid a cache.

 

Maybe I should take that a step further and offer to help some of those that have mentioned wanting to hide a cache.

 

If each of us only helped one or two cache hiders a year and they did the same in return, how quickly would that spread?

[+briansnat]

I think a couple of factors effecting the current lackluster cache placement that is becoming more prominent is the increased number of people playing the game (it has grown VASTLY since I started in 2001) thus a decreasing number of available good places people are finding. I'm not saying they aren't still out there, but it's getting harder in harder in some areas to find a place worthwhile that hasn't already had a cache placed.....

 

I'm tired of hearing that there are no or few good places to put a cache anymore. There may be a few less places where you can reach one without getting out of your car, but that's about it. If you can't find a good place, ask an "old school" cacher to suggest some places for you. You might have to (goodness forbid) actually walk a couple hundred feet to find a decent spot, but they're still out there if you're willing to look. I say this as part of a caching family including a blind man so don't tell me it's tougher for some than others to get to those caches. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-micro, I'm just anti-uninspired locations. I travel. I travel a lot. I've lived all over the country and I've yet to find a place that was devoid of interesting points of interest. What bugs me is when I see six uninspired caches of any size right next to a big state park a mile or two away with multiple historical and natural points of interest, but no caches. I know there are some places that are just saturated and don't need more caches. What I don't understand is why anyone feels the need to place a perfectly good cache behind the CVS next to the dumpster.

 

I agree. I live in one of the most densely cached state in the US, but I'm constantly amazed by the awesome places my fellow geocachers come up with to hide caches.

 

I'm still happy with the situation where I live but my complaint comes more from when I'm traveling. I'm in another state right now. Not far from my hotel is an old railroad bed that has been turned into a hike/bike path several miles long through somewhat pleasant looking terrain. The kind of place I'd love to go for some after work geocaching. I checked Google Earth to see how many caches were along the way. I found one - in the parking lot.

 

Last weekend I had a day off to go caching. I did a little research (because you have to these days) and found a few clusters of caches in what were "green areas" on the map. I picked one that looked like it could be a nice walk because it was a ways into this 4,700 acre park according to the map. I got to ground zero. It was in the parking lot - hidden among a pile of brush and stumps that had been dumped in a far corner of the lot. A 4,700 acre park and this is the best spot someone could come up with?

Edited May 16, 2007 by briansnat

[Trinity's Crew]

<snip>

Last weekend I had a day off to go caching. I did a little research (because you have to these days) and found a few clusters of caches in what were "green areas" on the map. I picked one that looked like it could be a nice walk because it was a ways into this 4,700 acre park according to the map. I got to ground zero. It was in the parking lot - hidden among a pile of brush and stumps that had been dumped in a far corner of the lot. A 4,700 acre park and this is the best spot someone could come up with?

They did get you to the park. What you chose to do after finding the cache was up to you. I assume there were trails and other things to entertain you. Why not take some time to explore? Edited May 16, 2007 by Trinity's Crew

[vtmtnman]

I think a couple of factors effecting the current lackluster cache placement that is becoming more prominent is the increased number of people playing the game (it has grown VASTLY since I started in 2001) thus a decreasing number of available good places people are finding. I'm not saying they aren't still out there, but it's getting harder in harder in some areas to find a place worthwhile that hasn't already had a cache placed.....

 

I'm tired of hearing that there are no or few good places to put a cache anymore. There may be a few less places where you can reach one without getting out of your car, but that's about it. If you can't find a good place, ask an "old school" cacher to suggest some places for you. You might have to (goodness forbid) actually walk a couple hundred feet to find a decent spot, but they're still out there if you're willing to look. I say this as part of a caching family including a blind man so don't tell me it's tougher for some than others to get to those caches. Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-micro, I'm just anti-uninspired locations. I travel. I travel a lot. I've lived all over the country and I've yet to find a place that was devoid of interesting points of interest. What bugs me is when I see six uninspired caches of any size right next to a big state park a mile or two away with multiple historical and natural points of interest, but no caches. I know there are some places that are just saturated and don't need more caches. What I don't understand is why anyone feels the need to place a perfectly good cache behind the CVS next to the dumpster.

 

I agree. I live in one of the most densely cached state in the US, but I'm constantly amazed by the awesome places my fellow geocachers come up with to find caches.

 

I'm still happy with the situation where I live but my complaint comes more from when I'm traveling. I'm in another state right now. Not far from my hotel is an old railroad bed that has been turned into a hike/bike path several miles long through somewhat pleasant looking terrain. The kind of place I'd love to go for some after work geocaching. I checked Google Earth to see how many caches were along the way. I found one - in the parking lot.

 

Last weekend I had a day off to go caching. I did a little research (because you have to these days) and found a few clusters of caches in what were "green areas" on the map. I picked one that looked like it could be a nice walk because it was a ways into this 4,700 acre park according to the map. I got to ground zero. It was in the parking lot - hidden among a pile of brush and stumps that had been dumped in a far corner of the lot. A 4,700 acre park and this is the best spot someone could come up with?

This is what I'm talking about.

 

When I get home and get some more caches out(After finding my set goal of 50 more),I want folks to tell me "We wanted our 100th find to be a vtmtnman cache".

 

I would be beyond embarresed to be on someone's ignore list.It would make me rethink my hiding style completely.