cache placing addicts/hogs

[+grizzleypark]

OK, so i'm new to geocaching, have known about it for a while ,but just getting into it recently. Have found a few caches, and starting to think about placing my own somewhere, but somewhat discouraged. I look at the geocaches on the maps and there are so many alrteady, and then i look at the people that have placed them, and sometimes its the same people with a half a dozed or more caches within reasonably small area, or some have over a hundred within 10 or 15 square miles......... Really??????? What are some thoughts on this? Does one person need to own so many caches within such a small area, what is the point? Especially when all their caches are similarly placed and hidden. How about saving some space for future cachers and not having a cache every 200' on a trail At what point does it become excessive or overkill? Thumbs up to all those that place interesting, innovative and original caches, and take pride in that rather than how many they own. Am i alone in this way of thinking?

[knowschad]

I think you are looking at it all wrong. The question is not "does another person NEED to own all those caches". The question is, "how do I thank them for giving so many caches to the community?" You got into caching over 10 years after it began... I think that it is fair to expect that there will be a lot of existing caches by now. Take your time and keep your eyes and mind open, and sooner or later, a very good spot will open up for you. Meanwhile, enjoy finding the ones that somebody else already put out there for you.

[I!]

I'm with the OP, not the dog. I want the finding of a cache to leave me feeling I'm glad I made the effort to track it down. Often, that's not the case.

[+Ike 13]

Some people like hiding more than finding. Other enjoy finding but never hiding. We need both to prosper. As long as the caches are well thought out, different, and maintained I'm not too bothered. Yes IMO it is annoying when one owner starts putting out lots of parking lot micros, but there's a lot of people who like finding them. I currently own 26 active caches. I don't feel like that's too many for me.

[+GeoGeeBee]

I'm with the OP, not the dog. I want the finding of a cache to leave me feeling I'm glad I made the effort to track it down. Often, that's not the case.

 

I would think after 500 finds you would have figured out how to predict which caches will give you that feeling, and which caches won't. Perhaps not with 100% accuracy, but enough to increase your enjoyment of the game. Just because someone chucks a film can under a lamp post skirt, doesn't mean you have to find it.

 

Whatever kind of cache it is that leaves you uninspired, it's pretty easy to filter them out of your searches. In most areas what's left will be more than enough caches to keep you busy.

[+L0ne.R]

OK, so i'm new to geocaching, have known about it for a while, but just getting into it recently. Have found a few caches, and starting to think about placing my own somewhere, but somewhat discouraged. I look at the geocaches on the maps and there are so many already, and then i look at the people that have placed them, and sometimes its the same people with a half a dozed or more caches within reasonably small area, or some have over a hundred within 10 or 15 square miles......... Really??????? What are some thoughts on this?

 

I do feel sorry for newbies. All the good spots are usually gone. It takes a lot more work to find something worth bringing cachers to. Geocaching since December 2001 and planting since early 2002, I have come to the conclusion that it's OK to archive our cache hides when I (I say 'I' because I'm usually the one in our partnership who takes care of our cache hides) grow weary of maintaining the caches - usually anywhere from 3-5 years.

 

We were lucky to be able to plant in some of the nicer areas of our town, so we got some kudos on our hides. At first I felt guilty about archiving a viable cache but once we removed and archived those hides others quickly planted (within days), and I have to say, the new COs did better jobs of planting then we did. Now they too get to enjoy the rewards of planting a good cache in a nice location.

Edited February 9, 2011 by Lone R

[+StarBrand]

If they are anything like me, it just happens over time. A few caches here a few caches there. A few this year, a few the next. Found a new interesting place nearby a few years later - so 1 or 2 more. Nobody else is really placing anything much. Next thing I know, a local newbie is accusing me of hogging an area.

First come, first serve I say.

[I!]

I would think after 500 finds you would have figured out how to predict which caches will give you that feeling, and which caches won't.

At 182 finds, such naivety is to be expected.

[+Gan Dalf]

I saw a thread once in these forums where someone said that a good rule of thumb should be to strive for a caching karma of 1 where caching karma is the ratio of the number of your finds to the number of finds on caches that you have placed. That way you are giving back as much as you have taken from the game. I have found that can be easily obtained by keeping your hides between 1-2% of your finds and by placing a variety of different cache types and locations.

 

I agree with the OP that some cachers hide more caches than they should based on the quality of those hides. I've always thought that those hiders like (or even need) getting the notifications that Cache Owners get when someone logs their caches and so they place lots of caches to maximize the number of e-mails they are getting.

 

The problem I see with hiding so many caches is that it will be difficult for the CO to maintain them all and this is evident by the high number of DNF and needs maintanence logs placed on caches from CO's with a high number of caches placed.

[+GeoGeeBee]

I would think after 500 finds you would have figured out how to predict which caches will give you that feeling, and which caches won't.

At 182 finds, such naivety is to be expected.

 

No, I wrote what I wrote because long before I logged 182 finds, I figured out how to filter out the caches that didn't interest me.

[+Castle Mischief]

I would think after 500 finds you would have figured out how to predict which caches will give you that feeling, and which caches won't.

At 182 finds, such naivety is to be expected.

 

However, in this case it's dead on. I figured out somewhere before cache #100 how to avoid finding caches that I might not like. It's really not that difficult.

[Clan Riffster]

Am i alone in this way of thinking?

No, I don't think so. The subject comes up every so often, so I'd say others feel that way. The replies to these complaints seem to mostly follow the example of the dude who knows Chad: Hunt the kind of caches you like. Thank the cache owners for hiding them. Avoid the kind of caches you dislike. So long as they maintain them, folks should hide as many caches as they feel inclined to hide. I will say that this is less of a problem for me, as I don't tend to hide my caches in the types of locations favored by volume hiders. Locally, the folks who own a bajillion caches seem to favor park & grabs, along stretches of roadway. Since anything I hide is likely to be considerably more than 529' from a road, these strings of caches don't have much impact on me.

[+Castle Mischief]

What are some thoughts on this?

 

My only thoughts are "Woohoo! So many caches to find! And I don't have to perform regular maintenance on them or replace the container if it comes up missing!"

 

As long as the other cachers that are placing high numbers of caches are keeping their containers in good shape and as long as they aren't tossing leaky containers under every stop sign in the county I really don't mind. I got into this to find the caches- hiding my own is just a bonus.

[I!]

No, I wrote what I wrote because long before I logged 182 finds, I figured out how to filter out the caches that didn't interest me.

I'm sure your tastes are oh so simple. Mine are more eclectic, more sophisticated ... you could only dream! See how you feel after 185 finds, then get back to me.

[knowschad]

I'm with the OP, not the dog. I want the finding of a cache to leave me feeling I'm glad I made the effort to track it down. Often, that's not the case.

I didn't hear anything in the OP that made it sound as though they weren't glad to find the caches. It sounded more to me as though they were having issue with the fact that there is nowhere to hide their own new caches.

 

How about saving some space for future cachers and not having a cache every 200' on a trail

 

To which, I would have to ask, how much space are you willing to save for those that come after you?

[+bflentje]

OK, so i'm new to geocaching, have known about it for a while ,but just getting into it recently. Have found a few caches, and starting to think about placing my own somewhere, but somewhat discouraged. I look at the geocaches on the maps and there are so many alrteady, and then i look at the people that have placed them, and sometimes its the same people with a half a dozed or more caches within reasonably small area, or some have over a hundred within 10 or 15 square miles......... Really??????? What are some thoughts on this? Does one person need to own so many caches within such a small area, what is the point? Especially when all their caches are similarly placed and hidden. How about saving some space for future cachers and not having a cache every 200' on a trail At what point does it become excessive or overkill? Thumbs up to all those that place interesting, innovative and original caches, and take pride in that rather than how many they own. Am i alone in this way of thinking?

 

I've hidden over 200 caches but I've hidden them over 6 years. Where were you six years ago to hide caches for me?

[+Ms.Scrabbler]

I must be cranky today.

 

To the OP, you wrote:

 

"and sometimes its the same people with a half a dozed or more caches within reasonably small area, or some have over a hundred within 10 or 15 square miles........."

 

I looked at your profile to see what area of the country you are in. New Jersey, I can see it being over saturated.

 

However, you have found 5 and all 5 are placed by different cachers - so for the moment I don't see the point of pointing fingers at those that came before you and placed caches so you would have some to find. Don't worry, they do turn over and you will have your chance to place a great hide.

[+KI4HLW]

I don't have a lot of caches out yet as mine take weeks to build, test, install, etc.. But if I wanted to place a cool cache idea and need a certain spot that already has a cache I would do what a fellow cacher does.

 

First look would look at the description, then go out and find it yourself.

 

If it is a well thought out hide with cool container, regularly active, and well liked I will follow it in case one day it will be archived.

 

If it is a unexciting P&G, uninteresting container, has been around for a while and has been found by all the locals, mirrors a ton of other nearby caches, and placed by a CO with a large number of hides I would write a polite letter, or ask him at the next monthly event if he would mind archiving it. So far this approach has always worked well by those who told me it is ok to use. We have a CO who has over 600 caches placed (not all currently active of course), some are really cool and he likes, some he places just to give others something to find. The second kind he is more then happy to archive because not only is the replacement better, but he now has a new cache to look for!

 

I really think cachers should find a good number of caches before placing one, gives you a better idea of what is a cool cache or allowed and what is not. Take this time to get to know the locals, they are a great source of info, and you will soon learn who you would feel comfortable asking to archive a cache for you.

 

P.S. That same CO has now started announcing a couple times a year at our monthly breakfasts an area of town that he will be archiving all of his P&G caches in 2 weeks from that day. Gives anyone who wants to do them time to get out there, and all those who want to place caches 2 weeks to scope out new spots and get containers ready to place them. It is a lot like a forest fire, the whole area goes barren, then new caches spring up over time and we all get new smileys.

[knowschad]

I think its all Briansnat's fault.

[+Ms.Scrabbler]

P.S. That same CO has now started announcing a couple times a year at our monthly breakfasts an area of town that he will be archiving all of his P&G caches in 2 weeks from that day. Gives anyone who wants to do them time to get out there, and all those who want to place caches 2 weeks to scope out new spots and get containers ready to place them. It is a lot like a forest fire, the whole area goes barren, then new caches spring up over time and we all get new smileys.

 

I LIKE it!

[+L0ne.R]

P.S. That same CO has now started announcing a couple times a year at our monthly breakfasts an area of town that he will be archiving all of his P&G caches in 2 weeks from that day. Gives anyone who wants to do them time to get out there, and all those who want to place caches 2 weeks to scope out new spots and get containers ready to place them. It is a lot like a forest fire, the whole area goes barren, then new caches spring up over time and we all get new smileys.

 

I LIKE it!

 

To share the fun and reward of cache ownership, how about a time limit? A cache hide is limited to 3 years with one renewal option.

 

After 6 years the area is open up to new COs for a 2 month period, if no one else plants in that 2 month period then the original CO can have the spot if he/she would like to re-plant.

 

It gives other COs a chance to plant in an area. Gives finders a new cache to find. Could also help weed out abandoned caches.

[+GeoGeeBee]

 

To share the fun and reward of cache ownership, how about a time limit? A cache hide is limited to 3 years with one renewal option.

 

 

This sounds like a solution in search of a problem.

[Pup Patrol]

To share the fun and reward of cache ownership, how about a time limit? A cache hide is limited to 3 years with one renewal option.

 

After 6 years the area is open up to new COs for a 2 month period, if no one else plants in that 2 month period then the original CO can have the spot if he/she would like to re-plant.

 

It gives other COs a chance to plant in an area. Gives finders a new cache to find. Could also help weed out abandoned caches.

 

I don't see why active, viable caches should be archived for no reason other than age.

 

We are celebrating the anniversaries of the oldest caches in Ontario this year. Why should they be archived, just because of an arbitrary number?

 

Many people on the forums have championed the "community maintenance" of the older caches, ones that have historical significance to the game in their area.

 

To weed out abandoned caches, post a "Needs Archived" log.

 

There's no obligation for each person to take on the role of cache owner. A formula of finds/hides is unmanageable, and ill-advised.

 

"Just because you can, doesn't mean you must or should."

[+L0ne.R]

 

To share the fun and reward of cache ownership, how about a time limit? A cache hide is limited to 3 years with one renewal option.

 

 

This sounds like a solution in search of a problem.

 

There have been a few laments in the forums by newbies who would like to enjoy cache ownership but can't find a good spot to plant. I believe this is a growing problem especially in cache dense areas of North America (and probably Europe too).

[Pup Patrol]

 

To share the fun and reward of cache ownership, how about a time limit? A cache hide is limited to 3 years with one renewal option.

 

 

This sounds like a solution in search of a problem.

 

There have been a few laments in the forums by newbies who would like to enjoy cache ownership but can't find a good spot to plant. I believe this is a growing problem especially in cache dense areas of North America (and probably Europe too).

There have also been a couple of threads like this one, wanting to stop receiving all those emails:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=268321

[+StarBrand]

 

To share the fun and reward of cache ownership, how about a time limit? A cache hide is limited to 3 years with one renewal option.

 

 

This sounds like a solution in search of a problem.

 

There have been a few laments in the forums by newbies who would like to enjoy cache ownership but can't find a good spot to plant. I believe this is a growing problem especially in cache dense areas of North America (and probably Europe too).

 

How about non-dense areas like where I live?? 70 caches within 20 miles. Most see around 10 visitors a year. I see little or no reason to archive them just because. I haven't seen a new cache in that radius for 9 months. Newbies are not raising pitchforks over a lack of space around here. (Except for 1 a few years ago)

[knowschad]

 

To share the fun and reward of cache ownership, how about a time limit? A cache hide is limited to 3 years with one renewal option.

 

After 6 years the area is open up to new COs for a 2 month period, if no one else plants in that 2 month period then the original CO can have the spot if he/she would like to re-plant.

 

It gives other COs a chance to plant in an area. Gives finders a new cache to find. Could also help weed out abandoned caches.

I've voluntarily opened up at least a half-dozen of my own caches in the past year. I live in an extremely cache-dense area, and yet not one of those spots has been re-used yet.

 

Would you apply that rule retroactively, so that caches like Mingo and Alvin's Phone Line would have to be immediately archived, or would you have it take effect only 6 years from the date the rule was instated?

 

Also keep in mind that not all caches are simply a container tossed into a convenient bush or stump or rock pile. Some (a rare few, unfortunately) have been hidden at a particular spot in a particular way for a particular reason, and archiving a cache with that much thought given to it would be very wrong (in my opinion).

[+Ecylram]

OK, so i'm new to geocaching, have known about it for a while ,but just getting into it recently. Have found a few caches, and starting to think about placing my own somewhere, but somewhat discouraged. I look at the geocaches on the maps and there are so many alrteady, and then i look at the people that have placed them, and sometimes its the same people with a half a dozed or more caches within reasonably small area, or some have over a hundred within 10 or 15 square miles......... Really??????? What are some thoughts on this? Does one person need to own so many caches within such a small area, what is the point? Especially when all their caches are similarly placed and hidden. How about saving some space for future cachers and not having a cache every 200' on a trail At what point does it become excessive or overkill? Thumbs up to all those that place interesting, innovative and original caches, and take pride in that rather than how many they own. Am i alone in this way of thinking?

 

I took at a look the area where you've cached and there really isn't that much cache saturation in the area. There is a LOT of room to place caches there. Keep looking and you'll start to see there are a lot of options still available out there.

 

So you know where I'm coming from, there are over 1000 caches placed within six miles of me and over 5000 in 20 mile radius. Even with that density I'm finding locations to place hides.

[+L0ne.R]

To share the fun and reward of cache ownership, how about a time limit? A cache hide is limited to 3 years with one renewal option.

 

After 6 years the area is open up to new COs for a 2 month period, if no one else plants in that 2 month period then the original CO can have the spot if he/she would like to re-plant.

 

It gives other COs a chance to plant in an area. Gives finders a new cache to find. Could also help weed out abandoned caches.

 

I don't see why active, viable caches should be archived for no reason other than age.

 

We are celebrating the anniversaries of the oldest caches in Ontario this year. Why should they be archived, just because of an arbitrary number?

 

Many people on the forums have championed the "community maintenance" of the older caches, ones that have historical significance to the game in their area.

 

To weed out abandoned caches, post a "Needs Archived" log.

 

There's no obligation for each person to take on the role of cache owner. A formula of finds/hides is unmanageable, and ill-advised.

 

"Just because you can, doesn't mean you must or should."

 

Part of the fun of geocaching for a lot of people is hiding caches. It just seems fair to share the enjoyment.

 

I totally understand the rewards that come with good cache ownership - nice comments in the logs, a pat on the back at events, recognition on the trail when you meet up with someone and they recognize your name because you hide memorable caches they enjoyed finding. So I can understand how frustrating it could be for a new cacher who would like to plant a nice cache in a nice spot when all of the good spots are planted. It's even more frustrating if the one planter has taken all of the nice spots.

 

You however are not alone, and probably in the majority in thinking that fairness does not trump "first come first serve".

 

As the OP's title suggests, it can feel like "hogging" to new wannabe COs, when people hide a lot of caches and don't leave room for others or don't relinquish areas for others. I like KI4HLW's suggestion that people contact COs to ask if they'll relinquish a spot. I'm sure there are many who would.

[+TerraViators]

IMO, the problem is not with a prolific hider, but a prolific hider who is an absent cache maintainer.

[+GeoGeeBee]

Part of the fun of geocaching for a lot of people is hiding caches. It just seems fair to share the enjoyment.

 

 

Is there really anyplace on earth where a grid-like pattern of caches every 528 feet is already in place? I'd like to see the map, please.

 

If there is such a place, it certainly isn't in the area where the OP's finds are located. There is still plenty of room for more caches there.

[+Kameharem]

There are good places to hide, you just have to take some time and be open minded. I thought there were a lot of caches near me and I have been holding a container for a month thinking I would never find the perfect spot to place it. But then when not expecting it, I discovered a small park with no caches not far from me so I have visited it and found an ideal place for a cache and my first hide will be comming shortly.

[+Ecylram]

IMO, the problem is not with a prolific hider, but a prolific hider who is an absent cache maintainer.

 

Truer words have never been spoken.

[knowschad]

IMO, the problem is not with a prolific hider, but a prolific hider who is an absent cache maintainer.

 

Truer words have never been spoken.

True, but not the issue that the OP has asked about.

 

To the OP... it sure looks to me as though there is room for at least one cache in the area of your very first find., unless there is a final for a puzzle or multi cache hidden nearby.

[jholly]

IMO, the problem is not with a prolific hider, but a prolific hider who is an absent cache maintainer.

 

Truer words have never been spoken.

True, but not the issue that the OP has asked about.

 

To the OP... it sure looks to me as though there is room for at least one cache in the area of your very first find., unless there is a final for a puzzle or multi cache hidden nearby.

Actually there are several nearby parks that seem to lack caches. So there you go OP, hog up those parks so someone can complain about you taking all the good cache places.

[+the4dirtydogs]

P.S. That same CO has now started announcing a couple times a year at our monthly breakfasts an area of town that he will be archiving all of his P&G caches in 2 weeks from that day. Gives anyone who wants to do them time to get out there, and all those who want to place caches 2 weeks to scope out new spots and get containers ready to place them. It is a lot like a forest fire, the whole area goes barren, then new caches spring up over time and we all get new smileys.

 

I LIKE it!

 

To share the fun and reward of cache ownership, how about a time limit? A cache hide is limited to 3 years with one renewal option.

 

After 6 years the area is open up to new COs for a 2 month period, if no one else plants in that 2 month period then the original CO can have the spot if he/she would like to re-plant.

 

It gives other COs a chance to plant in an area. Gives finders a new cache to find. Could also help weed out abandoned caches.

I don't think this is a good idea at all. I've found some very cool caches from the begining of caching. There wouldn't be any old caches out there then. It's a horrible idea come to think of it.

Edited February 9, 2011 by the4dirtydogs

[+KI4HLW]

OK, so i'm new to geocaching, have known about it for a while ,but just getting into it recently. Have found a few caches, and starting to think about placing my own somewhere, but somewhat discouraged. I look at the geocaches on the maps and there are so many alrteady, and then i look at the people that have placed them, and sometimes its the same people with a half a dozed or more caches within reasonably small area, or some have over a hundred within 10 or 15 square miles......... Really??????? What are some thoughts on this? Does one person need to own so many caches within such a small area, what is the point? Especially when all their caches are similarly placed and hidden. How about saving some space for future cachers and not having a cache every 200' on a trail At what point does it become excessive or overkill? Thumbs up to all those that place interesting, innovative and original caches, and take pride in that rather than how many they own. Am i alone in this way of thinking?

 

I took at a look the area where you've cached and there really isn't that much cache saturation in the area. There is a LOT of room to place caches there. Keep looking and you'll start to see there are a lot of options still available out there.

 

So you know where I'm coming from, there are over 1000 caches placed within six miles of me and over 5000 in 20 mile radius. Even with that density I'm finding locations to place hides.

 

Maybe this is related to the "should find at least XXX caches before you can place one discussions" Imagine I am a new cacher:

 

I find a dozen caches and now I want to hide my own so I think about the ones I found so far:

5 LPCs in the mall parking lot.

3 under bridges

2 in a park

1 under a downtown bench

1 on the local pier

 

So I look around town:

- Only one mall, walmart, target, etc parking lots are taken too

- Not a lot of bridges around and they have caches or don't seem safe

- all the parks have a cache so they are taken (maybe I consider if it has a cache it is taken as I don't know the 1/10th mile rule and that others may fit.)

- Its a small town, only a few benches right in a group

- Only the one pier in town

DANG! All the spots are taken, someone needs to make room for us newbies.

 

In reality the lack of experience gives me a very small idea of the places a cache may be, and I ignore the unused areas of town because they are not the type of area I found one in before so those must be bad areas.

 

(Not saying this is the CO's case, but I'm sure it has happened)

[+Don_J]

I saw a thread once in these forums where someone said that a good rule of thumb should be to strive for a caching karma of 1 where caching karma is the ratio of the number of your finds to the number of finds on caches that you have placed. That way you are giving back as much as you have taken from the game. I have found that can be easily obtained by keeping your hides between 1-2% of your finds and by placing a variety of different cache types and locations.

 

I agree with the OP that some cachers hide more caches than they should based on the quality of those hides. I've always thought that those hiders like (or even need) getting the notifications that Cache Owners get when someone logs their caches and so they place lots of caches to maximize the number of e-mails they are getting.

 

The problem I see with hiding so many caches is that it will be difficult for the CO to maintain them all and this is evident by the high number of DNF and needs maintanence logs placed on caches from CO's with a high number of caches placed.

 

What do you consider to be a high number of caches placed?

I have a total of 158 hides with about 20 of them archived. Of the roughly 140 active caches, none of them have open NM logs. 2 are disabled, 1 because the area is still closed after the largest forest fire in California history. The other, I'll admit that I have been procrastinating.

[+Don_J]

P.S. That same CO has now started announcing a couple times a year at our monthly breakfasts an area of town that he will be archiving all of his P&G caches in 2 weeks from that day. Gives anyone who wants to do them time to get out there, and all those who want to place caches 2 weeks to scope out new spots and get containers ready to place them. It is a lot like a forest fire, the whole area goes barren, then new caches spring up over time and we all get new smileys.

 

I LIKE it!

 

To share the fun and reward of cache ownership, how about a time limit? A cache hide is limited to 3 years with one renewal option.

 

After 6 years the area is open up to new COs for a 2 month period, if no one else plants in that 2 month period then the original CO can have the spot if he/she would like to re-plant.

 

It gives other COs a chance to plant in an area. Gives finders a new cache to find. Could also help weed out abandoned caches.

 

Wow!

I have a five caches series that leads you up a steep historic stage coach road. All of the locals have found them, but I still get about ten finds a year from out of towners that don't mind a six mile hike, enjoying some history and one of the best views in the area.

 

Your idea would wipe them right off of the map. I guess I'm greedy, but there is no way I could go along with that. Since the area and trail network is large, I see no reason to have a blanket rule that archives my perfectly good caches.

Edited February 9, 2011 by Don_J

[+briansnat]

Wow, now I have to defend myself for spending thousands of dollars and countless hours placing caches for the enjoyment of others. I don't know what to say beyond "oink oink".

Edited February 10, 2011 by briansnat

[+Don_J]

 

To share the fun and reward of cache ownership, how about a time limit? A cache hide is limited to 3 years with one renewal option.

 

 

This sounds like a solution in search of a problem.

 

There have been a few laments in the forums by newbies who would like to enjoy cache ownership but can't find a good spot to plant. I believe this is a growing problem especially in cache dense areas of North America (and probably Europe too).

 

Whenever I read that there is no room to hide a cache, I figure that there is no REASON to hide a cache. If the business district downtown is saturated, look further away from the center. I very seldom hide urban caches, but I bet I could have one under a lamp skirt in less than a half hour, even though I live in one of the most cache dense areas in the country.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Am i alone in this way of thinking?

 

Okay. I've hidden 77 caches. Some are cache and dashes. Some are long (okay, only a mile or so) hikes into the woods. Almost all are very interesting places. Ya know? I've never had any trouble finding a nice place to hide a cache! Yeah, two people hid caches near where I'd have liked to hide a cache. Oh, well. Lots more places out there! So, I don't understand your problem.

As the fox said: "Those grapes were probably sour anyway."

[+wimseyguy]

Welcome to geocaching-I hope you have lots of fun with it. I think it's highly presumptuous to toss around labels like addict and hog when you are new. Why not look around a bit more, try a bit harder to find special places to share with others, and say thank you to those who are willing to share theirs with you by placing caches there?

 

I'll make a big assumption that your first find was close to home? (yes your public profile shows your activity to all) It appears that there is a 4000+ acre open space just to the south of there with only one cache in it, and it's disabled. Granted that cache description states that the "The Great Piece Meadows is comprised of 4,275 acres of swampland...", but perhaps there are some trails at the edges that are accessible by foot and worthy of another cache or three? It's also possible that all of those spaces are hogged by the actual locations of the nearby puzzles, but I only see two within 2 miles so you might get lucky.

 

I grew up in NJ and visit family there a few times a year. While it may be true that there are a lot of caches there, it is far from over saturated compared to other places I have traveled in the past 8 wonderful fun filled years since I started caching.

Edited February 9, 2011 by wimseyguy

[+tozainamboku]

Wow!

I have a five caches series that leads you up a steep historic stage coach road. All of the locals have found them, but I still get about ten finds a year from out of towners that don't mind a six mile RT, enjoying some history and one of the best views in the area.

 

You idea would wipe them right off of the map. I guess I'm greedy, but there is no way I could go along with that. Since the area and trail network is large, I see no reason to have a blanket rule that archives my perfectly good caches.

Are you still ticked off because I asked you archive one of the caches so I could hide my Wherigo cache? I even put you in the Wherigo. What more do you want?

[+Don_J]

Wow!

I have a five caches series that leads you up a steep historic stage coach road. All of the locals have found them, but I still get about ten finds a year from out of towners that don't mind a six mile RT, enjoying some history and one of the best views in the area.

 

You idea would wipe them right off of the map. I guess I'm greedy, but there is no way I could go along with that. Since the area and trail network is large, I see no reason to have a blanket rule that archives my perfectly good caches.

Are you still ticked off because I asked you archive one of the caches so I could hide my Wherigo cache? I even put you in the Wherigo. What more do you want?

 

Toz, did you forget a smiley, or something. I'm really confused by your post. The cache that I archived was not part of the Devil's Slide series. I was never ticked off, If I was, I wouldn't have archived it. I happily archived it to make room for your Wherigo, (the only one in the area). I was both surprised and honored when we did a beta run on the Wherigo and I found myself playing a role in it.

 

Like I said, I am very confused by your post.

[knowschad]

IMO, the problem is not with a prolific hider, but a prolific hider who is an absent cache maintainer.

 

Truer words have never been spoken.

True, but not the issue that the OP has asked about.

 

To the OP... it sure looks to me as though there is room for at least one cache in the area of your very first find., unless there is a final for a puzzle or multi cache hidden nearby.

Actually there are several nearby parks that seem to lack caches. So there you go OP, hog up those parks so someone can complain about you taking all the good cache places.

But be sure to leave some room for those that join after you do.

[+briansnat]

Welcome to geocaching-I hope you have lots of fun with it. I think it's highly presumptuous to toss around labels like addict and hog when you are new. Why not look around a bit more, try a bit harder to find special places to share with others, and say thank you to those who are willing to share theirs with you by placing caches there?

 

I'll make a big assumption that your first find was close to home? (yes your public profile shows your activity to all) It appears that there is a 4000+ acre open space just to the south of there with only one cache in it, and it's disabled. Granted that cache description states that the "The Great Piece Meadows is comprised of 4,275 acres of swampland...", but perhaps there are some trails at the edges that are accessible by foot and worthy of another cache or three? It's also possible that all of those spaces are hogged by the actual locations of the nearby puzzles, but I only see two within 2 miles so you might get lucky.

 

I grew up in NJ and visit family there a few times a year. While it may be true that there are a lot of caches there, it is far from over saturated compared to other places I have traveled in the past 8 wonderful fun filled years since I started caching.

 

I didn't even realize he was local to me until your post (which means he was probably referring to me, being I have the most hides in the area by a significant margin). There are plenty of places for caches in this area. People only have to take the time to do a little research and look at the maps. Great Piece Meadow is a good example. Not many caches there. Nearby Troy Meadow has 3 caches, all mine (oink oink) and hundreds of empty acres just begging for caches. It is a beautiful area. About 30 miles to the north there is Tranquility Ridge Park. Until one local placed a cluster in it, there was only one cache in the park (oink oink), but 2/3rd of the park is devoid of caches. Plenty of room for someone willing to explore. I have a bunch of caches in the southern half of northern Norvin Green State Forest, but the northern half is pretty devoid of caches.

 

I'm constantly amazed at the cool spots my fellow local cachers are still coming up with for caches. All it takes is research and some exploring. If the OP were to email me I'm sure I could get him started at finding places to hide caches.

Edited February 10, 2011 by briansnat

[+KBLAST]

I am curious how the OP knows that the caches are all hidden in a "similar way" when they have only found one cache by each of 5 cache owners? Seems there is more here than we are hearing (as is usual). I really hope you can find some cool places to hide a cache and some cool ways to hide a cache!!! Good luck, I'll bet at least briansnat would love to find another cache or 2!

[+grizzleypark]

OK people, obviously everyone has an opinion on this topic, and i know dam well i can find a spot to hide a cache. There are hundreds of acres of woods right behind my house with out a single cache in them. I could easily go and hide a cache on every acre of it, but why? thats what boggles me, i know there are tons of areas of woods, urban areas, parks, etc. I have mtn biked, hiked, snowshoed, motorcycled, 4x4'd, boated, fished all over north jersey and surrounding areas. The main question is why does a single person need to hide so many in a more or less confined area. Obviously people that have been here a long time are going to have a lot more caches owned, i dont see the problem with that. And just because ive only found 5 so far, doesnt mean i havent educated myself on the "scene", i have looked at hundreds of caches on the site and read countless logs. Just because i cant always get the time to go out and cache, doesnt mean i'm not getting involved. My thoughts were based on not only what i have experianced in the short time i've been here, but on what i have seen and read on the site also. I'm not here to bad mouth anyone, its just something i dont understand, i know there is a lot of room out there to hide something, but i see so many grouped in small areas, i just dont get it.

[+grizzleypark]

Wow, now I have to defend myself for spending thousands of dollars and countless hours placing caches for the enjoyment of others. I don't know what to say beyond "oink oink".

HAHA, no defense is needed, i'm just curious about the concentration on caches in a particular area. I'm not singleing you out, i've read a lot about the caches you have placed and think a lot of them have been well thought out, nice job! better to be an innovator than a follower....... and im sure you had just as much enjoyment hiding the caches as the people who get to hunt em down, lol