Thoughts on changes in caching

[+fizzymagic]

There have been several discussions of late about how geocaching differs from how it was in "the old days." Various people have claimed that caches were in better shape back then, or that caches were in more interesting places, etc. Those have all seemed wrong to me; I recall quite clearly finding some very lame caches in 2002, and many of the containers used for caches were inadequate. Some people even hid caches in garbage bags, which are designed to break down in sunlight.

 

I was on a road trip last week form California to New Mexico, and I did a few caches that brought back the feeling I used to have in 2002 when I started caching. And I had a sudden realization about how caching really has changed since then. For me, at least.

 

It's not about containers or the beauty of the locations or any of that -- it's about the adventure. For me, the thrill of caching was heading out into the unknown, with no exact idea of what I would run into or how exactly I would find the cache, or if it would even be there. In 2002, maps on GPS units were a new thing, and the ones that did exist were pretty basic. There was no such thing as in-the-field data connectivity. Caching was much more a seat-of-the-pants activity.

 

I had some of those experiences on my road trip last week, out in the desert with nobody around for miles and zero bars on my phone. Driving on sketchy back roads, and wondering if my Subaru was going to make it back up the roads I went down! I loved it. I had a complete blast.

 

And I realized that it is that very uncertainty, the inherent unknown, that made me enjoy caching the most when I started and still tickles me today. But it is that sense of adventure that geocaching has lost. I think that is the real difference in caching between then and now.

 

Now, I know what you're going to say -- I can choose to go out with as little information as I want. That is certainly true, and I have gravitated toward caches that have those properties. I am really into lonely caches that haven't been found in a year or more, for example, or 5-star terrain caches that require ingenuity and excitement to reach.

 

But it's not all about me as a cache finder. I also own caches and interact with the community. So here's my main point: most cachers today want finding a cache to be a guaranteed outcome. They don't want any uncertainty. And that is slowly destroying the very spirit of geocaching.

 

Perhaps that is why I am so annoyed at various threads about how COs are supposed to drop everything and go fix their caches at the least sign of trouble. If caching is reduced to simply going to a spot and having a guaranteed outcome, where is the adventure? If every cache is guaranteed to be in pristine condition, where is the uncertainty?

 

Just think about all the ways that gc.com (and the world in general) has reduced uncertainty (or encouraged reduced uncertainty) in the last few years. Phone apps. Online maps. Attributes. Coordinate checkers. Power trails. Cache maintenance requirements. Automatic archival of caches after only a couple DNFs. It has gotten to the point where new cachers tend to feel entitled to find your cache, no matter what. And that entitlement has led to the devaluation of good logs. Since there was no uncertainty about finding the cache, there is little or no story to tell.

 

Individually, each of the above-mentioned items may look like a great deal, but I contend that, in aggregate, they are sucking the life out of caching.

[+patsu]

+1

[+cerberus1]

Kinda agree, may be why I still go after most caches singly, with a GPSr, download manually, and take notes in a notebook.

Most have higher terrain, or take a while to access (multis and such).

I still think of this as a hobby, instead of a game that requires points and stats, preferring an awesome view or unique location, to simply adding to a find count.

 

I'm not big on this odd (to me) "finds matter" thinking.

Many here won't leave their car if there's no guaranteed find.

- And it better be less than 200' away...

 

But I believe maintenance does matter, though maybe not to the extremes of some.

- I've found quite a few waterlogged, rusted shut cookie tins, wrapped in black plastic garbage bags.

[+dprovan]

On the one hand, I'm kinda part of the problem since, as a newbie with only 7 years under my belt, the fun for me is in finding the cache, not in searching for the cache. So not finding it doesn't augment the adventure by adding uncertainty. But at the same time, failing to find it doesn't diminish the adventure, either.

 

I want the caches to be present and in good shape, but I accept that that's not always possible. So while I come to it by going around the other way from you, I get to the same point of thinking it's wrong headed for GS to kowtow to those people looking for a guaranteed outcome. It's not just that the cost is too high: it's that there's not really a problem to begin with, so any cost would be too high.

[+barefootjeff]

Exactly! I'm lucky I live in an area with lots of rugged bushland where many excellent caches are born and bred. Just last week I completed a T5 cache that was published back in February - it took me three trips to finally get there, the first a steep climb up a heavily vegetated hill to reach WP1, the next day a kayak paddle across the river to reach WP2 and an almost vertical climb to the top of the ridge to reach WP3. By then I was too exhausted to try for GZ, and with intervening bad weather and other activities, didn't get there for another two months. It involved another kayak paddle and more steep climbing to a hiding place atop an amazing vantage point with views up and down the river.

 

Some might say it was a lot of effort for just one smiley, and I didn't know until I got there whether I'd be able to reach the exposed hiding place under a ledge, but for me it was a great adventure pushing me beyond my comfort zone, one I'll long remember and which makes caching all the more worthwhile. I'd rather one of those than a hundred P&Gs.

[+Mudfrog]

Exactly! I'm lucky I live in an area with lots of rugged bushland where many excellent caches are born and bred. Just last week I completed a T5 cache that was published back in February - it took me three trips to finally get there, the first a steep climb up a heavily vegetated hill to reach WP1, the next day a kayak paddle across the river to reach WP2 and an almost vertical climb to the top of the ridge to reach WP3. By then I was too exhausted to try for GZ, and with intervening bad weather and other activities, didn't get there for another two months. It involved another kayak paddle and more steep climbing to a hiding place atop an amazing vantage point with views up and down the river.

 

Some might say it was a lot of effort for just one smiley, and I didn't know until I got there whether I'd be able to reach the exposed hiding place under a ledge, but for me it was a great adventure pushing me beyond my comfort zone, one I'll long remember and which makes caching all the more worthwhile. I'd rather one of those than a hundred P&Gs.

 

Wish i were as lucky as some of you. I've driven hours to find caches that were challenging, creative, and/or in great locations. The adventure was what i was looking for and it sure didn't matter that it got me just one smiley. Unfortunately, i'd bet there hasn't been a cache placed within 50 miles of my area in the last few years that's had one of those qualities.

 

I have been saying for a few years that, for me at least, there's just way too much hand holding going on in geocaching. There was more adventure back in the good ole days because we didn't know exactly what to expect on most cache outings. Today, everything is pretty much spelled out to the letter. Not that it matters a whole lot since 99% of the today's hides are pretty much the same anyway.

[TahoeJoe]

Well said fizzymagic! Adventure is what attracted me to this game in the beginning and sadly is what is lacking in the game today. My mountain top caches rarely get hit anymore as it seems most players today aren't interested in these types of caches anymore. Smartphones changed the demographics of the type of players from outdoor enthusiasts looking for new adventures to a new type of player. Many of these players are attached to their smartphones and are more interested in treating their geocaching experience as another social media outlet instead of the adventure which was the heart and soul of geocaching in the beginning.

[+cerberus1]

...Just last week I completed a T5 cache that was published back in February - it took me three trips to finally get there, the first a steep climb up a heavily vegetated hill to reach WP1, the next day a kayak paddle across the river to reach WP2 and an almost vertical climb to the top of the ridge to reach WP3. By then I was too exhausted to try for GZ, and with intervening bad weather and other activities, didn't get there for another two months. It involved another kayak paddle and more steep climbing to a hiding place atop an amazing vantage point with views up and down the river.

 

Some might say it was a lot of effort for just one smiley, and I didn't know until I got there whether I'd be able to reach the exposed hiding place under a ledge, but for me it was a great adventure pushing me beyond my comfort zone, one I'll long remember and which makes caching all the more worthwhile. I'd rather one of those than a hundred P&Gs.

Yep !

Mine's currently an only found once 4.5/4.5 multi (that the CO hinted I was "around" half-way there at stage7), that because it's in game lands during seasons, still isn't completed.

Injured anyway, so the down-time kinda worked out .

We have a busy Spring Gobbler season 'til the end of May here, but Sundays look good - if it'd stop pouring mostly on Sundays.

[+Dame Deco]

I do see your point, but..."nothing gold can stay." The newness wears off everything in life. And as for needing to drive 50 miles to find a challenging cache--wasn't that true back in 2002 when there were hardly any caches? Ignoring 99% of the caches and going for the kind you like is easy enough, isn't it?

[+Team Microdot]

So here's my main point: most cachers today want finding a cache to be a guaranteed outcome. They don't want any uncertainty. And that is slowly destroying the very spirit of geocaching.

 

Whatever happens, they are guaranteed an outcome so there's nothing to worry about

 

As to whether most cachers are looking for finding a cache to be a guaranteed outcome - do you think that's for every single time they hunt for an individual cache or would one per 'excursion' do?

Edited April 25, 2017 by Team Microdot

[+baer2006]

most cachers today want finding a cache to be a guaranteed outcome. They don't want any uncertainty.

Amen to that.

 

All the countless throwdowns and "Found It"(!) logs saying things like "Cache seems gone, but since we've come a long way, I log it as found anyway" . And I know "high numbers" cachers, who won't even start on a more complex multicache without a "cheat sheet" or guaranteed phone support from a previous finder .

[+GO Geiger]

I agree about the adventure (both physical and mental) - we don't own smart phones, much less use one for caching. A Magellan 310 and 2 Magellan GC's are how we roll. (So the continuing app-ification of the website is a bit grating to us.)

We've been caching for almost exactly 6 years (in fact, the anniversary of our membership at GC.COM is April 23 - we just didn't find our first cache until a few weeks later). We haven't been at it as long as a lot of others.

 

Growing up, I used to explore old cemeteries with my mother. Living in WNY there are plenty of them. Geocaching has allowed me to find even more abandoned old cemeteries. It's made me aware of often overlooked monuments to past wars and mostly ignored roadside history signs. Occasionally (but not as often as I'd like) I take the time to CITO out some trash. I always take the time to fix fallen flags at military graves.

 

When out in the field, I often end up making my own adventure (sometimes by choice). A straight line across a series of ravines may not be faster than going around, but it sure is more fun! And usually muddier.

 

As far as the comparison of old caches to new ones: I agree that I'd rather take a long walk in the woods to find an ammo can than spend the same amount of time finding a few dozen film canisters in trees or LPCs. However, there are plenty of newer caches that I feel are as good or better than some of the early caches. For example, there is a local cacher who puts out involved multis (5-8 stages) in some of the parks around here. These are creek-walking, back-tracking, bush whacking, take-all-day multis. I can think of at least 4 of them that I enjoyed much more than "The Spot". This isn't to say that "The Spot" isn't a good cache, just that (subjectively) I think some recent caches are as good as or better than a lot of the older ones. To be fair, a lot of the newer caches aren't that great. This may be due to the cache hider, it may be due to cache saturation, or it may be due to something else. (But then, I think GC7F6 is by far the best 2000-2001 cache that we've ever done. Great location, nice long hike, and an unexpected twist or two.)

[+JL_HSTRE]

If there's been one big improvement in geocaching from 2002 to 2017 it is the almost total demise of film cans, and the rise of preforms as cheap yet reliable waterproof micros.

 

Smartphone access has been a mixed bag. The problems are well know. But in my 7 years I have seen cachers transition from urban-only to willing to swamp hike. I probably would have never started caching without smartphone app as a gateway. I now own a GPS and transitioned from unwilling to bushwack without jeans to indifference about being scratched up in shorts, and even made some swamp tromps.

 

I enjoy geocaching most for where it takes me. Preforms and ammo cans are waterproof and usually easy to find so I can search only briefly before continuing down the trail. I have cached out much of the good territory within an hour of home and work this winter has limited my ability to take weekend trips. I want to go cache places I've never been.

[+hzoi]

If there's been one big improvement in geocaching from 2002 to 2017 it is the almost total demise of film cans, and the rise of preforms as cheap yet reliable waterproof micros.

Sadly, it seems that, as the world has mainly switched from film to digital, some cachers have just switched from leaky film cans to leaky prescription bottles. But I do see more and more preforms, and I agree, those are highly preferable.

Edited April 25, 2017 by hzoi

[+redsox_mark]

Just think about all the ways that gc.com (and the world in general) has reduced uncertainty (or encouraged reduced uncertainty) in the last few years. Phone apps. Online maps. Attributes. Coordinate checkers. Power trails. Cache maintenance requirements. Automatic archival of caches after only a couple DNFs. It has gotten to the point where new cachers tend to feel entitled to find your cache, no matter what. And that entitlement has led to the devaluation of good logs. Since there was no uncertainty about finding the cache, there is little or no story to tell.

 

Individually, each of the above-mentioned items may look like a great deal, but I contend that, in aggregate, they are sucking the life out of caching.

 

A very interesting post.

 

I agree that the adventure is much of what makes it fun. And with more difficult caches there is a higher chance I won't succeed, and that makes it all the more exciting if I do. I might fail because the navigation is too difficult for me, or I can't solve a field puzzle, etc. I did some caches a while back in the desert of Qatar which sounds like the experience you had. I had maps, but there were no roads or trails! And yes, that added excitement.

 

But in the list quoted above, I see many positive things, and anyway, we can't go back on them. I'm glad for good maps. I do like checkers for puzzles. And I want caches to be maintained. I use a GPS and don't generally use an App, but Apps are here to stay.

 

On the other hand, I think power trails have generally hurt the game. And I don't like caches being archived too quickly because of a small number of DNFs.

[+cerberus1]

If there's been one big improvement in geocaching from 2002 to 2017 it is the almost total demise of film cans, and the rise of preforms as cheap yet reliable waterproof micros.

Sadly, it seems that, as the world has mainly switched from film to digital, some cachers have just switched from leaky film cans to leaky prescription bottles. But I do see more and more preforms, and I agree, those are highly preferable.

+1 Yep.

The few preforms we see come from folks from out of the area (but have vacation homes here).

Pill bottles replaced film cans here, most have only a strip of tape covering the private info of the owner of those meds, visible inside.

- Sheesh...

[+L0ne.R]

Ignoring 99% of the caches and going for the kind you like is easy enough, isn't it?

 

That's the problem. No it isn't easy enough at all.

You can't filter for quality, monitored/maintained containers with room for trackables.

If you filter for small - more then half are micros. Of the other 50% - 25% of those are cheap/free leaky unmaintained containers with unresponsive owners. Of the 15% that are left half of those are in bad shape but none of the finders think it's worth mentioning in their logs.

Filter for regular/large - more then half are in cheap leaky containers that never get monitored/maintained

Filter for favorite points - seems people don't love a well-maintained, authentic Lock&Lock (or other quality--costs more than a buck--gasketed lid container), in a refreshing forest, in a stump.

Edited April 25, 2017 by L0ne.R

[+L0ne.R]

If there's been one big improvement in geocaching from 2002 to 2017 it is the almost total demise of film cans, and the rise of preforms as cheap yet reliable waterproof micros.

 

I'm not seeing that many preforms. I think that's because pill bottles are more accessible and much cheaper--mostly free.

[+thomfre]

If there's been one big improvement in geocaching from 2002 to 2017 it is the almost total demise of film cans, and the rise of preforms as cheap yet reliable waterproof micros.

 

I'm not seeing that many preforms. I think that's because pill bottles are more accessible and much cheaper--mostly free.

In Europe it's completely opposite. We see a lot of preforms, but almost no pill bottles.

[+L0ne.R]

If there's been one big improvement in geocaching from 2002 to 2017 it is the almost total demise of film cans, and the rise of preforms as cheap yet reliable waterproof micros.

 

I'm not seeing that many preforms. I think that's because pill bottles are more accessible and much cheaper--mostly free.

In Europe it's completely opposite. We see a lot of preforms, but almost no pill bottles.

 

Maybe European citizens are not as sick as we are in North America.

[+coachstahly]

Ignoring 99% of the caches and going for the kind you like is easy enough, isn't it?

 

That's the problem. No it isn't easy enough at all.

You can't filter for quality, monitored/maintained containers with room for trackables.

If you filter for small - more then half are micros. Of the other 50% - 25% of those are cheap/free leaky unmaintained containers with unresponsive owners. Of the 15% that are left half of those are in bad shape but none of the finders think it's worth mentioning in their logs.

Filter for regular/large - more then half are in cheap leaky containers that never get monitored/maintained

Filter for favorite points - seems people don't love a well-maintained, authentic Lock&Lock (or other quality--costs more than a buck--gasketed lid container), in a refreshing forest, in a stump.

 

It seems you missed the point that fizzymagic was trying to make, which was about the uncertainty that was originally in place when they first started caching, both with regards to a find as well as the condition of the cache.

 

"But it's not all about me as a cache finder. I also own caches and interact with the community. So here's my main point: most cachers today want finding a cache to be a guaranteed outcome. They don't want any uncertainty. And that is slowly destroying the very spirit of geocaching.

 

Perhaps that is why I am so annoyed at various threads about how COs are supposed to drop everything and go fix their caches at the least sign of trouble. If caching is reduced to simply going to a spot and having a guaranteed outcome, where is the adventure? If every cache is guaranteed to be in pristine condition, where is the uncertainty?"

[+Team Microdot]

If every cache is guaranteed to be in pristine condition, where is the uncertainty?"

 

You might not be able to find it?

[+L0ne.R]

Ignoring 99% of the caches and going for the kind you like is easy enough, isn't it?

 

That's the problem. No it isn't easy enough at all.

You can't filter for quality, monitored/maintained containers with room for trackables.

If you filter for small - more then half are micros. Of the other 50% - 25% of those are cheap/free leaky unmaintained containers with unresponsive owners. Of the 15% that are left half of those are in bad shape but none of the finders think it's worth mentioning in their logs.

Filter for regular/large - more then half are in cheap leaky containers that never get monitored/maintained

Filter for favorite points - seems people don't love a well-maintained, authentic Lock&Lock (or other quality--costs more than a buck--gasketed lid container), in a refreshing forest, in a stump.

 

It seems you missed the point that fizzymagic was trying to make, which was about the uncertainty that was originally in place when they first started caching, both with regards to a find as well as the condition of the cache.

 

"But it's not all about me as a cache finder. I also own caches and interact with the community. So here's my main point: most cachers today want finding a cache to be a guaranteed outcome. They don't want any uncertainty. And that is slowly destroying the very spirit of geocaching.

 

Perhaps that is why I am so annoyed at various threads about how COs are supposed to drop everything and go fix their caches at the least sign of trouble. If caching is reduced to simply going to a spot and having a guaranteed outcome, where is the adventure? If every cache is guaranteed to be in pristine condition, where is the uncertainty?"

 

If you want a higher level of uncertainty there's the option to search for higher difficulty rated caches. When you do find that cache, wouldn't a cache in decent condition be preferred to say, a margarine tub with contents covered in mold? It seemed that generally back in the early days, back when owners placed a handful of caches--not hundreds--owners actually did things like provide and replace a pencil, provide a logbook instead of a sheet, replace a logbook within a few days of a report, check their caches occasionally just to be sure it was OK without being prompted by a 'needs attention' report. I don't understand extending "uncertainty" to the cache container. Who hopes that the container will be possibly be in rough shape?

 

There is so much adventure from beginning to end that a cache owner can provide. A nice walk to and from the cache, a nice location to explore, the fun of the search -- even if it's 'is it in that stump, or under that log, or hanging in that tree?', opening at least a small container that can hold more then a logsheet to see what might be inside--maybe a beautiful geocoin, a fun trackable, a signature item a cacher made with his own hands, or a fun swag item. If you prefer higher physical adventure you can filter by terrain rate. The problem for most people is the regular style adventure from beginning to end is lacking.

Edited April 25, 2017 by L0ne.R

[+fizzymagic]

It seems you missed the point that fizzymagic was trying to make, which was about the uncertainty that was originally in place when they first started caching, both with regards to a find as well as the condition of the cache.

 

"But it's not all about me as a cache finder. I also own caches and interact with the community. So here's my main point: most cachers today want finding a cache to be a guaranteed outcome. They don't want any uncertainty. And that is slowly destroying the very spirit of geocaching.

 

Perhaps that is why I am so annoyed at various threads about how COs are supposed to drop everything and go fix their caches at the least sign of trouble. If caching is reduced to simply going to a spot and having a guaranteed outcome, where is the adventure? If every cache is guaranteed to be in pristine condition, where is the uncertainty?"

 

If you want a higher level of uncertainty there's the option to search for higher difficulty rated caches. When you do find that cache, wouldn't a cache in decent condition be preferred to say, a margarine tub with contents covered in mold?

 

You did, indeed, completely miss my point. It's not about whether I can choose caches I enjoy more or not; it's about other cachers and their expectations. It's about the spirit of geocaching.

 

Focusing on the quality of containers and the condition of hides is akin to focusing on the clothing worn by performers in a symphony. Yes, the attire makes a difference, but the point of the symphony is the music, not the visuals. IMO, the point of geocaching is the adventure, not the container. A perfectly-maintained container in an easily-accessible, boring, utterly predictable spot does not represent the spirit of geocaching.

 

Yes, I avoid them; it's easy enough to do. But their ubiquity and the entitled expectations of other cachers, IMO, are slowly sapping the life from an activity I love.

 

In addition, IMO, the obsessive focus on containers and maintenance, which, while not unimportant, are also not essential parts of geocaching, is also slowly killing the sport.

[+Team Microdot]

Focusing on the quality of containers and the condition of hides is akin to focusing on the clothing worn by performers in a symphony. Yes, the attire makes a difference, but the point of the symphony is the music, not the visuals. IMO, the point of geocaching is the adventure, not the container. A perfectly-maintained container in an easily-accessible, boring, utterly predictable spot does not represent the spirit of geocaching.

 

So the spirit of geocaching is a skanky container that's tortuous to reach in an outlandish or nonsensical spot?

 

Is the spirit of geocaching just one thing defined by one person or can it be different things to different people at different times?

[+stevebrassett]

As a relative newcomer to the game, these are my cache likes and dislikes.

 

Likes

 

Unusual caches - especially homemade.

Beautiful locations

Caches that take two or three goes to find (only if they are local). I can then go away, pick through the online logs for clues, and wait for someone else to find it so that I know it is there.

 

Dislikes

 

Ivy covered trees

Lazy caches - a 35mm film canister somewhere that isn't special. Nothing against 35mm film canisters themselves, but I believe some thought should go into a cache - either object or location or both.

Badly maintained, wet, dirty and broken caches that obviously haven't been visited by the owner for years.

 

This is not an exhaustive list.

[+Hynz]

Focusing on the quality of containers and the condition of hides is akin to focusing on the clothing worn by performers in a symphony. Yes, the attire makes a difference, but the point of the symphony is the music, not the visuals. IMO, the point of geocaching is the adventure, not the container. A perfectly-maintained container in an easily-accessible, boring, utterly predictable spot does not represent the spirit of geocaching.

Brilliant analogy! I very much agree also to your opening post.

[+Mudfrog]

Focusing on the quality of containers and the condition of hides is akin to focusing on the clothing worn by performers in a symphony. Yes, the attire makes a difference, but the point of the symphony is the music, not the visuals. IMO, the point of geocaching is the adventure, not the container. A perfectly-maintained container in an easily-accessible, boring, utterly predictable spot does not represent the spirit of geocaching.

Brilliant analogy! I very much agree also to your opening post.

Not a great analogy, imo. It's easy enough to close my eyes and listen to a great performance. For me, geocaching is different in that there are many things that contribute to the adventure. Finding a carpy container doesn't ruin the adventure but the experience is always a bit better if the container is in decent shape and/or creatively hidden. Some people may not care at all about the container but there's most likely other things that are important to them. Each of us is different and have thoughts of what makes for a great adventure. Of course, there are many people that focus solely on smiley count so yes, probably not much else matters.

[+coachstahly]

 

If you want a higher level of uncertainty there's the option to search for higher difficulty rated caches. When you do find that cache, wouldn't a cache in decent condition be preferred to say, a margarine tub with contents covered in mold? It seemed that generally back in the early days, back when owners placed a handful of caches--not hundreds--owners actually did things like provide and replace a pencil, provide a logbook instead of a sheet, replace a logbook within a few days of a report, check their caches occasionally just to be sure it was OK without being prompted by a 'needs attention' report. I don't understand extending "uncertainty" to the cache container. Who hopes that the container will be possibly be in rough shape?

 

There is so much adventure from beginning to end that a cache owner can provide. A nice walk to and from the cache, a nice location to explore, the fun of the search -- even if it's 'is it in that stump, or under that log, or hanging in that tree?', opening at least a small container that can hold more then a logsheet to see what might be inside--maybe a beautiful geocoin, a fun trackable, a signature item a cacher made with his own hands, or a fun swag item. If you prefer higher physical adventure you can filter by terrain rate. The problem for most people is the regular style adventure from beginning to end is lacking.

 

I think you're romanticizing what you think it used to be like. I would venture to guess that there were cache container issues from the very beginning.

 

It took a bit of research but GC1D had some issues in its first year with no note or OM log (was that even an option back then) for some issues with the cache. First note of trouble was a cracked lid on 3/8/01, a full log on 7/14/01, a damp log and wet contents on 7/14/01, musty on 8/11/01, and rough shape, wet inside, lid cracked, might want to replace the container on 8/18/01. 5 months and no check on the cache to fix the issues listed in logs.

 

GC115C - 7/29/01 - contents damp, 10/31/01 - contents in pretty bad shape, 3/4 full of water, 12/25/01 - some swag frozen solid, 1/21/02 - no logbook, 4/1/02 - damp and logbook missing, 4/12/02 - wet inside, 5/25/02 - pretty damp inside. Over 6 months and no maintenance for a cache that obviously needed it.

 

GCFA - 11/22/02 - warped lid and bug "nest" inside, 2/10/03 - lid not sealing and damp inside, 2/22/03 - mildew, 10/26/03 - container is completely out of service and should be replaced soon, 11/2/03 - moldy and bad condition. 1 year and no maintenance since first issue.

 

GC189D - 8/29/01 - log damp, moisture inside, 9/10/01 - everything wet, 9/16/01 - wet inside, 9/23/01 - wet inside, 9/30/01 - damp inside, 10/17/01 - all damp inside, 11/10/01 - damp inside. 3 months and no mention of maintenance on a wet cache.

 

GC5C0 - 3/7/02 - gnaw marks on the lid, 3/9/03 - in plastic bag to keep water out from holes chewed through container, 7/13/03 - damp inside, 11/15/03 - damp inside, 2/21/04 - new container (NOT the CO but with their permission) placed almost a full year since the first issue was mentioned.

 

GCD4D - 6/20/02 - critter chewed a hole, 8/31/02 - hole from critter, 11/20/02 - container needs to be replaced, 1/5/03 - still has a hole, 8/7/03 - container needs some attention. Over a year and no maintenance.

 

GC1F78 - 2/17/02 - lid gone, chewed on and wet, 4/14/02 - chewed on bags and cache, 1/28/03 - maintenance finally done.

 

GC1676 - 11//27/01 - full of water, 12/29/01 - frozen swag, 1/10/02 - water in cache again, 3/23/02 - wet cache, 3/30/02 - damp inside, 6/26/02 - damp inside. 1 1/2 years and no maintenance on cache.

 

I get what you're saying (as well as Team Microdot), that a well maintained cache is much preferred over a wet, moldy mass of junk. However, this immediate need to get things pristine and clean (as well as the need to virtually guarantee a find) is a bit of a pipe dream and goes directly to what fizzymagic has pointed out.

[+cerberus1]

I think you're romanticizing what you think it used to be like. I would venture to guess that there were cache container issues from the very beginning.

Agreed.

I believe some forget what issues were around a few years ago.

 

Here, of our earlier finds...

Many very-long hike caches when we started were cookie/candy tins, metal coffee cans, or wooden containers (a lotta jewelry boxes), some with a plastic bag wrapped (always black for some odd reason..."camo" maybe) around 'em, most without even that.

The few no-seal water jugs were an improvement...

 

The huge wide-neck glass pickle, as well as glass peanut butter jars were interesting.

The couple placing china candy dishes was cute.

Besides things growing, these created a real problem.

 

"Quality" plastics were true Tupperware. Our first caches were Tupperware.

The joke of big bucks satellites finding Tupperware was true.

No real seal for outdoor use, most seemed to be perfect for labs studying bacteria/mold, with every one of ours having to be replaced within a year.

- Yet the poor-quality plastics seem to be still used today...

 

It wasn't until '06 or so that we noticed folks start using decent containers (by today's standards), and for us ammo cans were the norm.

 

The only thing I truly miss of this hobby is, at the time, much of it was the "language of location", and today we consider the location the goal, with that container secondary.

[TahoeJoe]

There was a sense of kinship in the beginning as we had a lot in common with each other. My friends I geocache with were outdoor enthusiasts and we enjoyed (as we still do) hiking and exploring the mountains in our area. I remember hiking a few mountain peaks in blizzards and finding our way back to the car only because we had our handheld GPS. Geocaching became a new adventure to us. Cracking open that ammo can and writing about our journey to the cache and then sitting back and reading the other log entries is what made geocaching so enjoyable to me. It’s obvious I don’t have much in common with the majority of cachers today as evident by the types and quality of caches I see out there today. Groundspeak caters to an entire different crowd today. Look at the ads on the cache pages. The mustache trackable I see constantly being promoted on the cache pages has very little to do with geocaching and more to do with a cute social media post. I’m disappointed with the path geocaching has taken. As long as I can still occasionally find the caches I enjoy, I'll stick around.

[+narcissa]

I think you're romanticizing what you think it used to be like. I would venture to guess that there were cache container issues from the very beginning.

Agreed.

I believe some forget what issues were around a few years ago.

 

Here, of our earlier finds...

Many very-long hike caches when we started were cookie/candy tins, metal coffee cans, or wooden containers (a lotta jewelry boxes), some with a plastic bag wrapped (always black for some odd reason..."camo" maybe) around 'em, most without even that.

The few no-seal water jugs were an improvement...

 

The huge wide-neck glass pickle, as well as glass peanut butter jars were interesting.

The couple placing china candy dishes was cute.

Besides things growing, these created a real problem.

 

"Quality" plastics were true Tupperware. Our first caches were Tupperware.

The joke of big bucks satellites finding Tupperware was true.

No real seal for outdoor use, most seemed to be perfect for labs studying bacteria/mold, with every one of ours having to be replaced within a year.

- Yet the poor-quality plastics seem to be still used today...

 

It wasn't until '06 or so that we noticed folks start using decent containers (by today's standards), and for us ammo cans were the norm.

 

The only thing I truly miss of this hobby is, at the time, much of it was the "language of location", and today we consider the location the goal, with that container secondary.

 

I remember finding caches that were meant to be experiments with different types of containers, because people were still figuring out what worked.

 

A lot of containers around here were homemade tubes made with plumbing components. We know now that those are terrible in this climate.

 

I have found old caches in cookie tins, 5 gallon buckets, and all manner of other containers that generally don't fly now because we know they don't work.

 

Overall, I find that the general condition of caches is better, either because they don't last as long so there's more turnover, or because people are more conscientious since they get dog-piled by the first dozen finders if they have the audacity to put out a poor container.

 

I want cache owners to maintain their caches within reason, and I'd certainly rather find a logbook I can sign than a logbook I can't. I just don't think it destroys a day of caching if I find a cache that's a bit slimy because it's been outside since 2002. I still got outside for a walk and/or some time with my family, and that's what it's about. If I wanted a hobby that consisted of opening clean, dry Lock n' Locks to marvel at how clean and dry they are, my hobby would be visiting the housewares sections at Walmart and Canadian Tire.

[+dprovan]

Focusing on the quality of containers and the condition of hides is akin to focusing on the clothing worn by performers in a symphony. Yes, the attire makes a difference, but the point of the symphony is the music, not the visuals. IMO, the point of geocaching is the adventure, not the container. A perfectly-maintained container in an easily-accessible, boring, utterly predictable spot does not represent the spirit of geocaching.

Brilliant analogy! I very much agree also to your opening post.

Not a great analogy, imo. It's easy enough to close my eyes and listen to a great performance. For me, geocaching is different in that there are many things that contribute to the adventure. Finding a carpy container doesn't ruin the adventure but the experience is always a bit better if the container is in decent shape and/or creatively hidden. Some people may not care at all about the container but there's most likely other things that are important to them. Each of us is different and have thoughts of what makes for a great adventure. Of course, there are many people that focus solely on smiley count so yes, probably not much else matters.

I was trying to argue with you, but then I realized the only thing I disagreed with was your opening statement: as far as I can see, all the other points in your paragraph fit fizzymagic's analogy perfectly in that you're listing things that aren't preferable, but none of them get in the way of the adventure itself. Even the point about different ideas about what makes a great adventure fit the analogy, both in that different people would have different ideas about how they'd like the orchestra to be dressed and in that different people like to go to different kinds of concerts.

[+SwineFlew]

But it's not all about me as a cache finder. I also own caches and interact with the community. So here's my main point: most cachers today want finding a cache to be a guaranteed outcome. They don't want any uncertainty. And that is slowly destroying the very spirit of geocaching.

 

I rarely agree with you, but this...wow... yes, I do agree with you on this. I noticed this since my beginning years of caching of 2010. Take one look of GC30, anyone that cant find that cache will almost guaranteed to use a throw down. :ph34r: :ph34r: They have to find it. 100%!

 

Now... you might know that APE cache is coming back, and I will tell you, there is a high chance it will go missing again. People will be spending 1000's of dollars to come to Washington just for that cache and yes I understand why they want a guaranteed of a find. Especially that cache.

[+dreadpiratefucci]

As a newcomer I can not speak to caching in the past. I can say that it was the accessibity of the app that got me into caching. The opportunity to use my phone for adventure. With the app I can just get in the car and drive. The adventure is still there. Hell, my son and I made a weekend of just driving and caching. No other purpose. Check the phone see one near by and off we go. DNF's are frustrating but they make the find so much sweeter. It's all a matter of perspective.

[+redsox_mark]

I think it is all about getting the right balance. If done with common sense, there is no reason why improving cache maintenance should hurt the adventure to be found in geocaching. Except if the "adventure" is the chance of a DNF. Today I would say about 90% of the caches I lo0k for are there. If only 50% were there, then the chance of success will be lower, but I don't really see that contributing to the adventure.

 

But where proposed changes discourage adventurous hides (see the current "mold" thread). I'd rather have the adventure and a few damp logs then pristine caches in parking lots.

 

So I don't have an issue with Groundspeak trying to address maintenance.

 

What I don't know is - what can/should Groundspeak do to further encourage caches which have that "sense of adventure"?

[+WearyTraveler]

I'm pretty sure that any cacher wants to find every cache they look for. And there are most likely many that want that guaranteed find. They're ikely the newer, younger cachers - the "everyone gets a trophy" generation.

When I don't find a cache, it's frustrating. But I'll log that DNF and put it on a watch list. If I can get back to that area, I'll look again.

[+Dame Deco]

Nature’s first green is gold,

Her hardest hue to hold.

Her early leaf’s a flower;

But only so an hour.

Then leaf subsides to leaf.

So Eden sank to grief,

So dawn goes down to day.

Nothing gold can stay.

 

The newness wears off everything in life. Things change. There are new things happening in geocaching, and if you don't like the new things there are still some exciting old caches to find. Back in the old days, you had to really search for caches and drive a long way to find them. Today, you have to work hard to find the kind you like and drive a long way to find them. What's the difference?

[+redsox_mark]

But I don't think this thread is suggesting going back to the old days.

 

i do find it confusing, but I think the point is that Groundspeak may be putting too much focus on making sure every cache can be found (is well maintained etc), and little or no focus on how we can keep a sense of adventure in the modern game.

 

But I'm not sure what can be done to encourage the sense of adventure. Actually I think Groundspeak has done some things, like

 

- Blogs etc highlighting unique, adventurous caches.

- Souvenirs for different cache types, to encourage cachers to try a variety

-GIFF - many of the films capture that sense of adventure and amazing places.

 

Personally, I enjoy caching as much now as I did when I started (in 2009). I can't speak for the real old days as I was a muggle then. I know how to identify caches which will involve an adventure. And I know how to identify those which involve a nice walk, but the caches will be easy. Some days I crave adventure, some days an easy walk will do.

[+dprovan]

When I started geocaching 7 years ago, one thing that really amazed me was the sense of cooperation. COs plant caches, seekers find them, COs and seekers work together to keep quality up, and GS just provides the grease that makes it happen so smoothly. I could imagine the whole thing functioning without GS, but it was obvious there'd be a lot of problems that way, and I was super impressed that GS did a such good job keeping those problems out of the way while not coming between the COs and the seekers.

 

What's happened in the last couple of years is that GS has changed from being the grease to being the middleman. At every turn, the attitude -- not only the attitude within GS, but also the attitude common in the forums -- has become that seekers are customers, and GS's primary concern should be supplying them. COs have become wholesalers, and GS doesn't have to worry about them except to keep the supply up. Seven years ago, it was the community's responsibility to eliminate caches that were broken or missing, but now almost everyone considers it GS's responsibility. The recent change that eliminates NMs and NAs is just the obvious last step in a string of changes that now has reviewers routinely seeking out and dealing with problems without waiting for NMs or NAs to be posted. Even in my area, which has never had a problem with bad caches staying around longer than they should, the reviewer has started immediately disabling caches after an NM instead of waiting for what, around here, is the inevitable NA.

 

Once I realized GS is now the middleman, the OP's problem becomes obvious: low volume. It's the same problem that eliminated challenge caches and caches that could be logged multiple times. But to me, the elimination of low volume caches, while definitely undesirable, isn't the main problem. What bugs me is the underlying change from a game among friends to a business. Not a business in the money grubbing sense -- the people involved in GS deserve any profit they get and more -- but a business in the sense of GS being what makes it happen instead of just being a background force for good that only gets involved when it needs to.

 

There's no reason for me to think that any individuals in GS are consciously working towards this end or are even aware of the change, but, unfortunately, that just makes it all the more likely that the trend will continue.

[+SeattleWayne]

If there's been one big improvement in geocaching from 2002 to 2017 it is the almost total demise of film cans, and the rise of preforms as cheap yet reliable waterproof micros.

 

I'm not seeing that many preforms. I think that's because pill bottles are more accessible and much cheaper--mostly free.

In Europe it's completely opposite. We see a lot of preforms, but almost no pill bottles.

 

Not surprised Europe isn't littered with empty pill bottles turned geocache. America is the leading country hooked on pain pills so it's no surprise how many pill bottles are used as geocaches.

[+SeattleWayne]

I'm just in it for the numbers. I don't really care what kind of cache it is. After all, the point of the game is to find geocaches.

[+fizzymagic]

The newness wears off everything in life. Things change. There are new things happening in geocaching, and if you don't like the new things there are still some exciting old caches to find. Back in the old days, you had to really search for caches and drive a long way to find them. Today, you have to work hard to find the kind you like and drive a long way to find them. What's the difference?

 

Had you taken the minimal effort required to actually read my post, you would have seen me write the very same thing. There are many good things that have come into caching and I enjoy them; I in no way am claiming we should return to the "good old days." I have no trouble finding good caches to seek and I appreciate them.

 

The difference now is what is expected of COs, not of seekers. COs put out caches for seekers to find. For free. With their own time and money. For nothing more than the pleasure of seeing logs. The negative change to the game is that seekers are demanding more and more from COs. You see it in threads in the forums proposing more and more hoops for COs to jump through to guarantee that seekers will find a pristine cache that meets their specifications. It is that change that I decry.

 

I suppose that I could just archive all the caches I own, but that seem puerile. Instead, I am (unsuccessfully) trying to promote the idea that we should be grateful to cache owners rather than constantly propose new ways to punish them.

[+L0ne.R]

 

The difference now is what is expected of COs, not of seekers. COs put out caches for seekers to find. For free. With their own time and money. For nothing more than the pleasure of seeing logs. The negative change to the game is that seekers are demanding more and more from COs. You see it in threads in the forums proposing more and more hoops for COs to jump through to guarantee that seekers will find a pristine cache that meets their specifications. It is that change that I decry.

 

I suppose that I could just archive all the caches I own, but that seem puerile. Instead, I am (unsuccessfully) trying to promote the idea that we should be grateful to cache owners rather than constantly propose new ways to punish them.

 

Cache ownership has not changed one bit for me. I still maintain my caches on the same schedule as I always have. Actually, in the last 5 years I have allowed myself to check less often. We use good quality containers and they rarely need maintenance, just a bit of a clean-up now and then, and replace the logbook--which tends to last years these days).

I use to check seasonally. Now I check twice (sometimes only once) a year.

Our first cache hide was a 2 hour drive away at a falls in the Georgian Bay area. We had to drive back 3 months later because it went missing after 3 finds. We replaced it and moved it into a more secluded area where it remained four years with seasonal OM visits until we archived it. We had another 2 hours away near Georgian Bay which we visited at least 3 times a year, sometimes more depending on whether it needed a new logbook.

 

Views near those cache hides:

 

[+SeattleWayne]

I own a few caches and I don't feel punished at all. After all, this is a hobby not a job. I don't expect anything in return for placing caches because I know what I'm getting into. I place a cache, (depending on how far away from home) I can expect I'll have to spend an hour or two driving out and fixing it because some cacher didn't screw the lid back on the right way or it came up missing.

 

It's a game, and a fun one. The game is always evolving in good ways and bad because there are 3 million caches out there to find and probably more than double that in people playing the game. As technology gets better, and more people join, new ideas are going to spawn. You may or may not like them, and that's okay.

 

I think people have an expectation of finding the cache on the first try and that's expected. It's a game of finding caches. If the cache is maintained it shouldn't be that hard to meet that expectation as the CO. I understand you like a bit of uncertainty when heading out, and no one has a problem with that. When I set out to find caches, that's the goal. To find caches.

[+CachingCubmaster]

If there's been one big improvement in geocaching from 2002 to 2017 it is the almost total demise of film cans, and the rise of preforms as cheap yet reliable waterproof micros.

Sadly, it seems that, as the world has mainly switched from film to digital, some cachers have just switched from leaky film cans to leaky prescription bottles. But I do see more and more preforms, and I agree, those are highly preferable.

+1 Yep.

The few preforms we see come from folks from out of the area (but have vacation homes here).

Pill bottles replaced film cans here, most have only a strip of tape covering the private info of the owner of those meds, visible inside.

- Sheesh...

Don't folks know that they can go to the pharmacy and ask for pill bottles? They will give them to you or charge no more than a nickel each.

 

Of course, I prefer an ammo can in the woods, but I started with the app (now using an eTrex 10) and have found my share of pill bottles (and placed a few)

[+cerberus1]

Don't folks know that they can go to the pharmacy and ask for pill bottles? They will give them to you or charge no more than a nickel each.

 

Of course, I prefer an ammo can in the woods, but I started with the app (now using an eTrex 10) and have found my share of pill bottles (and placed a few)

I don't believe there's a shortage of mediocre containers. Here we don't see a need to ask for more.

Carpy film cans can still be had by the bag full at many photos shops too...

[+UnHoly453]

Exactly! I'm lucky I live in an area with lots of rugged bushland where many excellent caches are born and bred. Just last week I completed a T5 cache that was published back in February - it took me three trips to finally get there, the first a steep climb up a heavily vegetated hill to reach WP1, the next day a kayak paddle across the river to reach WP2 and an almost vertical climb to the top of the ridge to reach WP3. By then I was too exhausted to try for GZ, and with intervening bad weather and other activities, didn't get there for another two months. It involved another kayak paddle and more steep climbing to a hiding place atop an amazing vantage point with views up and down the river.

 

Some might say it was a lot of effort for just one smiley, and I didn't know until I got there whether I'd be able to reach the exposed hiding place under a ledge, but for me it was a great adventure pushing me beyond my comfort zone, one I'll long remember and which makes caching all the more worthwhile. I'd rather one of those than a hundred P&Gs.

 

I just want to quote and +1 this entire thread... but here you've summarized quite perfectly the true beauty of caching. I was ~12 years old when I stumbled upon Geocaching with my father back in 2003. Back then, nearly all of the caches we found were FUN and not so simple. I only logged a hundred or so back then, before losing touch with the hobby for a long time. That said, it is those adventures, those experiences that I remembered, that brought me back to it, 11+ years later.

 

I want to put this out there for all of those who are complaining though:

 

If you don't like it the way it is - CHANGE IT! Be the change! You're tired of caches without character, requiring no effort, or creativity? Okay, set a precedent! Go out and PLACE the caches you WISH you were finding! For every cache that you feel is of low quality that you find, place two more that meet or exceed your expectations!

 

You are not entitled to complain about a problem which you are not willing to help to mitigate. JM2C...

[+CachingCubmaster]

Exactly! I'm lucky I live in an area with lots of rugged bushland where many excellent caches are born and bred. Just last week I completed a T5 cache that was published back in February - it took me three trips to finally get there, the first a steep climb up a heavily vegetated hill to reach WP1, the next day a kayak paddle across the river to reach WP2 and an almost vertical climb to the top of the ridge to reach WP3. By then I was too exhausted to try for GZ, and with intervening bad weather and other activities, didn't get there for another two months. It involved another kayak paddle and more steep climbing to a hiding place atop an amazing vantage point with views up and down the river.

 

Some might say it was a lot of effort for just one smiley, and I didn't know until I got there whether I'd be able to reach the exposed hiding place under a ledge, but for me it was a great adventure pushing me beyond my comfort zone, one I'll long remember and which makes caching all the more worthwhile. I'd rather one of those than a hundred P&Gs.

 

I just want to quote and +1 this entire thread... but here you've summarized quite perfectly the true beauty of caching. I was ~12 years old when I stumbled upon Geocaching with my father back in 2003. Back then, nearly all of the caches we found were FUN and not so simple. I only logged a hundred or so back then, before losing touch with the hobby for a long time. That said, it is those adventures, those experiences that I remembered, that brought me back to it, 11+ years later.

 

I want to put this out there for all of those who are complaining though:

 

If you don't like it the way it is - CHANGE IT! Be the change! You're tired of caches without character, requiring no effort, or creativity? Okay, set a precedent! Go out and PLACE the caches you WISH you were finding! For every cache that you feel is of low quality that you find, place two more that meet or exceed your expectations!

 

You are not entitled to complain about a problem which you are not willing to help to mitigate. JM2C...

 

I will add that there are some that are just a joy to find. This one here is the perfect example of a wonderful field puzzle in an urban setting. I had fun with this one and a few other of this particular CO's creations.

[+Mudfrog]

Exactly! I'm lucky I live in an area with lots of rugged bushland where many excellent caches are born and bred. Just last week I completed a T5 cache that was published back in February - it took me three trips to finally get there, the first a steep climb up a heavily vegetated hill to reach WP1, the next day a kayak paddle across the river to reach WP2 and an almost vertical climb to the top of the ridge to reach WP3. By then I was too exhausted to try for GZ, and with intervening bad weather and other activities, didn't get there for another two months. It involved another kayak paddle and more steep climbing to a hiding place atop an amazing vantage point with views up and down the river.

 

Some might say it was a lot of effort for just one smiley, and I didn't know until I got there whether I'd be able to reach the exposed hiding place under a ledge, but for me it was a great adventure pushing me beyond my comfort zone, one I'll long remember and which makes caching all the more worthwhile. I'd rather one of those than a hundred P&Gs.

 

I just want to quote and +1 this entire thread... but here you've summarized quite perfectly the true beauty of caching. I was ~12 years old when I stumbled upon Geocaching with my father back in 2003. Back then, nearly all of the caches we found were FUN and not so simple. I only logged a hundred or so back then, before losing touch with the hobby for a long time. That said, it is those adventures, those experiences that I remembered, that brought me back to it, 11+ years later.

 

I want to put this out there for all of those who are complaining though:

 

If you don't like it the way it is - CHANGE IT! Be the change! You're tired of caches without character, requiring no effort, or creativity? Okay, set a precedent! Go out and PLACE the caches you WISH you were finding! For every cache that you feel is of low quality that you find, place two more that meet or exceed your expectations!

 

You are not entitled to complain about a problem which you are not willing to help to mitigate. JM2C...

 

I used to believe this but i know and have seen firsthand that it doesn't work. What i like is the opposite of what most others go for these days. The vast majority want quick and easy. A cache that's different or challenging rarely gets a visit.