Jump to content

Feedback on new Elevation Challenge


_Shaddow_

Recommended Posts

While I visit the forums very infrequently I figured this is the spot to have this discussion. Tagging on The Navigatorz's 100 Mile Hike Challenge (WA State) and their note logged on that cache I'm considering setting up a very similar challenge based on hiking elevation rather then distance.

 

In particular, I'd like some feedback on the elevation limit to set, most likely either 100,000 feet or 50,000 feet. My personal elevation so far this year is well above 100,000 feet and I know there are others that do this much and more. I've also have considered that this amount is probably more then typical and a 100,000 feet challenge may exclude too many people.

 

My primary goal is similar to The Navigatorz's and to get people out hiking and exercising. A 50,000 feet goal would be about equivalent to hiking Mt Si's 3,300 ft gain about 15 times while the 100,000 mark would of course be double that. Considering that the hiking season around here is almost year round and a reasonable hiking schedule is once a week it could be completed at any time of year and would take just under 3 months. To make it more reasonable to complete during any time of year I would probably include snow shoeing since that is basically hiking with bigger boots.

 

Also, what are other suggestions or ideas?

Link to comment

Also, what are other suggestions or ideas?

Can we count hikes we've already done? :)

 

Why limit it to hiking? How about mountain biking, ski touring, etc? Anything human powered. Uphill is uphill. Then I suppose you need to decide whether absolute elevation or total elevation counts and whether or not you want to have some sort of minimum threshold for distance per outing, whether max elevation is at a cache, or on the way to or from a cache and so on.

Link to comment

Also, what are other suggestions or ideas?

Can we count hikes we've already done? :)

 

Why limit it to hiking? How about mountain biking, ski touring, etc? Anything human powered. Uphill is uphill. Then I suppose you need to decide whether absolute elevation or total elevation counts and whether or not you want to have some sort of minimum threshold for distance per outing, whether max elevation is at a cache, or on the way to or from a cache and so on.

 

To give everyone a fair chance it will be fresh; thinking about posting it 1/1/11 to make it easier to figure elevation gained in 2011 if people want to continue to keep track.

 

I would deviate from The Navigatorz here in that I would consider gross elevation gain, say if it's a lake over a saddle then the elevation difference between the trailhead, saddle and lake but the minor elevation gains such as stream crosses is out because it's simply too much work to verify and also GPS elevation tracks always have some error in them.

 

Some elevation minimum seems like it would be necessary to keep the postings to a reasonable level, maybe 500 feet. Probably no distance minimum. Elevation gain is only to a unfound unowned cache though one placed cache would be allowed. Not sure what to do about a through hike, probably the elevation from the closer, easier trail head.

Link to comment

Sounds like a great idea for a cache!

 

We like 50,000 feet. With 50,000 feet it would require around double the amount of hiking of the 100 mile hiking challenge since most people finished that challenge with about 20,000 feet. You could get your distance less than 200 miles if you want to climb a bunch of REALLY steep short hikes!

 

I think if you make it 100,000 feet, you will have very very few people finish the challenge...ever. With 4 or 5 times the challenge of the 100 mile hike, many people may not even want to participate because they might feel that they will never finish.

 

In the last year we have hiked somewhere between 50,000 and 60,000 feet of elevation and we hike a couple of times per month on average.

 

I think in deciding between 50,000 and 100,000 feet, the question is whether you only want a few die-hard hikers to complete this or if you'd rather have more cachers finish the challenge who only go hiking occasionally.

 

Yeah, you need a minimum elevation gain per hike. 500 feet is good. If you don't have a minimum, everyone will be submitting things like 20 feet of elevation gain to that skirt lifter cache at the grocery store.

Edited by GrnXnham
Link to comment

50,000 does seem like the much better choice, a good challenge while still reasonably obtainable.

 

Any thoughts on B+L's human powered suggestion? My personal experience with mountain biking is that it's much easier. We often use bikes to make the approach easier and sometimes even gain significant elevation with them if possible such as up the logging roads on Mt Bessemer or even Green Mt. There is more effort pushing the bikes up but only lose about 10-20% of our pace and the big pay off is an almost effortless and fast coast back. Skiing would be similar primarily because the easy coast down outweighs the effort up.

 

My personal preference is to keep the challenge to hiking and snow shoeing only but am open to considering the rest based on feedback.

Edited by _Shaddow_
Link to comment

50,000 does seem like the much better choice, a good challenge while still reasonably obtainable.

 

Any thoughts on B+L's human powered suggestion? My personal experience with mountain biking is that it's much easier. We often use bikes to make the approach easier and sometimes even gain significant elevation with them if possible such as up the logging roads on Mt Bessemer or even Green Mt. There is more effort pushing the bikes up but only lose about 10-20% of our pace and the big pay off is an almost effortless and fast coast back. Skiing would be similar primarily because the easy coast down outweighs the effort up.

 

My personal preference is to keep the challenge to hiking and snow shoeing only but am open to considering the rest based on feedback.

Good idea for a companion challenge to Hiking 100 Miles, and I agree with the 50,000 ft goal for reasons already stated.

 

I think you should stick to your original idea of keeping it to hiking and snowshoeing. Mountain biking and XC skiing have some advantages over foot travel, as you noted, and I think an apples-to-apples playing field would be more interesting and challenging. My 2 cents.

Link to comment

Mountain biking and XC skiing have some advantages over foot travel, as you noted, and I think an apples-to-apples playing field would be more interesting and challenging. My 2 cents.

Whether or not skiing or riding a bike is easier or more advantageous than hiking seems irrelevant when the proposed challenge is to accumulate elevation. What difference does it really make if someone skis, slides, rolls or whatever? By far the easiest way to descend would be by flying. And if someone actually manages to accumulate significant elevation gains in a human-powered aircraft, it should probably count at least triple.

 

Let's say there is a cache at Camp Muir (I have no idea if there actually is). If we were to climb all the way up there and then ski back down, our elevation gain would not count, but for someone who climbed up and glissaded down it would qualify? Or let's say we put the skins on and walk up on our skis. Would it really be easier than hiking up? One thing I know for certain is that carrying skis and boots up to Camp Muir is not really any advantage over hiking up and I speak from personal experience.

 

Realistically, if we were to participate in an elevation challenge, we would hike more than anything else, but it would be fun to do a mix of different things, kind of like we sometimes do in real life. We are still wondering how to gain elevation in our kayaks, so far unsuccessfully, or we'd be lobbying for using them too. Who knows? you might get more participants if you open things up to more than just hiking.

 

Finally, we look at a challenge like this as a personal challenge, not a competition or a race. Others might feel differently. Some people have more free time than others. Some people are relentless mighty stallions or half goat (or goat and-a-half). All we can do is marvel at their accomplishments. Speaking of which, it would be interesting to find a way to make this challenge have different levels so we can all watch in awe as ruck, BrewerMD, that Gal from the Harbor, or one of your cohorts blows right by 50,000 feet on their way to 100,000 feet and beyond. Maybe you could have a bonus for most elevation in a year, or something like that.

Link to comment

Mountain biking and XC skiing have some advantages over foot travel, as you noted, and I think an apples-to-apples playing field would be more interesting and challenging. My 2 cents.

Whether or not skiing or riding a bike is easier or more advantageous than hiking seems irrelevant when the proposed challenge is to accumulate elevation. What difference does it really make if someone skis, slides, rolls or whatever?

Seems pretty relevant to me, because alternate modes sometime require less physical exertion, and thus provide an advantage. I think that was Shaddow's point, as well. I know I've gone uphill further and faster on a bike than on foot (on certain trails). And riding a horse would be easier still. I agree that allowing different transportation modes would add flexibility, but if head-to-head competition is part of the challenge interest, it wouldn't be an apples-to-apples comparison. Just sayin'.

 

I like your idea of different elevation levels, tho. This filly would enjoy watching the stallions race each other to 100,000 and beyond.

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

I know I've gone uphill further and faster on a bike than on foot (on certain trails). And riding a horse would be easier still. I agree that allowing different transportation modes would add flexibility, but if head-to-head competition is part of the challenge interest, it wouldn't be an apples-to-apples comparison. Just sayin'.

Further faster, sure, but I'd be very surprised if anyone goes higher, faster on a bike. Head-to head and apples-to-apples is right out the door already unless everyone meets up at the same trailhead at a designated date and time.

 

If someone intends to "win" an elevation challenge, they need to accumulate more elevation quicker than anyone else and that means seeking out the "huff and puff" trails. Bikes and skis are probably not going to be much use in those circumstances. Now consider Monte Cristo: not very much climbing and a much nicer ride than a hike. A perfect trail for someone who is isn't ready to jog up Mailbox yet.

 

What about a situation like the one __Shaddow__ mentioned -- ride a bike part way and hike the rest? It seems like it would be easier to count the whole trip, not just the hiking portion. It also opens up some hikes that may not get done otherwise.

 

I am fairly certain that horses are not human powered, so yeah, they don't get invited.

Link to comment

Elevation Challenge... interesting.

 

Let us hope that at the end of each Elevation Gain there is a Cache.

 

Documented that the person either rode or walked to said point. How they returned does not matter.

 

Any thing beyond the cache is a freebie on the person who sought out said Cache. Cache is point.

 

I guess my 2 cents is the Elevation Challenge is to seek out out Caches which are at certain Elevations, log your find, document your mode of Transportation and Shaddow would either accepts your mode transportation in 2 different categories Walk or Ride. As this is his challenge to each individual.

 

Keep it simple, as there can be only pride in your own individual accomplishment, not who is first. This should be a challenge to yourself and the fact you did it.

 

I shall now step down and wander off aimlessly into the woods to seen my trail.

 

Good luck to each and everyone who attempts this challenge in their own way. :laughing:

Link to comment

Some good points made on both sides and the one that caught my attention the most is that it’s about all about the elevation (and exercise) rather then the distance or mode of transportation so I’m leaning towards including any human powered mode.

 

Though I have two major concerns. One is keeping the challenge balanced. It’s a lot easier and faster to gain elevation with a bike then hiking because the effort going up is significantly outweighed by the easy coast down not to mention the huge overall speed advantage. Also, bikers tend to carry much less weight, perhaps not even a backpack at all.

 

The second concern is the amount of effort I’ll need to put into maintaining the challenge. I think it’s reasonable to aim for 15-20 ‘hikes’ to gain the elevation so that puts an average gain per outing at 2,500-3,300 ft. I’m thinking the 500 ft minimum was too small before considering including other modes and now am more sure of it as bikers are more likely to do outings that gain much less altitude on average. I could see 50 rides that gain 1,000 feet that’s way too much work on my part.

 

Perhaps bumping the minimum gain per outing to 2,000 ft would mitigate some of the unbalance since there simply aren’t many rides with that much elevation (I think). Some other ideas is to have a separate minimum elevation gain for each mode or place a limit of say 1 or 2 outings that can be completed on bikes or skis.

Link to comment

When I first signed up for the 100 mile hike challenge I too thought about creating a similar elevation challenge.

 

I think a 100,000' would be an extremely challenging and rewarding goal as a 5/5. A 1000' minimum elevation gain would be very appropriate for this challenge. There should be a cache at the end of each hike to qualify and each hike would be specific to one cache. (No climbing to Camp Muir and logging 9,200' just because you nabbed Top 'O the Field and Banana Slugs and High Places in one trip.) Cachers will be required to climb to the highest points in Washington and log the most difficult caches in the state. And as for bikes or alternate forms of transportation, most of the caches that fit this criteria are on trails which are closed to wheeled and animal transportation. Really, would you ride a bike up to Mt. Si or Mailbox Peak anyway? As far as skis are concerned, how many caches are located where you can achieve that kind of elevation gain and ski either up or down? I watched many people ski up to Camp Muir last summer while I was training and can assure you they are working just as hard as those of us who were hiking.

 

Something you might consider is making a list of requisite caches which meet the criteria. That would help ensure that no one is dogging it.

 

So what if there are few people who participate? Not every cache or challenge is attainable by every geocacher. This would be a very elite group of cachers and worthy of the prestige associated with completing such a challenge. That would also help to limit the work required to maintain the challenge.

 

Count me in!

Link to comment

Moun10Bike already tried that Washington's Highest Caches Challenge and put it to rest before it was found for the following reasons, some of which I don't agree with:

 

"After some debate, I'm archiving this. I have several reasons, but in short:

 

* Too much overlap with other challenge caches (namely the Lookout Challenge)

* Too many challenge caches, and I feel guilty for adding to the glut

* Too little interest

* Too much work to maintain

* Most importantly, Groundspeak has set a guideline that Challenge caches cannot involve hiding caches, and yet to focus a Challenge around a list of what are truly the highest 100 caches, one has to allow people to "score" their hides, which I did. I have felt guilty for breaking this guideline, and the best thing I can do is archive before we get into the summer hiking season."

 

Yes, we agree that skiers and mountain bikers work as hard, even harder, going up. The issue is the huge payoff going down and therefore overall it's significantly easier then hiking. That's the very reason I often use it for the approach.

 

One of my primary goals to get people to participate and encourage exercising.

 

There is perhaps room for the one I'm proposing and something along the lines you are suggesting.

Link to comment

Moun10Bike already tried that Washington's Highest Caches Challenge and put it to rest before it was found for the following reasons, some of which I don't agree with:

 

"After some debate, I'm archiving this. I have several reasons, but in short:

 

* Too much overlap with other challenge caches (namely the Lookout Challenge)

* Too many challenge caches, and I feel guilty for adding to the glut

* Too little interest

* Too much work to maintain

* Most importantly, Groundspeak has set a guideline that Challenge caches cannot involve hiding caches, and yet to focus a Challenge around a list of what are truly the highest 100 caches, one has to allow people to "score" their hides, which I did. I have felt guilty for breaking this guideline, and the best thing I can do is archive before we get into the summer hiking season."

 

Yes, we agree that skiers and mountain bikers work as hard, even harder, going up. The issue is the huge payoff going down and therefore overall it's significantly easier then hiking. That's the very reason I often use it for the approach.

 

One of my primary goals to get people to participate and encourage exercising.

 

There is perhaps room for the one I'm proposing and something along the lines you are suggesting.

Yup, I remember that one. I think the key reason Jon archived it was the fourth one: "Too much work to maintain." He was constantly having to update the bookmark of 100 Highest Caches because folks were rapidly placing new ones just a little higher than others on the list. This knocked off caches that participants had already found, so they had to keep monitoring the list and revising their qualifying lists. A static list rather than a dynamic one (i.e. no new hides) would be one way of resolving that.

Edited by hydnsek
Link to comment

I recognize that some people really like these things, but they’ve never blown my kilt up. As such, I don’t come out against them, I just ignore them.

 

-It seems to take a HUGE amount of time and effort on the part of the challenge owner to consider the rules they make for the challenge. Really, nothing is worse than having your “find” not count because the rules suddenly changed. People are very creative in finding shortcuts, so the challenge owner has to foresee what clever ways the participant will invent in an effort to ‘get more by doing less’. I remember one of the first such challenges that involved finding caches within every square of some map. People started dropping lame micros all over the place and then finding them.

 

-I’ve seen good people bickering about the challenge rules, what counted, who was first, etc. A challenge that creates contention, conflict, and makes enemies of otherwise friendly people is really not much of a challenge, since those behaviors are all easily achievable anyway.

 

-I’ve seen people decline a great hike, which they admitted they’ve always wanted to do, because it wouldn’t get them whatever they needed for the challenge. So the challenge becomes the new ‘numbers game’ where we worry more about the stats then we do about having fun.

 

I’m not trying to discourage you from creating your challenge, but the best approach might be to go back and familiarize yourself with some of the ones that have already been done, and try to learn from them. Elevation as a metric might be difficult to quantify.

 

If you want to make a fun challenge, make the challenge to show a GPS reading (in Washington) that’s the farthest distance from any published geocache, that you had to hike to reach. :laughing:

Edited by Criminal
Link to comment

Criminal, you make some good though pessimistic points. And believe me I understand the anti-rules attitude and such but also know that good people can have good clean fun within rules. And without rules, or in other words a definition of what we're talking about, there really isn't anything to discuss. There is nothing.

 

I'll take from your points to make it as clear and easy as possible for participates as well as me.

 

BTW: you were probably just joking and being sarcastic but just in case the challenge you propose is really just the same thing with different rules and that you personal think would be fun, yes?

Edited by _Shaddow_
Link to comment

Ok, everybody look left :laughing: Yep first time on a forum. (dang noobs)

Finding out the hard way, I’m with Criminal and won’t be jumping all over another challenge. Like was already written, we all have our own personal reasons to accomplish things and ways we do it. In the end the only real reward is only personal self gratification. We all know we’re good at what we do, that’s what separates us from the average cacher.

That being said, I want to throw in my 2 cents.

1 cent: I feel the easiest way to keep track is, elevation at the TH and elevation at the highest cache of the hike. It doesn't get any easier to verify than that.

2 cent: Shaddow you mention a few times “exercise”. I think just getting up off the couch and attempting an elevation cache is a good start. Unless you count calories burned, who’s to say the person walking back down at a slugs pace isn’t getting more than someone that put it in gear and pedaled their B’s off. I hiked up Washington on packed snow, and slid my feet in the slush on the way back down. I think a skier would have gotten more exercise that day than I did. And I really don’t know of that many caches that would benefit a bike rider enough that a goat couldn't go straight up with less effort. I think you allowing bikes and skis would also make for more fun. (Anybody want to teach me how to ski?)

 

Just my 2 cents, and like LandRover wrote, “ "TS they don't have to do it."”

Edited by Boonie-Medic
Link to comment

MtnMutt, Criminal and Boonie-Medic have all touched on the importance of keeping the rules simple. We love simple. Boonie's suggestion to count a single high point is a good one because it makes keeping track easy for the participants and more importantly, for the cache owner.

Link to comment

Some thoughts while reading this thread (I'm not going to go back and quote every point):

 

While a biker may not have the weight of a pack, they are moving the weight of the bicycle along with their body.

 

Years ago the Army did a study that found that each extra pound on the feet was like 5 pounds on the back. Recent studies show that incorrect - it's more like 6 pounds. My point, skis require more effort going up than 'bare' booted feet. And downhill skiing uses a lot more energy than a sitting glissade.

 

Isn't the challenge about gaining the elevation, not losing it? If someone carried a paraglide rig up to a high cache and flew back down, that wouldn't count?

Link to comment

I appreciate all the comments and help

 

From personal experience the round trip effort for hiking and snow shoeing is considerably more then for biking or skiing, and of the two snow shoeing is more much more effort then hiking thus is in by default.

 

I'm thinking it's coming down to whether this is a hiking-elevation challenge or just an elevation challenge. I'm all for the later but my concern is balance of effort. Most people hike so by including other modes it possibly gives the few an advantage. Maybe it's a mute concern as most elevation simply can't be gained on bike trails and will require hiking anyway. Not that concerned about skiing or snowboarding since it's a very small niche and there is a distinct disadvantage in trying to find caches buried by snow.

 

Looking for simplicity, fairness and balance.

 

Yes it's simpler to only include the elevation difference between the trail head and cache but I'll most likely include other major elevation gains, say for example over a saddle to a lake and say of at least 100' gain. A good example is Snow Lake where the trail drops about 400' past the saddle. That elevation needs to be gained on the way out and should be included.

 

Going to post some preliminary rules shortly

Link to comment

Ok here's what I'm thinking (below). I was just going to jot down a quick draft then ended up developing a near final copy lol. Oh well, not much left to do then which is always good.

 

So, the rules as a whole are a somewhat long read but still fairly simple I think; there is a header with a basic rule, six rules in total, then under each is more info explaining each rule in detail or outlining any special cases. Before the rules is a quick note about the spirit behind the cache and afterwards follows the logging requirements with some examples to help clarify and make it easier to post logs.

 

Reduced the individual trip minimum to 1,000 from 2,000 to make it more reasonable for bikers and skiiers

 

Please let me know if I missed anything, something is unclear or needs to be elaborated.

 

=======

 

The Spirit:

 

The spirit of this cache is to:

1) Promote caching, exercise, outdoor activity and fun within Washington State

2) Provide a personal challenge and a group challenge

 

The Rules:

 

1) To log a find on this cache you must accumulate 50,000 feet of elevation gain starting 1/1/11

A) All elevation gain on or after this date is acceptable provided all the other listed rules are followed. You do not need declare you are joining this challenge, however, after you become aware that you wish to join us then for fun and fairness you should post your hikes as you complete them so we may see your ongoing progress

 

2) Your ascent must be completely under your own power by any combination of hiking, snow shoeing, snow skiing or mountain or road biking.

A) Your decent may be by any means

B] You may combine modes between trips or within an individual trip

C) Other human powered modes of accent may be considered at my sole discretion

 

3) Your route must be the reasonably shortest and either follow a trail shown on Northwest Trails or a road shown on Google Maps (an exception is provided below for off-trail travel)

A) For off trail travel you must provide a track log. The track logs need to include reasonable spaced data points with each recording the coordinates and a date and time stamp – most GPSrs will automatically collect this information provided you turn on your track recording option. Trails added to NW Trails after your trip will be considered only when appropriate and at my sole discretion

 

4) The end point must be a located physical cache located in Washington State that you have not previously found

A) The cache must have a physical logbook and you must personally sign it during the trip with a handwritten signature and it must be verifiable at a future date. DNFs do not count. In the case where a cache is missing after you have found it then other evidence of your trip may be accepted at my sole discretion. Track logs, online cache logs, consultation with the CO and reliable witnesses will carry a lot of weight in my decision.

B] Your own previously placed caches do not count however you may include one cache that you place after the start date of the challenge

C) Adopted caches are accepted provided you found them before adopting

D) Multiple trips on the same trail or to nearly the same destination is acceptable provided a cache is found on each trip. An example is Mt Si that currently has three caches near the summit; you may complete in three trips, one for each cache

E) The final location of puzzle and multi-caches will count provided approval is given ahead of time and at my sole discretion. My decision will be based primarily on whether I’ve completed them yet (yes is good) and therefore know by my own work where the final is located. Typically this will be in the Issaquah and Snoqualmie River Valley areas including all three forks.

F) Trip start points may be located outside Washington State

 

5) Can be completed in any number of increments of at least 1,000 foot each

A) Typically the elevation gain is the net difference between the trail head and cache

B] However, many trails have significant ups and downs that add to the accumulated elevation gain; for example regaining the elevation on the way back after dropping down a saddle to a lake. This elevation can be included provided each segment is a minimum of 100’ vertically, follows the other listed rules (particularly #2), and the extra logging requirements are followed (see logging requirements below)

C) For through hikes you may include the accumulated elevation either from a) the origin trail head to the cache or from b] the cache to the ending trail head. Note in case b the elevation is NOT the difference between the cache and trail head but only the amount of elevation gained along the trail

 

6) You must log your trips as noted under Logging Requirements

 

The Logging Requirements:

 

For each trip provide the information in bold listed below as a note type log on the cache page in the order shown. This is to make it easier for myself and others to track. Significant deviation from this format will be rejected at my sole discretion at which time you may repost in a more readable format. This is about the log and not the trip itself; provided you follow the rules all trips will count.

1) Your Trip #

2) Trip Name

3) Date of Trip

4) Total Elevation Claimed

5) Starting Location (name and coordinates and elevation)

6) Destination Cache (name and GC # and elevation)

7) Elevation Difference (only necessary if adding Additional Segments then note the elevation gain between the trail head and cache)

8) Extra Segments (include details for each additional 100’+ elevation segment similar to the start-destination elevation

9) Off-trail info (if going off-trail note beginning and end location and elevation)

9) Personal Notes: (if you want)

 

Use the following examples as templates.

 

Log Example #1 for a hike on-trail to Gem Lake (Gem Cache):

Trip #1 to Gem Lake on 1/1/11 for 2,270 ft

Alpental parking lot N47 26.727 W121 25.414 @ 3135 ft to Gem Cache GCGKFP @ 5030 ft = 1895 ft

Snow Lake to saddle N47 27.957 W121 26.899 @ 4015 to N47 27.619 W121 26.799 @ 4390 = 375 ft

 

This is a beautiful hike!

 

Log Example #2 for a hike on-trail to Mt Si (SiHi):

Trip #2 to Mt Si on 1/2/11 for 3,270 ft

Mt Si Trail Head N47 30.342 W121 44.348 @ 660 ft to Si Hi GC541 @ 3930 ft

 

Log Example #3 for a hike off-trail to Dream Lake (Dream Cache):

Trip #3 to Dream Lake on 1/3/11 for 2,280 ft

Taylor River Trail Head N47 33.637 W121 31.933 @ 1170 ft to Dream Cache GCH0W9 @ 3450 ft

(would include a screenshot of the off-trail track section or email the track to me)

Link to comment

It looks like you put a lot of thought into it, so that’s good. The only drama I can see is that there is a finite number of ‘hike’ geocaches out there, especially given Rule 5, and there won’t be very many more hidden. Most of the hikers here have done most of the qualifying caches already.

 

Rule 4 uses the generic term ‘caches’ instead of the more specific geocaches (grndspeak).

-Do other caches listed on other websites count?

-What are the criteria for an acceptable cache?

-If I hide a ‘cache’ somewhere, like in the Wilderness or National Park, slap an “Official Geocache” sticker on it, and list it on my website, will it count for the finders?

-What about archived caches like (French Peak) which are still physically present with a logbook that can still be signed?

-What if I’m hiking along and happen upon a cache of trail maintenance provisions (shovels, picks, etc)?

-What about summit registers, like the summit register/pseudo geocache on Mt O’Neil?

 

EDIT to add:

From where does one obtain the starting and ending elevation? The reading on your GPS can be very different than the published elevation, especially if the starting or ending point is in a poor reception area. So does a participant go by what their GPS tells them, or what the map tells them, or what a hiking guidebook tell them?

Edited by Criminal
Link to comment

Another question popped into my head: What about decent caches? Such as the Iron Horse trail, starting at the top (once the tunnel opens next summer) you can go all downhill to many caches (with a car shuttle). Or Ring of Fire where you climb down to the cache?

 

If the ascent follows the rules then yes. I'll will add something to clarify this situation

 

... The only drama I can see is that there is a finite number of ‘hike’ geocaches out there, especially given Rule 5, and there won’t be very many more hidden. Most of the hikers here have done most of the qualifying caches already.

 

I know that's going to be tough. But am considering two things: 1) for finish ranking order it helps level the playing field for newer hikers or those that might be intimidated 2) it'll motivate us to search out and do new hikes

 

Rule 4 uses the generic term ‘caches’ instead of the more specific geocaches (grndspeak).

-Do other caches listed on other websites count?

-What are the criteria for an acceptable cache?

-If I hide a ‘cache’ somewhere, like in the Wilderness or National Park, slap an “Official Geocache” sticker on it, and list it on my website, will it count for the finders?

-What about archived caches like (French Peak) which are still physically present with a logbook that can still be signed?

-What if I’m hiking along and happen upon a cache of trail maintenance provisions (shovels, picks, etc)?

-What about summit registers, like the summit register/pseudo geocache on Mt O’Neil?

 

Adding the word 'active' to rule #4 and then will clarify that it must be active the the same day it is found (need not be active at the time approved for finding the final)

Adding a subpoint to #4 that will specify 'geocache' and listed on GC

 

Nice, French Peak is now on my 'want to do' list Why did you archive? I see that it's in the wilderness but wasn't it grandfather in?

 

From where does one obtain the starting and ending elevation? The reading on your GPS can be very different than the published elevation, especially if the starting or ending point is in a poor reception area. So does a participant go by what their GPS tells them, or what the map tells them, or what a hiking guidebook tell them?

 

Will add somewhere that it will be based on Google Maps Terrain setting

 

Good points, thanks

Link to comment

I have a few more items that I would like feedback on if you're willing. I’m sure each one of these could be a topic onto its own and maybe it’s been discussed before on the forums. I could search for them (NOT very good at that) but I’m more interested in your feedback then some generic cachers.

 

FTF, STF, TTF Prizes?

Probably won't be any prizes. Normally I don't do prizes but also know it seems to be more the norm for these more difficult challenges and are sometimes even as big as MB coins. I don't have a personal coin or would add some. I could buy some nice coins I suppose but that's not special like a MB or a personal coin. For something like this a gift card or a more generic coin almost seems cheesy and would take away from rather then add something to the overall experience. Is that a major negative or downer if I don't include any prizes?

 

Location of final; walk up or a hike in itself?

I'm leaning towards placing the final on Si. After doing 50,000 feet a walk up might be nice though a hike-to maybe with some significant elevation seems more appropriate. After working so hard and getting into better shape it might be nice to use the new found fitness to go hunt the cache. Strong thoughts either way?

 

Low or high D?

I'm on the fence about this one but probably just a little more towards a higher D. The cache itself will be a hide with a typical range of D but I often see and it also seems appropriate that the D should reflect the effort evolved in overcoming the challenge. In that case I would make the D = 4.5 because they are more rare then D = 5.0. Strong thoughts either way?

Link to comment

Sorry for the delay and not getting it posted yesterday morning but it's now in for review and posting.

 

But any hikes done yesterday or today will count. Here's the final right up and rules. Thanks for all the help and feedback! Good luck!!

 

====

 

My friends and I joke that we love to get high. High above the surround area as well as a buzz from the eye candy of amazing sights overlooking below, the feeling of accomplishment of a difficult challenge and probably a real intoxication our bodies get from working them hard. Not to mention good times in the company of good friends or the serenity of solitude.

 

I know there are other people out there that feel the same way. If that describes you then you’re welcome for the additional motivation. Or if you’re in the group of people that think you may feel the same way but haven’t been motivated to get out and test that theory yet then here’s a great opportunity for you.

 

I’ve played with the thought of doing this challenge for a few years and discussed different ideas with friends over time usually and most appropriately while in the trail. Final motivation came when the idea was brought up on the Hike 100 Miles Challenge (WA State) cache page, a challenge that I strongly suggest attempting concurrently since there are many similarities.

 

By the way, I understand that 50,000 feet sounds like a lot. It is. Though not overwhelmingly and it’s completely do-able over time. If this challenge is still intimidating then consider:

- A lot of the ‘hardcore’ ele junkies have already gotten most of the ‘easy’ caches so this challenge will be equally hard for them, just in a different way

- Getting the 1,000 foot minimum for qualifying trips is relatively easy especially if done over several miles so the slope is reduced

- It’ll get easier as you go; getting into better shape has it’s benefits

- It’s not work when you’re enjoying yourself

- Geocaches are an easy and excellent way to find hikes and places to go

- Visit Switchbacks.com and download NW Trail Maps the incredible number of trails available in the NW

 

List of Participants and Elevation. Updated January 1, 2011 at 12:00 AM

 

Geocacher Name Total Elev. Gain Start Date Finish Date

You

x,xxx

xx/xx/2011 xx/xx/2011

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

The Challenge:

This is simple; all you need to do is gain at least 50,000 feet elevation! You get the elevation by using your own human power to go to find a cache. You don’t even have to come down if you don’t want to but it’s highly recommended. And since this is all about the gain, when you do eventually come down you can do it the easiest way possible; if you are able to base jump off a 4,000 ft cliff and land in the parking area moments later then more power to you! Read on for more information and the particulars.

 

The Spirit:

The spirit of this cache is to:

1) Promote caching, exercise, outdoor activity and fun within Washington State

2) Provide a personal challenge and a group challenge

 

The Rules:

1) To log a find on this cache you must accumulate 50,000 feet of elevation gain starting 1/1/11

A) All elevation gain on or after this date is acceptable provided all the other listed rules are followed. You do not need declare you are joining this challenge, however, after you become aware that you wish to join us then for fun and fairness you should post your hikes as you complete them so we may see your ongoing progress

 

2) Your ascent must be completely under your own power by any combination of hiking, snow shoeing, snow skiing or mountain biking.

A) Your decent may be by any means

B) You may combine modes between trips or within an individual trip

C) Other human powered modes of accent may be considered at my sole discretion

 

3) Your route must be the reasonably shortest and either follow a trail shown on Northwest Trails Map or a road shown on Google Maps (an exception is provided below for off-trail travel)

A) For off-trail travel you must post a screenshot of your track in your log and email a track log in gpx format to me. The track logs need to include reasonable spaced data points with each recording the coordinates and a date and time stamp – most GPSrs will automatically collect this information provided you turn on your track recording option. Trails added to NW Trails after your trip will be considered only when appropriate and at my sole discretion

B) Trip start points may be located outside Washington State when necessary

C) Multiple trips on the same trail or to nearly the same destination is acceptable provided a cache is found on each trip. An example is the summit area Mt Si that currently has three caches; you may complete in three trips, one for each cache (note 4A regarding signature order)

 

4) The end point must be a located physical active cache located in Washington State that you have not previously found

A) The cache must have a physical logbook and you must personally sign it during the trip with a handwritten signature and it must be verifiable at a future date. If you usually use a stamp or sticker then add your handwritten signature as well. Your signature must be placed such that it is in chronological order in the log book immediately following the previous finder and located such that all future finders will physically sign the log after your signature (this rule is intended to void future-dating of logs). DNFs do not count. In the case where a cache is missing after you have found it then other evidence of your trip may be accepted at my sole discretion. Track logs, online cache logs, a picture of the cache log, consultation with the CO and reliable witnesses will carry a lot of weight in my decision

B) Cache must be active when you find it. Archived and temporarily disabled caches do not count

C) The cache must be listed on geocaching.com

D) Your own previously placed caches do not count. New caches you place do not count

E) Caches placed by others while you are physically there do count provided you return on a future date to sign the log as well as following all the rules (note rule 4A regarding signature order and 3C regarding one find per trip). FTF of these caches do not count; you must be the second or later finder

F) Finds are allowed on your adopted caches provided you found them before adopting them

G) The final location of puzzle and multi-caches will count provided approval is given by me ahead of time and at my sole discretion. My decision will be based primarily on whether I’ve completed them yet (yes is good) and therefore know by my own work where the final is located. Typically this will be in the Issaquah and Snoqualmie River Valley areas including all three forks

H) This cache may not be used

 

5) Can be completed in any number of increments of at least 1,000 foot each

A) Elevations gains will be rounded to the nearest 10’ increment and are based on the topo contour lines per NW Topo Maps

B) Typically the Total Elevation Gain is the net difference between the trailhead and the cache

C) Additional Gain(s): However, many trails have significant ups and downs that add to the accumulated elevation gain. For example, the regaining of elevation on the way back after dropping down a saddle to a lake is part of the accumulated gain for a trip. This elevation can be included provided each segment is a minimum of 100’ vertically, follows the other listed rules and is logged using the extra logging requirements (see items 7 and 8 in the logging requirements section below)

D) For through hikes you may claim the accumulated elevation either from a) the origin trailhead to the cache or from B) the cache to the ending trailhead. Note in case b that the elevation gain is not the net difference in elevations but only the amount of elevation gained along the way and in fact this number may be zero

 

6) You must log your trips as noted under Logging Requirements

 

The Logging Requirements:

For each trip post a separate note log on the cache page. In the log provide the information listed below in bold generally in the order shown. Choose one of the templates below or create your own and follow it in all of your logs. This is about making it easier to follow your progress and not about the trip itself; provided you follow the rules all trips will count.

 

1) Your Trip #

2) Date(s) of Trip

3) Name of Trail per NW Trails

4) Total Elevation Gain

5) Starting Location (Name and coordinates and elevation)

6) Destination Cache (Name and GC # and elevation)

7) Elevation Difference Between Starting Location and Destination Cache (This item is only necessary if including Additional Gain(s))

8) Additional Gain(s) (List a description and the beginning and end coordinates and elevations for any additional 100’+ elevation gain segments)

9) Off-trail info (List the beginning and end locations and elevations for any off-trail segments. Provide a screenshot of your track in your log and email a copy of the track file to me in gpx format)

10) Personal Notes (if you want)

 

You may use or modify one of the following templates or create your own from scratch:

 

Log Example #1 for a hike on-trail to Gem Cache:

Trip #1

1/1/11

High Lakes Trail

2,270 ft

Alpental Parking Lot, N47 26.727 W121 25.414, 3135 ft

Gem Cache, GCGKFP, 5030 ft

1895 ft

Snow Lake to saddle

Snow Lake, N47 27.957 W121 26.899, 4015 ft

Saddle, N47 27.619 W121 26.799, 4390 ft

375 ft

 

Log Example #2 for a hike on-trail to SiHi:

Trip #2 up Mt Si on 1/2/11 on the Mt Si Trail for 3,270 ft Mt Si Trailhead (coordinates N47 30.342 W121 44.348, elevation 660 ft) SiHi (GC541, 3930 ft) This was a busy trail but still lots of fun

 

Log Example #3 for a hike partially off-trail to Dream Cache:

My trip #3 was to Dream Lake on 1/3/11 along the Snoqualmie Lake Trail and off-trail for a total of 2,280 ft elevation gain. I started the day out at the Taylor River Trailhead coordinates N47 33.637 W121 31.933 and at the 1170 ft elevation mark and headed out to Dream Cache GCH0W9 at the 3450 ft elevation mark on the shores of Dream Lake. This hike required some off-trail travel starting about 4 miles out at N47 35.115 W121 27.342 and from there to the cache and back. I’ve included a screenshot of my track and emailed my track log to the CO. (then include a screenshot of the off-trail track section and email the track file in gpx format to me). This hike puts my total elevation gained for the challenge at xx,xxx ft, almost done yoo-hoo!

Link to comment

Quick update for those watching this topic

 

I submitted the cache on 1/2 but for some reason it's been a very slow process getting it through.

 

Got the note below on 1/5 to which I responded on 1/6 because I didn't get an email telling me that there was a reviewer note but instead just happened to check the cache page before emailing to ask what the hold up was. I made the changes so it should be good to go...

 

"Hi Shaddow,

 

There are a few issues that need to be addressed with your requirements before I will be comfortable with publishing this.

quote:

3) Your route must be the reasonably shortest and either follow a trail shown on Northwest Trails Map or a road shown on Google Maps (an exception is provided below for off-trail travel)

A) For off-trail travel you must post a screenshot of your track in your log and email a track log in gpx format to me. The track logs need to include reasonable spaced data points with each recording the coordinates and a date and time stamp – most GPSrs will automatically collect this information provided you turn on your track recording option. Trails added to NW Trails after your trip will be considered only when appropriate and at my sole discretion

 

This unfairly penalizes people with a GPs unit that does not record track logs. Please remove this requirement or come up with something that is doable by everyone.

quote:

4) The end point must be an active physical cache located in Washington State which was published before 1/1/11 and that you have not previously found

A) The cache must have a physical logbook that you must personally sign during the trip with a handwritten signature and it must be verifiable at a future date. If you usually use a stamp or sticker then add your handwritten signature as well. Your signature must be placed such that it is in chronological order in the log book immediately following the previous finder and located such that all future finders will physically sign the log after your signature (this rule is intended to avoid future-dating of logs)

 

I have no concerns with when a qualifying cache was published. Even if a cache is placed just for this challenge, people have to hike up to it just the same.

You can't dictate how a finder signs a cache, especially one that you do not own. Stamp, sticker, or signature, it does not matter. Furthermore, it's unverifiable, as many log books contain signable space between logs. Some of this has to be taken in good faith, and the acknowledgment that some will cheat no matter how much you try to prevent it and they are only cheating themselves.

 

I am going to disable your cache for now so you can consider how to address these concerns. Please enable your cache when you are ready for me to look at it again. As always, feel free to contact me with any questions."

Link to comment

Got some closed door feedback from a cacher that says I've got far too many rules and have therefore taken all the fun out to the point that they are no longer going to participate when originally they were very excited about it.

 

I certainly don't want to turn anyone off or be some kind of control freak I just want it to be clear. The more questions and issues that I can avoid up front saves me a ton of time later on. Maintenance of this cache is going to be a lot of work, in particular going through all the logs of which there could potentially be up to 50 for each participant. That's why I was so clear about the logging requirements, to make it easier on me.

 

Not sure if or how to make any changes to the rules or tone to this person happy, or if these are issues that others feel too. I think I might drop the logging templates, that seems like it will help.

 

blah

Link to comment

Hi Shaddow,

Don't get discouraged, feedback is meant to be helpful not hurtful. There are a whole bunch of rules in this challenge and we cachers are free flowing type of people (what? no?). I would definitely take the suggestions made by the reviewer and perhaps consider the feedback from the others. This sounds like it could be a great challenge once it all gets ironed out and I do look forward to it, once I can actually walk again. Putting together and owning any challenge is a challenge in itself (I own one and am putting together two others) so just know that going in. But it is also fun! Cache on.

Link to comment

Thanks BrewerMD, I hope so!

 

Here's the latest. Now's the time for feedback

 

==

 

The Challenge:

This is simple; all you need to do is gain at least 50,000 feet elevation. You get the elevation by using your own human power to go to find a cache. You don’t even have to come down if you don’t want to but it’s highly recommended. And since this is all about the gain, when you do eventually come down you can do it the easiest way possible; if you are able to base jump off a 4,000 ft cliff and land in the parking area moments later then more power to you!

 

There are 5 very basic rules which are listed below in bold. Under each are some clarifications and particulars. Also there are some logging requirements that are there so we can follow your progress as well as make it a lot easier on me to maintain the cache over time.

 

The Spirit:

The spirit of this cache is to:

1) Have fun

2) Promote caching, exercise and outdoor activity within Washington State

3) Provide a personal challenge and a group challenge

 

The Rules:

1) To log a find on this cache you must accumulate 50,000 feet of elevation gain

A) Trips on or after 1/1/11 count

 

2) Ascent are be completely under your own power by any combination of hiking, snow shoeing, snow skiing or mountain biking.

A) Decent may be by any means

B] Different modes can be combined between trips or within an individual trip

C) Other human powered modes of accent may be considered at my sole discretion

 

3) Follow a trail shown on Northwest Trails Map or a road shown on Google Maps

A) If traveling a significant distance off-trail (more then about a mile or with additional elevation sections) then post a screenshot of your track in your log and email a track log in gpx format to me. If your GPS does not record tracks then a marked-up topo map can substitute for the above requirements

B] Trip start points may be located outside Washington State when necessary

C) Multiple trips on the same trail or to nearly the same destination is fine provided a cache is found on each trip

 

4) Find an active physical cache located in Washington State which was published before 1/1/11

A) The cache have a physical logbook

B] The cache is active at the time you find it. Archived and temporarily disabled caches do not count

C) They need to be a new find. DNFs do not count

D) The cache must be listed on geocaching.com

E) Your own caches don’t count except that finds are allowed on your adopted caches provided you found them before adopting them

F) The final location of puzzle and multi-caches may count provided approval is given by me ahead of time and at my sole discretion. My decision will be based primarily on whether I’ve completed them yet (yes is good) and therefore know by my own work where the final is located. Typically this will be in the Issaquah and Snoqualmie River Valley areas including all three forks

G) This cache doesn’t count towards the challenge

 

5) Complete in increments of at least 1,000 foot each

A) Elevations gains are rounded to the nearest 10’ increment and based on the topo contour lines per NW Topo Maps

B] Typically the accumulated elevation gain is the net difference between the trailhead and the cache. However, many trails have significant ups and downs that add to the accumulated elevation gain and these may be included provided each segment is a minimum of 100’ vertically. For example, the regaining of elevation on the way back after dropping down a saddle to a lake is part of the accumulated gain for a trip

D) For through hikes the accumulated elevation is either from the origin trailhead to the cache or from the cache to the ending trailhead. Note in that the elevation gain is not the necessarily the difference in elevations but only the amount of elevation gained along the way and in fact in one direction of travel this number may be zero

 

The Logging Requirements:

For each trip post a separate note log on the cache page. In the log provide as a minimum the information listed below in bold. No need to declare that you are joining this challenge, however, after you become aware that you wish to join us then for fun and fairness you should post your hikes as you complete them so we may see your ongoing progress.

 

1) Date(s) of Trip

2) Name of Trail per NW Trails

3) Accumulated Elevation Gain

4) Starting Location

5) Destination Cache

 

If the Accumulated Elevation Gain is more then the net difference between the start and the cache then include:

6) Additional Elevation Gain(s) (Start/end elevations and locations or coordinates for additional 100’+ elevation gain segments)

 

If off-trail travel then include:

7 ) Off-trail Information (Start/end elevations and locations or coordinates)

Link to comment

@ ironman114:

Glad to hear. I also like a lot of off-trail and that rule is there for guys like us that sometimes travel many miles without a trail - you can probably appreciate that without out a marked up map or GPS track I'd have no way of double checking logs.

 

Most of the rules were more about me heading off questions, bickering, verification etc. I think the new pared down rules should still get most of that although I ready got asked if someone can use horses...

 

@chubby forest monkey

I've got to draw some reasonable boundaries more to keep my work load reasonable. Also this gives the opportunity for someone to post one in Oregon. I'm not opposed to adding to adding Oregon, but if I do the next question will be Idaho? then Montana? then? I'm still considering though, maybe opening it up to all trails on NW Trails Maps...

Edited by _Shaddow_
Link to comment

_Shaddow_

 

Question:

 

What is the purpose in the date cut-off? (Originally 1/1/11 and now three months prior) I can't figure out what kind of problem there would be with someone hiking up a mountain to find a cache placed yesterday?

 

And along with that, why not allow everyone to place one cache that would count towards this challenge? I remember in the early discussion, you talked about this option but it didn't make it into the final set of rules. Someone mentioned early on that if you let cachers place unlimited caches, you would see people hike to the top of the same mountain behind their house again and again and keep placing one new cache there each time. But by limiting cachers to one placement only that would count towards the challenge, it would eliminate this. Why wouldn't this work?

 

I guess I'm just comparing it to the 100 mile hike challenge where there is no cut-off date and everyone can place one cache and I haven't seen any problems with that challenge cache. What kind of problems do you anticipate?

 

Thanks

 

Dave

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...