Maine Cache and Cache Hider Stats

I still feel as cache hiders there are dangers we do not need to subject cachers to, especially unknowingly. We don't need to restrain from hiding a cache in the woods simply because bears are there. We don't need to restrain from hiding a cache in a city just because crime is higher there. Anyone going up a mountain or into a city hopefully has some ideas of the typical dangers that might exist. As a hider if you know a particular spot is unhealthy or unsafe due to conditions that are not typical I don't think a cache should be there. Gc.com has pulled several caches over the years which were placed near marijuana crops - Why would they do that - should they just let the cacher find out on his own?

There is no black and white. Not every area behind a store is unsafe. Not every remote section of woods is safe. An area can become unsafe after a cache is hidden. And I would hate to see rules placed forcing anyone to place or not place caches a certain way. I'd rather discuss these issues among our community of geocachers as we do here and hope they think and make an informed decision when they place caches. If you think the place anything anywhere any way approach is the way for caches to be placed, then you have every right to promote that ideal.

This is actually a great topic for it's own thread.

This is why Geocaching.com (Groundspeak) has legal statements on their site :

http://www.geocaching.com/about/termsofuse.aspx

See this one :

"Geocaching, hiking, backpacking, and other outdoor activities involve risk to both persons and property. There are many variables including, but not limited to, weather, fitness level, terrain features and outdoor experience, that must be considered prior to seeking or placing a cache. Be prepared for Your journey and be sure to check the current weather and conditions before heading outdoors. Always exercise common sense and caution. You assume all risks arising in connection with seeking a cache or any other related activity."

I have some risky cache locations, that I am rather proud of and in the published listings for the caches, I put an additional warning in.

People need to be responsible for their own actions and choices on whether or not they choose to seek a cache. It is as simple as that.

Seems to me that I did not single anyone one out in particular. My comments were very general in nature. If it hit a sensitive chord with some then my apology and at the same time the old adage holds true,

If the shoe fits, you must wear it!

I am not going to get into a discussion about who placed what cache where. That gains nothing in the short or long run.

My point was about the general down slide as it relates to cache placement everywhere. Not just in Maine.

Sorry about the perceived lameness of one of my caches. I could always just archive them and you would not have to worry yourself about it any longer.

I believe that the rating of a cache as far as worthy,lame,dangerous or anything else is truly that of each individual finder. The cache placer can only make a suggestion as to the "quality" of their hide but it is each one of us finders that will determine to ourselves if the spot is lame,quality or otherwise. Each one of us has our own opinions on EVERY cache!With this being said, probably most caches have "quality" to them for someone.

The discussion here will detiorate into a true pissing contest if we start trying to rate each others caches. Mike hates nanos, that's fine; Dave disfavors micros or series of micros..that's fine too. Puzzle caches make me crazy...so who cares!

Gob-ler's Centum cache was all about acknowledging the effort it often takes to complete a 100 caches in a 24 hour period. It was not his hardest or easiest cache and wasn't intended to be. Up until Mike's SMR and Chadd's Star War series there weren't that many cachers who bagged 100 in a day so I say I'm proud to be one of the few who have qualified to sign in behind the store!

LIke I've said many times before, I like them all..some more then others, but I truly do like them all. I think folks can tell by the logs people post which caches are held in high regard. There's no need to denegrate fellow cacher's hides in this forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gob-ler

Seems to me that I did not single anyone one out in particular. My comments were very general in nature. If it hit a sensitive chord with some then my apology and at the same time the old adage holds true,

If the shoe fits, you must wear it!

I am not going to get into a discussion about who placed what cache where. That gains nothing in the short or long run.

My point was about the general down slide as it relates to cache placement everywhere. Not just in Maine.

Sorry about the perceived lameness of one of my caches. I could always just archive them and you would not have to worry yourself about it any longer.

---

Don't you dare do that until I find it. Like most everybody else after you find a cache there is hardly any reason to go back. Unless your like me and take new people out on adventures. I think in the 400 I have found I could call only one lame.

Like they say lameness is in the eye of the beholder. Of coarse they also say I'm crazy and when I cache they we wont be hearing from they anymore.

Oh yeah, nanos are bad.

I don't mind taking people back to great caches. Heck, I go on finds of my own caches that I am proud of with people who are looking for them!

Gob-ler, I apologize if you were offended. My comment was merely an example and response to your comment regarding matching proper cache locations with the proper cache. I never said your cache was "lame". It was meant more for an example to everyone of a great themed cache which using their definitions of lame caches, would not be so "lame". Maybe you should change it to the "Double Centum" and make cachers find 200 in a day to up the ante since from some of the feed back here, apparently Mike and I have ruined it for everyone by making it easier for people to log your cache ha ha

Well, back when the Centum cache was placed, I think I may have been the only one in the state who had done a hundred in a day. Actually I did that twice in the same week back in February down in Maryland. Clueseeker had a Centum cache in Maryland I Johnny_Cache and I completed the requirements and then I went and found the final for the FTF when JC could not make it.

That was were the cache idea came from and when it was listed in Maine there was some concern if it could be done. The first to complete did it in NH and the other states soon followed with the exception I think of Massachusetts. That one is still available.

When Ekio however you spell his handle was contemplating the Stud Mill Road thing he emailed me and asked if I would mind and my response was have at it. I really have to say even I was surprised at the number of folks who undertook the challenge and completed. It seems to be a very popular challenge cache although honestly, it is quite a bit easier now than when first listed. The logs have been most interesting.

There is no Double Centum in my future. If you want to place one go ahead, although it would be a bit difficult for anyone who caches regularly up that way to complete it as they have made the big runs already.

As for the comments that were made, most of the challenge caches I have done it is the challenge that has been the difficult part. While the final for that cache is not my best or most difficult it has been visited often.

You might try a couple of my better ones. Maybe MSCREP - 3000 is a big number. Not many have done the cache, but it certainly has raised a few eyebrows. Railroad Park in its early days was a head scratcher and while still a bit difficult it is not a tough as it used to be.

I have rambled enough, Cache on!

Thank you for your suggestions Gob-Ler! I'll check that cache out!

This thread seems like a free-for-all lately, and now this is on my mind...

All caches get easier with time, it's just too bad some get pushed toward the easy line sooner than "was intended", saying that as if I know what was intended, which in case you're wondering, I really don't.

The centums probably would never have been placed if caching had not gotten easier beforehand. I'd guess 90% of the cachers now started at a time when the ease of PQs and notifications, as well as advanced technology (Auto GPS, Mapping GPS, Cachemate, GSAK, etc.) were commonplace and may not ever realize there was a time when this technology was nonexistent in the caching world.

That and with with a larger number of caches and cachers, some originally unique hides are quite commonplace, and even if you have not found a particular hide, you may have heard about it. Heck, even the first GRC and LPC appear a bit tricky the first time. The desire to get the numbers has pushed cachers to hide caches in ways to help promote those numbers.

Online mapping has come a long way too. Color aerials and street view - there are a few caches now you can actually see the cache using street view.

A centum would have been very tough if not impossible if you had to load each cache page and print it out, load each coordinate onto your GPSr, and then travel to each cache (without the aid of Auto navigation) which was probably an average of 20 miles apart or more. Filter out your GSAk caches to only show caches placed in 2003 or earlier and try planning a centum from there and you'll see what I mean. Heck, just try planning the centum in Maine using dates earlier than the placed date of the challenge (14 May 09).

And while everyone knows I don't think all these factors have advanced caching in a positive way, overall caching has improved. I do like having all my caches in GSAK and being able map them out, upload them to my Nuvi, GPSr, Laptop, and PDA, I probably would have thought that was overkill (and possibly cheating!) when I started caching.