omaha bike trail

[PCFrog]

@Cathunter wrote:

Every cache should have a certain “WOW” factor. Build on that.

1/3 of the caches in the state would have to vanish under this idea.

Not every cache has a wow factor but leads people to places they might otherwise have seen or go.

[kbraband]

@shrek & fiona wrote:

what is your thought is this to many in one area

Since you asked… yes, it’s too many. A cache should be a reason to let someone discover a cool location. One cache on a 2-mile stretch of bike trail can do that.[/quote]

you need to review a little before you bark

one cache is parking
an old school
tunnel
beaver dam
benchmark
trail head
where train killed one
where train went into the river killed 3
ghost
small town history
thees are not the names of the caches but what there about

do all of thees sound boring along a bike trail

Did I bark? All I did was answer (in a courteous way, I might add) your question. If you don’t want to hear answers that don’t agree with your opinion, don’t ask for other people’s opinions.[/quote]

[Bushwhacking Queen]

In Illinois, Panther in the Den has a Can Can Series. 18 caches along a trail. Every fourth cache is a puzzle with the coordinates coming from the three caches prior.

Special Ed and Fallen Fairy have a series along a bike route on Lake Shore Drive, each is a traditional cache and can only be reached by walking the stretch or renting a bike.

Multi caches are difficult to do on your own because if you can’t find a waypoint you can’t log what you’ve found. I’ve stayed away from multi-stage (more than two) multi caches for this exact reason. I attempted a 7 pt multi on my lunch hour only to have a difficulty reading the fourth waypoint. I did another 4 or 5 point multi but couldn’t find waypoint three. The owner of the cache said he too dislikes multis.

[WI_Robin]

Let me first and foremost say that I appreciate all that our cache approvers do so that we may all have the joy and privilege of placing and finding caches. Without their time and efforts we would not be able to participate in the sport we all enjoy. This post is my opinion, and not meant to be critical of our approvers. I would not like to have the job of deciding which caches of the hundreds submitted every week are suitable for publication!

I can tell you as owner of the HBZ series that I have only received compliments on those caches. I am not saying they are the greatest caches or that they are something that everyone likes, but most cachers love the fact that they can go to a park, hike the trails and find more than one cache. In most instances to find all of the caches in the park you have to spend several hours there, walking, relaxing and enjoying the trails. Along the way you can enjoy the scenery, peace and more than likely see some wildlife. Although they are part of one big multi/mystery, if you don’t find one you can still go on to the next and get credit for your find. I don’t see how having these “power trails” detracts from the sport of geocaching, or is undesirable.

If “A cache should be a reason to let someone discover a cool location.” why does it seem that the majority of cache are becoming skirt lifters in various parking lots and film canisters placed in guardrails and stop signs? I don’t see those kind of caches having any problems being approved and the vast majority of those are on private property. I have and do find these caches, but get sick of them pretty quick. Not saying that there is not a place for them and I know there must be people who enjoy them or there wouldn’t be so many. I just think that it should take you longer to find the cache than it takes to park, but that’s just me.

If you place 6 caches on 2 miles of bike trail, you are more than likely going to walk 4 miles and in the time spent doing those caches you could have found 12 skirt-lifters (or more) in a cache dense area. I did the caches on the Omaha bike trail and had a great time; a much better time than I do when I am on a “numbers run” caching day. Even the drive out to the area was enjoyable. The caches on the bike trail where a variety and would be appropriate and enjoyable for virtually any cacher of any age, level and ability. Even if the cache it’s self is not totally handicapped accessible, bike trails are usually wheelchair friendly and if caching with a partner the caches would be very handicapped friendly.

If there is a ruling on how many caches should be placed in a particular area besides the no closer than .10 miles from an other cache than it should be published and consistent. Or maybe there should be goals for cache placement. A cache that would otherwise be published because it meets the general guidelines could be denies because it does not meet the “goals” of cache placement. Many caches that I have been to I wonder what the goal of that cache was, except to provide an other opportunity for a smiley.

[ecorangers]

😀 My family has hunted WI Robin’s Happy Birthday Zuma 50 caches. It was great to keep the car in one parking lot and hunt a pocket of caches in each of those county parks. It was a bonus that they were ammo boxes and not micro’s in the woods. Thanks again Robin!

As for other “pocket of caches” dare I say Saturated areas….if you don’t like to hit an area that is saturated then don’t hunt them! If you don’t like cemetery hides, don’t hunt them, if you don’t like dead end guard rail hunts, don’t hunt them, just don’t stop (or prevent) the rest of us from hunting them. As long as they meet the geocaching.com guidelines, I say let them hide them.

With gas prices at $3.09 a gallon in West Bend and rising…..well you get the picture.

People hunt and hide caches for different reasons. That’s what so great about this sport! Tami

[zuma]

@WI_Robin wrote:

Let me first and foremost say that I appreciate all that our cache approvers do so that we may all have the joy and privilege of placing and finding caches. Without their time and efforts we would not be able to participate in the sport we all enjoy. This post is my opinion, and not meant to be critical of our approvers. I would not like to have the job of deciding which caches of the hundreds submitted every week are suitable for publication!

I can tell you as owner of the HBZ series that I have only received compliments on those caches. I am not saying they are the greatest caches or that they are something that everyone likes, but most cachers love the fact that they can go to a park, hike the trails and find more than one cache. In most instances to find all of the caches in the park you have to spend several hours there, walking, relaxing and enjoying the trails. Along the way you can enjoy the scenery, peace and more than likely see some wildlife. Although they are part of one big multi/mystery, if you don’t find one you can still go on to the next and get credit for your find. I don’t see how having these “power trails” detracts from the sport of geocaching, or is undesirable.

If “A cache should be a reason to let someone discover a cool location.” why does it seem that the majority of cache are becoming skirt lifters in various parking lots and film canisters placed in guardrails and stop signs? I don’t see those kind of caches having any problems being approved and the vast majority of those are on private property. I have and do find these caches, but get sick of them pretty quick. Not saying that there is not a place for them and I know there must be people who enjoy them or there wouldn’t be so many. I just think that it should take you longer to find the cache than it takes to park, but that’s just me.

If you place 6 caches on 2 miles of bike trail, you are more than likely going to walk 4 miles and in the time spent doing those caches you could have found 12 skirt-lifters (or more) in a cache dense area. I did the caches on the Omaha bike trail and had a great time; a much better time than I do when I am on a “numbers run” caching day. Even the drive out to the area was enjoyable. The caches on the bike trail where a variety and would be appropriate and enjoyable for virtually any cacher of any age, level and ability. Even if the cache it’s self is not totally handicapped accessible, bike trails are usually wheelchair friendly and if caching with a partner the caches would be very handicapped friendly.

If there is a ruling on how many caches should be placed in a particular area besides the no closer than .10 miles from an other cache than it should be published and consistent. Or maybe there should be goals for cache placement. A cache that would otherwise be published because it meets the general guidelines could be denies because it does not meet the “goals” of cache placement. Many caches that I have been to I wonder what the goal of that cache was, except to provide an other opportunity for a smiley.

I just wanted to say that I agree with Robin (as I need to), on the above. I personally enjoyed the string of caches along the Omaha bike trail quite a lot, and in no way did they feel too close to one another. Rather, it was a delightful walk down the trail.

I think if you look at the recent multi GC1276B (placed by the same person-so I am sure it is a good cache too), it is apparent how attractive long multis are to the typical cacher. It was published 4/19/07 and no one has even tried it yet. I was in the area last week, and it was raining, and if it had been 4 seperate caches we might have tried one or two. But a long multi didnt sound like fun in the rain, though I am sure it is a fun cache for folks on bikes.

Anyway, I like the caches that Chris is putting out, and I hope ya keep putting em out along trails. The ones I have done so far are excellent

zuma

[benny7210]

I think WI_Robin hit the nail right on the head with her post.

[Team Hemisphere Dancer]

I am also with WI Robin on this one.

[Bushwhacking Queen]

WI_Robin, very well said! Obviously you put a lot of time and effort into your post and it is very thorough in communicating what a lot of us feel. Thanks!! I echo what the others have said!

This hobby/sport is played different ways by different people from all walks of life. Some adhear to the established guidelines, some don’t, however, one thing that is followed is the placement of caches as they are monitored by our approvers. Those approvers volunteer their time for what may seem like a thankless job, but really we are all very thankful for the time and energy they dedicate to the hobby/sport we all love or come to love. The approvers can request a cache be changed to a multi, however, if it follows the guidelines established by geocaching.com being .10+ away from one another, as well as other guidelines, the caches should be approved, even if the urging to make it a multi falls on deaf ears.

The great thing about the way the geocaching database has been created is that we (cachers) can select all different attributes that meet our own desires (traditionals, multis, difficulty level, terrain level, kid friendly, etc.). We also have the ability to look in our maps or our queries and say, “Hm, there are a pocket of caches in this park — I do/don’t think I’ll hunt them.”

[K0rpl]

I have to agree with Both WI_Robin, and BQ. Both hit the nail on the head. If you don’t like the cache, the Cache owner, or the Placement. Don’t hunt it. That simple…. I however am a equal oppurtunity hunter. if it is there, I will hunt it… For the most part. I don’t have a scuba tank, so I guess there are a few that I won’t be hunting this year.. Next year maybe….

[shrek and fiona]

Lets close this one

[Author]

Posts