|
Post by Forum Admin on Sept 29, 2012 17:32:57 GMT -9
I decided today that for the sake of my blood pressure, I am going to filter out nano sized caches. I am reminded over and over again why I quit caching. I don't want to quit but neither do I want to find nanos, or bison for that matter, where a larger cache can be placed. I don't need the stress of looking for a miniature ammo can in a pine thicket (and in the rain). I also don't like match boxes in pine tree. So to save my BP, no nanos in my PQ searches.
This has been an unpaid caching announcement. I endorse all the venom that was spewed.
|
|
|
Post by coloreido on Sept 30, 2012 6:05:00 GMT -9
I often think the same thing, scobey: Why place this [camo bison, oodle, etc] here when it won't be muggled? However, I am guilty of doing the same thing; you may want to ignore my "Survivor: Anchorage" (GC39YEF).
I am aware that the Blue Goose GeoTour series is coming out soon, which will feature 16 small sized geocaches in city parks. Stay tuned!
|
|
powmia
Silver Cacher
Caches Found/Hidden xxxx/x
Posts: 208
|
Post by powmia on Sept 30, 2012 18:06:04 GMT -9
I approve this message.
|
|
|
Post by ladybugkids on Sept 30, 2012 20:25:57 GMT -9
In my opinion, nanos have their place in urban settings and/or when cleverly placed. Nano and some micro placements in the woods often result in the area around ground zero having every living thing trampled and every dead thing torn apart. A bomb proof hint can help avoid this. I have cut short more than one outing in the woods or just skipped a bunch of caches when I've walked into a series of micros hidden in nondescript ways in nondescript locations (see my signature line, below). When I get the chance to break away from work and family, I want to be on the move with my dogs and like minded humans and be treated to some place special. I don't want to spend an inordinate amount of time thrashing around the same 1000 square feet of forest when that same amount of time could put me a half mile to a mile down the trail or up the mountainside. When I'm with my family, the junior ladybugs have absolutely no interest in looking for a container if it isn't big enough to contain swag. In my opinion, it is very easy to make a nano or micro painfully difficult to find in the woods without any special thought or skill. The GPS error makes it tough enough to find the right ground zero. Couple that with a gazillion nondescript places the cache could be hidden and the hunt automatically is a tough one. The real skill/cleverness comes in placing the largest cache an area will support and have it survive. Check my profile...I've hidden very few micros and I have one nano out there as the first stage of a two-stage multi because the location required it, but after eight years, 131 out of 135 physical caches in locations as far flung as Faribanks, Valdez, the Kenai Peninsula, and Anchorage, placed by my family and me are still active. The above said, geocaching is as different as each individual who participates in the activity. Presumably, people hide the type of cache they prefer to seek. With the available mapsets and toolsets, each person can tailor each and every one of their caching trips to their liking. scobey: Got any tips on how to filter out nanos since that cache size isn't differentiated from "micro?" Many folks list a nano as an "other" sized cache, but some clever cache containers also get listed there, too, and I'd hate to miss out on them.
|
|
|
Post by Forum Admin on Oct 1, 2012 10:51:40 GMT -9
Nanos do have a place in an urban environment where a larger cache is impractical. I hid the first nano and admit it was probably a poor location. I also have a micro or 2 in pine trees because they were the best location. But to put a nano in scrub pine thicket and then call it a 1.5 in difficulty doesn't seem appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by karma123 on Oct 7, 2012 5:05:55 GMT -9
I just love caching and fortunately, we get to choose the type of caches we find and the type of caches we place. Here in Alaska, there's something for everyone to enjoy. I appreciate everyone who takes the time and effort to place caches.
|
|
|
Post by ladybugkids on Oct 7, 2012 7:23:32 GMT -9
I just love caching and fortunately, we get to choose the type of caches we find and the type of caches we place. Here in Alaska, there's something for everyone to enjoy. I appreciate everyone who takes the time and effort to place caches. +1!
|
|
|
Post by NorthWes on Oct 7, 2012 12:38:13 GMT -9
I just love caching and fortunately, we get to choose the type of caches we find and the type of caches we place. Here in Alaska, there's something for everyone to enjoy. I appreciate everyone who takes the time and effort to place caches. Well put, Karma - I agree...
|
|
|
Post by SSO JOAT on Oct 7, 2012 15:06:01 GMT -9
GSAk --> Filter -->
|
|
|
Post by akstafford on Oct 8, 2012 8:40:16 GMT -9
Totally agree.... with both Scobey & LBK. I want a cache that'll either bring me to a unique location, a fun location, be a unique hide, or something to make it interesting. The valley is littered with little plastic tubes stuck in stops signs in nondescript neighborhoods. I've hidden three caches in protest of this trend: Livin' Large (GC2X7B4), Park, Walk & Grab (GC3TYRN) and Micro in the Woods (GC3MXQN). I'm hoping to inspire other cache owners to take a little more effort in their hiding.
|
|
FlightRiskAK
Bronze Cacher
Posts: 66
GeocacheAlaska! Membership Level: Sourdough
|
Post by FlightRiskAK on Mar 5, 2013 21:05:43 GMT -9
Caches are meant to be found and I enjoy the "found" logs on my caches. I'd rather hide an ammo can in the woods any day just for the logs. I totally agree that if a nano (or even an ammo can) is hidden in a sensitive area, either subject to destruction in the search process or muggle infested, a bomb proof hint will help protect the cache and the surroundings. Intense searching is bound to draw unwanted attention in an urban environment.
|
|