I guess it all depends on what your goals for the cache are.  Do you
really want a cache that is going to be found a lot, or do you want to
take the brave few to a new exciting place.
We snaptek types love being taken to a new place, and it shows in most, if
not all, of our caches.  Some of them are fairly difficult to get to, but
worth it once you get there. (Anyone, done freemont saddle want to back me
up on this :)
We've also got Labyrinth Canyon, that currently holds the record for the
least visited cache... too bad too, it's an interesting area, but I guess
the fact that you have to own a boat or rent one hinders a lot of
visitors.  Anyway, for us, it's not about getting a zillion people to the
cache, but getting the brave few, to see someplace nice or interesting.

Brian Cluff
Team Snaptek

On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Jim Stamm wrote:

> After a long time, and many miles, I finally placed a cache at Buster
> Spring (GC441F).  I felt that it was a good placing at the time because
> it offered challenge, variety of attack routes, and hopefully a sense of
> accomplishment for the successful geocacher.
>
> Now I am having second thoughts, and wanted some input before placing
> another.  The emphasis seems to be on the number of caches, and the speed
> with which they are attained.  Buster Spring will definitely hinder that
> type of goal.  Is it a bad idea to place caches in Arizona that eat up
> time?
>
>
> -Jim
>
> _______________________________________________
> Az-Geocaching mailing list
> listserv@azgeocaching.com
> http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
>
> Arizona's Geocaching Resource
> http://www.azgeocaching.com
>

--