[Az-Geocaching] Without "vacation" geocaches, some areas may never see a cache

[Trisha]

Thank you, Andy, for voicing the opinion of the many of us who are
less physically able to go after the hard "physically challenging
outdoor adventure" caches.

I think it is great that some folks can enjoy rigorous activity, at
one time I did alot of hiking and backpacking, rock-climbing, SCUBA,
etc...but not any more. Thank goodness there is such a variety of
caches so that everybody can find something to enjoy.

Trisha "Lightning"
Prescott


On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 14:35:19 -0700, "Andrew Ayre" wrote:






You 
mean what YOU THINK it should be. Not what it should be. Right? I'm
sure you 
were expressing your own opinion rather than wanting Geocaching to
exclude those 
less physically able.
 
Andy

  -----Original Message-----From: 
  az-geocaching-admin@listserv.azgeocaching.com 
  [mailto:az-geocaching-admin@listserv.azgeocaching.com]On Behalf Of
Ken 
  AkermanSent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 12:20 PMTo: 
  listserv@azgeocaching.comSubject: [Az-Geocaching] Without 
  "vacation" geocaches, some areas may never see a cache
  Vacation caches are not always a bad idea.  For example, I sometimes 
  travel to areas that don't have a very high population density and
have few or 
  no caches.  Such areas may have many great places to visit, places
with 
  excellent hiking trails and scenery, and many ideal locations to
place 
  caches.  Unfortunately, I travel through many such areas where I
would 
  like to go out and find a cache, but there is no cache to be found.
   
  If there are no people living in the area who are willing and able 
  to place caches, then why shouldn't I, or any other geocacher, place
a cache 
  in such a location?  Such areas need more caches - why should so 
  many great scenic and beautiful areas have few or no caches, while 
  an urban area like Phoenix has an overabundance of caches?  
   
  If a cache is well-hidden in a remote area using a durable container
like 
  an ammo can, then the cache should last for many years without
having to 
  "maintain" it.  For example, there is a cache on the summit 
  of Kings Peak, the highest point of Utah.  That is the kind of place 
  where I think more caches need to be.  This is a cache, however,
that one 
  cannot be expected to go out and check on within short notice, even
if the 
  cache owner lives nearby.   Getting to the summit of Kings Peak and 
  back takes about two days and is accessible to most people only
during the 
  summer months.
   
  For example, on my last trip I was in Wyoming, and I found several
caches 
  in the state.  However, many parts of the state have few or no
caches, 
  because the population of Wyoming is the lowest of any state. 
Therefore, 
  low-population density regions like Wyoming need the help from
people 
  traveling through the state to increase the number of caches in the 
  state.  Also, geocachers from the Phoenix area should be encouraged
to 
  place more caches in those parts of Arizona that don't have many
caches.
   
  Therefore, geocachers traveling through areas with few or no active 
  geocachers and few or no caches should be encouraged to place new
caches, as 
  long as such caches are well-hidden using durable containers.  This
will 
  help make geocaching more like what it really should be - a 
  physically-challenging outdoor adventure activity that one can do
anywhere in 
  the world.
  Ken Akerman (a.k.a. 
  Highpointer)