The purpose of this particular project is to document activity at the larger caches maintained by shellbadger. The information provided will be referenced in later reports.
The study examines 72 shellbadger caches that: (1) are/were small to large travel-bug-capable containers and (2) recorded at least ten finds while active. These are/were the caches maintained as the chief dispersal mechanism for my TBs. Examples of the cache containers used are the five largest in the figure at right. I also have almost a hundred (97) bison tube caches, all but one of which are in cemeteries.
The image below shows the distribution of shellbadger caches from which TBs have been retrieved. The black dots are active caches, the red dots are now-archived caches. All of the caches are/were accessed on paved roads and all but one are/were park and grabs at the roadside. The westernmost caches are on the plateau known as the Llano Estacado where the principal land use is irrigated agriculture. The easternmost caches are in ranch country with more topographic relief and far less tilled acreage.
The study examines 72 shellbadger caches that: (1) are/were small to large travel-bug-capable containers and (2) recorded at least ten finds while active. These are/were the caches maintained as the chief dispersal mechanism for my TBs. Examples of the cache containers used are the five largest in the figure at right. I also have almost a hundred (97) bison tube caches, all but one of which are in cemeteries.
The image below shows the distribution of shellbadger caches from which TBs have been retrieved. The black dots are active caches, the red dots are now-archived caches. All of the caches are/were accessed on paved roads and all but one are/were park and grabs at the roadside. The westernmost caches are on the plateau known as the Llano Estacado where the principal land use is irrigated agriculture. The easternmost caches are in ranch country with more topographic relief and far less tilled acreage.
The caches in the table below are numbered, but are also arranged alphabetically. The data tabulated includes the GC code, the abbreviated cache name, the date the cache was hidden, the date of the last find and total finds. These values are obtained from the cache home page. The derived values are the number of days between the hiding of the cache and the most recent find (as of 3/4/2017) and the average days between finds of a particular cache.
The average age of the caches on the list is over four years. The first cache was No. 72, put out 1/26/2010. It was the first of 15 ammo can caches and lasted about a year and a half; the last ammo can stolen was in 2014. All current caches are either screw-top, quart-size containers or pint or half-pint lock-top flat containers that are replaced as sunlight and temperature extremes break them down. The oldest active cache (69) was set out 2/27/2010.
The newest caches (8, 59, 61) are replacements for nearby archived caches. I commonly reuse a good location if the archived cache was lost to serendipitous events (guardrail damage, felled trees, etc.). There are 20 archived caches on the list, most of which were relocated slightly, but given the same name as the former cache. I do not replace muggled or inactive caches. The newest non-replacement cache (No. 38) was set out because my routine maintenance route is very near a county (Hall) where I had no caches.
Collectively, on average, the caches were visited every 28 days; the range among individual caches is 8 to 91 days. These numbers have lowered over the period I have been monitoring cache activity. Based on cacher comments in logs, I suspect the some of the perceived increase in frequency of cacher visits is real, but it might contain some error. First, virtually all the caches are very near well-traveled, paved roads; this is real. Second, my caches are well-maintained, widely-distributed and are now more targeted by cachers doing county runs; this is also real. However, I divide the total number of finds into the days between hiding of the cache and the date of the most recent find. The error creeps in when, for example, when two or more people in the same vehicle are all logging the finds. That said, I am not going to correct the values by reading past logs. I will just change my definition from visits to finds and learn to live with the data as they are.
The most frequently visited active caches (42, 50, 59,61, 71) are all visited, on average about every 15 days or less. All but the last one are in rural locations. These five caches might be considered my best caches, but are in stark contrast to some of the caches my TBs have visited in Europe, with visitation frequencies of 2-3 per week. In fairness, my core caching area in northwest Texas harbors neither the population nor cache densities observed in countries like England, Belgium, the Netherlands or Germany.
I have produced and uploaded some other reports on my travel bug and geocaching activities. The general titles and links follow.
The newest caches (8, 59, 61) are replacements for nearby archived caches. I commonly reuse a good location if the archived cache was lost to serendipitous events (guardrail damage, felled trees, etc.). There are 20 archived caches on the list, most of which were relocated slightly, but given the same name as the former cache. I do not replace muggled or inactive caches. The newest non-replacement cache (No. 38) was set out because my routine maintenance route is very near a county (Hall) where I had no caches.
Collectively, on average, the caches were visited every 28 days; the range among individual caches is 8 to 91 days. These numbers have lowered over the period I have been monitoring cache activity. Based on cacher comments in logs, I suspect the some of the perceived increase in frequency of cacher visits is real, but it might contain some error. First, virtually all the caches are very near well-traveled, paved roads; this is real. Second, my caches are well-maintained, widely-distributed and are now more targeted by cachers doing county runs; this is also real. However, I divide the total number of finds into the days between hiding of the cache and the date of the most recent find. The error creeps in when, for example, when two or more people in the same vehicle are all logging the finds. That said, I am not going to correct the values by reading past logs. I will just change my definition from visits to finds and learn to live with the data as they are.
The most frequently visited active caches (42, 50, 59,61, 71) are all visited, on average about every 15 days or less. All but the last one are in rural locations. These five caches might be considered my best caches, but are in stark contrast to some of the caches my TBs have visited in Europe, with visitation frequencies of 2-3 per week. In fairness, my core caching area in northwest Texas harbors neither the population nor cache densities observed in countries like England, Belgium, the Netherlands or Germany.
I have produced and uploaded some other reports on my travel bug and geocaching activities. The general titles and links follow.