An ongoing debate: The micro

This article was originally published on Cache Up NB. It has been mirrored here for archive purposes only.

The first ever geocache I ever went out and found by myself was a micro. The first geocache I ever found or saw ever was a micro. The first geocache I ever logged was a micro. The last physical geocache container I found (the day of the Ice Walk) was a micro. Do you sense a pattern here?

If you spend any amount of time reading message boards and other commentary on the sport of geocaching, you will undoubtedly come across the ever lasting debate on whether or not the “micro” has become the death of geocaching. There are plenty of posts and plenty of people out there who feel that the microcache has brought the original intent of geocaching down to a level that it will never get away from.

Of my 2260 finds as of today, 918 of those are micros. That means that 40% of the cache containers I have found have been micros. A quick review of a handful of cachers shows that we’ve found more micros than any other kind but that for some the amount of regulars vs micros is pretty close. From what I could see, whether or not micros are your top size found, it does appear that most people have around 30% or more of their finds as micros.

That would lead me to believe that there tend to be more micros out there than any other kind of cache. Yes, it’s all about where you are, but I think it is pretty safe to say that we see a lot of micro caches out there.

The ongoing debate that gave me the title for this story is that in the beginning, caches were regular sized or larger. They had swag, and were generally hidden in the woods or in places where most people don’t go unless they are out for a walk, hunting, or hiking. As time went on, people had the idea of creating micros with no swag and just a log for people to sign. This would allow them to hide caches in places previously thought unavailable. However, the proliferation of the micro also brought us the nano, and many other aspects to microcaching that purists hate.

So for me, I look at the micro debate and I see two sides. For the pro side:

• Micro’s allow you to hide a cache in previously unavailable locations such as urban areas
• Micro’s provide a new element of “stealth” required in order to obtain the cache without the general public being aware of it
• Micro’s provide an additional level of difficulty in finding the container (sometimes) due to their size
• Micro’s are less expensive to purchase/obtain and hide than full sized containers such as ammo cans
• Micro’s tend to be easier to obtain in large numbers, and thusly make it easier to hide more of them in a series or on a trail
• Micro’s are easier to replace than regulars since they typically are more abundant

For the con side:

• Micro’s are notorious for needing maintenance more than regulars due to the lack of adequate waterproof containers
• Micro’s tend to get muggled more often due to their urban placement
• Excessively large powertrails tend to be made up of micro’s (ET Highway) where questionable tactics for logging of finds is in use
• Many micros’ are hidden on the branches of small bushes and thusly the bush gets destroyed by cacher’s trying to find the container
• Because many micro containers are “throwaway” containers such as a 35mm cannister, many micro-hides that go missing are simply archived instead of being replaced
• Micro’s limit/eliminate the ability to trade swag items or deposit travel bugs/coins

There are merits to both sides of this debate, but for myself, after having been caching for a few years, and seeing how many micros get put out, I tend to shy away from hiding new micros and try and take the time and effort to put together new regular or at least small sized caches. I don’t knock folks who do hide micros as I have my own, but when there are so many that are already out there now, it’s nice to be able to try and hide regular sized caches to give us a break from micros.

What’s your take on the micro?