Another Milestone has been past.....

swampgecko · Post by **swampgecko** » 13 January 04 6:58 am

This particular Milestone slipped throu unnoticed, Australia now has 2000 plus Active caches at the moment......

The Active cache count stands as follows
ACT 77
NSW 532
NT 22
QLD 208
SA 480
TAS 37
VIC 442
WA 263

Total 2061

Congratulations Everyone....

As a side note, when I went to the States back early last year, California alone back then had 2000 active caches.

traineediplomat · Post by **traineediplomat** » 13 January 04 12:11 pm

the population differences between AUS and California are???

It is possible for them to "try for 100 caches in a day"....there was a guy who was going to do that.....wonder how he went

Two Goth Geeks · Post by **Two Goth Geeks** » 14 January 04 1:23 pm

Geez! I'm going to have to seriously help QLD out!

riblit · Post by **riblit** » 14 January 04 3:58 pm

traineediplomat noted:

It is possible for them to "try for 100 caches in a day"....there was a guy who was going to do that.....wonder how he went

That's a find every 14 mins 24 secs over the full 24 hour period.

Does that mean the 'no caches closer than 0.1 mile' guideline is not valid in California?

Even then travelling time would eat into it..

EcoTeam · Post by **EcoTeam** » 14 January 04 9:14 pm

riblit wrote:traineediplomat noted:
It is possible for them to "try for 100 caches in a day"....there was a guy who was going to do that.....wonder how he went
That's a find every 14 mins 24 secs over the full 24 hour period.

Does that mean the 'no caches closer than 0.1 mile' guideline is not valid in California?

Even then travelling time would eat into it..

Maybe they just toss'em out the car window over there?

Imagine doing 100 "A momentary lapse of reason" caches!

EcoDave

The Ginger Loon · Post by **The Ginger Loon** » 15 January 04 8:57 am

EcoTeam wrote:Imagine doing 100 "A momentary lapse of reason" caches!

Note to self: Must resurrect "A Momentary Lapse Of Reason" one day...

Quasar · Post by **Quasar** » 15 January 04 10:59 pm

According to <A HREF="http://www.brillig.com/geocaching/us_ca ... ">Buxley's Geocaching Waypoint</A> there are currently no less than 9,774 caches in California! It's a wonder they can move over there.

rav 4 raiders · Post by **rav 4 raiders** » 01 February 04 11:19 pm

South Australia Rocks!

We are doing well considering the population.

Other than the fact that they have sub standard football - I still prefer the code of my birth place - Rugby Rules!

Go the Saints!

traineediplomat · Post by **traineediplomat** » 27 February 04 3:48 pm

Active caches (population 2002 ABS) and people per cache (ppc)

SA 498 (1,520,200) 3,053 ppc
ACT 66 (321,800) 4,876 ppc
WA 257 (1,927,300) 7,499 ppc
NT 21 (198,000) 9,429 ppc
VIC 456 (4,872,500) 10,685 ppc
TAS 41 (472,700) 11,529 ppc
NSW 543 (6,640,400) 12,229 ppc
QLD 214 (3,707,200) 17,323 ppc

The Ginger Loon · Post by **The Ginger Loon** » 27 February 04 4:56 pm

traineediplomat wrote:Active caches (population 2002 ABS) and people per cache (ppc)
<ul>
<li>SA 498 (1,520,200) 3,053 ppc</li>
<li>ACT 66 (321,800) 4,876 ppc</li>
<li>WA 257 (1,927,300) 7,499 ppc</li>
<li>NT 21 (198,000) 9,429 ppc</li>
<li>VIC 456 (4,872,500) 10,685 ppc</li>
<li>TAS 41 (472,700) 11,529 ppc</li>
<li>NSW 543 (6,640,400) 12,229 ppc</li>
<li>QLD 214 (3,707,200) 17,323 ppc</li>
</ul>

Sorry TD I couldn't help reformatting this...

Team Stargazer · Post by **Team Stargazer** » 27 February 04 6:16 pm

The Ginger Loon wrote:
traineediplomat wrote:Active caches (population 2002 ABS) and people per cache (ppc)
<ul>
<li>SA 498 (1,520,200) 3,053 ppc</li>
<li>ACT 66 (321,800) 4,876 ppc</li>
<li>WA 257 (1,927,300) 7,499 ppc</li>
<li>NT 21 (198,000) 9,429 ppc</li>
<li>VIC 456 (4,872,500) 10,685 ppc</li>
<li>TAS 41 (472,700) 11,529 ppc</li>
<li>NSW 543 (6,640,400) 12,229 ppc</li>
<li>QLD 214 (3,707,200) 17,323 ppc</li>
</ul>

Sorry TD I couldn't help reformatting this...

Hehe ...

(Go SA!)

bmac · Post by **bmac** » 28 February 04 5:51 pm

Active caches (population 2002 ABS) and caches per million people (cpmp)
<ul>
<li>SA 498 (1,520,200) 328 cpmp</li>
<li>ACT 66 (321,800) 205 cpmp</li>
<li>WA 257 (1,927,300) 133 cpmp</li>
<li>NT 21 (198,000) 106 cpmp</li>
<li>VIC 456 (4,872,500) 93.6 cpmp</li>
<li>TAS 41 (472,700) 86.7 cpmp</li>
<li>NSW 543 (6,640,400) 81.8 cpmp</li>
<li>QLD 214 (3,707,200) 57.7 cpmp</li>
</ul>

Recalculated the stats to a cache per person ratio - that way the bigger the number, the bigger the cache/population density. Perhaps a more informative quantity would be the caches per active cachers ratio, but where does one get the statistics from?

bmac.

Papa Bear_Left · Post by **Papa Bear_Left** » 28 February 04 9:24 pm

bmac wrote:
Active caches (population 2002 ABS, 2001 NZBS) and caches per million people (cpmp)
<ul>
<li>SA 498 (1,520,200) 328 cpmp</li>
<li>South Island NZ 300 (949,245) 316 cpmp</li> <li>ACT 66 (321,800) 205 cpmp</li>
<li>WA 257 (1,927,300) 133 cpmp</li>
<li>North Island NZ 321 (2,870,688) 112 cpmp</li> <li>NT 21 (198,000) 106 cpmp</li>
<li>VIC 456 (4,872,500) 93.6 cpmp</li>
<li>TAS 41 (472,700) 86.7 cpmp</li>
<li>NSW 543 (6,640,400) 81.8 cpmp</li>
<li>QLD 214 (3,707,200) 57.7 cpmp</li>
</ul>
Recalculated the stats to a cache per person ratio - that way the bigger the number, the bigger the cache/population density. Perhaps a more informative quantity would be the caches per active cachers ratio, but where does one get the statistics from?

Just adding the NZ North and South Island figures into the equation, for interest.

GeoQuacks · Post by **GeoQuacks** » 28 February 04 11:00 pm

What about cache density (caches / sq KM)?

Team Stargazer · Post by **Team Stargazer** » 29 February 04 4:13 am

GeoQuacks wrote:What about cache density (caches / sq KM)?

Hmm ... let's see

Victoria = small state with high number of caches.

Your just trying to get to the top of the list anyway you can

LOL

Geocaching Australia

Another Milestone has been past.....

Another Milestone has been past.....

California

Well the stats are now

Re: Well the stats are now

Re: Well the stats are now