"Mike Teague" <>
Sent: 6/2/2000 5:57:50 PM

Difficulty ratings?

I remember early on, someone toyed with the idea of a difficulty rating
system for the stashes...

maybe a number 1-10... the idea seems good in principle, but if the stasher
is the one to rate, we need objective criteria to rate them by... (dave
found two of mine up on Mt St helens to be rather dangerous, but I didn't,
for instance )

the number might consider criteria such as elevation, the amount of hiking
involved, and terrain type..

but then, what would be harder, a mile hike uphill on a smooth trail, or 0.1
mile thru a swamp, over a lava bed, or off trail thru thick forest/brush?
hmm.... i dunno!

how about this.. maybe a number indicating the stash's elevation in hundreds
of feet , and a two letter identifier for type of terrain..

for terrain, maybe:
tr - trail / road
gr - grassland
rk - rocks
fo - forest
ez - within 100 feet of a road

... and so on .. thats all I can think of right now :)

so, if the stash has a 31FO tag, and I'm up on a road at 2900 feet within a
half mile of the stash, I know I've got 200 feet of elevation to hike uphill
thru forest to get to it...

now I'm thinking, places with numerous different approaches might have
different terrain.. how could this work? maybe list the most difficult
terrain experienced? so if there's a trail, some grass, and then rocks, list
it as RK ? if so, we need to rate the terrain... how many types of terrain
can there be?

I'm just thinking aloud... looking for input.. maybe we dont need a rating
system at all.. it seems like alot of this _could_ be gotten from topo maps
(elevation at least) if you do alot of pre-planning before your stash hunt.

Mike Teague -
GPS Stash Hunt Homepage -