the4dirtydogs

I know of 5 caches that are active and are on the COs property that have been dug in the ground to hide the cache. A couple utility boxes, sprinkler boxes, and one fire hydrant and they all have double digit favorites. Like I said before I will report a cache that has been buried if I know that permission hasnt been granted. May I assume correctly that the reviewer is not aware of how those are hidden? Or that they were hidden prior to the "NEVER" wording change in the guidelines? You can assume what you want to but you know what they say about the word "assume"

I guess the guidelines are working, then. For the digging up the cache part, but I still find lots of caches buried up to the lid as the OP states she wanted to do. I dont see anything wrong with that if you have permission. I've also called out a few cachers for hiding like this because I know they didnt have permission and they've archived the caches. At one time, I would have agree with you. That was before the official "Geocaches are never buried" change. To me, "never" does include private property. You can bury what you want on your own property... just don't list it as a geocache on this site. There is nothing wrong with listing a cache like this on this site as long as you have permission too. Especially if it's on your own property and the cache will be published. If you say so. Im saying so

I guess the guidelines are working, then. For the digging up the cache part, but I still find lots of caches buried up to the lid as the OP states she wanted to do. I dont see anything wrong with that if you have permission. I've also called out a few cachers for hiding like this because I know they didnt have permission and they've archived the caches. At one time, I would have agree with you. That was before the official "Geocaches are never buried" change. To me, "never" does include private property. You can bury what you want on your own property... just don't list it as a geocache on this site. There is nothing wrong with listing a cache like this on this site as long as you have permission too. Especially if it's on your own property and the cache will be published. I'd be curious to see what would happen if you buried a cache on your property, someone posted a Needs Archive log on it because it was buried to see what a reviewer would do. Yes, there *are* caches that are buried but anyone that has read the guidelines beyond the fourth sentence would have read that there is no precedent for hiding a cache. Just because you can find a published cache which violates the guidelines doesn't mean that another caches which violates that guidelines would be published, or remain active if someone posts a needs archive log on it. WWhy would anyone post a needs archive on any cache that is on someones property? Seems to me to be a real stupid reason to post a need archive but some people are real stupid so that doesn't surprise me

We have one around here on an actual course out in the desert that was abandoned and left for dead. Guess they ran out of money. All the caches are pretty cool too.

You can also get away with burying a cache without permission on private property, as long as the reviewer doesn't know that's how it's hidden. In both scenarios, however, a reviewer will likely archive the cache if they find out it's buried, permission or not. The buried caches you've seen are probably unknown to the reviewer. The caches were published with the knowledge of how they were hidden. Believe me I was the same way on this issue. The ones I find I report if I know permission wasn't granted or not the COs property.

I dont see why it would not be legal but you're going to get the copycat response that the cachers finding the cache wouldnt know that you didnt dig the hole.

There is nothing wrong with listing a cache like this on this site as long as you have permission too. Especially if it's on your own property and the cache will be published. ****My opinion only**** This latest post is an example of taking two statements (in this case, guidelines) and combining the two. In reading of rules, laws, guidelines and the like, one should read to the end of the sentence. The period indicates "end of sentence". To add something from another sentence, is merely "reading into" what that particular sentence had meant to convey. From what I see of the guidelines regarding digging and permission, they are separate and distinctly different portions of those guidelines. There is no indication that these two portions should overlap or be inclusive to the other. Not only are they separated by a period, but they are in separate numbered sections of those guidelines. Those two items are distinctly separate and unrelated to one another by any means. ****My opinion only**** Not throwing stones here.... it's just the way I had been taught (long, long ago -- but still within this galaxy) to read laws, instructions, rules and the like. You know what they say about opinions...they're like A-holes and they all stink. I understand what you're saying and you're entitled to your own opinion. I'm just saying you can get away with placing a cache like this on your own property and with permission. I've seen this done before.

I know of 5 caches that are active and are on the COs property that have been dug in the ground to hide the cache. A couple utility boxes, sprinkler boxes, and one fire hydrant and they all have double digit favorites. Like I said before I will report a cache that has been buried if I know that permission hasnt been granted.

I guess the guidelines are working, then. For the digging up the cache part, but I still find lots of caches buried up to the lid as the OP states she wanted to do. I dont see anything wrong with that if you have permission. I've also called out a few cachers for hiding like this because I know they didnt have permission and they've archived the caches. At one time, I would have agree with you. That was before the official "Geocaches are never buried" change. To me, "never" does include private property. You can bury what you want on your own property... just don't list it as a geocache on this site. There is nothing wrong with listing a cache like this on this site as long as you have permission too. Especially if it's on your own property and the cache will be published.

Depends on if thats the COs property or he had permission for that type of hide from the land owner. Or like someone else said, the pipe was already there. Permission has nothing to do with the 'buried' guideline (see above posts discussing copycats and the guideline itself that doesn't list any exceptions). The only way that hide would be acceptable would be if the pipe was pre-existing. Of course permission has everything to do with a buried cache. If I want to bury a cache to the lid on my property I will and the cache will be approved(thats the only way around that guideline and I've seen this done many times). As for copycats thats on them to obtain permission too, I can't control what other cachers do.

I guess the guidelines are working, then. For the digging up the cache part, but I still find lots of caches buried up to the lid as the OP states she wanted to do. I dont see anything wrong with that if you have permission. I've also called out a few cachers for hiding like this because I know they didnt have permission and they've archived the caches.

Depends on if thats the COs property or he had permission for that type of hide from the land owner. Or like someone else said, the pipe was already there.

The harm also occurs when geocachers get the idea that caches can be buried, and start digging whenever it takes them more than a couple minutes to find a well-hidden (but not buried) cache. Oh man you guys are killing me over here. Really, I have never heard of any geocacher digging for a cache. Must be the treasure hunt part

That's because buried caches are fairly rare. I'm sorry I find it funny that you say buried caches are rare yet you have found several that are buried. I said fairly rare. I've probably found 5 buried caches out of 7000+ finds. I'd say that's fairly rare. I still think its funny. Sorry.

The harm occurs when a geocacher finds a cache that has been partially buried with permission, decides this is a good idea to copy, goes to a park, and partially buries a cache without permission. You might not think this does much harm, but plenty of land managers do, and some have banned geocaching on their lands over a lot less than people coming and digging holes. Groundspeak's guideline against digging to hide or seek a cache is there for a reason. That's part of the problem with placing caches without permission, buried or not.

That's because buried caches are fairly rare. If there were a lot more of them, then there would be a lot more digging up the woods looking for them. Some of the older buried caches were grandfathered when the rule was established. Other buried caches are on private property. Other buried caches don't mention that they are buried on the cache page, and the owner probably didn't mention it in a Reviewer Note. I have found several caches that were buried and covered up with dirt. Again, that's because caches that are buried and covered with dirt are fairly rare. What you will find, however, are cachers who come across a partially buried container (perhaps on private property) and then dig holes in parks to partially bury their own caches (without realizing this is against the guidelines). I'm sorry I find it funny that you say buried caches are rare yet you have found several that are buried.

Some of the ones I have found have been really fun. One was at a church and was like a water valve box and had an ammocan hidden inside under false valves. I almost didnt find that one.

I'm guessing that a reviewer might grant an exception if it's one your own property but the guidelines don't say that you can bury a cache if it's on your own property. The problem that I see with allowing buried caches on ones own property is that the CO is not required to divulge the fact that a cache is on their own property. Someone that hasn't read the No buried Caches rule (which has recently had a language change) might assume that it's okay to dig a hole in order to bury a bucket up to the rim for a cache hidden in a city park, a location they may assume has adequate permission if there are already several other caches in the park. Thats why you dont assume anything and ask for permission like you're suppose to. Like I said I've found buried(up to the lid) caches all over the place.

If the cache is on your own property then go for it. Say so on the cache page and all is good. Good luck.

Not a good idea, but I have found a few dozen(if not more) caches just like this. You can if the cache is on your own property.

I really doubt that you will ever see a "copy current cache page" you can use the copy/paste method. I hope you have a lot of people finding your new series. 63 caches is a pretty good series to put out there, hope you had fun placing them.

LOL. I have a cache in between an archery range and a shooting range. It's called bullets or arrows.

Leave the full log in the cache for the CO to take care of it. Some COs keep them. I've added plenty of new logs to caches but I dont think I've ever taken one out of a cache. Maybe a moldy wet one.

I say go for it, you have the ok from the CO. Thats all that matters, if says it's ok then replace it and claim your smiley face.

IIRC, Usain does ease up on qualifying races. He still wins, but he saves his energy (and his best times) for the final races where he is competing against the best runners for the prize. But more to the point: Even if there are 6-year-old girls at Usain's events, Usain isn't competing against 6-year-old girls. And Joe FTF Hog isn't competing against 6-year-old girls either. Joe FTF Hog is competing against Tom FTF Hog and Steve FTF Hog and Dave FTF Hog and Bob FTF Hog and all the other FTF Hogs. And maybe it looks like Joe FTF Hog is "running up the score" with this series of caches, at least, compared to the 6-year-old girl. But again, he isn't competing against the 6-year-old girl. He's competing against all the other FTF Hogs. That's clear from the fact that someone else started from the opposite end and beat him to some of the FTFs. First, to address the False Analogy Fallacy idea that Andronicus brought up. I've met enough geocachers in real life to come to the conclusion that any analogy that involves a comparison between an average geocacher and an Olympic caliber athletes is likely going to be a pretty good candidate for the False Analogy Fallacy designation. I've also come to the conclusion based upon reading the forums for many years that the FTF game is significantly different depending on where one happens to live. Maybe in some places the FTF games is about Joe FTF Hog competing against Tom FTF Hog and Steve FTF Hog and Dave FTF Hog and Bob FTF Hog and all the other FTF Hogs. However, I don't see a lot of threads from Joe FTF Hog complaining the Tom FTF Hog won't ease up so that Joe's "career find count" of 457 FTFs can get a bit closer to Tom's 523 career FTFs. What I do so is Bill "I'd like experience what it's like to be FTF on one or two caches" wondering why Tom FTF hound and Bob FTF hound insist on being FTF on every cache available. Whether or not someone agrees that the inclusion of world record holding athletes in any sort of analogy has any validity, let's consider a scenario that includes that 6 year old girl. Based on some of the responses here I wonder how the following would pan out. Joe FTF Hog and Bill, whose six year old daughter has wondered what it would be like to find a cache before anyone else, get an instant notification for a cache (Bill has only recently become a PM and has learn about notifications). Bill and his daughter arrive first at the parking area a few hundred feet from the cache, and the six year old girl, eyes locked on her fathers smart phone starts walking toward the cache. Joe FTF Hog screeches to a halt as he pulls into the parking area, jumps out an starts walking swiftly toward the cache when he notices the you girl with a GPS in her hand. What does Joe do? You're kidding right. This is getting really stupid. I cant believe you would even waste your time thinking of this stuff... nevermind I believe it. What does Joe do? They share the FTF and get ice cream.