Krieger

...and you apparently see nothing wrong with digging the hole for creating those hides?? Many landmanagers ban caching for this very reason. seriously - a pressure cooker? sounds more like household trash instead of a geocache. It was one of the more difficult ones I've had to find and was placed by one of the best hiders in my area. If done properly, it can make the cache hunt very enjoyable. Idiots will always make poor decisions, but my point is that making the guidelines so strict to try to cover for all the stupid things people do will hurt the uniqueness of the sport. I think the guidelines should be changed to reflect that "With permission from the land owner", burying the cache could be permitted, so long as cache seeker does not have to dig to discover the cache. It was my cache that started the threads dealing with this guideline. I like your wording because it covers all the salient points of the reasons for it: Pemission, allows insetting, and restricts discovery to no digging. I would suggest that the background and reasoning for the guideline be included.

My apolgies to all for the gender bias.

Yup. Certainly looks like a guideline violation to me. This is precisely the sort of thing guideline is meant to prohibit. Apparently a reviewer found it and agreed. So I give this a: Very emphatic, but rude and uncalled for. The text of your message should have been sufficient.

Well, Gentlemen, I becomes clear to me that those of you who oppose my hide do so based on your own personal view of the guideline addressing digging or burying. I believe that the guideline was originally intended to prevent people from totally disturbing an area. That's point one. Point two is for those of you who supported me. We are working the words in our favor, however, as Miragee stated in one his replies, only the word "digging" was used and revised later to include the use of tools. The forum on rewording of that Guideline is going in another forum. I see that some of you are already participating in that one. Good. With regard to the restrictions attributed to the Arizona BLM; it seems each of the offices across the U.S. take their broad direction from Washington D.C., but are given latitude to manage their own area of responsibility. in suppoort of this statement, go to the BLM Website and search for Instruction Memorandum No. 2005-092. The Carson City office of BLM has stated to me that there is nothing wrong with my hide. Lastly, I would think that a group of people who persue a sport as complex as this one would not reduce themselves to personal attacks. One of the replies was especially egregious. I can only hope that maturity and good manners would win out over sensationlism and self-agrandisment. So, for those of you who supported my view, thank you. And to those of you presented dissenting views, I thank you also for stimulating a healthy discussion. My next step is to the appeal process. With that I bid you all adieu.

Someone made the suggestion that I post a picture of the hide. Go to GCNPR1 for a looksee and then tell me if I violated the existing "guideline" two years ago.

I just visted the Bureau of Land Management in Carson City, NV to get a read on this issue. With the UTM coordinates, we determined that the site is, in fact, on BLM land. Prior to going to the BLM office, I took pictures of the site which I showed one of their representatives. I asked if this kind of hide was okay. The reply was that there was nothing wrong with it. Let's continue the discussion on the salient point of being buried. Perhaps a better stipulation in the "guidelines" should be that caches cannot be below ground level. I'd like to let this forum go another few days, with the reviewers permission. before I submit my appeal.

Hello To All Geocachers, A little over two years ago, I placed Sage One in Bureau of Land Management land just south of Carson City, NV. It is an ammo can placed in a wooden encasement that has a wooden cover. I used my hands to put this wooden encasement into the ground, leaving the top fully exposed to view. A geocacher finding this hide has only to lift the cover and extract the ammo can, make the log entry, trade goodies, replace the can into the wooen box and replace the cover. Additionally, the cache is covered with a few dead wood sticks and small stones taken from within a few feet of the hide. One geocaher in the past two years has complained about how this cache hidden resulting in my cache being archived. If you view the logs for Sage One you will find nothing but praise for Sage One with one exception. I'm at the start of the appeal process and the basis of that appeal is that this cache is not truly "buried" in the literal sense since it is exposed to view and doesn't require disturbing the ground to get to it. I'm open for criticism, support, or questions. Thanks, Krieger