TheWeatherWarrior

Guidelines restricting cache placement should have a rationale behind them. However Groundspeak will rarely share the rationale so all we get in speculation in the forum. For years the speculation has been that the no-bury guideline was introduced because a ranger found a buried cache on NPS property and that led to caches being banned in all land administered by the NPS. Now we find out that there was no buried cache. Instead we find a ranger who wanted to get caches banned and he was able to argue to his superior that cache were buried and thus a threat to the parks. So the idea may be that the rationale is that any argument someone can make up about caches warrants a guidelines that says caches can never be hidden that way. However, I would think the proper response would be to dig (pardon the pun) a little deeper and find out just what the real concerns of the park management is. While many land managers worry about buried caches - perhaps due to experience with metal detectors - the fact is that when caches are buried the aren't creating the problems that people searching for artifacts with metal detectors do. Nor will buried cache cause the other problem that land managers have with digging. A guideline that is more specific than "caches are never buried" and had a clearly stated rationale would be easier to enforce, IMO. And, yes, it would give cache hiders more options. But somehow they manage to exist anyhow. That's because caches are clearly buried. They are buried under piles of rocks or under sticks and leaves. The confusion is when they get soil place around or on top of them. Most people know the guideline isn't about burying by about digging. The real concern the land managers have is with digging. But digging is nearly as hared to define as burying. Originally, the guidelines referred to using a shovel, trowel, or other pointy tool. So could you dig with your hands or with a stick? Is removing some rocks to create a space for the cache digging? Is pushing a bison tube into soft soil digging? What has happened is guidelines creep. The "shovel, trowel, pointy tool" stuff has been removed and now we can't make a hole. Eventually we won't be able to cover caches with rocks or leaves. I'm not making a judgment on cache cops or whether one should report guidelines violations. The caches in this thread are clearly against the guidelines, at least the current interpretation, and a cacher who finds one is certainly within their rights to report it to the reviewer without having to worry about getting called names. The "no-bury" guideline exists bases on a perception by Groundspeak that land managers are concerned buried caches can cause problems. Rather than working with land managers to address these concerned and having a limited guideline that addresses specific issues, we have a total ban on making holes in the ground. I keep wanting to post an NA on LordBritish's Necropolis of Britannia Manor III. I haven't been to this cache, but my guess is the Mr. Garriott had to dig holes in his property (possible using heavy equipment) to create this unique cache. I wonder what guidelines he violated? Rule violated? Report & enforce. Question about things? Give the CO a chance to respond. Innocent until proven guilty. "Cache cop" implies over-zealousness. See the above red paragraph. Uncertainty. Armchair NA suggested. Tsk-tsk-tsk. Sounds "cache-cop-ish"! And I'll add this. Let's suppose there's a clear violation and an immediate archive. I think the CO - who put out the effort - deserves a polite email of notice that goes on to suggest what can be done to remedy the problem & allow the cache to be reinstated. My understanding from reviewers (yes plural) is if is is YOUR property, digging is fine....because YOU are the land manager.

I always considered 'hitch hikers' to mean the annoying little seed pods that get attached to your clothes while geocaching. In the Mid-Atlantic they were pretty benign, just sticky, but in Florida, some have a bit of spins that hurt. I guess that Travel Bug is a good name. But it seems that hitchhiker has been used.

If you want a urban regular or large container, consider getting into welding. I've got a smaller ammo can that I'm going to possibly weld a plate to, drill holes and hard mount to a spot in downtown Tampa (probably be a couple months before I get to it though).

It was....before you joined the game. "Land managers" were even really a big deal yet. Your memory is wrong. It was entirely about land manager concerns. I have been reading these forums since 2001 and recall it was due to a single buried cache in a National forest that caused a nationwide ban. Just as a single hide on a RR track ROW using spray paint caused the RR guideline, as well as a court case which resulted in a fine and probation. Possible. But I've around just as long as you. I guess I was wrong. I do remember it being a hot topic when I joined, but I guess what was going on in Washington State didn't get transmitted as much to Washington DC where I was. ;-)

I personally don't consider the sprinkler hides that are "pushed" into the soil a violation. But I look at it as there is ton more damage by caching in a natural reserve than by a person in a MANMADE flower bed or landscaped area where the sprinkler exists.

It was....before you joined the game. "Land managers" were even really a big deal yet.

Solution: When the cache is archived, post a new cache, you can link to the old listing in your new cache submission for posterity. Now the cache will have an official active owner who will maintain the cache and its listing and you get credit for it. Then...even if the second cache is archived in the future, they can still link to it. I like this! By establishing a link on this new cache's page to the page of the original listing, you also provide a complete log history of the cache in this spot, regardless of who the owner happened to be. Clever idea. Then, all you have to worry about is the unlikely possibility of the original owner grabbing what legally is his property. Clever yes....more clever: on the old archive page, post a Write Note with a link to the new cache so any readers of the archive cache will know there is a new cache to enjoy (and re-find).

Should come to Florida....dry season and we still are in our fourth day of rain.

Cached in multiple states and have been analyzing a bit for years the aerial (not satellite when you zoom in) images. For nearly 10 years while practicing architecture and for some years as a geocacher. Google maps are VERY accurate. I have pointed out that point a few times and I always hear otherwise. Now I haven't been to every spot in the country but I can say I have been all over the DC, Miami (and now Tampa) regions and have YET to find things more than a foot or two off. This includes work with civil engineering an survey drawings I used within the AutoCad and later the BIMS software. It was not uncommon to use aerial images for preliminary site planning. A few times a parking lot or building line had to be adjusted, but again, on the magnitude of two feet or so. Sometimes there are elements of the aerial that do make it unqualified for accuracy verification. One such situation I recently encountered was downtown Tampa where a poor quality aerial was used and direct overhead view was not used, but a bird's eye isometric view (angled view for the home gamer). Another dis-qualifier is shadows. Again, urban environments tend to be the most common place this has occurred in my trials. Once zoomed in, even if directly above, if taken while shadows were long, it may put areas in shadow to the point not reference point can be determined properly. This also occurs with tree lines mountains and other elements. One excellent way to measure accuracy is via Geodetic survey marks and using the "benchmark" part of the site. Done this a number of times over the years and again have noted excellent accuracy (and observed iPhones are generally more accurate than a Garmin 60CSX). And yes, I have tried to keep my experiments/observations as scientific as possible. As a final note, I wish cachers would use the aerial image more often to confirm the cache location. When you aren't even on the correct side of a roadway, you definitely don't have the coordinates right.

some people do not consider certain situations as 'buried'. Pine needles is a perfect example. Yes, you have to clear the way for the cache container, and the container may be completely concealed (buried) under the pine needles. However, these have been allowed almost everytime. Just because you say it is buried, doesn't mean it meets the conditions to violate the guidelines (remember they aren't hard rules). I believe for example, buried/digging is permitted when on private property with permission clearly given. I also believe some digging/burying is allowed in some industrial/commercial zones. If memory serves me correctly, the original point of the "not buried" rule was to prevent 'cruel' hides to allow hunters/geocachers a realistic chance at finding. Obviously over the years environmental issues, respect for property (public or private) and more have filtered into the prohibition, but as said above there have been exceptions. I've probably found a dozen or so "buried" caches that didn't need any sort of reporting.

Yes, I have search and read some of the threads from the first (and other) Geo Woodstock events. But I want MOAR Anything folks want to share about the FIRST Geo Woodstock: how it came about, planning successes and failures, lessons learned, getting there and back. ESPECIALLY like to hear from organizers and Lackeys. But anyone can share.

Whatever you do, just don't ask these guys where they got their coconuts:

Did you renew based on an email? Is it possible you mistaken the reminder for renewal with your membership actually expiring? Also, this is related to a yearly renewal, not the 3 month renewal option?

Lab Caches are simply experiments, not a new type itself. Where they spawn a new type is yet to be seen. Best to just let Groundspeak do their thing and then judge. BTW, in my opinion, the Waymarking end is Terrible. I feel like I'm jumping back in time to 1999 when I visit that site. Just a really annoying, poor graphics way that Foursquare surpassed in the second month of service.

Start hitting up the junk piles of old city utility boxes, covers, etc. find places (might have to coordinate with the officials in Key West...but it is a small town) like a fake parking meter, an empty utility box, a faux sewer cover (small 8" diameter type), etc. There are TONS of good small, regular and LARGE caches that are possible in urban areas (and I'm getting ready to prove the point here in Tampa).

It likely stems from an issue where the park service kicked out an existing caches to make room for their own caches. Because of a backlash they likely are modifying the policy to be more in their favor and discourage placement unconditionally. You will also want to reference the Northern New Jersey Geocaching group that initiated the discussion and if I remember right initiated the action of forcably threatening cachers to archive their caches to better themselves over the good of the caching community. I have been waiting for updates myself as was looking to call on a boycott of the parks but stopped when it was mentioned that there was cachers working with the parks. In fact, it seem to be somewhat of a issue because geocachers from the southern part of the state did not support this and felt the action hurt them more than helped them. So yes, definitely looking for updates. I'm holding any further criticism and such as it may be that the parks and the local caching group apologizes to the cachers affected and returns to an open policy and a first come, first serve basis.

There is a reason....leave it at that. This is not the only one as such.

The game is sloppy now. Gonna have to get use to it. It is a product of the size of the game. I don't like it, and will rant about it....but I'm getting burnt out on ranting and just simply will try to find better caches and place better. But that will come in time. I long realized the days of old are gone. At least I can say I was there and feel lucky and privileged to have been there as far back as 2002.

Almost exclusively use my iPhone 5 for geocaching so that becomes the primary camera too. However, at times I do bring along one of my Canon 7D cameras. Granted my business is in filming and photography (weather oriented though).

Lab Caches do NOT show up in the statistics. If you have 10 Lab Caches, your finds will always show 10 more finds versus the number found in your statistics page. This is due to the experimental nature of Lab Caches. Yes...kinda annoying, but I think it is fun anyways. You can delete the Lab Caches if you want the stats to match your finds, though that will make the icon in your profile disappear.

This is the best answer your going to get.... That is NOT the point of the thread. I'm looking for ACTUAL sales and prices.

Oh, that is just a challenge cache. Though it does give me a FANTASTIC (and annoying) cache idea.

I changed my username some time back. This current one has worked since around 2005. My first username was a ham radio call, but I'm not even licensed anymore (ham radio is so dumb now). I'll never get bored of mother natures extreme force and I love "battling" the elements.

Probably an attempt to make ad revenue on YT.

I am not into geocoins other than as trackables I grab and drop (like travel bugs). But seeing just how crazy the collectible value of them has become and how coveted some are about certain coins, I got to thinking...what the most expensive geocoins out there. Now, I'm not talking about the manufacture side, strictly talking about retail side and/or the collectable value via auctions or individual sales (like eBay completed sales, etc.).