snowfoxrox Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 I have been perusing Ebay looking for cache container ideas. I have seen several ads for pipes fitted with various lids that are 1/2 buried initially, but the tops come right off and the cache is hidden inside the pipe. Is this ok? I didnt think we were allowed to "countersink" our containers? If it's ok, then..well.. <<evil grin>> but if not, I would not want to do something wrong. Many thanks. SFR Quote
+briansnat Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 From the guidelines under Off Limits: Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate. So in short its not allowed if digging is required to place or find a cache. Half buried or fully buried its a no-no. Quote
ImpalaBob Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 (edited) Koikeeper and I have done many as you described ..... regardless of what the guidelines say. ImpalaBob Let me clarify ... We have found many as you described ... we have not hid any in that way! One was a stump, when rolled over it had a concrete lined box in the ground with a perfectly fit ammo can. One was in the middle of a grass lawn ..... down inside an old clothes line pole hole. These are only 2 of about a dozen or more that were below ground level. Note ... We did not have to dig to find them. Edited January 6, 2006 by ImpalaBob Quote
+The Leprechauns Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 Koikeeper and I have done many as you described ..... regardless of what the guidelines say. ImpalaBob My thanks to the hiders of those caches, for making life more difficult for those people who deal with land managers. "Are these caches buried?" is one of the top three concerns usually identified at the early stages of land manager discussions. The guidelines are there for a reason. Quote
+Team_LPD Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 Koikeeper and I have done many as you described ..... regardless of what the guidelines say. ImpalaBob Wow Quote
+Isonzo Karst Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 It can be tough to distinguish a dug hole from using an existing hole. The long leaf pines in Florida will burn right down into the ground leaving a very cylindrical oversized posthole looking hole. Can sure look man made. And perfect for dropping in that large round container. Eventually it looks like somebody dug a hole and buried it. BTW, I have no hides like this, but I see them. Quote
+whistler & co. Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 One of our finds (I won't say which one...don't want to get anyone in trouble) had the container BURIED. There was no pre-existing hole, and in order to find it, one had to move a couple of medium-sized rocks, then dig through several inches of rocky dirt, then there was the cache container. If it had not been a such a challenge to get to the cache site itself, I would not have been so persistant in searching and probably would not have found it at all, but I didn't want to make the trek again to clear up a DNF. The terrain at ground zero is perfectly level, so there is no way to hide a cache there without burying. I have no idea how the hider explained this to the approver (it's not an old cache). It's in a great place, so I hope no one complains about how it was hidden and gets it archived! Quote
+briansnat Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 It's in a great place, so I hope no one complains about how it was hidden and gets it archived! I hope someone does, because if its in a public park and a park ranger decideds to have a look at it, it can get our sport banned. A buried cache was the trigger for the ban on geocaches in national parks. Quote
+Faith the Aquariaqueen Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 I found a travel bug hotel made from a 5 gallon bucket that was buried, however, the lid was ground level and accessible without digging anything. I found it unique, and easy to use. Quote
+*gln Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 I found a travel bug hotel made from a 5 gallon bucket that was buried, however, the lid was ground level and accessible without digging anything. I found it unique, and easy to use. There are two parts to the digging problem. You may not need to dig to get the cache out but did the cache placer have to dig to put the cache in? Then again if he had permission to dig, lets go get the backhoe and dig a real hole. :-) Then it would be ok I suppose. Quote
+The Leprechauns Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 I have no idea how the hider explained this to the approver (it's not an old cache). In the cache review process, the volunteer only can go by what's on the cache page, and what information is volunteered by the hider in a reviewer note. They assume everyone follows the guidelines unless the available information suggests otherwise. So, I am curious what information on the cache page tells us that the cache is buried? The answer to your question is likely very simple: nothing was said, so it got through. The community and the listing service then relies upon reports from finders to weed out caches that shouldn't have been published. Quote
+*gln Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 I found a travel bug hotel made from a 5 gallon bucket that was buried, however, the lid was ground level and accessible without digging anything. I found it unique, and easy to use. Super Hero I-40 Eastbound TB Stash & Dash ? It even says it buried on the cache page, He must have had permission to dig, OR it might be in the sand where no pointy opject was needed. Quote
+briansnat Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 (edited) I found a travel bug hotel made from a 5 gallon bucket that was buried, however, the lid was ground level and accessible without digging anything. I found it unique, and easy to use. Super Hero I-40 Eastbound TB Stash & Dash ? It even says it buried on the cache page, He must have had permission to dig, OR it might be in the sand where no pointy opject was needed. ...or he added the buried part to the page afterward, or the reviewer just missed it. Looks like a violation of the guidelines to me: Edited January 6, 2006 by briansnat Quote
+*gln Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 the picture does not loook too much like soft sand!! Must be very soft rocks. Change a cache page AFTER the fact? Hmmmm. Quote
+Vinny & Sue Team Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 Having found several 95% buried (only lid and top inch of bucket showing) and half-buried caches around here and all across the USA, I must say that I suspect that if the hider has permission from the property owner (or if the cache is placed on their own property) then the reviewers seem to okay the placement. Also, I have come across one 95% buried wilderness are cache that is a legacy cache, one of the oldest caches in the country, and I know for a fact that the reviewers are aware of this and have decided to allow it to stay in place (because it was placed many years ago and is not causing any trouble, and, or course, no excavation is needed to open the lid), because it was I who raised the matter for review at one point (and the decision was that we should let sleeping dogs lie since this particular placement was causing no problems. Quote
+Thrak Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 One of our finds (I won't say which one...don't want to get anyone in trouble) had the container BURIED. There was no pre-existing hole, and in order to find it, one had to move a couple of medium-sized rocks, then dig through several inches of rocky dirt, then there was the cache container. If it had not been a such a challenge to get to the cache site itself, I would not have been so persistant in searching and probably would not have found it at all, but I didn't want to make the trek again to clear up a DNF. The terrain at ground zero is perfectly level, so there is no way to hide a cache there without burying. I have no idea how the hider explained this to the approver (it's not an old cache). It's in a great place, so I hope no one complains about how it was hidden and gets it archived! Actually, I would report it to a reviewer in a heartbeat. When people ask me about caching they often ask about "buried treasure" and such. I always tell them empatically that burrying anything is strictly forbidden. Anybody who does so is putting all geocachers in a bad light and adding fuel to the arguments of folks who want to ban geocaching. Quote
+StarBrand Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 I have never dug a hole to place a cache but have seen a few placed that way. However, one of my caches got mostly buried in a landslide a few years ago and now just barley sticks out of the ground - I've been accused of wrongdoing on that one but honestly - nature buried it - not me and the seeker need not dig. I can clearly understand why digging is off limits - it would encourge the uneccesary disturbance of too much random area. Land managers don't want this. Quote
+Miragee Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 I know of three five-gallon bucket caches that are buried. Two of them took a lot of work to dig the big holes in rocky ground . . . however, I wouldn't want to be the person who reports them . . . Maybe that is a good purpose for an anonymous "sockpuppet" account . . . Quote
+The Canning Clan Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 wasn't the first cache ever in a dug hole??? Quote
+briansnat Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 wasn't the first cache ever in a dug hole??? Not sure what bearing that has on this, as there were no guidelines and rules at the time, but yes it was. Quote
+Moose Mob Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 wasn't the first cache ever in a dug hole??? Not sure what bearing that has on this, as there were no guidelines and rules at the time, but yes it was. It also contained food items. Quote
+Vinny & Sue Team Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 (edited) wasn't the first cache ever in a dug hole??? Yes, this is true. My perception -- much as I referenced earlier -- is that even nowadays, while partially-buried (and, of course, totaly buried) caches are forbidden in state parks, county parks and similar parks, there are still some partially-buried caches in other settings which are approved by GC reviewers. Personally, I feel that any cache which is buried and requires digging to retrieve it is a horrible idea. As for the 95% buried caches, with the top of the bucket and the lid showing, well, I think that some of them may be fine if the landowner has given permission. Edited January 6, 2006 by Vinny & Sue Team Quote
snowfoxrox Posted January 6, 2006 Author Posted January 6, 2006 Thats kind of what I thought. I want my caches to be on the up and up. I was just curious after reading several auctions and web sites offering 95% hidden prefab type caches. Many thanks to all who have responded! ~SFR~ Quote
+briansnat Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 (edited) wasn't the first cache ever in a dug hole??? Not sure what bearing that has on this, as there were no guidelines and rules at the time, but yes it was. It also contained food items. And the second cache ever placed had alchohol Personally, I feel that any cache which is buried and requires digging to retrieve it is a horrible idea. As for the 95% buried caches, with the top of the bucket and the lid showing, well, I think that some of them may be fine if the landowner has given permission. If its your own land or private land where you have permission to dig there is nothing really to stop you. I agree though that its a bad idea anywhere. People who find the things may not realize that the cache was on private land and think its a dandy idea, then go do it in a state park. Edited January 6, 2006 by briansnat Quote
+whistler & co. Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 The cache I was referring to is on some of that great "unknown owner" land that abounds here in North Eastern PA. There is a lot of land that was (and probably still is) owned by coal companies that went out of business 40 or more years ago, and these lands are generally used by the public in every way imaginable: hunting, hiking, beer parties, tossing out old appliances, burying murder victims (yes, really), picking blueberries, riding ATV's. While it was a messy business trying to get the cache container out, burying it did absolutely NO damage to the area, and in light of the other ways people use and abuse old, unreclaimed mining land, burying a tupperware is not really causing a problem in this PARTICULAR situation. Although I do agree that caches are bettter off not being buried, maybe in this instance the reviewer realized that doing so would cause absolutley no harm to the landscape (if you can call a few million tons of culm "landscape" anyway!). Quote
+Vinny & Sue Team Posted January 6, 2006 Posted January 6, 2006 ...I agree though that its a bad idea anywhere. People who find the things may not realize that the cache was on private land and think its a dandy idea, then go do it in a state park. Brian, even though we have found several semi-buried caches across the USA, I must agree with you -- there is such a danger that a cacher may see one and think that it is okay to place a buried pr partly-buried cache in a town park or a state park, and that is where the trouble begins! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.