Partially Buried?

[Leighton]

Would it be acceptable to bury a 5-gallon bucket, but leave the open end and lid level with the surface?

 

This way, opening the lid would effectively reveal a 5-gallon hole in the ground to hide cache items.

 

Other obvious restrictions apply, that is, digging in public areas, permission to place a cache, ease of access to the location, etc. But does this violate the burial of a cache rule? No digging would be required to "unearth" the contents of the cache.

 

[edit for spelling]

Edited January 29, 2006 by Leighton

[+Davispak]

I don't think it would, but be careful about digging, One of the forming tenants of this hobby was not to disturb nature. So make sure you get it cleared and mention it when you go to get it published on the site

[+Renegade Knight]

Digging to place the cache is the orginal issue.

 

Without special circumstances the cache is a no go.

[+Mopar]

So many questions can be answered just by reading the guidelines.

Caches may be quickly archived if we see the following (which is not inclusive):

• 
   
  
• 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.
  

[+Deliveryguy428]

However if you happen to find a natural 5 gallon bucket size hole in the ground then it would ok since you did not physicaly change the landscape to place the cache it was natural.

[+LaughingTerry]

I have found 2 or 3 cahes hidden that way and few more in holes with a rock or wood slab over them. I have one hidden that way too. You don't need a shovel to find them so I figure the guidelines are met. Mine is on private property so I had permission to hide it that way.

[+Mopar]

You don't need a shovel to find them so I figure the guidelines are met.

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.

[+fishingdude720]

I would ike to do this. I have started to make the cap blend in with the bush because I got fake plants and put them on the top. Hey, the first cache was a five gallon bucket

[+WizCreations]

I've found 1 that was placed exactly how you want yours (just the lid sticking out), but it was only a small plastic container. It's obvious that the hole was dug by the hidder because there is no way that there would naturally be a hole there the perfectly fits the diameter and height of the container.

[+Quiggle]

No buried caches, whether to hide or to find. As Mopar has already pointed out, this is against the guidelines, and a large part of the reason the NPS (National Park Service) does not allow geocaching on their lands. Anyone hiding a cache by burying it (even "partially") only contributes further to this.

[+Mudfrog]

We have a cache that is hidden similarly in a national forest. It's a 5 gallon bucket filled with stuff that we placed in an old armadillo? (some kind of critter dug it at one time) hole. Was almost the perfect size and left about 6 inches of the bucket sticking up above the ground. We just placed a couple of branches and some moss on top to conceal it.

[dutchmaster]

 

This way, opening the lid would effectively reveal a 5-gallon hole in the ground to hide cache items.

Make sure that all trade items FLOAT! In my part of the world that type of cache would soon become a 5 gallon puddle (full of sinkers and floaters). A better plan would be to hide it laying flat on it's side.

 

dutchmaster

[+DiskDevil]

I have found many caches half-buried. I believe that a few of them were fantastic hides. I know of one such hide that was recently archived. I think it had TORCHER in it's name.

[+Davispak]

I found a perfect hole for one of my hides. It was an old stump hole. The can fit perfectly into it, and some groundcover plant had covered trhe hole slightly adding perfect concealment. I have been getting good feedback on it. If you could find something like that, well there ya go, problem solved.

[+Puzzzler]

So many questions can be answered just by reading the guidelines.

Caches may be quickly archived if we see the following (which is not inclusive):

• 
   
   
  
• 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.
   
  

Now I'm getting confused. The word "pointy" is the culprit. This seems to imply that it is ok to use a non-pointy object, otherwise the word "pointy" wouldn't be specifically called out. Does this mean that is ok to use your hands to create a depression? For instance, I've seen many forest caches where the cache was placed in a shallow depression in the pine needle ground covering. The dirt was not disturbed, only the pine needles. This was definitely "dug" but not necessarily with a pointy object.

 

The other aspect of this thread that confuses me is that natural holes can be used to insert the cache container. However, is it allowed for the cache hider to carry over small rocks to fill in the sides of the hole to make it conform to the container? If not, then what's the difference where a cache has been placed on the ground, has a large rock on top, and a few smaller rocks set along the sides?

 

I'm not trying to be nit-picky here. I just want to try to understand the intend of the requirement. I had previously thought that the phrase "Caches that are buried" referred to caches with dirt/sand/gravel on top such that the seeker would have to dig for it. Now I find that I'm mistaken. Thanks for any clarifications that any of you can provide.

[+briansnat]

Now I'm getting confused. The word "pointy" is the culprit. This seems to imply that it is ok to use a non-pointy object, otherwise the word "pointy" wouldn't be specifically called out. Does this mean that is ok to use your hands to create a depression? For instance, I've seen many forest caches where the cache was placed in a shallow depression in the pine needle ground covering. The dirt was not disturbed, only the pine needles. This was definitely "dug" but not necessarily with a pointy object.

 

The other aspect of this thread that confuses me is that natural holes can be used to insert the cache container. However, is it allowed for the cache hider to carry over small rocks to fill in the sides of the hole to make it conform to the container? If not, then what's the difference where a cache has been placed on the ground, has a large rock on top, and a few smaller rocks set along the sides?

 

I'm not trying to be nit-picky here. I just want to try to understand the intend of the requirement. I had previously thought that the phrase "Caches that are buried" referred to caches with dirt/sand/gravel on top such that the seeker would have to dig for it. Now I find that I'm mistaken. Thanks for any clarifications that any of you can provide.

 

The reason for the rule is that land managers don't want us digging up the forest. When negotiating with them to allow geocaching, its usually their first concern. So digging to place a cache is a no no.

 

Though technically "buried", hiding a cache under leaves, sticks or rocks does not involve digging and is fine. If you dig a hole and leave the lid exposed its technically not buried, but is agaist the rules.

 

To simplify the rule: Dig = bad. No digging = good.

 

I don't think anyone would consider brushing aside pine needles or leaves to be digging.

Edited January 31, 2006 by briansnat

[+BigWhiteTruck]

I have found many caches half-buried. I believe that a few of them were fantastic hides. I know of one such hide that was recently archived. I think it had TORCHER in it's name.

Funny.

Just because it's underground doesn't mean they used a shovel!