Distances For Multi Cache

[+vomadude]

Hi, I'm thinking of putting out a cache in a cemetery but I wanted to use clues from the area to guide people to the cache. My question is how far apart do the clues have to be? Is it 600 feet like the caches? Thanks

[+The Leprechauns]

Check out this post in the pinned FAQ thread regarding the Cache Saturation Guideline. The 528 foot rule doesn't apply to stages within your own multicache.

 

As a practical matter, the stages should be far enough apart from one another so that there is no risk of someone finding the wrong stage out of order. 100 feet oughtta do it.

[+Team_LPD]

No set distances (+/-) but, if you are doing a multi, please list the total distance required to find the cache. I don't mind multi's, but I would like to know how far I'll be walking, what kind of time required, etc when doing a multi. Nothing worse that getting part way into a multi and finding you have to walk another "X" more miles when you are already "X" miles from the beginning.

[+badlands]

There's a two stager here, 6 miles apart. No coords for the 2nd stage, just distance and bearing.

 

There's also a two stager here where the stages are only about 100 feet apart but it takes hours to solve the puzzle from the first stage.

 

Like Team LPD said, it's not good or bad, just let people know what they are getting into (without giving it away).

[+Wile E. Dragonfly]

OK... so, say I have my first and last stages of a multi far enough away from neighboring caches to meet the .10 rule. But, this is a puzzle multi and to solve the puzzle, one must answer questions provided at stage one by looking at informational posts along the trail set out by the park. I've added nothing to these posts, they simply use the information written on them without harming or altering them to answer questions on their paper. Doing this causes the cachers to walk the entire length of the trail and learn something about the park in the process... but also causes the cacher to be closer to neighboring caches than .10. Still, different parks and there is a fence between the two. And, if the requirement to solve the puzzle in this manner was not had, they would bushwack across the front of the park and never see the rest of an interesting little place... Is that a breach in the rules? Please help!

Edited July 5, 2006 by Wile E. Dragonfly

[+Boot Group]

I suggest you contact your local approver and bounce these questions off him/her. Good luck!

[+Isonzo Karst]

Wile E. Dragonfly, your stages are virtual stages (the informational posts) and they are just like cache boxes. IE, they need to be 528 from other caches.

However, your individual reviewer might allow you to do this, if you provide enough information to justify an exception to the saturation rule.

[+Wile E. Dragonfly]

Wile E. Dragonfly, your stages are virtual stages (the informational posts) and they are just like cache boxes. IE, they need to be 528 from other caches.

However, your individual reviewer might allow you to do this, if you provide enough information to justify an exception to the saturation rule.

 

This really makes me sad... I could easily just make it a traditional 2 stage cache with the coordinates to the second one inside of the first and totally be within the 528 rule thing. But, because I gave an incentive for folks to walk the trail that they are already on it may not be approved? And, yes, I've already submitted it and gotten a reply asking for additional waypoints... I really never considered it an issue until then because all I am asking folks to do is to look at the signs already on the trail. I didn't even take coordinates for these...

 

If you were the reviewer, what would you want to hear so that I would be allowed to do this? Please help, I spent a lot of time making this and think that people will be loosing out by not having it like this.

 

Thanks.

[+IV_Warrior]

While I can't promise it will help, it wouldn't hurt to mention the seperate parks with fence seperating them part. You'll still likely need coords for the virtual stages, though. How close are the markers to existing caches? Is there a way to use one or two that are at least 528 feet from an existing cache, and still force people to follow the trail like you wish?

[+Wile E. Dragonfly]

I will add the fence part... and the two caches in the neighboring park result in 2/3 of the nature trail in being off limits from caches. It is a TINY trail/park and is not even .10 mile wide at the end near the other caches. And, no there is no way to have the signs that aren't close to existing caches. The crazy thing is, to get from stage 1 to stage 2 you can bush wack OR walk the entire trail... and I know that the park managers would prefer folks staying on the trail as much as possible. And, the managers were also excited when I said that I would be using the little posts...

 

Thoughts? And, thanks for the help...

[+Team Neos]

I freely admit that I have, in the past (on really, really, really hot days when my back had already moved into spasms of pain, but I didn't have the sense to stop caching) gone to the far end of the trail where it comes out to get to a cache that was closer to the end of the trail than to the berginning of the trail.

 

That said, if I knew a cache was on the trail, and you assured me that the trail was pretty and that I should not miss experiencing this little treasure for myself, I would walk the trail to the cache. If you told me the nice ranger didn't want me to bushwack, I wouldn't. I think 19/20 cachers would do the same. (The other one would probably bushwack even if that meant going further than taking the trail).

[+Wile E. Dragonfly]

Yes, but would you look at the cute little signs and read all of the interesting things written about the plants? Or, would you just take a walk and notice all of the things that you've seen in this landscape before? I have a masters degree in botany and I learned stuff off of those little signs... neat things that knowing what the plants scientific name is and who it's related to doesn't teach you. Like which tree was used a lot for making pencils, or which shrub has leaves that contain caffiene and was used in the Civil War as a tea by the soldiers. I didn't know that stuff and I think it is neat... and by looking at the signs and paying attention to where I was, I was doing more than taking a walk and staying on the trail like the rangers said to do, I was delving deeper into my environment, taking the time to "smell the roses" or notice the pretty flowers on the poison ivy. It's that next level deeper... This area is not the most beautiful place in the world, but it is still interesting and can be fascinating if one takes the time to look... and that is what I am trying to do, get people to slow down and look. Not just rush for the cache at the end of the gps to grab another , but see their home landscape and see what is so amazing about it. Later, I will add a waypoint for carnivorous plants in the little park (can't see them right now) and I know that folks have no idea that we have any plant like that in the state, no less our little town... I guess that I'm having a hard time explaining this... and I'm frustrated partly due to the amount of effort that I put into it but also because I would have made the cache like this even if there wasn't neighboring caches preventing me from placing the two stages at that end of the park.

 

Again, I welcome any thoughts or suggestions for helping me get this approved... Thanks so much for the help so far, I do appreciate it.

[+Team Neos]

Well, I would read the signs, but I am a high school Biology teacher--so I do things like that. My husband would read them, because he is a giant receptacle for trivia, and things like that are his source. We were caching in Myrtle Beach SC with a local this spring and came to a cache that was deep in a park along a walking trail with signs along the way. We stopped and read every sign, even though the signs had nothing to do with the cache--they weren't even mentioned on the cache page. I think a lot of geocachers would have done the same thing. I think people who like geocaching tend to like nature, and people who like nature just tend to want to know more about it.

 

But you do have a point, some people would not read the signs.

 

I agree with the folks who say mentioning the fence would be helpful. I would go back and get the cords for the stopping points to see how close they actually are to the caches in the other park. If they are 300 feet away from anything else and across the fence, the reviewer might be willing to work with you a bit--if they are only 100 feet away from another cache, well, maybe not. Perhaps the owner of the other cache could scoot it over a bit, if you pleaded nicely?

 

The reason for the 528 feet buffer is to prevent cache over-saturation and to make is less likely that one cache will be confused for another one. In this case, the fence makes a pretty definitive barrier. And it's not like the average cacher would confuse a sign on one side of the fence with a geocache on the other side of the fence. Especially since you can be right up front and state on your page that you are going to have them stop at x number of signs to get clues for the final.

 

If all else fails, please do put out your cache anyway. Some people will take the whole trail and some people will read the signs. And at least a few of them will go to that park just because you put your cache there.

[+Wile E. Dragonfly]

Trust me, I totally agree with the cache saturation rule! I do, and in general, I think most of the rules that geocaching have are rational... not something I can say about most groups. However, on this one, I have two options. I can leave the puzzle in place, if the reviewer agrees, and use the existing signs in the park, and come technically "too close" to caches in a neighboring park via the virtual stages. OR, I can take the puzzle out, make it a boring normal 2 stage cache, but following the rules... and the signs and trail will still be there. If I were a reviewer, and this was explained to me, I would hope that I would see the logic in this... and for all I know, the reviewer on mine WILL. I hope that she/he does....

 

And, as far as you actually taking the time to read the signs... I am very glad to hear it, but honestly, most of the folks that I know, cachers or not, wouldn't. Maybe it's where I live, maybe it's that the university is here and they're tired of thinking... I know I've been in that position before. I don't know, but I do know that puzzle or no, the posts and trail are still within 150 feet of the other caches... and it's not going to change no matter what my cache is designed to be like.

 

If there was another park in the area that I could use this idea on... I would. But, so far as I know, this is the only park like it in the area....

 

I do have a question, and I know that it is probably out there, but where on the main page is the rule written that states that virtual stages are subject to the distance rule? I know that it is on the getting started forum, I found that after placing it, but I figured that all of the rules would be on the main website page. And, if not... can someone fix that? My mom is very techinically challenged and will never figure out the forum thing to learn all of the additional rules... And, as I'm mailing her my old gps this weekend, she'll be up and running soon...

 

Thanks for all of the help, and again, still, always... and additional suggestions are very much appreciated.

[+Wile E. Dragonfly]

Happy news! The reviewer approved the cache... happens to be a lover of puzzle caches. Lucky me. But, it's a good lesson learned about virtual waypoints...

 

Thanks for all of the help and suggestions, I think the second note to the reviewer (written with your suggestions) made the difference.

 

Oh, and the cache is... GCWZ6B

[+IV_Warrior]

Glad to hear your cache got published the way you wanted it.

 

A little tid-bit about the signs though, those who are really interested in them would have read them either way. Those who aren't intrested are just going to skim them enough to get the needed info to find the cache, and not really learn anything from them anyway.......

[Keystone]

Happy news! The reviewer approved the cache... happens to be a lover of puzzle caches. Lucky me. But, it's a good lesson learned about virtual waypoints...

 

Thanks for all of the help and suggestions, I think the second note to the reviewer (written with your suggestions) made the difference.

 

Oh, and the cache is... GCWZ6B

Well, I generally dislike puzzle caches because I am no good at them -- but this has no bearing on my reviews of caches submitted by others for publication.

 

I would have listed your cache too. I peeked at the archived reviewer notes and you did a good job of explaining why an exception should be made. Separate but adjoining parks, and the encroaching waypoints are virtual. I agree -- the second note made the difference.

 

Here is an example of how advice in the forums can help to produce a happy result.