Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
supertbone

Cache density and earthcache waypoints

Recommended Posts

I placed a cache today that was with in a couple hundred feet from one of five waypoints belonging to an Earthcache. My cache was denied. It was my understanding that it couldn't be with in .1 from waypoints for multis and unknown caches per the written GC policy. Can this also be applied to Earthcaches as well, even though they are virtual?

Share this post


Link to post

Earthcaches are absolutely irrelevant to any other cache type. An earthcache can be placed at the same spot as a traditional cache, and vice versa.

I've actually done that, placed earthcaches almost ontop of traditionals and had traditionals placed ontop of EarthCaches. Kind of hard to confuse the two. No baisis for denial in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post

What Lep said - there's no proximity limitation against earthcaches, webcams or virtuals.

 

Actually, that statement isnt correct.

 

The guidelines are as follows (for Earthcaches):

 

"Under 30 ft is not allowed, period. Between 30 ft and 300 ft is allowed with permission from the other cache owner."

 

That is for Physical waypoints.

Share this post


Link to post

What Lep said - there's no proximity limitation against earthcaches, webcams or virtuals.

 

Actually, that statement isnt correct.

 

The guidelines are as follows (for Earthcaches):

 

"Under 30 ft is not allowed, period. Between 30 ft and 300 ft is allowed with permission from the other cache owner."

 

That is for Physical waypoints.

 

Thanks - yep - thats what I got from Earethcache Central too.

 

And a few of my Earthcaches are within the limit - but other cache owners have been very willing to allow an Earthcache next to theirs to date.

 

So no problem.

Share this post


Link to post

I read the question above this one (at the time) and responded there before I saw this one. I am cross posting because the topics have evolved to be the same.

 

----------------

 

30 ft rule! What is this? I've never heard of this. Here is a quote from the earthcache guidelines at earthcache.org:

 

"EarthCaches can be placed close to existing caches, but we require that the EarthCache developer contact the original cache developer before submittal. "

 

Is this a case of an "unwritten guideline"? Does anyone have a direct reply from Geoaware on this. Are you willing to speak up here on this Geoaware?

 

And while I'm asking - Is permission required to place an earthcache near an existing cache. The published guideline requires contact not permission or is this implied?

 

Regular caches don't require contact or permission in such circumstances. For instance - If I had a traditional cache placed behind a boulder with a plaque on it another cacher could put a stage of a multi-cache at the same location (one that required taking info from the plaque to calculate the next stage) without permission from me as the hider of the traditional cache. Seems to me to be the exact same circumstances. Quote from GC.com cache hiding quidelines (bolding is mine):

 

Cache Saturation

The guideline does NOT apply to event caches, earthcaches, grandfathered virtual and webcam caches, stages of multicaches or puzzle caches entered as “question to answer” or “reference point,” or to any “bogus” posted coordinates for a puzzle cache.

 

The same sentence also pointedly mentions earthcaches too as exempt from this rule.

 

Not trying to tell Geoaware what the rules are or how to do his job, but sure would like to see some consistancy between all cache types. And to see the guidelines spelled out in their entirety. Because I sure do hate (yes hate) unwritten guidelines.

 

Deane

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

---------------

 

So am I reading you right here Carbon Hunter and TheWonderStuff, this isn't published guidelines but something you've gotten from corespondence with Geoaware? Is this something recent?

 

Please clarify for the rest of us Geoaware?

 

Thanks,

 

Deane

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure if they are published or not. But I got this in an email from Geoaware.

 

Tried to get my caches as far as possible from exisiting caches, but in one case, about 75m was as far as i could go, without walkign into the ocean at low tide mark!

Share this post


Link to post

I recently submitted an earthcache that was near a traditional. I had already contacted the cache owner and told them what I was doing (I always do that in those cases--I even offer to let them have 'first dibs' at making the earthcache and to help them set it up if needed. Just trying to get along with others and not step on any toes).

 

The cache owner was exicted. He said he got a lot of questions about the area, but he knew nothing about the geology and would be happy to see the earthcache there.

 

I inadvertantly used the cache cords for the earthcache cords, instead of the ones I took while I was there. Geoaware asked me to move it at least 30 feet away. I was able to move it the 100 feet away to the area where I had taken a reading (it's a large expanse of boulders--let's let everyone have a good reason to explore all the interesting things there and get a litttle exercise, hm?).

 

I added the cache owner's name to the earthcache. I would never have found that wonderful area if he hadn't taken me there while geocaching!

Share this post


Link to post

I recently submitted an earthcache that was near a traditional. I had already contacted the cache owner and told them what I was doing (I always do that in those cases--I even offer to let them have 'first dibs' at making the earthcache and to help them set it up if needed. Just trying to get along with others and not step on any toes).

 

The cache owner was exicted. He said he got a lot of questions about the area, but he knew nothing about the geology and would be happy to see the earthcache there.

 

I inadvertantly used the cache cords for the earthcache cords, instead of the ones I took while I was there. Geoaware asked me to move it at least 30 feet away. I was able to move it the 100 feet away to the area where I had taken a reading (it's a large expanse of boulders--let's let everyone have a good reason to explore all the interesting things there and get a litttle exercise, hm?).

 

I added the cache owner's name to the earthcache. I would never have found that wonderful area if he hadn't taken me there while geocaching!

 

I concur...

Even if I'm near the .1M limit I will notify any nearby geocache owner of the EC. I have never had a negative response, in fact the opposite. Oftentimes the EC will give an explanation of the area. I will also incorporate any nearby caches to my submittal. This way all parties and cachers win...

Share this post


Link to post

What Lep said - there's no proximity limitation against earthcaches, webcams or virtuals.

 

Actually, that statement isnt correct.

 

The guidelines are as follows (for Earthcaches):

 

"Under 30 ft is not allowed, period. Between 30 ft and 300 ft is allowed with permission from the other cache owner."

 

That is for Physical waypoints.

The statements WERE correct at the time they were made. Someone bumped a thread from fall 2006. Guidelines change over time, and apparently GSA has added some. The cache saturation guideline for geocaches has changed since that time, too.

Share this post


Link to post

What Lep said - there's no proximity limitation against earthcaches, webcams or virtuals.

 

Actually, that statement isnt correct.

 

The guidelines are as follows (for Earthcaches):

 

"Under 30 ft is not allowed, period. Between 30 ft and 300 ft is allowed with permission from the other cache owner."

 

That is for Physical waypoints.

The statements WERE correct at the time they were made. Someone bumped a thread from fall 2006. Guidelines change over time, and apparently GSA has added some. The cache saturation guideline for geocaches has changed since that time, too.

Good to know the new guidelines. When I created most of my Earthcaches there was no saturation limit. Indeed, cache guidelines do change over time.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm all for the 30' rule! It allows for some separation on the GPX file for my Gupy. Gotta go in real close sometimes to differentiate, but the separation is there. I'm working on finding two multicaches. One has 32 virtual waypoints, the other has 11 actual waypoint caches. The one set apears on my GPS, the other I have to enter manually. (I can imagine the frustration that the reviewer had with those two caches! Both were published at the same time, after months of work on the part of both cache owners!) A little separation is a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post

Is there a density guideline for more than one EarthCache in the same spot? I would think there was unless the other EarthCache could bring up some other aspect of the geology in that spot? I posed this question to my area Geoaware reviewer but have had no response.

Share this post


Link to post
Is there a density guideline for more than one EarthCache in the same spot? I would think there was unless the other EarthCache could bring up some other aspect of the geology in that spot? I posed this question to my area Geoaware reviewer but have had no response.
From the EarthCache guidelines:

 

"3. EarthCaches must highlight a unique feature. EarthCaches that duplicate existing EarthCaches or related sites may be rejected. EarthCaches must be developed to provide a unique experience to the location's visitors, and to teach a unique lesson about the feature at the site. Multiple EarthCaches on the same feature should be avoided. Content, rather than proximity, will be the guiding principle for EarthCache reviewers."

Share this post


Link to post

Is there a density guideline for more than one EarthCache in the same spot? I would think there was unless the other EarthCache could bring up some other aspect of the geology in that spot? I posed this question to my area Geoaware reviewer but have had no response.

 

I have two EarthCaches which end up at the same location.

 

The published coordinates for the first (X) are at that end location.

 

The published coordinates for the second (Y) start further back along the trail as it is necessary to make observations along the way which feed into a different aspect of the geological features at the end location (X).

 

This format seemed to work for our local geoaware.

 

I have also been told in the past by a different geoaware that two simpler EarthCaches which are more accessible are 'better' than one, more complex EarthCache which people might find too challenging and that so long as the two icons were not on top of each other on the map, that could be a workable scenario.

 

As previously mentioned though, the diversity of the geology and Earth Science Lessons factors large in the decision of whether geographically close EC's can be published - in my experience.

Share this post


Link to post

Is there a density guideline for more than one EarthCache in the same spot? I would think there was unless the other EarthCache could bring up some other aspect of the geology in that spot? I posed this question to my area Geoaware reviewer but have had no response.

 

There are three earthcaches at Fort Jefferson in Dry Tortuga National Park, two we own and a third by another cacher. All of them focus on different aspects.

 

I was actually going to publish our two as one unified cache until the reviewer recommended I break them up, so I knew right away that they weren't going to have an issue with proximity.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

×