First Time Placing a Cache , So much trouble ready to call it quits for good !

[Luckless]

You might want to rethink having the kids help place a cache. It takes me hours, maybe even a couple of days to get the coordinates, and then try them out, and then readjust them, etc. until I get them just the way I want them. I doubt any kids would have enough patience to help me with that. For that reason I wouldn't recommend that kids help while getting/averaging coordinates- unless you've got a more accurate GPS and can do it quicker than I can. Maybe they could help locate the spot or double check the coords later after all the averaging has been done and make the final placement of the cache. Having to deal with bored/discouraged kids while trying to average a cache would not be anything I would want. I'd end up discouraged too.

Edited February 27, 2007 by Luckless

[+duhgee]

You might want to rethink having the kids help place a cache. It takes me hours, maybe even a couple of days to get the coordinates, and then try them out, and then readjust them, etc. until I get them just the way I want them. I doubt any kids would have enough patience to help me with that. For that reason I wouldn't recommend that kids help while getting/averaging coordinates- unless you've got a more accurate GPS and can do it quicker than I can. Maybe they could help locate the spot or double check the coords later after all the averaging has been done and make the final placement of the cache. Having to deal with bored/discouraged kids while trying to average a cache would not be anything I would want. I'd end up discouraged too.

That's what kids are like? Sounds just like my wife! Having the `distance to destination' on the GPSr has been a lifesaver, not to mention the snacks/treats/candy that I use to bribe her to keep going. Even still, with all the work of placing a cache properly, I've found it's best done alone - without wife, nor apparently with child either. Ah, she's great fun though. I wouldn't trade her for most of the geoswag I get my hands on! [Good thing she doesn't read the forums!]

[+Moore9KSUcats]

I have no idea how it happened, but Saturday we placed a new cache, and as usual, hubby averaged the coordinates right on top of the container for several minutes. The cache was approved late last nite, and this morning, two different geocachers rushed out to be FTF.

 

Somehow, the coordinates led them to a field about 140' away. We weren't even over there, and he didn't "fat finger" them into the computer when he entered them. Strange!

 

Well, geocacher #1 called hubby, and asked..... and was directed to the correct area.

 

It isn't like there is great tree cover there... there are two lone trees in a field about 60' from the nearest tree.

 

Anyway, we went back, and sure enough... the posted coordinates (and the coordinates in the GPSr) led to the field..... We took new coordinates, and checked them out by walking around and seeing if they pointed to the correct area, and they did.

 

Strange things do happen, and placing a good cache can take time and planning and rechecking!

 

Read the log... he wrote it up really well.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...38-36b8ca694408

[+avalanchewolf]

Duplicate post

Edited March 4, 2007 by avalanchewolf

[+avalanchewolf]

First of all I thank you all for you input and advise. It did not fall apon deaf ears and was well put to use. The past 2 days I have been researching areas for a new placement and after making sure we had a perfect area we invited some friends that had never been out but own a much fancier GPS than ours headed out once again with the guidelines, 2 GPS , Laptop (internet enabled) and google earth to place the cache.

 

We made sure there were no caches within 0.20 to make sure we were doubled the placement range and double checked this against google earth with the geocache LMK file enabled and making sure both GPS were showing the same coords.

 

We posted the cache and after enabling it checked once again nearby caches using the FIND all nearby caches link as below :

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.asp...lon=-121.247514

 

And off we went to find the nearby caches. Well no luck in finding some of them but our friends were able to find a few which seems like the may be hooked for sure !

 

Tonight though before heading to bed I check to see if the listing has been approved yet. The wife said she hadnt seen that shade of red before but it was quite vibrant.

 

I was given the same copy and paste response as the 2 other times before except this time with false reasons which explained the shades of red flashing across my face.

 

It read the same exactly before with a differant problem cache that :

 

Hi avalanchewolf !

While I appreciate your enthusiasm in hiding this cache, I am unable to post it as it stands.

 

At this time, your cache does not appear to meet the guidelines because it is too close to another cache. Caches should not be placed within 0.1 mile (528 feet) of existing caches, unless there is some sort of natural barrier between the two locations.

 

Guidelines for geocaches can be viewed at the following link: (visit link)

 

Your cache is to close to one of the stages of a nearby Multi cache: (visit link)

 

Pease re-locate this cache so it conforms with the guidelines for placement. Once you have moved it, just update this same cache page to reflect the new coordinates and description, then click on the ''click to enable'' link at the top of the cache page to put the cache back onto the reviewer queue.

 

You may email me at via the link to my profile on the log. Please be sure to include the cache name and GCxxxx number, or better yet, the URL of the cache page.

 

Thanks for your cooperation!

Nomex

Northern California Volunteer Cache Reviewer

 

 

Now some belived it was my noobness before but and true it partialy was but this time , I can not see I am in the wrong here. What more can a person honestly do when checking 2 differant GPS units and google earth and the Geocaching website.

 

The response followed :

 

What are you talking about ? Do you just have a beef against us placing this or any other cache ? This is the 3rd time you have not approved this cache due to distance guidelines not being met, which has now been moved to a location miles away. These are all caches nearby , including one that is disabled and has not been foun since Oct. 2006 in which you are stating it is too close. And I am a premium members so this shows ALL caches including premium member only caches! I really do not understand the problem here and your copy and paste statment has no grounds for not approving this cache relating to the placement guidelines.

 

LISTING OF NEARBY CACHES PER GEOCACHING WEBSITE USING ALL NEARBY CACHE DATA LINK :

(visit link)

 

0.2mi

11 Nov 06 Full Moon Rising by The Janitor (GCZAD7)

California 2 days ago*

 

0.3mi

6 Apr 03 Third Time's the Charm by Kimbo (GCF3B7)

California 2 days ago*

 

0.3mi

16 Mar 04 M.A.S.H. by Jeo (GCHYBT)

California 2 days ago*

 

0.3mi Multi Magic (GCTKC4)

California 12 Oct 06

Which is disabled and has not been found since October 12, 2006 and was reported on February 18 to need repair BY OWNER and has not been repaired since this occuring.

 

0.3mi

16 Mar 06 Maidu Power (GCTNVC)

California

 

I have followed all guidelines to the LETTER and going beyond the them to make sure there are no problems. I am reporting this matter on the forums. I appericate you are a volunteer and the hours of work you have given the community but if you are just going to copy and paste information without checking it you should honestly step away.

 

You are stating that N 38° 43.999 W 121° 14.851 is closer that 0.10m away from N 38° 44.283 W 121° 14.817 when with DME is showing 0.33 miles away. How does that work ? And on top of that there are caches closer than this one but still well outside the guidelines minimum distance range but instead you referance a diabled cache 3X the distance requirement per the placement guidelines.

 

If there is something I am missing , by all means clue me in but please provide the details of this information so I can better understand why. If it is personal well then see above as there is no place as a reviewer for it in something that is supposed to be fun and educational.

 

Yes I belive I was a bit harsh in my rebutle but with good cause. But rest assured I have not given up and will get this cache placed even if I will need help from Groundspeak it self. As always your advise is greatly appericated.

[bogleman]

Could it be that this cache is what is causing the proxmity challenge? Your location could be/is too close to one of the stages of the multi.

 

You could contact the owner and ask them the numbers of their stages (to see if yours is too close to one of the stages). Without knowing the locations of the stages to the mulit you are only getting yourself more frustrated. Personally I would give up on your chosen location or find all the stages to the multi (with the owners help if needed).

[+avalanchewolf]

Yup that is the cache that the reviewer is reporting it is too close.

 

We did give up on the last location and moved it about 3 miles away and are still having problems. We cant find all the locations of the multi cache because it has been disabled as of 2 weeks ago and has not had any activity since Oct. of 2006.

 

The starting point to this multi is 0.33 miles away ( direct line , not a walking path ) The next nearest cache to our placement is .20miles away.

Edited March 4, 2007 by avalanchewolf

[+avalanchewolf]

Well I think this time we are done. We have archived another location and we are disbanding the cache.

 

We know a person that does geocaching and will give him the vesel that we were using that was from a cache that was destroyed and we tried to give it new life. Maybe the container was just cursed never to be a cache.

 

I made peace with the reviewer and I am leaving the topic to die. Will have to say will take awhile to get back into hunting and I dont have any intentions on trying to place again for sure.

 

Thanks all once again that gave me input that was used to find this last placement just once again didnt work out.

[+Wile E. Dragonfly]

While I understand your frustration, I don't understand leaving the game over it... I am an owner of a 4 stage multi... and if you havn't done it, there's no way to know where the stages are and they are not anywhere close to the first stage. It is part of the game unfortunatly. I have solved that problem by doing all of the caches in my area... but at one point was close to putting out a cache in a great park, only to do a hard puzzle cache and found the final hide in that park!

 

It does make me wonder if there could be some sort of pre-approval process for location only that we could implement with the reviewers so that you could verify that the area was OK to hide in before going to the effort of hiding the cache. As it stands now, we're supposed to have the cache ready to go before submitting it for approval. If we had a location pre-approval, then situations like yours wouldn't be so common.

Edited March 4, 2007 by Wile E. Dragonfly

[+ironman114]

Yup that is the cache that the reviewer is reporting it is too close.

 

We did give up on the last location and moved it about 3 miles away and are still having problems. We cant find all the locations of the multi cache because it has been disabled as of 2 weeks ago and has not had any activity since Oct. of 2006.

 

The starting point to this multi is 0.33 miles away ( direct line , not a walking path ) The next nearest cache to our placement is .20miles away.

 

I see you have finally realized that the cache you are too close to is a multi. That would mean that pulling up all nearby caches will not show all the stages to a multi. You would have to find them to know where they were. Yes the cache is disabled right now but it has been disabled before to repair the ride you have to go on to get the numbers needed. Past logs indicate that the owner is diligent about fixing his cache.

 

You could wait till the cache is re-enabled and take your kids on what looks would be a fun, interesting ride or you could use Bogleman's suggestion

and send an email to the cache owner and explain that you have been trying to hide a cache and one of the waypoints of his disabled cache is giving you some trouble and could he possibly help by giving you the coordinates of the stage closest to your proposed hide. You may include the coordinates of your proposed cache so he could only reveal the one stage causing you problems not all the stages.

 

Or you could just quit and teach your kids quitting is easier than fixing things.

[+Too Tall John]

It does make me wonder if there could be some sort of pre-approval process for location only that we could implement with the reviewers so that you could verify that the area was OK to hide in before going to the effort of hiding the cache. As it stands now, we're supposed to have the cache ready to go before submitting it for approval. If we had a location pre-approval, then situations like yours wouldn't be so common.

 

Hmm... here's what I'm thinking:

 

A page that works almost just like "Search for a Cache from Coordinates." Instead of searching just caches it'd search all entered waypoints. If a waypoint is closer than it should be, the page returns a red flag, or whatever. It doesn't have to return any other information that would be spoiler for another cache. If the area is clear, it could return " Congratulations! You found it, intentionally or not! This is a great place to hide a cache.**" This would help someone research where to place a cache.

 

If I'm reading the OP's stories correctly, this would have helped avoid a lot of frustration, and it doesn't have to involve the reviewers at all, in fact, it would mean they'd not have to keep sending hiders messages when they hid a cache too close to a multi stage they didn't know about. I don't know how frequently this happens, but I bet the reviewers would love the idea. Wouldn't you briansnat?

 

Of course, someone would find a way to abuse the function, right? Hmm... havn't thought about this long enough to figure out how...

 

** Pending final review by volunteer reviewer. Groundspeak reserves the right to refuse any cache for any reason. Not available in all 50 states. Please see your local reviewer for details.

[+kf4oox]

It does make me wonder if there could be some sort of pre-approval process for location only that we could implement with the reviewers so that you could verify that the area was OK to hide in before going to the effort of hiding the cache. As it stands now, we're supposed to have the cache ready to go before submitting it for approval. If we had a location pre-approval, then situations like yours wouldn't be so common.

 

This is a great Idea. I will go for a pre approval for location. This will let people check if they could then place a cache somewhere then do all the other work and submit it. It would save work on many people including the headaches from rejected people. All they will have to say is that their is something too close and not need to ident a multi stage or anything. I really think this is a grand idea.

 

Paul

[+QSparrow]

Sorry about all the trouble you're having! I hadn't even thought about the multi-cache problem, so thanks for the heads up. I have a disabled cache out there as well that has been rejected twice for proximity. Growing pains for us newbies! Keep up the spirit and don't take it personally - I really don't think the reviewer is against you in any way, they are just doing their duty.

Edited March 4, 2007 by QSparrow

[+cave-rat]

ha....I had the same problem when I started...it was at a lake and the actual walk around the lake from the nearest cache was .5 miles but the stupid lake had to be narrow enough that it was just under the legal limit...I told the reviewer that...he did not move so I got moved it .....now too close to another one....gave up that spot moved it....same problem again. Finally for the fourth time I checked every other caches nearby it- 700ft to the next nearest....but had to go on vacation...when came back...somebody beat me to it and their cache was 200 ft away...arrrr gave up that park altogether and placed it in my front yard. Never regret it since it is very easy to maintance it and fun to watch people hunt for it.

 

don't give up...it is still fun

[+chuckwagon101]

Well I think this time we are done. We have archived another location and we are disbanding the cache.

 

We know a person that does geocaching and will give him the vesel that we were using that was from a cache that was destroyed and we tried to give it new life. Maybe the container was just cursed never to be a cache.

 

I made peace with the reviewer and I am leaving the topic to die. Will have to say will take awhile to get back into hunting and I dont have any intentions on trying to place again for sure.

 

Thanks all once again that gave me input that was used to find this last placement just once again didnt work out.

 

Uhhhhhhhhh......remind me to never take you fishing!

[+lals cache]

We just started a few weeks ago. We have not tried to hide one yet. I was unaware of the guidelines. I am glad I saw this so I know to read well and pay attention so we do not encounter the same pitfalls.

[+Airhead-kb]

We just started a few weeks ago. We have not tried to hide one yet. I was unaware of the guidelines. I am glad I saw this so I know to read well and pay attention so we do not encounter the same pitfalls.

ditto

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

It's always been my personal advice to new cachers to wait until they have found about 100 caches before hiding their first, so they can get a better feel for what works and what doesnt in the game, That's about the time I hid my first, and have heard back from others who took that advice and they were happy with the results too.

 

on another note, it may make the game a lot more fun to approach if in a little more laid back manner. I know one cacher who was actually yelling at a twelve year old who wanted to walk in circles rather than wait for the GPS to settle down, Personally I dont see how such an overbearing and technical approach can be any fun. Try putting away the 528 foot ruler and coming at the problem from another angle.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Don't despair, avalanchewolf. You'll eventually find a good spot for your cache.

 

I've been doing this for nearly 5 years now and sometimes the same thing happens to me. I had driven by a perfect cache location many times and wondered why no one had placed a cache there. I finally got around to putting a container together and hiding it. There was a virtual cache nearby, but since those no longer count for the saturation guideline, I thought my spot was ok. I placed the cache, wrote up the page, then got word that it was too close to a stage of a multicache. Argh! it turns out that this location is a stage of a multi that starts in another country, some kind of epic "world cache" where you get the coordinates from someone who has found the previous stage. The stages of multis count for the saturation guideline, so I had to take my cache elsewhere.

 

Oh well, there will be another location down the road where I can place it. There may be a sense of urgency for you since this is your first cache, but don't take shortcuts to get it out there. The guidelines are all there for a reason, and like them or not, you have to follow them to play the game.

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

Don't despair, avalanchewolf. You'll eventually find a good spot for your cache.

 

I've been doing this for nearly 5 years now and sometimes the same thing happens to me. I had driven by a perfect cache location many times and wondered why no one had placed a cache there. I finally got around to putting a container together and hiding it. There was a virtual cache nearby, but since those no longer count for the saturation guideline, I thought my spot was ok. I placed the cache, wrote up the page, then got word that it was too close to a stage of a multicache. Argh! it turns out that this location is a stage of a multi that starts in another country, some kind of epic "world cache" where you get the coordinates from someone who has found the previous stage. The stages of multis count for the saturation guideline, so I had to take my cache elsewhere.

 

Oh well, there will be another location down the road where I can place it. There may be a sense of urgency for you since this is your first cache, but don't take shortcuts to get it out there. The guidelines are all there for a reason, and like them or not, you have to follow them to play the game.

 

when did they start with the whole "stage of a multi" I thought it was onlt the final that counted?

[Keystone]

Checking the coordinates for all stages of a multicache didn't become common among reviewers until 2003.

 

Since late 2005, the listing guidelines have mentioned this specifically.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Don't despair, avalanchewolf. You'll eventually find a good spot for your cache.

 

I've been doing this for nearly 5 years now and sometimes the same thing happens to me. I had driven by a perfect cache location many times and wondered why no one had placed a cache there. I finally got around to putting a container together and hiding it. There was a virtual cache nearby, but since those no longer count for the saturation guideline, I thought my spot was ok. I placed the cache, wrote up the page, then got word that it was too close to a stage of a multicache. Argh! it turns out that this location is a stage of a multi that starts in another country, some kind of epic "world cache" where you get the coordinates from someone who has found the previous stage. The stages of multis count for the saturation guideline, so I had to take my cache elsewhere.

 

Oh well, there will be another location down the road where I can place it. There may be a sense of urgency for you since this is your first cache, but don't take shortcuts to get it out there. The guidelines are all there for a reason, and like them or not, you have to follow them to play the game.

 

when did they start with the whole "stage of a multi" I thought it was onlt the final that counted?

 

I'm not sure when, exactly, but it has been for quite some time. The actual wording from the guidelines is this:

The cache saturation guideline applies to all physical stages of multicaches and mystery/puzzle caches, as well as any other stages entered as “stages of a multicache.”

[+Team GPSaxophone]

or what Keystone said

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

thanks, I had a friend run into that same problem

[+HaLiJuSaPa]

To get a cache published this year, I'd advise against adopting the strategy of waiting for your cache reviewer to get fed up and move on. Picking a different spot this weekend would be faster.

 

I think its only a matter of moving it 15 feet. Heck, he probably doesn't need to move the cache. If he provides coords 15 feet in the right direction, they will still be within the normal margin of error.

 

Actually, considering the built in error in GPS units, his cache might actually be OK, but the the coords are off a bit in the wrong direction. Taking another reading at the cache site may well give him the 528 ft. buffer required.

 

If I had seen this thread sooner, that's exactly what I would've said, no need to move it, nicely said briansnat

 

But given that (combined with it being a first time hider), it's a shame the reviewer didn't just let it go. Rules are rules and while I can see not letting it be 68 ft. from another cache (as opposed to the 528 ft. being within the margin of normal GPS error), turning off newbies to the sport can't be a good thing......