Jump to content

Geocacher doesn't want it there


BiT
Followers 1

Recommended Posts

A situation to contemplate.

 

An existing geocache is hidden within a park. The geocache doesn't have any information of the geophysical feature other then the geocache has the general feature in its name. The Parks Department has approved and is excited about an EarthCache at the location and but the geocache owner doesn't want to "share" the park. The geocache was approved by the park so they know of it existence.

 

What do you do?

  • Place the EarthCache 0.1 mi. away from the geocache?
  • What if you cannot place the EarthCache 0.1 mi. away?
  • Place it anyway, the geocacher doesn't "own" the park?
  • Fold it up and move along, we don't want EarthCaches to become like geocaches (every big box parking lot with a skirt lifter or cemetery having a geocache)?

 

What are you thoughts?

Link to comment

The Parks Department has approved and is excited about an EarthCache at the location and but the geocache owner doesn't want to "share" the park. The geocache was approved by the park so they know of it existence.

 

Doesn't want to "share" the park?! :lol: What the @#%@~! :laughing: That attitude just speaks for itself. I'll just leave that alone so I don't get banned from the forums.

 

I would say that the Park Department's approval and support of the EarthCache (or even the placement of other traditionals) trumps any selfish cacher's desire to keep an area to themselves. I’d go with your 3rd option; Place it anyway sending them a note that the Park Department wants to support the EarthCaches.

Link to comment

Just my humble opinion, but I would submit the Earthcache. I agree with the erstwhile Platinum Earthcacher above, that you have permission from the Park and that should be sufficient.

 

You might need to contact the Earthcache Reviewer for a final ruling, but my take on the situation is....

 

1. Earthcaches are virtual and are therefore not subject to the Saturation portion of the Guidelines.

 

2. It sounds like the Park is enthusiastic about having BOTH, a traditional cache AND an Earthcache. This sounds like a good thing to encourage IMO.

 

3. The Park may see the Earthcache as a way to promote their Mission to educate the public about features within the Park.

 

We can use all the good will with Land Managers we can get, and it sounds like you have a good working relationship with the Land Manager of this particular Park.

 

So long as you have a thick skin for the potential fallout with the adjacent cache owner, I think it's worth a try.

Link to comment

And what would you prove by doing that? We are required to ask permission first and if the owner says no then you must respect their decission, right? If that was not the case then why would geoaware require that you ask first.

 

If Geoaware was to set up the EC against the traditional geocache owners request then Geoaware would be breaking his own rules and that would prove that the earthcaching rules don't mean squat...

 

I suggest to place the earthcache 0.1 away from the geocache.

 

I’d go with your 3rd option; Place it anyway sending them a note that the Park Department wants to support the EarthCaches.

Edited by Cav Scout
Link to comment

My interpertation of the "asking permission" guideline is this:

 

It only applies if your EarthCache is right on top of the existing cache. You do not have to be .1 mile from the existing cache. Just a reasonable distance (perhaps 100 ft ?).

 

Best to shoot Geoaware an email describing the situation first before you go much further. You hold the trump card here, the park wants you to place the EarthCache!

 

Good luck,

 

Deane

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

Link to comment

I fail to see the issue. The park doesn't belong to the cacher so he doesn't get to "share" anything. "Sharing" implies that it belongs to him anymore than it belongs to you. Place it with appropriate coords and ignore the other cache. From your description, they have nothing to do with one another anyway. :D

 

I would agree w/the above...

 

The Park is Public Land, which means it’s owned by the “public" not one individual. Both cachers are I'm sure taxpaying members of the "public".

 

Who exactly has the final say on an EC the Park, GSA or GS? They, in my eyes, seem to be two separate caches w/ two separate paths of approval.

 

What are the chances that the geocache is under a ”permit” from the Park and could this “permit” either be not renewed, or rescinded by the Park based on this conflict? It seems to me that the Park should have the final say…

 

BTW… What Park is this?

Link to comment

A situation to contemplate.

...

What are you thoughts?

Proximity is a non issue for the cache expereince. Proximity is an issue as a courtesy to the owner.

 

If their cache has nothing to do with the EarthCache , I'd not even bother asking the cache owner. EarthCaches are their own thing and don't conflict with a regular cache.

 

If by chance the cache has something to do with the EarthCache I'd give the owner first right of refusal to place the EarthCache . If they don't wish to do so, I'd place it on my own.

 

Lastly, if the park is excited and wanted a cache, by gosh that's what it's all about. Place whatever the heck kind of cache they are thinking they want placed in as many locations and on as many sites as it takes to get them all listed.

Link to comment

A situation to contemplate.

...

What are you thoughts?

Proximity is a non issue for the cache expereince. Proximity is an issue as a courtesy to the owner.

 

If their cache has nothing to do with the EarthCache , I'd not even bother asking the cache owner. EarthCaches are their own thing and don't conflict with a regular cache.

 

If by chance the cache has something to do with the EarthCache I'd give the owner first right of refusal to place the EarthCache . If they don't wish to do so, I'd place it on my own.

 

Lastly, if the park is excited and wanted a cache, by gosh that's what it's all about. Place whatever the heck kind of cache they are thinking they want placed in as many locations and on as many sites as it takes to get them all listed.

 

Don't get me wrong here, I love the EarthCaches I have found, But place one on top of or within the my space of my cache and I will have your Earthcache archived, if I was to tell you no, myself I would not tell you no if you asked. But again a Earthcache Is part of Geocaching and falls under the cache saturation rule , with the exception given that you can ask the cache owner if he minds it being close to his. Over half the Earth caches I have placed are near other caches and all the cachers loved the idea. They knew it may bring more activity to their cache. If a cacher did tell you know, you would just have to deal with it. Push this to much and you might find EarthCaches heading down the same road as Virtuals. The "EarthCaches are their own thing" is true, yes! But, No! You still claim your smiles on the GeoCaching Site. Respect for all cachers and caches should be given. I have seen one EarthCache here in Hunsville get archived for placing, without asking a nearby cache owner, So it has been done.

Placing EarthCaches in a holeyer then though place, Thinking you can ignore all others is in my opinion, a bad road to try to go down.

Again try this "If their cache has nothing to do with the EarthCache , I'd not even bother asking the cache owner. EarthCaches are their own thing and don't conflict with a regular cache." near one of my caches and it will be archived faster then you wrote it up.

Link to comment

A situation to contemplate.

...

What are you thoughts?

Proximity is a non issue for the cache expereince. Proximity is an issue as a courtesy to the owner.

 

If their cache has nothing to do with the EarthCache , I'd not even bother asking the cache owner. EarthCaches are their own thing and don't conflict with a regular cache.

 

If by chance the cache has something to do with the EarthCache I'd give the owner first right of refusal to place the EarthCache . If they don't wish to do so, I'd place it on my own.

 

Lastly, if the park is excited and wanted a cache, by gosh that's what it's all about. Place whatever the heck kind of cache they are thinking they want placed in as many locations and on as many sites as it takes to get them all listed.

 

Don't get me wrong here, I love the EarthCaches I have found, But place one on top of or within the my space of my cache and I will have your Earthcache archived, if I was to tell you no, myself I would not tell you no if you asked. But again a Earthcache Is part of Geocaching and falls under the cache saturation rule , with the exception given that you can ask the cache owner if he minds it being close to his. Over half the Earth caches I have placed are near other caches and all the cachers loved the idea. They knew it may bring more activity to their cache. If a cacher did tell you know, you would just have to deal with it. Push this to much and you might find EarthCaches heading down the same road as Virtuals. The "EarthCaches are their own thing" is true, yes! But, No! You still claim your smiles on the GeoCaching Site. Respect for all cachers and caches should be given. I have seen one EarthCache here in Hunsville get archived for placing, without asking a nearby cache owner, So it has been done.

Placing EarthCaches in a holeyer then though place, Thinking you can ignore all others is in my opinion, a bad road to try to go down.

Again try this "If their cache has nothing to do with the EarthCache , I'd not even bother asking the cache owner. EarthCaches are their own thing and don't conflict with a regular cache." near one of my caches and it will be archived faster then you wrote it up.

No, they don't, otherwise they wouldn't get published. GeoAware has indicated what the restrictions that the GSA and Groundspeak have developed.

Link to comment
I have seen one EarthCache here in Hunsville get archived for placing, without asking a nearby cache owner, So it has been done.

Really? I'd love to see the GC# on that one to see the circumstances of its delisting.....I too was under the impression that PROXIMITY DOES NOT APPLY. PM it to me if you'd rather not post it here.

Edited by Lostby7
Link to comment

A situation to contemplate.

...

What are you thoughts?

Proximity is a non issue for the cache expereince. Proximity is an issue as a courtesy to the owner.

 

If their cache has nothing to do with the EarthCache , I'd not even bother asking the cache owner. EarthCaches are their own thing and don't conflict with a regular cache.

 

If by chance the cache has something to do with the EarthCache I'd give the owner first right of refusal to place the EarthCache . If they don't wish to do so, I'd place it on my own.

 

Lastly, if the park is excited and wanted a cache, by gosh that's what it's all about. Place whatever the heck kind of cache they are thinking they want placed in as many locations and on as many sites as it takes to get them all listed.

 

Don't get me wrong here, I love the EarthCaches I have found, But place one on top of or within the my space of my cache and I will have your Earthcache archived, if I was to tell you no, myself I would not tell you no if you asked. But again a Earthcache Is part of Geocaching and falls under the cache saturation rule , with the exception given that you can ask the cache owner if he minds it being close to his. Over half the Earth caches I have placed are near other caches and all the cachers loved the idea. They knew it may bring more activity to their cache. If a cacher did tell you know, you would just have to deal with it. Push this to much and you might find EarthCaches heading down the same road as Virtuals. The "EarthCaches are their own thing" is true, yes! But, No! You still claim your smiles on the GeoCaching Site. Respect for all cachers and caches should be given. I have seen one EarthCache here in Hunsville get archived for placing, without asking a nearby cache owner, So it has been done.

Placing EarthCaches in a holeyer then though place, Thinking you can ignore all others is in my opinion, a bad road to try to go down.

Again try this "If their cache has nothing to do with the EarthCache , I'd not even bother asking the cache owner. EarthCaches are their own thing and don't conflict with a regular cache." near one of my caches and it will be archived faster then you wrote it up.

 

Don't get me wrong but. It's not your cache. It's not your land. Therefore if I asked as a courtesy because you had your own cache in the area and you said you wanted nothing to do with the proposed EarthCache , tough. To have the power to force someone elses cache to be archived would mean you had real and actual authority over the the grounds, the listing and the cache. You don't. You are limited to your own box.*

 

My Joint Venture at Crater Rings Cache has an EarthCache in the exact same place. I don't recall being asked and that would have been nice. But that EarchCache has not interfered in the least with my cache. If anything it gets more folks there as the rate of finds seems to have gone up lately.

 

*I defend you as the owner of that box more than most in these forums.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment

A situation to contemplate.

...

What are you thoughts?

Proximity is a non issue for the cache expereince. Proximity is an issue as a courtesy to the owner.

 

If their cache has nothing to do with the EarthCache , I'd not even bother asking the cache owner. EarthCaches are their own thing and don't conflict with a regular cache.

 

If by chance the cache has something to do with the EarthCache I'd give the owner first right of refusal to place the EarthCache . If they don't wish to do so, I'd place it on my own.

 

Lastly, if the park is excited and wanted a cache, by gosh that's what it's all about. Place whatever the heck kind of cache they are thinking they want placed in as many locations and on as many sites as it takes to get them all listed.

 

No you are correct, I do not own the land for 99.9%of my caches, But When I place a cache, that cache is mine and the virtual space around it. That’s why you can not place one inside of the saturation rules. If for some reason I did not like you, I could delete any finds I wanted to. I’m not going to, But the point is I could if I so wished. I all so would not stop a EarthCache near any of my caches, more people to maybe go after mine along with it.

As for the one in Huntsville shut down, I am trying to figure it out, It was almost a year ago, I do not remember much of the details on it, other then its location. I was only in my first month of caching and had it loaded, Myself and the Kids had went to the site to get our first EarthCache, completed all the requirements and a couple of days latter I went to long it, it was shut down. A nearby cache owner did not want it near his cache because of the developer never asked. So it was gone.

I don’t see most cachers out there saying no, but placing an EarthCache with out asking is the same as not asking the land owner.

If proximity does not matter, then we should be able to place any cache, any where we want. But we can’t!

Being what they are. EarthCaches and there developers should place them selves up to a higher standard in the caching community. Follow the caching rules and don’t look for loopholes that will belittle the entire idea.

 

Again that is my two cents worth.

 

 

 

Don't get me wrong here, I love the EarthCaches I have found, But place one on top of or within the my space of my cache and I will have your Earthcache archived, if I was to tell you no, myself I would not tell you no if you asked. But again a Earthcache Is part of Geocaching and falls under the cache saturation rule , with the exception given that you can ask the cache owner if he minds it being close to his. Over half the Earth caches I have placed are near other caches and all the cachers loved the idea. They knew it may bring more activity to their cache. If a cacher did tell you know, you would just have to deal with it. Push this to much and you might find EarthCaches heading down the same road as Virtuals. The "EarthCaches are their own thing" is true, yes! But, No! You still claim your smiles on the GeoCaching Site. Respect for all cachers and caches should be given. I have seen one EarthCache here in Hunsville get archived for placing, without asking a nearby cache owner, So it has been done.

Placing EarthCaches in a holeyer then though place, Thinking you can ignore all others is in my opinion, a bad road to try to go down.

Again try this "If their cache has nothing to do with the EarthCache , I'd not even bother asking the cache owner. EarthCaches are their own thing and don't conflict with a regular cache." near one of my caches and it will be archived faster then you wrote it up.

 

Don't get me wrong but. It's not your cache. It's not your land. Therefore if I asked as a courtesy because you had your own cache in the area and you said you wanted nothing to do with the proposed EarthCache , tough. To have the power to force someone elses cache to be archived would mean you had real and actual authority over the the grounds, the listing and the cache. You don't. You are limited to your own box.*

 

My Joint Venture at Crater Rings Cache has an EarthCache in the exact same place. I don't recall being asked and that would have been nice. But that EarchCache has not interfered in the least with my cache. If anything it gets more folks there as the rate of finds seems to have gone up lately.

 

*I defend you as the owner of that box more than most in these forums.

 

No you are correct, I do not own the land for 99.9%of my caches, But When I place a cache, that cache is mine and the virtual space around it. That’s why you can not place one inside of the saturation rules. If for some reason I did not like you, I could delete any finds I wanted to. I’m not going to, But the point is I could if I so wished. I all so would not stop a EarthCache near any of my caches, more people to maybe go after mine along with it.

As for the one in Huntsville shut down, I am trying to figure it out, It was almost a year ago, I do not remember much of the details on it, other then its location. I was only in my first month of caching and had it loaded, Myself and the Kids had went to the site to get our first EarthCache, completed all the requirements and a couple of days latter I went to long it, it was shut down. A nearby cache owner did not want it near his cache because of the developer never asked. So it was gone.

I don’t see most cachers out there saying no, but placing a EarthCache with out asking is the same as not asking the land owner.

As for myself, I think EarthCaches and developers should hold ourselves to a higher stand then most. Rather then look for loopholes to place an Earthcaches somewhere.

 

That my cents worth.

Edited by Clarkbowman
Link to comment

... When I place a cache, that cache is mine and the virtual space around it. ....

 

This is where we disagree. You absolutly own the cache. You don't have a cache free easment around your cache. There is courtesy involved. If I hide a cache and list it on any site I should give you enough space so our finders don't find each others caches on accident. That's not a problem with Virtual type caches. It's closer than 528' for the sole purpose of avoiding accidental finds even accounting for courtesy.

 

What I'm holding as a courtesy you are holding as an absolute.

Link to comment

... I was only in my first month of caching and had it loaded, Myself and the Kids had went to the site to get our first EarthCache, completed all the requirements and a couple of days latter I went to long it, it was shut down. A nearby cache owner did not want it near his cache because of the developer never asked. So it was gone....

 

That is disspointing. Can you log the archived cache? You did the work. I'd ask the EarthCache owner.

Link to comment

The following is from the GC guidelines for cache placement:

 

Cache Saturation

The reviewers use a rule of thumb that caches placed within .10 miles (528 feet or 161 metres) of another cache may not be published on the site. This is an arbitrary distance and is just a guideline, but the ultimate goal is to reduce the number of caches hidden in a particular area and to reduce confusion that might otherwise result when one cache is found while looking for another. On the same note, don't go cache crazy and hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. If you want to create a series of caches (sometimes called a "Power Trail"), the reviewer may require you to create a multi-cache, if the waypoints are close together. A series of caches that are generally intended to be found as a group are good candidates for submission as a single multicache.

 

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." 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. Within a single multicache or mystery/puzzle cache, there is no minimum required distance between waypoints.

 

So while you may want to control the space around your physical cache, GC rules do not allow you to do so in the case of virtuals. I do agree that informing nearby cache owners would be a nice thing to do.

Link to comment

The following is from the GC guidelines for cache placement:

 

Cache Saturation

The reviewers use a rule of thumb that caches placed within .10 miles (528 feet or 161 metres) of another cache may not be published on the site. This is an arbitrary distance and is just a guideline, but the ultimate goal is to reduce the number of caches hidden in a particular area and to reduce confusion that might otherwise result when one cache is found while looking for another. On the same note, don't go cache crazy and hide a cache every 600 feet just because you can. If you want to create a series of caches (sometimes called a "Power Trail"), the reviewer may require you to create a multi-cache, if the waypoints are close together. A series of caches that are generally intended to be found as a group are good candidates for submission as a single multicache.

 

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." 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. Within a single multicache or mystery/puzzle cache, there is no minimum required distance between waypoints.

 

So while you may want to control the space around your physical cache, GC rules do not allow you to do so in the case of virtuals. I do agree that informing nearby cache owners would be a nice thing to do.

 

Time to eat crow, I was defiantly wrong on the distance thing.  So who knows now 

The EarthCache here in Huntsville after publishing, was then in a few days Un Published because of the not asking part. That much I know happened. Past that who knows? Not me!

Link to comment

The following is from the GC guidelines for cache placement:

 

.....

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." 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. Within a single multicache or mystery/puzzle cache, there is no minimum required distance between waypoints.[/color]

....

 

Time to eat crow, I was defiantly wrong on the distance thing.  So who knows now 

The EarthCache here in Huntsville after publishing, was then in a few days Un Published because of the not asking part. That much I know happened. Past that who knows? Not me!

 

From my understanding, EarthCaching has guidelines over and above those of GC. Not least of all, the educational piece - which makes an EarthCache an EarthCache - is not listed anywhere in GC rules, but on the guidelines at EarthCache.org.

 

So too the requirement that "EarthCaches can be placed close to existing caches, but we require that the EarthCache developer contact the original cache developer before submittal." (this is quoted from the most recent guidelines)

It is a requirement of EarthCache and of geoaware that this "coutesy" be extended.

 

I also understand that these rules are developed in conjuction with Groudspeak, and that NONE of them exists without good reason.

 

Thank you to Clarkbowman for this:

"As for myself, I think EarthCaches and developers should hold ourselves to a higher stand then most."

In this case it seems geoaware, by requiring that we contact the nearby cache owner, is holding us to these higher standards.

 

Now. For the original question of this thread - what to do if the nearby cache owner says "No, I would like you not to place an EarthCache near my cache" ... anyone?

Link to comment
So too the requirement that "EarthCaches can be placed close to existing caches, but we require that the EarthCache developer contact the original cache developer before submittal." (this is quoted from the most recent guidelines)

It is a requirement of EarthCache and of geoaware that this "coutesy" be extended.

I find myself wondering when this was adopted...I have placed 13 ECs and never been asked to get permission from or to inform another cacher of my EC placement….

 

BTW welcome to the boards AnnyJ.

 

-Edit to extend welcome to AnnyJ.

Edited by Lostby7
Link to comment

It's questions like this that I can see the point of getting other cacher's opinions, but in reality, there isn't a question to ask. If you want to place an Earthcache, place it. If the the cacher in question has a problem with a virtual cache with educational aspects to it that bring cachers to not just your cache, but thiers too, then they have a serious problem.

 

Place the cache wherever you want to.

Link to comment

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 1
×
×
  • Create New...