Jump to content

Why the angst over caches in the ground?


cx1
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

I'll probably really start a flame war now, but I'll give a reviewer all the necessary information that is requested/required, but I don't think it really matters since the local reviewers seem to follow the spirit of the rules when I see the bulk of the caches that gets approved over here.

 

Well, that's between you and your reviewer.

Link to comment

There's no translating needed. It's a simple question(s): Were you born in the woods? Do you gather your food there and sleep in a den under a rock?

 

Your translation contains an absolute "are my only" that mine does not.

 

Unless your spending a significant portion of your time out in the wild, you are not "living" there. it is not your native "environment" you are just visiting.

 

For me there is no distinction. There is only 1 global environment that all animals, of which humans are just 1 species, inhabit together. No one is visiting anyone, from whatever direction (human <-> horse <-> beaver <-> mosquito <-> ...) you look at it.

 

Hey, I'm all for a "one world" point of view, but there are boundaries and there are distinctions. We can share the world with all the creatures, but I'm not going to let the wild animals do their thing (poo, mate, mark territory) in my house and I'm going to try and not do my thing (dig holes, throw down trash, start a forest fire) in the places they call home.

 

But trying to make this a "Eco-hippy-tree-hugging-pink-leftist" stand against buried caches is missing the point and is sending this thread off the rails. The reason we don't dig has already been stated in posts above and if you missed it, you'll never "get it".

 

(Now please stand for a chorus and verse of "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing", "We Are the World" and "Imagine".)

Holding onto a rule just because of the rule is just plain stupid. It is not like 1 carefully buried geocaching every square kilometer will drive all the plants and animals to extinction and ruin it for everybody. The car ride over roads, through cities, over water, ..., to the parking lot when you go geocaching, does a whole lot more damage and digging then burying caches will ever do! (must ... not ... mention ... landfills)

Link to comment

Two and a half days later this thread is still going?? Like some agreement will be reached if everyone uses different words or examples to make their point?

 

 

Digging is forbidden.

 

People disregard the rules.

 

Neither is going to change any time soon.

 

Let it go.

Letting it go in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... DING!. (looks like it is needed to since the forum is timing out big time at the moment for me)

 

It seems that we're really an ocean apart. Next I'll have to drop my whole beauty pageant 'I want to bring peace to the earth' stance :anibad:

Link to comment

I have seen a small cemetery cache placed with permission that was interesting -- it is sunk in the ground with a small flat marker stone on top of it with "Geo. Cache" carved in it.

 

Very creative, and an oddly appropriate place for a buried cache that was the last part of a multi that tracked a lot of historical figures buried in the cemetery.

 

As noted above -- placed with permission.

 

It is a great cache. Did the permission by the cemetery and by the reviewer make it OK to hide it this way? I think so.

Link to comment

Animals can dig all the holes they want,its their environment.We are just visitors.

E.T. phone home. E.T. phone home. E.T. phone home. E.T. phone home.

Exactly where did we come from?

 

THANK YOU. This whole notion that humans are just here visiting warrant many comments and four letter words that would get me banned.

 

So you were born in the woods, I take it? You gather your food there and sleep in your den under a rock?

I can't speak for bflentje, but I hint and I am a fan of Euell Gibbons.

Because of his books "wild" food is a weekly part of my diet during the winter and and the frequency increases according to the season.

 

You questions translate like this to me.

Hospitals, houses and supermarkets are my only environment.

 

There's no translating needed. It's a simple question(s): Were you born in the woods? Do you gather your food there and sleep in a den under a rock?

 

Your translation contains an absolute "are my only" that mine does not.

 

Unless your spending a significant portion of your time out in the wild, you are not "living" there. it is not your native "environment" you are just visiting.

Your talking about territory. You don't have to spend a significant portion of time in the woods for them to be part of your physical, chemical, and biotic factors (as climate, soil, and living things) that act upon you or an ecological community and ultimately determine you or it's survival.

Like it or not, you are part of an micro environment, territorial environment, macroenvironment, super macroenvironment etc etc.

So it isn't a visit to their environment.

Link to comment

Your talking about territory. You don't have to spend a significant portion of time in the woods for them to be part of your physical, chemical, and biotic factors (as climate, soil, and living things) that act upon you or an ecological community and ultimately determine you or it's survival.

Like it or not, you are part of an micro environment, territorial environment, macro-environment, super macro-environment etc etc.

So it isn't a visit to their environment.

 

Yes I am talking about territory because that is how the land managers see it. The land managers that care about the perception of digging are not thinking in a "big picture" world view, they are thinking in a "the environment that is my duty and job to care for" view.

 

I understand that we all share the same planet. I understand this as an argument for preservation of natural environments. I've never seen this as an argument for digging a hole in the woods.

 

Again, this is not an issue of pro-eco-leave-no-trace-don't-step-on-the-microbes environmentalism run-rampant. This is an issue of how the people that would give us permission to hide on enormous tracts of government controlled land perceive our hobby.

Link to comment

Two and a half days later this thread is still going?? Like some agreement will be reached if everyone uses different words or examples to make their point?

 

 

Digging is forbidden.

 

People disregard the rules.

 

Neither is going to change any time soon.

 

Let it go.

 

Joined: 23-January 10

 

Stick around. We do this. When it gets out of control the bricks will fly. Until then either post or don't post, but don't ask other people not to post- it doesn't work. Believe me, I've tried.

Link to comment

Holding onto a rule just because of the rule is just plain stupid. It is not like 1 carefully buried geocaching every square kilometer will drive all the plants and animals to extinction and ruin it for everybody. The car ride over roads, through cities, over water, ..., to the parking lot when you go geocaching, does a whole lot more damage and digging then burying caches will ever do! (must ... not ... mention ... landfills)

 

Every guideline is there for a reason. There is a history. It's not about saving the daisies. I know I'm not the first person to say this in this thread.

 

Geocaches that cause damage - to property, vegetation, whatever - have the potential to put geocaching in a bad light.

 

Many of us are on the forefront of dealing with public land managers, and everytime a cache gets publicity for causing a problem, it makes it harder to argue in favour of keeping geocaching from getting banned or restricted. Inconsiderate cache hides place the entire game at risk. It's worth talking about, and worth pointing out when it comes up.

 

The guidelines were changed long ago to prohibit buried caches because that was the original reason why caches became banned in National Parks after a certain incident caused all kinds of problems. They are only now starting to allow caches, but if they discover that caches are being buried again(even in other places), they may permanently ban them. Most parks prohibit digging and just a mere perception that someone might dig to hide one would cause a widespread ban. With that being said, pushing a narrow object an inch wide (or less)into the ground generally is ok.

 

You can find indents in the ground if you look long enough. I found one that I was certain that the CO buried, but then as I was walking away my foot went into the ground nearly up to my knee. I then walked around the area to try to purposely repeat what had happened and did it a few more times. It seems that the ground was sort of hollow due to a intense fire that burned through the area awhile ago. Another cache was hidden near a creek which was affected by the tides, and there was a animal hole which was enlarged by the creek and abandoned by the critter that had made it. The top of the ground was an open hole only about 6 inches wide, but it opened up into a mini cavern below it a few feet wide with a 12 inch wide tunnel leading down to the creek about 10 feet away. The cache was an ammo can chained to a root and pushed deep down the tunnel. I found another which was a 5 gallon bucket buried to the rim, but it had been there since '02 or so, before the guidelines had changed.

 

Dont do it! Just say no! :D

 

I think all cachers need to do everything we can to dispell the notion that this is a game about 'buried' treasure.

 

Any cache that 'skirts the guidelines' and that re-inforces the treasure notion just pushes landmanagers to want to ban the game or create very restrictive rules. The idea here is hide things in plain sight via creativity. I have personally seen this in action. Caches that interact in the ground are generally a bad idea. 'just sayin

 

It's not about being green, it's about being allowed to play the game on other people's property.

 

If this game had the image of buried caches then land owners would immediately get the impression that cachers are going to come dig on their land.

 

Metal detecting, for example, has a reputation for digging holes and is therefore banned in quite a large percentage of lands.

 

Very few land owners or managers want strangers coming to dig on their land, so if they thought we'd show up with shovel in hand the immediate and natural reaction would be for them to say "No geocaching allowed"

 

Since Groundspeak and geocachers have been very vocal about the 'no digging' rules (yes, this is one of the Guidelines that is pretty much a rule) land owners (cautiously) take our word for it that no digging will be done and allow our game.

 

It's not about whether digging a hole damages anything, it's about keeping the image of our game up to the land owner's expectations.

Link to comment

Holding onto a rule just because of the rule is just plain stupid. It is not like 1 carefully buried geocaching every square kilometer will drive all the plants and animals to extinction and ruin it for everybody. The car ride over roads, through cities, over water, ..., to the parking lot when you go geocaching, does a whole lot more damage and digging then burying caches will ever do! (must ... not ... mention ... landfills)

 

Every guideline is there for a reason. There is a history. It's not about saving the daisies. I know I'm not the first person to say this in this thread.

 

Geocaches that cause damage - to property, vegetation, whatever - have the potential to put geocaching in a bad light.

 

Many of us are on the forefront of dealing with public land managers, and everytime a cache gets publicity for causing a problem, it makes it harder to argue in favour of keeping geocaching from getting banned or restricted. Inconsiderate cache hides place the entire game at risk. It's worth talking about, and worth pointing out when it comes up.

 

The guidelines were changed long ago to prohibit buried caches because that was the original reason why caches became banned in National Parks after a certain incident caused all kinds of problems. They are only now starting to allow caches, but if they discover that caches are being buried again(even in other places), they may permanently ban them. Most parks prohibit digging and just a mere perception that someone might dig to hide one would cause a widespread ban. With that being said, pushing a narrow object an inch wide (or less)into the ground generally is ok.

 

You can find indents in the ground if you look long enough. I found one that I was certain that the CO buried, but then as I was walking away my foot went into the ground nearly up to my knee. I then walked around the area to try to purposely repeat what had happened and did it a few more times. It seems that the ground was sort of hollow due to a intense fire that burned through the area awhile ago. Another cache was hidden near a creek which was affected by the tides, and there was a animal hole which was enlarged by the creek and abandoned by the critter that had made it. The top of the ground was an open hole only about 6 inches wide, but it opened up into a mini cavern below it a few feet wide with a 12 inch wide tunnel leading down to the creek about 10 feet away. The cache was an ammo can chained to a root and pushed deep down the tunnel. I found another which was a 5 gallon bucket buried to the rim, but it had been there since '02 or so, before the guidelines had changed.

 

Dont do it! Just say no! :D

 

I think all cachers need to do everything we can to dispell the notion that this is a game about 'buried' treasure.

 

Any cache that 'skirts the guidelines' and that re-inforces the treasure notion just pushes landmanagers to want to ban the game or create very restrictive rules. The idea here is hide things in plain sight via creativity. I have personally seen this in action. Caches that interact in the ground are generally a bad idea. 'just sayin

 

It's not about being green, it's about being allowed to play the game on other people's property.

 

If this game had the image of buried caches then land owners would immediately get the impression that cachers are going to come dig on their land.

 

Metal detecting, for example, has a reputation for digging holes and is therefore banned in quite a large percentage of lands.

 

Very few land owners or managers want strangers coming to dig on their land, so if they thought we'd show up with shovel in hand the immediate and natural reaction would be for them to say "No geocaching allowed"

 

Since Groundspeak and geocachers have been very vocal about the 'no digging' rules (yes, this is one of the Guidelines that is pretty much a rule) land owners (cautiously) take our word for it that no digging will be done and allow our game.

 

It's not about whether digging a hole damages anything, it's about keeping the image of our game up to the land owner's expectations.

What they said above!

Link to comment

Two and a half days later this thread is still going?? Like some agreement will be reached if everyone uses different words or examples to make their point?

 

 

Digging is forbidden.

 

People disregard the rules.

 

Neither is going to change any time soon.

 

Let it go.

 

Joined: 23-January 10

 

Stick around. We do this. When it gets out of control the bricks will fly. Until then either post or don't post, but don't ask other people not to post- it doesn't work. Believe me, I've tried.

Starts looking around for, non-buried (of course), bricks in preparation :D

 

Don't mind me, I just like to argue.

Link to comment

I dont know Juniper,I guess in your country if they let you dig then there isnt much I can do to convince you its not cool.And I dont feel much like arguing about who the environment belongs to.That point really doesnt matter anyways.Parks and such here are very picky about what you do in them,you cant cut trees,take rocks from creekbeds,take plants and you sure cant dig holes.Most of the parks here are open to geocaching,they are run by Erie Metroparks.These parks have many caches hid in them,some by the park staff themselves.None buried.And that is also their rule.They have to approve the location,as well as the reviewer.A buried cache would not only break our rule but theirs too.And could result in caches being banned in all the parks under their controle.That would result in a heck of a lot of caches being archived.Not something I would want to be responsible for just because i didnt follow the rules to the letter.I am new to this game and so far I love it.I dont want to see it banned in my area or anywhere else as a result of not following a simple written rule.That result would also shine a negative light on this game to the non-player community.

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0oGkz...t-701&sao=0

Edited by chachi44089
Link to comment

Your talking about territory. You don't have to spend a significant portion of time in the woods for them to be part of your physical, chemical, and biotic factors (as climate, soil, and living things) that act upon you or an ecological community and ultimately determine you or it's survival.

Like it or not, you are part of an micro environment, territorial environment, macro-environment, super macro-environment etc etc.

So it isn't a visit to their environment.

 

Yes I am talking about territory because that is how the land managers see it. The land managers that care about the perception of digging are not thinking in a "big picture" world view, they are thinking in a "the environment that is my duty and job to care for" view.

 

I understand that we all share the same planet. I understand this as an argument for preservation of natural environments. I've never seen this as an argument for digging a hole in the woods.

 

Again, this is not an issue of pro-eco-leave-no-trace-don't-step-on-the-microbes environmentalism run-rampant. This is an issue of how the people that would give us permission to hide on enormous tracts of government controlled land perceive our hobby.

I have mentioned it isn't an environmental issue, it is a land owner/manager issue (seems we agree on that). Now I'm no longer 100% sure if I did it in this thread, but I have done it within the last few days.

 

I was only arguing against the statement that we are only visiting their environment, "their" in reference to non humans.

If you go back and have another look at the quote nesting I'm sure you will see that.

Link to comment

Most land managers couldn't care less about our little pastime.

 

They do, however, tend to care quite a bit about the land they are responsible for.

 

If there is a perception that geocaching is going to cause harm to the land they are responsible for, then they will simply say no.

 

Therefore, a good portion of the guidelines exist in order to put land managers at ease.

 

It's as simple as that.

 

Digging holes may be great on private property owned by the hider. It may even be possible to do with written permission from the land owner. But the guidelines are there for a reason and should be followed.

Link to comment

Your talking about territory. You don't have to spend a significant portion of time in the woods for them to be part of your physical, chemical, and biotic factors (as climate, soil, and living things) that act upon you or an ecological community and ultimately determine you or it's survival.

Like it or not, you are part of an micro environment, territorial environment, macro-environment, super macro-environment etc etc.

So it isn't a visit to their environment.

 

Yes I am talking about territory because that is how the land managers see it. The land managers that care about the perception of digging are not thinking in a "big picture" world view, they are thinking in a "the environment that is my duty and job to care for" view.

 

I understand that we all share the same planet. I understand this as an argument for preservation of natural environments. I've never seen this as an argument for digging a hole in the woods.

 

Again, this is not an issue of pro-eco-leave-no-trace-don't-step-on-the-microbes environmentalism run-rampant. This is an issue of how the people that would give us permission to hide on enormous tracts of government controlled land perceive our hobby.

I have mentioned it isn't an environmental issue, it is a land owner/manager issue (seems we agree on that). Now I'm no longer 100% sure if I did it in this thread, but I have done it within the last few days.

 

I was only arguing against the statement that we are only visiting their environment, "their" in reference to non humans.

If you go back and have another look at the quote nesting I'm sure you will see that.

 

It's cool. I think we both got each other's opinions twisted around the other points of view in this thread.

Link to comment

I don't know Juniper,I guess in your country if they let you dig then there isn't much I can do to convince you its not cool.

 

I didn't notice Juniper's country of origin. I guess it's conceivable that there's a difference in reviewer policy outside the US. Sorry, I was speaking from the point of view as it is on the ground over here. I have no idea how the shots are called in Belgium.

Link to comment

I'm with Briansnat on this one.

Burying caches just shows a lack of imagination, and opens up the possibility of some land manager creating a new ban on caches on land he controls.

It's not worth the risk of losing more areas for us to play our game, just so someone can place a cache without having to use their imagination and creativity.

Many times folks who want to support the burying of caches use the "they are squashing my creativity" line as support for their cause. How about showing enough creativity to find a way to hide that cache without burying it?

I've seen some really cool ways of hiding a cache in plain sight that are very difficult to find without learning to think outside the box. Now those are creative!

I don't think it is a lack of imagination, just the application of common sense. I've seen my share of caches that are hidden according to the rules, especially in urban surroundings, where the creativity of the hide is the cause of geocachers tearing up the surroundings and causing damage to property too, maybe not a tree or ground, but still damage.

 

So for me the whole 'burying causes damage and might get geocaching banned' argument is moot, since the same applies to all non buried caches too. You could hide a bloody magnetic nano in a lamp post in the parking lot of your local ACME and get geocaching banned on their properties worldwide. Same effect, even though the cache wasn't buried.

 

You totally missed my point. My point was not about damage to the surrounding area. It's about how land managers perceive our game and decide to ban caching on their lands because they think cachers are going to show up with shovels in hand. Land managers do not have to understand our game to ban it.

To me common sense dictates that we don't hide caches in ways that can mislead land managers to think that our game may be bad for thier lands. Common sense would say it's not worth the risk.

Link to comment

I'm with Briansnat on this one.

Burying caches just shows a lack of imagination, and opens up the possibility of some land manager creating a new ban on caches on land he controls.

It's not worth the risk of losing more areas for us to play our game, just so someone can place a cache without having to use their imagination and creativity.

Many times folks who want to support the burying of caches use the "they are squashing my creativity" line as support for their cause. How about showing enough creativity to find a way to hide that cache without burying it?

I've seen some really cool ways of hiding a cache in plain sight that are very difficult to find without learning to think outside the box. Now those are creative!

I don't think it is a lack of imagination, just the application of common sense. I've seen my share of caches that are hidden according to the rules, especially in urban surroundings, where the creativity of the hide is the cause of geocachers tearing up the surroundings and causing damage to property too, maybe not a tree or ground, but still damage.

 

So for me the whole 'burying causes damage and might get geocaching banned' argument is moot, since the same applies to all non buried caches too. You could hide a bloody magnetic nano in a lamp post in the parking lot of your local ACME and get geocaching banned on their properties worldwide. Same effect, even though the cache wasn't buried.

 

You totally missed my point. My point was not about damage to the surrounding area. It's about how land managers perceive our game and decide to ban caching on their lands because they think cachers are going to show up with shovels in hand. Land managers do not have to understand our game to ban it.

To me common sense dictates that we don't hide caches in ways that can mislead land managers to think that our game may be bad for thier lands. Common sense would say it's not worth the risk.

 

But that is exactly what I want: let the land manager decide if he/she wants to allow a buried cache and the possible consequences or not. I just feel that the current 'no burying whatsoever' rule overshoots its target. And for me the same applies to other hiding forms, just check if it is allowed with the appropriate owner/organisation.

Edited by Team Juniper
Link to comment

But that is exactly what I want: let the land manager decide if he/she wants to allow a buried cache and the possible consequences or not. I just feel that the current 'no burying whatsoever' rule overshoots its target. And for me the same applies to other hiding forms, just check if it is allowed with the appropriate owner/organisation.

 

My POV is a bit different. When I join any group or organization that wants me to agree to a set of rules, I either agree to the rules or go elsewhere. And if I agree to the rules, my own personal integrity insists that I honor my word, which I freely gave, to follow those rules. Now if I believe the rules are faulty, I can either go elsewhere, or I can work from the inside, as a member, to lobby for a change to the rules. But until and unless the rules are changed, I think more highly of my word than to ignore the portion of the rules with which I disagree.

 

YMMV

Mrs. Car54

Link to comment

I'm with Briansnat on this one.

Burying caches just shows a lack of imagination, and opens up the possibility of some land manager creating a new ban on caches on land he controls.

It's not worth the risk of losing more areas for us to play our game, just so someone can place a cache without having to use their imagination and creativity.

Many times folks who want to support the burying of caches use the "they are squashing my creativity" line as support for their cause. How about showing enough creativity to find a way to hide that cache without burying it?

I've seen some really cool ways of hiding a cache in plain sight that are very difficult to find without learning to think outside the box. Now those are creative!

I don't think it is a lack of imagination, just the application of common sense. I've seen my share of caches that are hidden according to the rules, especially in urban surroundings, where the creativity of the hide is the cause of geocachers tearing up the surroundings and causing damage to property too, maybe not a tree or ground, but still damage.

 

So for me the whole 'burying causes damage and might get geocaching banned' argument is moot, since the same applies to all non buried caches too. You could hide a bloody magnetic nano in a lamp post in the parking lot of your local ACME and get geocaching banned on their properties worldwide. Same effect, even though the cache wasn't buried.

 

You totally missed my point. My point was not about damage to the surrounding area. It's about how land managers perceive our game and decide to ban caching on their lands because they think cachers are going to show up with shovels in hand. Land managers do not have to understand our game to ban it.

To me common sense dictates that we don't hide caches in ways that can mislead land managers to think that our game may be bad for thier lands. Common sense would say it's not worth the risk.

 

But that is exactly what I want: let the land manager decide if he/she wants to allow a buried cache and the possible consequences or not. I just feel that the current 'no burying whatsoever' rule overshoots its target. And for me the same applies to other hiding forms, just check if it is allowed with the appropriate owner/organisation.

 

It's sure not what I want!! I don't want to put any land manager in the position where he might ban caching. Common sense tells me not to do that. Land managers in the US are very sensitive to people digging in their areas, possibly due to the popularity of metal detecting. Most lands for public use here include in their rules of use that no digging is allowed. Maybe it works differently where you are but here's how it goes over here....

 

Cacher calls land manager - "Hello sir. I am a geocaching enthuiast and would like to know if I can hide a container on your land. I would like to bury it in the ground so my fellow geocachers will think it is a really cool way to hide my geocache, and it's really the best way to hide what I have in mind. My common sense tells me I need to dig on your land to make my hide work."

 

Land manager answers cacher - "Geo-whatting?? People burying things on MY land? How do I make sure no one can do this on MY land??"

 

Just asking can get caching banned. Then all the other cachers who would have placed guideline compliant caches in the area are out of luck.

 

Not a good idea, when burying is not an integral part of caching (nor does it need to be). Why insinuate to some uneducated land manager that it's part of the game, when Groundspeak has been trying to stop just this perception for years?

It was just one buried cache that got caching banned in our National Parks system, blocking many tens of thousands of acres from cachers.

I think the "no burying whatsoever" guideline is one of the reasons that some of the more enlightened land managers DO allow caching on their lands. They know they never have to worry about someone burying a cache on their lands. They don't have to worry that there might be some cases where burying is allowed.

It makes it an easy decision to allow caching on their lands that way.

Link to comment

I'm with Briansnat on this one.

Burying caches just shows a lack of imagination, and opens up the possibility of some land manager creating a new ban on caches on land he controls.

It's not worth the risk of losing more areas for us to play our game, just so someone can place a cache without having to use their imagination and creativity.

Many times folks who want to support the burying of caches use the "they are squashing my creativity" line as support for their cause. How about showing enough creativity to find a way to hide that cache without burying it?

I've seen some really cool ways of hiding a cache in plain sight that are very difficult to find without learning to think outside the box. Now those are creative!

I don't think it is a lack of imagination, just the application of common sense. I've seen my share of caches that are hidden according to the rules, especially in urban surroundings, where the creativity of the hide is the cause of geocachers tearing up the surroundings and causing damage to property too, maybe not a tree or ground, but still damage.

 

So for me the whole 'burying causes damage and might get geocaching banned' argument is moot, since the same applies to all non buried caches too. You could hide a bloody magnetic nano in a lamp post in the parking lot of your local ACME and get geocaching banned on their properties worldwide. Same effect, even though the cache wasn't buried.

 

You totally missed my point. My point was not about damage to the surrounding area. It's about how land managers perceive our game and decide to ban caching on their lands because they think cachers are going to show up with shovels in hand. Land managers do not have to understand our game to ban it.

To me common sense dictates that we don't hide caches in ways that can mislead land managers to think that our game may be bad for thier lands. Common sense would say it's not worth the risk.

 

But that is exactly what I want: let the land manager decide if he/she wants to allow a buried cache and the possible consequences or not. I just feel that the current 'no burying whatsoever' rule overshoots its target. And for me the same applies to other hiding forms, just check if it is allowed with the appropriate owner/organisation.

 

It's sure not what I want!! I don't want to put any land manager in the position where he might ban caching. Common sense tells me not to do that. Land managers in the US are very sensitive to people digging in their areas, possibly due to the popularity of metal detecting. Most lands for public use here include in their rules of use that no digging is allowed. Maybe it works differently where you are but here's how it goes over here....

 

Cacher calls land manager - "Hello sir. I am a geocaching enthuiast and would like to know if I can hide a container on your land. I would like to bury it in the ground so my fellow geocachers will think it is a really cool way to hide my geocache, and it's really the best way to hide what I have in mind. My common sense tells me I need to dig on your land to make my hide work."

 

Land manager answers cacher - "Geo-whatting?? People burying things on MY land? How do I make sure no one can do this on MY land??"

 

Just asking can get caching banned. Then all the other cachers who would have placed guideline compliant caches in the area are out of luck.

 

Not a good idea, when burying is not an integral part of caching (nor does it need to be). Why insinuate to some uneducated land manager that it's part of the game, when Groundspeak has been trying to stop just this perception for years?

It was just one buried cache that got caching banned in our National Parks system, blocking many tens of thousands of acres from cachers.

I think the "no burying whatsoever" guideline is one of the reasons that some of the more enlightened land managers DO allow caching on their lands. They know they never have to worry about someone burying a cache on their lands. They don't have to worry that there might be some cases where burying is allowed.

It makes it an easy decision to allow caching on their lands that way.

that is how I feel and what I have tried to say.You verse it much better than me.Thank you.I even posted this link for him to read.Its a bunch of state parks and their take on digging holes.I dont think he even looked at it. http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0oGkz...t-701&sao=0

Edited by chachi44089
Link to comment

You seem to be the only one here who wants to bend or break the rules after many members have told you its a bad idea,and why.Over and over.Maybe you should ask the heads of Geocaching.com to let you be exempt from the rules.Let me know how that works out.

Just for the record: all the caches I've placed are according to the rules and guidelines (so no buried ones). So I'm not breaking any rules, I'm just reporting about the situation which I see over here in the area where I cache most (Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany).

 

The situation for the last few years is that I have come across many caches that would be considered 'buried' by the rules and guidelines, but that also don't seem to bother anyone, land managers included, and haven't had the effect of geocaching being banned in certain area's.

 

This seems to indicate that the blanket 'no digging' ban isn't working in its current form, but more importantly that is doesn't correctly reflect the worldwide character of the game and thus needs to be updated.

Link to comment

I'm with Briansnat on this one.

Burying caches just shows a lack of imagination, and opens up the possibility of some land manager creating a new ban on caches on land he controls.

It's not worth the risk of losing more areas for us to play our game, just so someone can place a cache without having to use their imagination and creativity.

Many times folks who want to support the burying of caches use the "they are squashing my creativity" line as support for their cause. How about showing enough creativity to find a way to hide that cache without burying it?

I've seen some really cool ways of hiding a cache in plain sight that are very difficult to find without learning to think outside the box. Now those are creative!

I don't think it is a lack of imagination, just the application of common sense. I've seen my share of caches that are hidden according to the rules, especially in urban surroundings, where the creativity of the hide is the cause of geocachers tearing up the surroundings and causing damage to property too, maybe not a tree or ground, but still damage.

 

So for me the whole 'burying causes damage and might get geocaching banned' argument is moot, since the same applies to all non buried caches too. You could hide a bloody magnetic nano in a lamp post in the parking lot of your local ACME and get geocaching banned on their properties worldwide. Same effect, even though the cache wasn't buried.

 

You totally missed my point. My point was not about damage to the surrounding area. It's about how land managers perceive our game and decide to ban caching on their lands because they think cachers are going to show up with shovels in hand. Land managers do not have to understand our game to ban it.

To me common sense dictates that we don't hide caches in ways that can mislead land managers to think that our game may be bad for thier lands. Common sense would say it's not worth the risk.

 

But that is exactly what I want: let the land manager decide if he/she wants to allow a buried cache and the possible consequences or not. I just feel that the current 'no burying whatsoever' rule overshoots its target. And for me the same applies to other hiding forms, just check if it is allowed with the appropriate owner/organisation.

 

It's sure not what I want!! I don't want to put any land manager in the position where he might ban caching. Common sense tells me not to do that. Land managers in the US are very sensitive to people digging in their areas, possibly due to the popularity of metal detecting. Most lands for public use here include in their rules of use that no digging is allowed. Maybe it works differently where you are but here's how it goes over here....

 

Cacher calls land manager - "Hello sir. I am a geocaching enthuiast and would like to know if I can hide a container on your land. I would like to bury it in the ground so my fellow geocachers will think it is a really cool way to hide my geocache, and it's really the best way to hide what I have in mind. My common sense tells me I need to dig on your land to make my hide work."

 

Land manager answers cacher - "Geo-whatting?? People burying things on MY land? How do I make sure no one can do this on MY land??"

 

Just asking can get caching banned. Then all the other cachers who would have placed guideline compliant caches in the area are out of luck.

 

Not a good idea, when burying is not an integral part of caching (nor does it need to be). Why insinuate to some uneducated land manager that it's part of the game, when Groundspeak has been trying to stop just this perception for years?

It was just one buried cache that got caching banned in our National Parks system, blocking many tens of thousands of acres from cachers.

I think the "no burying whatsoever" guideline is one of the reasons that some of the more enlightened land managers DO allow caching on their lands. They know they never have to worry about someone burying a cache on their lands. They don't have to worry that there might be some cases where burying is allowed.

It makes it an easy decision to allow caching on their lands that way.

that is how I feel and what I have tried to say.You verse it much better than me.Thank you.I even posted this link for him to read.Its a bunch of state parks and their take on digging holes.I dont think he even looked at it. http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0oGkz...t-701&sao=0

 

Yeah, I bloody well know, I've read the link, but you are all talking about the situation regarding national parks in the USA. The world is a bigger place than just the United Stated of America. I'm trying to get the point across that there are parts of the world where the 'no digging' part of the rules isn't as much of a problem and that land managers, cache placers and geocachers can come to an agreement that in the right circumstances a buried cache doesn't mean Armageddon.

Link to comment

I'm with Briansnat on this one.

Burying caches just shows a lack of imagination, and opens up the possibility of some land manager creating a new ban on caches on land he controls.

It's not worth the risk of losing more areas for us to play our game, just so someone can place a cache without having to use their imagination and creativity.

Many times folks who want to support the burying of caches use the "they are squashing my creativity" line as support for their cause. How about showing enough creativity to find a way to hide that cache without burying it?

I've seen some really cool ways of hiding a cache in plain sight that are very difficult to find without learning to think outside the box. Now those are creative!

I don't think it is a lack of imagination, just the application of common sense. I've seen my share of caches that are hidden according to the rules, especially in urban surroundings, where the creativity of the hide is the cause of geocachers tearing up the surroundings and causing damage to property too, maybe not a tree or ground, but still damage.

 

So for me the whole 'burying causes damage and might get geocaching banned' argument is moot, since the same applies to all non buried caches too. You could hide a bloody magnetic nano in a lamp post in the parking lot of your local ACME and get geocaching banned on their properties worldwide. Same effect, even though the cache wasn't buried.

 

You totally missed my point. My point was not about damage to the surrounding area. It's about how land managers perceive our game and decide to ban caching on their lands because they think cachers are going to show up with shovels in hand. Land managers do not have to understand our game to ban it.

To me common sense dictates that we don't hide caches in ways that can mislead land managers to think that our game may be bad for thier lands. Common sense would say it's not worth the risk.

 

But that is exactly what I want: let the land manager decide if he/she wants to allow a buried cache and the possible consequences or not. I just feel that the current 'no burying whatsoever' rule overshoots its target. And for me the same applies to other hiding forms, just check if it is allowed with the appropriate owner/organisation.

 

It's sure not what I want!! I don't want to put any land manager in the position where he might ban caching. Common sense tells me not to do that. Land managers in the US are very sensitive to people digging in their areas, possibly due to the popularity of metal detecting. Most lands for public use here include in their rules of use that no digging is allowed. Maybe it works differently where you are but here's how it goes over here....

 

Cacher calls land manager - "Hello sir. I am a geocaching enthuiast and would like to know if I can hide a container on your land. I would like to bury it in the ground so my fellow geocachers will think it is a really cool way to hide my geocache, and it's really the best way to hide what I have in mind. My common sense tells me I need to dig on your land to make my hide work."

 

Land manager answers cacher - "Geo-whatting?? People burying things on MY land? How do I make sure no one can do this on MY land??"

 

Just asking can get caching banned. Then all the other cachers who would have placed guideline compliant caches in the area are out of luck.

 

Not a good idea, when burying is not an integral part of caching (nor does it need to be). Why insinuate to some uneducated land manager that it's part of the game, when Groundspeak has been trying to stop just this perception for years?

It was just one buried cache that got caching banned in our National Parks system, blocking many tens of thousands of acres from cachers.

I think the "no burying whatsoever" guideline is one of the reasons that some of the more enlightened land managers DO allow caching on their lands. They know they never have to worry about someone burying a cache on their lands. They don't have to worry that there might be some cases where burying is allowed.

It makes it an easy decision to allow caching on their lands that way.

The same could be said for someone that wants to place a non buried cache that follows the rules and guidelines to a tee. He also HAS to contact the respective land manager/organisation and ask permission. That same act could also get geocaching banned in certain area's. Even with only caches that follow the guidelines a land manager would still have to worry about all the other effects that geocaching has. Thinking that disallowing digging is some sort of a cure-all isn't realistic.

 

What's next? Geocachers can't use walking sticks and the like because they too poke holes in the ground?

Link to comment

Here's the scenario. Land Manager Bob has never heard of Geocaching. Bob finds a cache or finds out about a cache on somebody else's land that's buried, maybe reads one of the plethora of news articles about caching as "buried treasure". Worst case scenario- Bob gets wind of a cache that was buried unbeknownst to the property owner. Bob gets negative opinion of caching and decides not to allow shovel toting cachers to play their game on his land.

 

There are large tracts of land here in the US that prohibit caching for these very reasons.

Link to comment

Two and a half days later this thread is still going?? Like some agreement will be reached if everyone uses different words or examples to make their point?

 

 

Digging is forbidden.

 

People disregard the rules.

 

Neither is going to change any time soon.

 

Let it go.

 

Joined: 23-January 10

 

Stick around. We do this. When it gets out of control the bricks will fly. Until then either post or don't post, but don't ask other people not to post- it doesn't work. Believe me, I've tried.

 

 

What was I thinking?? You're absolutely right. My being here since January (as you pointed out for no apparent purpose other than to belittle me) surely makes me inferior.

 

The bolded part of your statement is what amuses me. You state it as though its something to be proud of.

 

Well, by all means carry on. I have been in the same situation on a thread I started, and sooner or later you come to realize it is pointless to continue. Evidently your superior intellect has not recognized that quite yet. Its a free country and this is a public forum. When you get through be sure and let me know which "rules" you managed to get changed or deleted.

 

;)

Link to comment

I'm with Briansnat on this one.

Burying caches just shows a lack of imagination, and opens up the possibility of some land manager creating a new ban on caches on land he controls.

It's not worth the risk of losing more areas for us to play our game, just so someone can place a cache without having to use their imagination and creativity.

Many times folks who want to support the burying of caches use the "they are squashing my creativity" line as support for their cause. How about showing enough creativity to find a way to hide that cache without burying it?

I've seen some really cool ways of hiding a cache in plain sight that are very difficult to find without learning to think outside the box. Now those are creative!

I don't think it is a lack of imagination, just the application of common sense. I've seen my share of caches that are hidden according to the rules, especially in urban surroundings, where the creativity of the hide is the cause of geocachers tearing up the surroundings and causing damage to property too, maybe not a tree or ground, but still damage.

 

So for me the whole 'burying causes damage and might get geocaching banned' argument is moot, since the same applies to all non buried caches too. You could hide a bloody magnetic nano in a lamp post in the parking lot of your local ACME and get geocaching banned on their properties worldwide. Same effect, even though the cache wasn't buried.

 

You totally missed my point. My point was not about damage to the surrounding area. It's about how land managers perceive our game and decide to ban caching on their lands because they think cachers are going to show up with shovels in hand. Land managers do not have to understand our game to ban it.

To me common sense dictates that we don't hide caches in ways that can mislead land managers to think that our game may be bad for thier lands. Common sense would say it's not worth the risk.

 

But that is exactly what I want: let the land manager decide if he/she wants to allow a buried cache and the possible consequences or not. I just feel that the current 'no burying whatsoever' rule overshoots its target. And for me the same applies to other hiding forms, just check if it is allowed with the appropriate owner/organisation.

 

It's sure not what I want!! I don't want to put any land manager in the position where he might ban caching. Common sense tells me not to do that. Land managers in the US are very sensitive to people digging in their areas, possibly due to the popularity of metal detecting. Most lands for public use here include in their rules of use that no digging is allowed. Maybe it works differently where you are but here's how it goes over here....

 

Cacher calls land manager - "Hello sir. I am a geocaching enthuiast and would like to know if I can hide a container on your land. I would like to bury it in the ground so my fellow geocachers will think it is a really cool way to hide my geocache, and it's really the best way to hide what I have in mind. My common sense tells me I need to dig on your land to make my hide work."

 

Land manager answers cacher - "Geo-whatting?? People burying things on MY land? How do I make sure no one can do this on MY land??"

 

Just asking can get caching banned. Then all the other cachers who would have placed guideline compliant caches in the area are out of luck.

 

Not a good idea, when burying is not an integral part of caching (nor does it need to be). Why insinuate to some uneducated land manager that it's part of the game, when Groundspeak has been trying to stop just this perception for years?

It was just one buried cache that got caching banned in our National Parks system, blocking many tens of thousands of acres from cachers.

I think the "no burying whatsoever" guideline is one of the reasons that some of the more enlightened land managers DO allow caching on their lands. They know they never have to worry about someone burying a cache on their lands. They don't have to worry that there might be some cases where burying is allowed.

It makes it an easy decision to allow caching on their lands that way.

The same could be said for someone that wants to place a non buried cache that follows the rules and guidelines to a tee. He also HAS to contact the respective land manager/organisation and ask permission. That same act could also get geocaching banned in certain area's. Even with only caches that follow the guidelines a land manager would still have to worry about all the other effects that geocaching has. Thinking that disallowing digging is some sort of a cure-all isn't realistic.

 

What's next? Geocachers can't use walking sticks and the like because they too poke holes in the ground?

So you want the rules changed for your area.Have you considered the fact that people travel to different countries to geocache?How are people supposed to know the rules if they are different in every region?Who would write and keep up on all the different rules?That is why I believe a blanket rule is the best for all.Then people can travel to other places and not worry about accidentally breaking a rule and messing things up for the locals in that area.

Link to comment

I understand where you are coming from. I don't see why you don't understand where everybody else is coming from.

 

Perhaps once tens of thousands of acres of land have been banned from caching in your country you will understand. I certainly hope that doesn't happen. Unfortunately it will be too late at that point to make amends and it may take years to get those lands opened back up to caching again, if ever. Why take that risk just so you can push the envelope? Especially when, with a little creativity, you can produce an ingenioius hide that won't create any issues.

 

I learned a long time ago when I was a teenager (back in the Stone Age) that if I asked my parents for permission to do something that I knew that I would probably get "no" for an answer, the rest of my activities would likely come under a microscope as well. ;)

Link to comment

So you want the rules changed for your area.Have you considered the fact that people travel to different countries to geocache?How are people supposed to know the rules if they are different in every region?Who would write and keep up on all the different rules?That is why I believe a blanket rule is the best for all.Then people can travel to other places and not worry about accidentally breaking a rule and messing things up for the locals in that area.

 

Very good point. There is a lot of "monkey see, monkey do" in geocaching. This may even be the reason some have the attitude about buried caches that they do. The OP mentions that he have seen some that apparently don't cause any issues. At least they don't cause an issue until caching is banned somewhere because of them. Then it's too late, and how many other cachers will have seen that that now think it's OK because they saw one just like it?

Link to comment

So you want the rules changed for your area.Have you considered the fact that people travel to different countries to geocache?How are people supposed to know the rules if they are different in every region?Who would write and keep up on all the different rules?That is why I believe a blanket rule is the best for all.Then people can travel to other places and not worry about accidentally breaking a rule and messing things up for the locals in that area.

A lot of rules differ by country already, road rules are one example, and you're supposed to know them for the country you are in and the ones you are going to. Why can't the same be possible for geocaching?

 

If you'd go to England, thinking the road rules are a blanket rule, and drive on the right, you'd be certainly messing things up for the locals.

 

Blanket rules are a utopian idea.

Link to comment

So you want the rules changed for your area.Have you considered the fact that people travel to different countries to geocache?How are people supposed to know the rules if they are different in every region?Who would write and keep up on all the different rules?That is why I believe a blanket rule is the best for all.Then people can travel to other places and not worry about accidentally breaking a rule and messing things up for the locals in that area.

A lot of rules differ by country already, road rules are one example, and you're supposed to know them for the country you are in and the ones you are going to. Why can't the same be possible for geocaching?

 

If you'd go to England, thinking the road rules are a blanket rule, and drive on the right, you'd be certainly messing things up for the locals.

 

Blanket rules are a utopian idea.

But we are not talking about "road rules".In most sports and games the rules are the same no matter where you go.That keeps the playing field level for all.Just imagine if the Olympics had different rules in every country for the same game.Do you think that would work?

Edited by chachi44089
Link to comment

I understand where you are coming from. I don't see why you don't understand where everybody else is coming from.

 

Perhaps once tens of thousands of acres of land have been banned from caching in your country you will understand. I certainly hope that doesn't happen. Unfortunately it will be too late at that point to make amends and it may take years to get those lands opened back up to caching again, if ever. Why take that risk just so you can push the envelope? Especially when, with a little creativity, you can produce an ingenioius hide that won't create any issues.

 

I learned a long time ago when I was a teenager (back in the Stone Age) that if I asked my parents for permission to do something that I knew that I would probably get "no" for an answer, the rest of my activities would likely come under a microscope as well. ;)

Depends on how big the everybody else group is: it would be nice to have a worldwide geocaching poll about a subject suggest as the 'no digging' allowed rule and see how many people are fore it, against it or stand somewhere in the middle (my position).

 

What I find strange is that most of the people in this thread see only digging as a possible way that geocaching could get banned. IMHO I think every possible way of hiding and certainly the ingenious one, could get geocaching banned by land owners. What I would like is the method of hiding shouldn't be limited, but that it has to be agreed upon by all parties involved. This would still mean that the national parks in the USA can say that caches are allowed, but no when digging is involved.

 

Placing a cache according to the current rules could also cause geocaching to come under the microscope, something this seems to be blissfully ignored in this thread.

Link to comment

So you want the rules changed for your area.Have you considered the fact that people travel to different countries to geocache?How are people supposed to know the rules if they are different in every region?Who would write and keep up on all the different rules?That is why I believe a blanket rule is the best for all.Then people can travel to other places and not worry about accidentally breaking a rule and messing things up for the locals in that area.

A lot of rules differ by country already, road rules are one example, and you're supposed to know them for the country you are in and the ones you are going to. Why can't the same be possible for geocaching?

 

If you'd go to England, thinking the road rules are a blanket rule, and drive on the right, you'd be certainly messing things up for the locals.

 

Blanket rules are a utopian idea.

But we are not talking about "road rules".In most sports and games the rules are the same no matter where you go.That keeps the playing field level for all.Just imagine if the Olympics had different rules in every country for the same game.Do you think that would work?

I was just making a comparison to present a broader view of the problem. In some places blanket rules are present and do work. Regarding the Olympics, you're right, but that is a set of rules, per sport, that is created by an international governing body, with many members, that review and change rules on a constant basis, to reflect the current state of the game, which is exactly what I want for geocaching too.

Link to comment

I understand where you are coming from. I don't see why you don't understand where everybody else is coming from.

 

Perhaps once tens of thousands of acres of land have been banned from caching in your country you will understand. I certainly hope that doesn't happen. Unfortunately it will be too late at that point to make amends and it may take years to get those lands opened back up to caching again, if ever. Why take that risk just so you can push the envelope? Especially when, with a little creativity, you can produce an ingenioius hide that won't create any issues.

 

I learned a long time ago when I was a teenager (back in the Stone Age) that if I asked my parents for permission to do something that I knew that I would probably get "no" for an answer, the rest of my activities would likely come under a microscope as well. ;)

Depends on how big the everybody else group is: it would be nice to have a worldwide geocaching poll about a subject suggest as the 'no digging' allowed rule and see how many people are fore it, against it or stand somewhere in the middle (my position).

 

What I find strange is that most of the people in this thread see only digging as a possible way that geocaching could get banned. IMHO I think every possible way of hiding and certainly the ingenious one, could get geocaching banned by land owners. What I would like is the method of hiding shouldn't be limited, but that it has to be agreed upon by all parties involved. This would still mean that the national parks in the USA can say that caches are allowed, but no when digging is involved.

 

Placing a cache according to the current rules could also cause geocaching to come under the microscope, something this seems to be blissfully ignored in this thread.

I dont think you would like the outcome of your pole.You seem to be the only one who "blissfully" ignores all reasons for not digging holes.I see no one here backing up your arguement.Didnt you agree to play by the rules when you joined?Every possible reason has been explained to you over and over as to why it is not allowed.You have nothing to say when people here give you their reasons why it is not allowed.You seem to only be concerned about yourself and how changing the rules will benifit you,and no concern about the other world wide players or the future of the game.Seems selfish to me.

Link to comment

... Yeah, I bloody well know, I've read the link, but you are all talking about the situation regarding national parks in the USA. The world is a bigger place than just the United Stated of America. I'm trying to get the point across that there are parts of the world where the 'no digging' part of the rules isn't as much of a problem and that land managers, cache placers and geocachers can come to an agreement that in the right circumstances a buried cache doesn't mean Armageddon.

And we're trying, apparently with no success, to get the point across that it's not about whether it is okay to dig where you live. It's about the international perception of our game. Groundspeak and the game of geocaching have become for all practical purposes synonymous, and Groundspeak has, with the support of the overall geocaching community, found that the perception of 'buried treasure' is bad for our relationships with land owners.

 

I am quite sure that there are areas where digging on other people's land is no big deal, even commonly accepted... but the game doesn't carry the perception of that small area, it carries the image and perception of the game of geocaching, an international endeavor.

 

If we have our way, and we will, when land owners think of geocaching one of the few things that they'll know is that we don't allow digging for 'buried treasure'. And that's a good thing.

 

The perception that we don't allow digging except for where we do wouldn't help at all. ;)

 

Most of us cache locally and tend to think locally. That's why we see so much 'Yeah, but things are different where I live' posting.

 

Before the advent of the internet we could get away with localism. Landowners in the UK had no way to know how something was done in the US. If they had been called upon to think of geocaching they would have thought of it as how it was played in their town or immediate area.

 

Not so today. Any Google search on geocaching delivers a plethora of information about caching on every part of the globe. The game no longer has a local image, it has an international one.

 

On this issue of digging it is the best interest of the game that the international message a landowner derives from that information is a united 'no digging' practice.

Link to comment

But that is exactly what I want: let the land manager decide if he/she wants to allow a buried cache and the possible consequences or not. I just feel that the current 'no burying whatsoever' rule overshoots its target. And for me the same applies to other hiding forms, just check if it is allowed with the appropriate owner/organisation.

 

This is already the case. If you can show you have explicit permission from a land owner/manager you might be able to get an exception from the guideline. The guidelines say

There may be some exceptions. If your cache fits within one of the above areas, please explain this in a note to the reviewer. If you are given permission to place a cache on private property, indicate this on the cache page for the benefit of both the reviewer and people seeking out the cache.

 

The guidelines don't say that you can bury a cache if you get permission because that would end up encouraging people to hide caches this way. Ultimately someone who has seen a cache like this will do it somewhere without getting permission. At least if a cache placed without permission was not buried, all the owner has to do is remove the cache and it's as if it was never there. If there was a hole dug specifically to hide a cache, he will have to fill in the hole and possibly replant the area. This is true for any hide that defaces private or publid property and why these hides are also not allowed.

 

Several people have brought up land manager perceptions about geocaching. It is certainly the case when land managers find out about geoacaching they will want to know just how and where caches can be hidden. For many land managers there is a real concern that geocachers are going to be digging holes in their parks. The guidelines are written as they are, so that managers can be told "caches are never buried." This may not be entirely true, but at least you can say that caches are not supposed to be buried and therefore you will not have to worry about cachers digging holes in your parks.

 

I believe the majority have spoken.

Thankfully it is not the majority that decides on the guidelines. It is Groundspeak and the volunteer reviewers. For the most part the guidelines have been written to address real issues that have occured over the past 10 years of caches being placed. The guidelines attempt to address these issues while still giving cachers the most possible leeway in placing caches. The guidelines specifically provide for exceptions to be made. Often reviewers are able to grant the exception and approve the cache. In some case, only Groundspeak can grant an exception. The truth is that caches can be buried and that with proper permission one can dig with a shovel, trowel, or other pointy tool to hide a cache. But remember that these are exceptions, just having permission may not be enough of a reason for a reviewer or Groundspeak to allow it. The reviewer will take into account local laws and customs in deciding whether an exception can be made.

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment

Placing a cache according to the current rules could also cause geocaching to come under the microscope, something this seems to be blissfully ignored in this thread.

 

All caches require permission. That is just a chance one has to take when placing any cache. However, having the the guidelines to back you up helps to reassure a land owner who may not be willing to allow you to place a cache on his land.

 

While I would not recommend that you go about asking random, unknown land owners if you can bury a cache on his property, you can bury one on your own property. Sure it's frowned upon because others may try to copy it elsewhere, but you get a lot of leeway when placing caches on your own property.

 

I would even think if you know a property owner personally and they wanted you to bury the cache and were willing to give you written permission that you would have a good shot getting it published. Remember, these are guidelines, not hard, inflexible rules.

 

But a creative person can figure out how to place caches without needing to bury them. I don't know about German landscapes, but around here there are a lot of natural indentions in the landscape. Look for abandoned holes dug by animals. Look for holes left by rotted out trees. It's possible to place caches underground without digging anything.

Link to comment

What was I thinking?? You're absolutely right. My being here since January (as you pointed out for no apparent purpose other than to belittle me) surely makes me inferior.

 

I'm sorry. I wasn't trying to pull a "I've been here forever and I know everything, you silly n00b." I should have worded that better.

 

We can discuss the rest of your post in PMs, cause by even posting this I am guilty turning this thread, which was largely on-topic into an off-topic back-and-forth between you and me.

Edited by Castle Mischief
Link to comment

All it takes is one bad apple, and it ruins the whole bunch. If there's a doubt study up on your history of Geocaching in South Carolina.

 

Many years ago a garveyard was vandalized. A geocache was found. Lawmakers linked the two, and almost banned geocaching in almost every public area they could. Thankfully the community stepped up went to the State House, explained our hobby and settled to only ban caches in graveyards.

 

Within the past few months someone slipped in a bill that geocaching would be banned on all DNR owned and manaaged. Great caches with FULL premission of the land owners are now banned just because that land is managed by DNR.

 

So yall go ahead and hide caches however you want, just don't cry when the only place to hide a cache is the land you own. I'll be busy obtaining proper premission and following every guideline so we can still enjoy caching here.

Link to comment

This was quite interesting. So from what I can gather there are certain factions here that whenever they see "interact with the ground "they automatically assume buried. And of course since every geocacher is packing shovels with them whenever they go caching it also implies lots and lots of digging of holes to find this buried cache. This will of course lead to the complete banning of geocaching worldwide, well except in Germany the Netherlands and that area around there.

Not to say this thread didn't have some good posts with some useful common sense guidelines amidst all the chatter but overall it just seemed to validate what I was curious about.

What I find funny though is almost every cache on the planet "interacts with the ground" in some fashion or another yet most would not consider them buried.

Link to comment

This was quite interesting. So from what I can gather there are certain factions here that whenever they see "interact with the ground "they automatically assume buried. And of course since every geocacher is packing shovels with them whenever they go caching it also implies lots and lots of digging of holes to find this buried cache. This will of course lead to the complete banning of geocaching worldwide, well except in Germany the Netherlands and that area around there.

Not to say this thread didn't have some good posts with some useful common sense guidelines amidst all the chatter but overall it just seemed to validate what I was curious about.

What I find funny though is almost every cache on the planet "interacts with the ground" in some fashion or another yet most would not consider them buried.

Almost off on vacation, just enough time left for a small reply.

 

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. Finding buried caches around where I live, has never ever involved using a shovel (though hiding them could've). I've never found a buried cache where the immediate environment looked like the moon's surface or like a bomb recently exploded there.

 

One example of a buried cache that I've found is this one. Notice the small ammo box shaped hole in front of the tree (you can just spot one corner of it), that in hidden condition is covered by a thin film of soil and pine needles with the nearby stump placed on top.

Link to comment

This was quite interesting. So from what I can gather there are certain factions here that whenever they see "interact with the ground "they automatically assume buried. And of course since every geocacher is packing shovels with them whenever they go caching it also implies lots and lots of digging of holes to find this buried cache. This will of course lead to the complete banning of geocaching worldwide, well except in Germany the Netherlands and that area around there.

Not to say this thread didn't have some good posts with some useful common sense guidelines amidst all the chatter but overall it just seemed to validate what I was curious about.

What I find funny though is almost every cache on the planet "interacts with the ground" in some fashion or another yet most would not consider them buried.

Almost off on vacation, just enough time left for a small reply.

 

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. Finding buried caches around where I live, has never ever involved using a shovel (though hiding them could've). I've never found a buried cache where the immediate environment looked like the moon's surface or like a bomb recently exploded there.

 

One example of a buried cache that I've found is this one. Notice the small ammo box shaped hole in front of the tree (you can just spot one corner of it), that in hidden condition is covered by a thin film of soil and pine needles with the nearby stump placed on top.

Do you want permission to dig holes?Then step right up and ask for it.If you are willing to ask,then are you willing to accept the answer?Simple question.Simple answer.

Link to comment

I just realized something that I'm too lazy to check out.

 

The little checkbox on the hidey form says that you have read the guidelines but does it say your cache adheres to the guidelines?

 

And, on another note. When people come into my house I have some pretty basic rules. If people think it's OK to violate those rules then I am free to kick them out of my house. I suspect the same is true for geocaching. If you decide to skirt the rules, they are free to kick you out, at least from hiding the caches.

Link to comment

I just realized something that I'm too lazy to check out.

 

The little checkbox on the hidey form says that you have read the guidelines but does it say your cache adheres to the guidelines?

 

And, on another note. When people come into my house I have some pretty basic rules. If people think it's OK to violate those rules then I am free to kick them out of my house. I suspect the same is true for geocaching. If you decide to skirt the rules, they are free to kick you out, at least from hiding the caches.

 

This issue I am seeing however is people getting up in arms over an idea that does not have to be in any way contrary to the GC guidelines.

This thread has provided several but no way near an exhaustive list of how a cache, or part thereof might happen to be in the ground without any guideline being violated. No digging being done to place one and no digging being required to find it. Yet because it is even partially in the ground it is somehow skirting a non-existent rule. The rule does not say a cache can not be in the ground, it says no digging can be done to put it there and no digging can be required to find it. That is why it is acceptable to 'bury' an ammo box under a pile of sticks or pieces of bark.

 

In the quoted example it is more akin to a house rule you may have that guests are not allowed to watch your television, yet you kick them out for using their phone to set their Tivo.

Link to comment

I just realized something that I'm too lazy to check out.

 

The little checkbox on the hidey form says that you have read the guidelines but does it say your cache adheres to the guidelines?

 

And, on another note. When people come into my house I have some pretty basic rules. If people think it's OK to violate those rules then I am free to kick them out of my house. I suspect the same is true for geocaching. If you decide to skirt the rules, they are free to kick you out, at least from hiding the caches.

 

This issue I am seeing however is people getting up in arms over an idea that does not have to be in any way contrary to the GC guidelines.

This thread has provided several but no way near an exhaustive list of how a cache, or part thereof might happen to be in the ground without any guideline being violated. No digging being done to place one and no digging being required to find it. Yet because it is even partially in the ground it is somehow skirting a non-existent rule. The rule does not say a cache can not be in the ground, it says no digging can be done to put it there and no digging can be required to find it. That is why it is acceptable to 'bury' an ammo box under a pile of sticks or pieces of bark.

 

In the quoted example it is more akin to a house rule you may have that guests are not allowed to watch your television, yet you kick them out for using their phone to set their Tivo.

Using an existing hole and tossing some leaves or other debris over it has been discussed in this thread already,and seems to be an acceptable method.The big fuss is over Team Juniper who wants the rules changed to permit him to dig holes with tools and bury wooden boxes and buckets to place his cache in.This would use tools to hide and to find the cache.Read the Team Juniper posts in this thread.

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 2
×
×
  • Create New...