Placing a Cache

[+firestars]

So, I go ahead and place another cache. Pop it in its hidey hole, measure the Co-Ords and go home to log it. Total time - 1hr max.

 

The cache is rejected because 'there is another close by, within the .1 mile limit' - ok, thats fine, but its not live.

 

"When will it be live?" I ask our local reviewer.

 

"Dont know, could be months" came the reply.

 

Why? What on earth could take someone months to do? There should be a time limit on the placing of the cache to it going live, before the space is made free for someone to do it a dadgum sight quicker.

 

Im off later to mark and then register my whole village in .1 mile squares "just in case I need them in a year or so"

 

The mind boggles.

[+thehoomer]

So, I go ahead and place another cache. Pop it in its hidey hole, measure the Co-Ords and go home to log it. Total time - 1hr max.

 

The cache is rejected because 'there is another close by, within the .1 mile limit' - ok, thats fine, but its not live.

 

"When will it be live?" I ask our local reviewer.

 

"Dont know, could be months" came the reply.

 

Why? What on earth could take someone months to do? There should be a time limit on the placing of the cache to it going live, before the space is made free for someone to do it a dadgum sight quicker.

 

Im off later to mark and then register my whole village in .1 mile squares "just in case I need them in a year or so"

 

The mind boggles.

I understand your concerns but put the boot on the other foot......

Imagine that other cache setter is you and you have found a great place for a cache but are waiting on permission from the land owner. You wouldnt be too happy if once you recieved your permission, the reviewer told you you could no longer have that position because someone else has now placed a cache too close to it. This is one of many reasons why there could be a delay. Good luck with it if it finally gets the go ahead.

[+firestars]

I cant see that permission would be required in this instance, however, would it not be prudent (and indeed fair) if you sought permission before registering the location?

 

Maybe its just me.

[+The Bongtwashes]

I cant see that permission would be required in this instance, however, would it not be prudent (and indeed fair) if you sought permission before registering the location?

 

Maybe its just me.

Check the guidelines. Permission is required for all caches. It can take ages to get the necessary permission, but if you've found the ideal place to hide a cache then you'll want to reserve the location.

Some multi- and puzzle caches take people ages to set up, if a particular location is suddenly not available it may require reworking of the whole cache, indeed it may mean the whole thing is not viable.

Edited June 23, 2011 by The Bongtwashes

[+thehoomer]

That would rather depend. If the location was perfect for a very clever hide you had in mind, you may want to secure the location and seek permission retrospectively. To be honest, Im not certain if a co ordinate is saved indefinately if a cacher claims it. Again, Im not sure but I think the only way your proposed co ordinate would be freed up, is if the other cacher decided not to use theirs and archived the listing. Im sure someone with more knowledge will step in here and fill us in .

[+Graculus]

When we come across a cache that hasn't been submitted (or submitted but not published for some reason) that is 'blocking' a newly placed cache we ask the owner of the 'blocking' cache what their intentions are. Their cache could be waiting on permission or they've decided not to proceed with it due to the problems it has. We give the owner a reasonable time to respond to our request. For example, if I ask someone via email or a log on their cache and they don't reply within a couple of weeks I'll ignore that cache and the new one can then be reviewed again. If the owner does respond and says they are working on some aspect of it then we'll give them a suitable time to sort things out. How long? This depends. Getting permission sorted out from some land managers can be quite time consuming so it could indeed be months. If it's a cache that doesn't appear to require specific permission and from reading the cache description it doesn't look like it's ready to be published I'd probably give them two weeks to submit it for review. If they don't then they may very well lose that location.

 

People do create cache pages to hold a location but if it's clear the cache is not ready to go and someone else wants to use that spot then it's not fair the other cacher can keep it 'blocked'. They may be asked to submit their cache or lose the location.

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

[+firestars]

Thank you for the info Chris.

 

I was asked by the reviewer what I wished to do, move it or delete it. Of course, I retorted that I could not make that decision unless I was given some indication of what _he_ was going to do with regards contacting the cache owner and how much time was going to be permitted to go live or archive.

 

I guess I will have to wait.

[+firestars]

I cant see that permission would be required in this instance, however, would it not be prudent (and indeed fair) if you sought permission before registering the location?

 

Maybe its just me.

Check the guidelines. Permission is required for all caches. It can take ages to get the necessary permission, but if you've found the ideal place to hide a cache then you'll want to reserve the location.

Some multi- and puzzle caches take people ages to set up, if a particular location is suddenly not available it may require reworking of the whole cache, indeed it may mean the whole thing is not viable.

 

Can you send me the link to that part of the guidelines please? I have had permission for just one of my caches and I cannot beleive for one minute that ALL have permission granted by one person or another.

[+Graculus]

Guidelines

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

[+firestars]

Guidelines

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

 

I would suggest that 99% of caches placed on public property do not have permission. When will you be archiving them?

[+topmonkey]

I'm just confused about one thing here. I may have completely misunderstood how it works but I was under the impression that if you created a cache listing but did NOT click on the 'submit for review' button, then the reviewer would not see it. If so, how can you then create a cache listing 'just to hold the location'?

[+dfx]

I'm just confused about one thing here. I may have completely misunderstood how it works but I was under the impression that if you created a cache listing but did NOT click on the 'submit for review' button, then the reviewer would not see it. If so, how can you then create a cache listing 'just to hold the location'?

 

You're talking about the "enabled - ready for review" checkbox. You're right, they won't see it in the review queue, but it will still appear when they run their proximity checks.

[+NattyBooshka]

Surely it would be better for all then if we got the warning before we submit, so the reviewer and potential co aren't both wasting their valuable ale time?

[+Bear and Ragged]

Surely it would be better for all then if we got the warning before we submit, so the reviewer and potential co aren't both wasting their valuable ale time?

Great way to "Battleship" a location, to find that very difficult Puzzle cache that you can't solve...

[+NattyBooshka]

Surely it would be better for all then if we got the warning before we submit, so the reviewer and potential co aren't both wasting their valuable ale time?

Great way to "Battleship" a location, to find that very difficult Puzzle cache that you can't solve...

I wouldn't waste my valuable time that way either!

[+Graculus]

I'm just confused about one thing here. I may have completely misunderstood how it works but I was under the impression that if you created a cache listing but did NOT click on the 'submit for review' button, then the reviewer would not see it. If so, how can you then create a cache listing 'just to hold the location'?

The wording on the submit form is a bit confusing about this. It doesn't come into our queue for review but it 'exists' as a cache page so we are able to see it when it pops up in proximity to another cache.

 

Why don't you get to see proximity problems when you submit your new cache? Proximity to other traditionals would be easy - but you should have checked that yourself before submitting the cache. Proximity to stages or finals of multis and unknowns is a lot more difficult. Older caches don't have such waypoints at all as they were never a requirement and many more recent ones have the waypoints incorrectly set as Stages rather than Questions (which are not checked for proximity)- or the other way round which would produce a false proximity error. So I think it would be more confusing for cache owners getting such warnings. We have the advantage on 'awkward' caches of being able to see the review and publication history so can work out what the stages are or should be.

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

[+NattyBooshka]

I'm just confused about one thing here. I may have completely misunderstood how it works but I was under the impression that if you created a cache listing but did NOT click on the 'submit for review' button, then the reviewer would not see it. If so, how can you then create a cache listing 'just to hold the location'?

The wording on the submit form is a bit confusing about this. It doesn't come into our queue for review but it 'exists' as a cache page so we are able to see it when it pops up in proximity to another cache.

 

Why don't you get to see proximity problems when you submit your new cache? Proximity to other traditionals would be easy - but you should have checked that yourself before submitting the cache. Proximity to stages or finals of multis and unknowns is a lot more difficult. Older caches don't have such waypoints at all as they were never a requirement and many more recent ones have the waypoints incorrectly set as Stages rather than Questions (which are not checked for proximity)- or the other way round which would produce a false proximity error. So I think it would be more confusing for cache owners getting such warnings. We have the advantage on 'awkward' caches of being able to see the review and publication history so can work out what the stages are or should be.

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

Ok... I generally start my listing with my home coordinates, but don't intend to hide one there, maybe I should put them offshore while I work on them?

 

Am I right in thinking then, if everything is done correctly, that a question/virtual stage of a multi could have a physical cache placed a foot away, whereas a physical stage would be subject to the 0.1 mile rule? If so that's cool... Was looking at making a multi that would attract the numbers players as well as multi fans, as I may have brushed on in another thread.

[+MartyBartfast]

 

Ok... I generally start my listing with my home coordinates, but don't intend to hide one there, maybe I should put them offshore while I work on them?

 

Am I right in thinking then, if everything is done correctly, that a question/virtual stage of a multi could have a physical cache placed a foot away, whereas a physical stage would be subject to the 0.1 mile rule?

 

As for the first point you could also start a new listing with the co-ords of one of your existing caches as it would be occupying the same exclusion zone and therefore wouldn't block anyone out.

 

For the second point, yes that's correct. One of my physical caches occupied the same spot as a virtual "question" stage of a local multi.

[+Happy Humphrey]

Why? What on earth could take someone months to do? There should be a time limit on the placing of the cache to it going live, before the space is made free for someone to do it a dadgum sight quicker.

I'll ignore the very valid but tricky "permission" question (OK, not all sites really need permission but some definitely do). Even without that consideration it can easily take weeks or months to get a cache placed.

 

As a minimum it takes a couple of days (unless you don't care about whether your coordinates are 100% correct and the container is suitable for the location). Unless it's just a standard micro or something similar it could take a couple of weeks devising the puzzle or intermediate stages. Or building the container(s) (including ordering parts and waiting for delivery). Then you might want to trial it and make adjustments. Perhaps if you've little else to do you could rush it through in a few days but most people have to fit caching around making a living.

I'd guess that the majority of the (>100) caches I've found in the last fortnight have been months in the planning.

Edited June 24, 2011 by Happy Humphrey

[+NattyBooshka]

 

Ok... I generally start my listing with my home coordinates, but don't intend to hide one there, maybe I should put them offshore while I work on them?

 

Am I right in thinking then, if everything is done correctly, that a question/virtual stage of a multi could have a physical cache placed a foot away, whereas a physical stage would be subject to the 0.1 mile rule?

 

As for the first point you could also start a new listing with the co-ords of one of your existing caches as it would be occupying the same exclusion zone and therefore wouldn't block anyone out.

 

For the second point, yes that's correct. One of my physical caches occupied the same spot as a virtual "question" stage of a local multi.

Haha! Why didn't I think of answer #1? Ok... Don't answer that one!

 

As for answer #2, cool... I wasn't aware of this, so my multi idea will only take half as long to plan as I first thought... Hopefully I can have it set by the end of July with a view to going live early autumn once things have weathered and been tested. Thanks so much for the clarification!

[+Amberel]

Just to clarify, if you use an existing feature it's not subject to the proximity rules. If you place anything there yourself it is.

 

Rgds, Andy

[+Graculus]

Just to clarify, if you use an existing feature it's not subject to the proximity rules. If you place anything there yourself it is.

 

Rgds, Andy

 

Basically yes. Anything you place is a physical object. Exception is firetacks as they become too numerous.

 

Another consideration where we may ask for a waypoint to be changed is when two are the same. For example someone uses a 'noticeboard' that someone else is already using for another cache or an unknown cache has the same coords as another cache (with an unknown cache the coordinates can be 'random' and not necessary related to the cache). In the first case whilst there is nothing stopping you using a clue someone else is using it might be considered bad etiquette to do so. But the other problem with this and the unknown cache is that on an electronic map (or mapping GPS) the icons will appear on top of each and be difficult to select. So if you are paperless and have an unknown cache on the screen it would be hiding the other cache icon underneath so you'd have problems selecting them with your finger or cursor to open the page and read it. For this reason we normally ask for such waypoints to be changed.

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

[+NattyBooshka]

Just to clarify, if you use an existing feature it's not subject to the proximity rules. If you place anything there yourself it is.

 

Rgds, Andy

 

Basically yes. Anything you place is a physical object. Exception is firetacks as they become too numerous.

 

Another consideration where we may ask for a waypoint to be changed is when two are the same. For example someone uses a 'noticeboard' that someone else is already using for another cache or an unknown cache has the same coords as another cache (with an unknown cache the coordinates can be 'random' and not necessary related to the cache). In the first case whilst there is nothing stopping you using a clue someone else is using it might be considered bad etiquette to do so. But the other problem with this and the unknown cache is that on an electronic map (or mapping GPS) the icons will appear on top of each and be difficult to select. So if you are paperless and have an unknown cache on the screen it would be hiding the other cache icon underneath so you'd have problems selecting them with your finger or cursor to open the page and read it. For this reason we normally ask for such waypoints to be changed.

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

Makes sense... I think! Work in progress, then you guys can tell me what I've got wrong... I'm a bit rusty...

 

Now, I'm not planning on placing stuff on one route of the multi, it will be done with compass skills and old school pacing... So a physical thing to find (or the paces don't work) but not hidden by me, or a clue like a sign... Just a place to be. Would I be better off listing them as "question to answer" to denote there's no hidden stage cache type thingy? I understand the need for waypoint co-ordinates, but they'll never be used, deduced or seen by anybody to complete the cache... So would be arbitrary... Could I leave them out all together? The other route to the end would be a more regular multi, using modern toys!

[+Amberel]

Would I be better off listing them as "question to answer" to denote there's no hidden stage cache type thingy?

That's correct. In general, if you put something there yourself its a stage of a multi-cache, if you don't then it's a question to answer.

I understand the need for waypoint co-ordinates, but they'll never be used, deduced or seen by anybody to complete the cache... So would be arbitrary... Could I leave them out all together?

I expect they would like to have all the waypoints listed, with the correct co-ordinates.

 

Rgds, Andy

[+NattyBooshka]

Would I be better off listing them as "question to answer" to denote there's no hidden stage cache type thingy?

That's correct. In general, if you put something there yourself its a stage of a multi-cache, if you don't then it's a question to answer.

I understand the need for waypoint co-ordinates, but they'll never be used, deduced or seen by anybody to complete the cache... So would be arbitrary... Could I leave them out all together?

I expect they would like to have all the waypoints listed, with the correct co-ordinates.

 

Rgds, Andy

Thanks... Got my latest assignment handed in this morning... Brain hurting, so thought I'd go for simplification so I can fit the info in the memory.

 

Was confused as where one route is going to be true multi, the other is going to be a REAL letterbox hybrid.

Edited June 24, 2011 by NattyBooshka

[+Graculus]

You should always list waypoints for two reasons. 1)They can easily be downloaded to a GPS and saves the finder have to manually enter them. 2)It really helps us to know where the locations are. If they are a 'physical' object you've placed then we MUST know where that is, the cache wouldn't get published without. With question stages we'd ask you to add them if you hadn't done so before finishing the cache review.

In all cases if you wish you can make the waypoints hidden from finders on the page - we can always see them.

 

You can make a cache work pretty much anyway you want it to. There is no reason why you can't have a multi with some physical stages, some questions to answer and some navigation. The guidelines only require that GPS usage is demonstrated at some point. If you created a cache starting at a known car park which consisted of just directions and distances you could use a compass for then that wouldn't qualify. I did publish a 'pirate map' type cache which you had to follow. The maps was hidden in a container which you used your GPS to find.

 

Always a good idea with a really complex idea that is going to take you a lot of work to set up to talk to your reviewer beforehand. Don't forget you can check locations yourself for permission (going back to the original subject of this thread) by using the various mapping resources that we use; MAGIC, Countryside Council for Wales, Scottish Natural Heritage, Forestry Commission Scotland/Wales and Woodland Trust to name but a few. Take a look at the permission page on my resource site (link under my signature).

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

[+NattyBooshka]

You should always list waypoints for two reasons. 1)They can easily be downloaded to a GPS and saves the finder have to manually enter them. 2)It really helps us to know where the locations are. If they are a 'physical' object you've placed then we MUST know where that is, the cache wouldn't get published without. With question stages we'd ask you to add them if you hadn't done so before finishing the cache review.

In all cases if you wish you can make the waypoints hidden from finders on the page - we can always see them.

 

You can make a cache work pretty much anyway you want it to. There is no reason why you can't have a multi with some physical stages, some questions to answer and some navigation. The guidelines only require that GPS usage is demonstrated at some point. If you created a cache starting at a known car park which consisted of just directions and distances you could use a compass for then that wouldn't qualify. I did publish a 'pirate map' type cache which you had to follow. The maps was hidden in a container which you used your GPS to find.

 

Always a good idea with a really complex idea that is going to take you a lot of work to set up to talk to your reviewer beforehand. Don't forget you can check locations yourself for permission (going back to the original subject of this thread) by using the various mapping resources that we use; MAGIC, Countryside Council for Wales, Scottish Natural Heritage, Forestry Commission Scotland/Wales and Woodland Trust to name but a few. Take a look at the permission page on my resource site (link under my signature).

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

Used to talk to my reviewer a lot... That bit I remember well! My idea isn't overly complicated of different... Just that I'll be using GC.com for pure letterboxing clue hosting within a regular multi that will require GPS skills. Think from car park to co-ordinates (with OS ref as well) to start box with more coordinates and also letterboxing clues in should meet the requirements. Then will take the two sets of players on different routes, to the same end point. Will take coordinates for the letterboxes side so that you know where they are.

 

Have made contact with local reviewer recently, so will run the full plan by them first.

 

Original topic just raised a couple of questions for me... Didn't mean to hijack, just piggy back it!

[+Happy Humphrey]

Ironically, the new cache that I set up over the weekend has fallen foul of this rule. It's taken me about 12 hours effort to get the cache and cache page ready, and cost a fair amount (including two trips out to the cache site). Now it looks like that's all gone to waste and I'll have to recover the container, because someone else has that spot reserved. This is in an area where caches are very sparse, so I didn't expect that I'd need to check with the reviewer first!

Edited June 27, 2011 by Happy Humphrey

[+NattyBooshka]

Ironically, the new cache that I set up over the weekend has fallen foul of this rule. It's taken me about 12 hours effort to get the cache and cache page ready, and cost a fair amount (including two trips out to the cache site). Now it looks like that's all gone to waste and I'll have to recover the container, because someone else has that spot reserved. This is in an area where caches are very sparse, so I didn't expect that I'd need to check with the reviewer first!

I suppose the unknown answer is how far away are you... Could be as little as a couple of feet in it... In which case maybe manipulate the co-ords a little as you'd still be easily findable. If you've chosen the exact same place... Err... Hmmm... Opencaching and quickly! Some on there check here for proximity, don't know about the other way round though!

[+t4e]

Surely it would be better for all then if we got the warning before we submit, so the reviewer and potential co aren't both wasting their valuable ale time?

Great way to "Battleship" a location, to find that very difficult Puzzle cache that you can't solve...

 

i can't imagine anyone using such tactic to find that elusive mystery cache...who in his/her right mind would go out searching a 160m radius for it?

[+Happy Humphrey]

I suppose the unknown answer is how far away are you... Could be as little as a couple of feet in it... In which case maybe manipulate the co-ords a little as you'd still be easily findable. If you've chosen the exact same place... Err... Hmmm... Opencaching and quickly! Some on there check here for proximity, don't know about the other way round though!

Trouble is, I could be moving it even closer. And the site was one just crying out for a cache, with one really good hiding place. I wrote a short story, with the key to finding the cache as part of the tale; hence the lengthy effort required!

The suggestion is to resubmit after 10 days and see if the other person has given up on the spot after being contacted by the reviewer.

[+NattyBooshka]

I suppose the unknown answer is how far away are you... Could be as little as a couple of feet in it... In which case maybe manipulate the co-ords a little as you'd still be easily findable. If you've chosen the exact same place... Err... Hmmm... Opencaching and quickly! Some on there check here for proximity, don't know about the other way round though!

Trouble is, I could be moving it even closer. And the site was one just crying out for a cache, with one really good hiding place. I wrote a short story, with the key to finding the cache as part of the tale; hence the lengthy effort required!

The suggestion is to resubmit after 10 days and see if the other person has given up on the spot after being contacted by the reviewer.

Will your reviewer tell you how close you are? Are there other places within a couple of hundred feet to hide it? You could always take them to the point and do a bearing/paces thing from it.

[+Towcester Pirates]

Guidelines

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

 

Can someone please tell me what evidence is required to show you have permission from a land owner?

[+Bear and Ragged]

Guidelines

 

Chris

Graculus

Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com

UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk

Geocaching.com Knowledge Books

 

Can someone please tell me what evidence is required to show you have permission from a land owner?

 

From the guidelines: "By submitting a cache listing, you assure us you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location".

 

In the UK there are some locations that require specific permission for caches to be placed. There are also some locations where permission will not be given or where caches may not be placed. This is either at the request of the landowner/manager or due to their sensitive nature or for reasons of security. This is specific to the UK.

 

When submitting a cache in a location where you have obtained specific permission you should add the permission information you received as a 'Note to Reviewer' log on the cache page for the reviewer to see when you submit it. The information should include the name of the person who gave their permission and their telephone number or email address. The text of any email correspondence or letter giving permission should be copied there too. Please note these logs are not visible when the cache is published. Permission does not apply to 'question to answer' stages of multi-caches (where there is no physical component or container) which may involve visiting these locations. Please see the page 'Help your Reviewer' on how to add such letters to a log.

 

Does your cache require SPECIFIC permission?

 

Have to say http://www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk/resources/permish.html is worth a read!

Get a cuppa, and have a read.

 

edit for speelin.

Edited June 28, 2011 by Bear and Ragged