No Buried Caches

[+hajaluke]

Hello There.

 

Guidelines state that the caches cannot be buried. This is understandable since no one really wants to go digging up the earth to find the cache.

 

My question is, do you think a partially buried (say 35-50%) large cache is acceptable? I know I could ask the admins, but I just wanted your opinion.

 

I was thinking of placing a large cache, but not just tucking and covering it. I wanted to secure it in the earth to make sure it doesn't go anywhere to easily.

 

What do you guys think about that?

Edited June 23, 2011 by hajaluke

[knowschad]

The guidelines should really probably read, "Dig no holes".

[+Keelmann And Cici]

Agreed, I think anything that requires digging is out.

[+The Blorenges]

No... really... please don't.

 

Apart from the fact that it's not allowed by the Guidelines we have to follow, can you imagine if it became a trend? Would 30% buried be OK?... 50%?... How about a bit deeper? 80%? What if I bury it with the lid flush with the ground? Other newer cachers would see it and think, "Oh, that's great... I can do that... it must be OK, after all, it's not really buried, is it? You can still see the lid..." Then the next guy tries it but puts a bit of dirt all over the lid as "camo"...

 

and before you know it there's a craze of buried caches and all the Landowners start finding scrapes and shallow pits and dug patches on their land...

 

and geocachers will be the Spawn of the Devil.

 

Maybe I exaggerate just a little bit.

 

Just, no. It's a bad idea.

 

MrsB

Edited June 23, 2011 by The Blorenges

[+hajaluke]

No... really... please don't.

 

Apart from the fact that it's not allowed by the Guidelines we have to follow, can you imagine if it became a trend? Would 30% buried be OK?... 50%?... How about a bit deeper? 80%? What if I bury it with the lid flush with the ground? Other newer cachers would see it and think, "Oh, that's great... I can do that... it must be OK, after all, it's not really buried, is it? You can still see the lid..." Then the next guy tries it but puts a bit of dirt all over the lid as "camo"...

 

and before you know it there's a craze of buried caches and all the Landowners start finding scrapes and shallow pits and dug patches on their land...

 

and geocachers will be the Spawn of the Devil.

 

Maybe I exaggerate just a little bit.

 

Just, no. It's a bad idea.

 

MrsB

 

Good point, MrsB

[+JL_HSTRE]

Besides the copycat issue, the Absolutely No Buried Caches rule is also a big deal to many State and National Parks.

[+A & J Tooling]

No digging allowed. Of course, that hasn't stopped a lot of people from doing it.

[mresoteric]

If it's on your own property it should be ok.

[+mikehoffman]

mothballs will keep landowners away

[4wheelin_fool]

Also, seed caches are not allowed. Try to imagine the amount of film cans a buried 5 gallon bucket may yield if it gets fertilized properly.

[Clan Riffster]

I wanted to secure it in the earth to make sure it doesn't go anywhere to easily.

I think some sort of tether is a much better idea.

[+A & J Tooling]

If it's on your own property it should be ok.

 

Nope. Wrong answer. I wanted to do this until it was revealed to me, if they (us) find a buried container in one place, they'll start digging at the 1st one they can't find on someone elses property. I know, that I check fence post caps when I'm in a cemetary because I've found quite a few this way.

[+Geodalf]

If I remember right the rule is you can't use a pointed instrument. So I guess a dull shovel is OK.

[+webscouter.]

If I remember right the rule is you can't use a pointed instrument. So I guess a dull shovel is OK.

 

You remember incorrectly. You cannot dig with anything.

[+ToysRGood]

Wow - I never thought of it in regards to the HIDE, only to the FIND. I found a really, really well done cache that was partially buried - allowing an inconspicuous object to be placed over it as a cover - but it did not require the FINDERS to do any digging. Now I'm wondering what the intent of the "no buried caches" rule is? I always assumed it meant "don't make it so finders have to dig," since that would obviously be horrible. Sounds like everyone thus far definitely reads that differently than I did!

[+Afterburned]

I found one recently that had had some soil fall on it (had been un searched for in a whole year) so we had to dig to find it!

Not originally buried, but needed to dig to find. Bad precedent?

We just left a stone and some moss on top of it like it was originally hidden.

[+Castle Mischief]

I found one recently that had had some soil fall on it (had been un searched for in a whole year) so we had to dig to find it!

Not originally buried, but needed to dig to find. Bad precedent?

We just left a stone and some moss on top of it like it was originally hidden.

 

Yes, this happens. Was there a hole dug to place it in? No.

[+Castle Mischief]

No digging allowed. Of course, that hasn't stopped a lot of people from doing it.

 

They're guidelines, not rules for a reason. Every now and then exceptions have been made. Assuming that your cache is an exception and trying weasel it past a reviewer without giving the full details is a really good way to get that cache archived and all your future submission looked at under a microscope.

 

So yeah, for every guideline it's possible to find an example that seems to voilate that guideline. Either it does violate the guideline and the reviewer doesn't know about it yet or an exception was granted.

[+joranda]

The oldest cache out is buried in the ground next to a fence post. They must have used a flat shovel to do the work since they are not pointed.

[mresoteric]

If it's on your own property it should be ok.

 

Nope. Wrong answer. I wanted to do this until it was revealed to me, if they (us) find a buried container in one place, they'll start digging at the 1st one they can't find on someone elses property. I know, that I check fence post caps when I'm in a cemetary because I've found quite a few this way.

 

If it's only partially buried (35% to 50%) as the OP suggested, then how would finding such a cache make people start digging at the 1st one they can't find on someone else's property?

 

If anything it might make someone think they can bury one when they hide it. But then that should not get approved unless they own the property or get explicit written permission to hide one in such a manner.

[+hajaluke]

If it's on your own property it should be ok.

 

Nope. Wrong answer. I wanted to do this until it was revealed to me, if they (us) find a buried container in one place, they'll start digging at the 1st one they can't find on someone elses property. I know, that I check fence post caps when I'm in a cemetary because I've found quite a few this way.

 

If it's only partially buried (35% to 50%) as the OP suggested, then how would finding such a cache make people start digging at the 1st one they can't find on someone else's property?

 

If anything it might make someone think they can bury one when they hide it. But then that should not get approved unless they own the property or get explicit written permission to hide one in such a manner.

 

Thanks for all of your opinions! Wow, I'm glad I asked.

[+popokiiti]

If there is an existing depression in the ground, you can use that. Otherwise, caches should not be buried.

It is always best to ask if you are unsure and the "if in doubt, don't" mantra of my late Mum has always helped me.

[+ShaunEM]

I found one under a foot of wet leaves. It was buried IMO! May not have seem so bad, but after the rain.. what a mucky muck!

 

Shaun

[4wheelin_fool]

Let the ground speak for itself. Why try to choke it with a cache?

[+StarBrand]

bad idea, sets a bad prescedent, sets a bad example, against the gudelines, makes muggles upset, makes land owners/managers upset, bad idea

[+NYPaddleCacher]

bad idea, sets a bad prescedent, sets a bad example, against the gudelines, makes muggles upset, makes land owners/managers upset, bad idea

 

+1

 

The "No buried Caches" guideline exists for a reason. It's not to stop geocachers from hiding and seeking caches using a pointy object. One of the reasons is to avoid the perception by land managers that geocaching is about "finding buried treasure". I don't know why, but sometimes it sounds like some geocachers look at the guidelines and try come up with an interpretation or hiding technique that "technically" falls within the guideline without considering the spirit of the guideline.

[+Don_J]

If it's on your own property it should be ok.

 

I honestly don't know if Groundspeak would allow that, or not. I wish they would just put it in writing that no buried caches can be listed on their site, regardless of property ownership or permissions.

[+briansnat]

Wow - I never thought of it in regards to the HIDE, only to the FIND. I found a really, really well done cache that was partially buried - allowing an inconspicuous object to be placed over it as a cover - but it did not require the FINDERS to do any digging. Now I'm wondering what the intent of the "no buried caches" rule is? I always assumed it meant "don't make it so finders have to dig," since that would obviously be horrible. Sounds like everyone thus far definitely reads that differently than I did!

 

The intent of the rule is so that geocaching doesn't get banned by many park systems. Most land managers just don't like the idea of people digging up their parks. Whether the geocachers are hiding or finding a cache is irrelevant to them.

 

As for the guideline it reads "Geocaches are never buried. If a shovel, trowel or other pointy object is used to dig or break ground, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not permitted".

Edited June 24, 2011 by briansnat

[+drain13]

i once found an ammo can under a field stone under a bench once. it was on private property and secured to something so it couldnt be removed and had a lock on it. one of the coolest early finds i can remember. there was a lot more to the clues and description to guide you in the right direction to look, but still an interesting twist on the rules. Of course when i first started i thought this activity was gonna be all indiana jones but has turned out to be a different sort of fun. SL TFTC

[+StarBrand]

i once found an ammo can under a field stone under a bench once. it was on private property and secured to something so it couldnt be removed and had a lock on it. one of the coolest early finds i can remember. there was a lot more to the clues and description to guide you in the right direction to look, but still an interesting twist on the rules. Of course when i first started i thought this activity was gonna be all indiana jones but has turned out to be a different sort of fun. SL TFTC

Covered does not equal Buried.

[+Sol seaker]

If it's on your own property it should be ok.

 

Nope. Wrong answer. I wanted to do this until it was revealed to me, if they (us) find a buried container in one place, they'll start digging at the 1st one they can't find on someone elses property. I know, that I check fence post caps when I'm in a cemetary because I've found quite a few this way.

 

If it's only partially buried (35% to 50%) as the OP suggested, then how would finding such a cache make people start digging at the 1st one they can't find on someone else's property?

 

If anything it might make someone think they can bury one when they hide it. But then that should not get approved unless they own the property or get explicit written permission to hide one in such a manner.

 

a partially buried cache was the cause of caching getting banned in national parks in WA and I believe in the whole US. It was from a partially buried cache in Olympic National Park.

 

State parks here now have created a permit system to get a cache approved there.

A lot of people don't want to do the great paperwork that it takes to get a cache approved in a state park.

 

I am glad city parks don't require that paperwork. Imagine if they did and you'll think twice about making land managers mad.

[mresoteric]

If it's on your own property it should be ok.

 

Nope. Wrong answer. I wanted to do this until it was revealed to me, if they (us) find a buried container in one place, they'll start digging at the 1st one they can't find on someone elses property. I know, that I check fence post caps when I'm in a cemetary because I've found quite a few this way.

 

If it's only partially buried (35% to 50%) as the OP suggested, then how would finding such a cache make people start digging at the 1st one they can't find on someone else's property?

 

If anything it might make someone think they can bury one when they hide it. But then that should not get approved unless they own the property or get explicit written permission to hide one in such a manner.

 

a partially buried cache was the cause of caching getting banned in national parks in WA and I believe in the whole US. It was from a partially buried cache in Olympic National Park.

 

State parks here now have created a permit system to get a cache approved there.

A lot of people don't want to do the great paperwork that it takes to get a cache approved in a state park.

 

I am glad city parks don't require that paperwork. Imagine if they did and you'll think twice about making land managers mad.

 

The hider did not own the national park nor have explicit permission to hide a cache there. I suggested it would be ok on his/her own property.

Edited June 24, 2011 by mresoteric

[+Team Van Dyk]

Just so I understand what we're talking about here. Those micros with acorns or pinecones or rocks glued to the caps which are pushed in the ground such that only the acorn/pinecone/rocks is showing (at ground level so it looks like it's just sitting there)...those are against the rules?

 

I guess they are, now that I read the rule, but I've probably found 4-5 of them in the last 2 months alone (and no, they aren't old "grandfathered" hides), and a couple of Groundspeak resellers sell pre-made versions of these caches (same deal with sprinklerheads).

 

How stringently is this rule actually followed/enforced?

 

Just curious.

[+niraD]

Just so I understand what we're talking about here. Those micros with acorns or pinecones or rocks glued to the caps which are pushed in the ground such that only the acorn/pinecone/rocks is showing (at ground level so it looks like it's just sitting there)...those are against the rules?

Maybe. Maybe not. Was "a shovel, trowel or other pointy object is used to dig or break ground, whether in order to hide or to find the cache"?

 

I've found a number of caches hidden below ground level, but AFAICS they were hidden in existing holes or depressions (whether natural or man-made), and no digging was done to hide the cache. I've also found caches covered with handfuls of loose sand/leaves/gravel/bark/whatever as camouflage, or pushed into the loose sand/leaves/gravel/bark/whatever on the ground. But again, no digging was done to hide the cache.

[AZcachemeister]

If I remember right the rule is you can't use a pointed instrument. So I guess a dull shovel is OK.

 

You remember incorrectly. You cannot dig with anything.

 

Your bare hands should be OK.

[+briansnat]

Just so I understand what we're talking about here. Those micros with acorns or pinecones or rocks glued to the caps which are pushed in the ground such that only the acorn/pinecone/rocks is showing (at ground level so it looks like it's just sitting there)...those are against the rules?

 

I guess they are, now that I read the rule, but I've probably found 4-5 of them in the last 2 months alone (and no, they aren't old "grandfathered" hides), and a couple of Groundspeak resellers sell pre-made versions of these caches (same deal with sprinklerheads).

 

How stringently is this rule actually followed/enforced?

 

Just curious.

 

Pushing a stake or similar object into the ground isn't quite the same as excavating a hole.

[+BigAl437]

You remember incorrectly. You cannot dig with anything.

 

Your bare hands should be OK.

 

Unless they are legal weapons like Chuck Norris has.

[+TomToad]

You remember incorrectly. You cannot dig with anything.

 

Your bare hands should be OK.

[/Quote]

 

Unless they are legal weapons like Chuck Norris has.

Chuck Norris doesn't bury his caches, his caches bury themselves.