Jump to content

A decent reason for tooclose


Recommended Posts

Caching in the Wisconsin Dells, I came across a pair of very close caches, both by the same hider: Dam Pretty View #1 and #2.

They're only a couple-hundred feet apart, but much of that is vertical.


Now here's a reason to have two caches close together. #1 is a bit of a tricky spot, but relatively easy to get to. #2 requires a bit more cliff scrambling -- and was outside of my abilities on a wet, slippery day (although the fisherman with both hands full made it down OK).


I don't know if this is how this pair got OK'd, but I'd have no problem in a situation like this: The "junior" version for most of us, and the "extreme" version nearby for those of us who still think they're immortal.


I am Arrowroot, son of Arrowshirt. I have many names, you know

Link to comment

The caches were placed in August 2002. I don't think the distance rule was quite as rigidly enforced back then, at least for caches hidden by the same hider in an area that didn't have a lot of caches in it prior to the good efforts of that hider.



I was formerly employed by the Department of Redundancy Department, but I don't work there anymore.

Link to comment

They have stated the .1 mile guideline is flexible. Situations like that with extreme terrain changes between caches still have a chance at being approved. 2 caches might be 100 feet apart, but one is at the top of a cliff, the other, the bottom. Or opposite sides of a river. Either case, since the actual distance needed to travel from cache A to cache B is alot further then straight bushwacking, the approvers will consider them. Just be sure to include a note mentioning why you feel the short apparent distance is justified, to ease the approval process.


Tae-Kwon-Leap is not a path to a door, but a road leading forever towards the horizon.

Link to comment

Originally posted by Poindexter:

Where I'm from, we have regular caching "events" where several caches may be placed in a park for the event and they are usually left there as regular caches after that. There's one area I know of with 10 caches within a half mile radius.


We also have an area like that in Michigan, near where I live. I think that this could be a serious problem if it becomes widespread.


Why have ten geocaches in such close proximity? One remaining cache would be all right by my reckoning, but I think the rest of them should be removed to save on land impact.


Warm regards,




Link to comment

I came across a strange one last week. I was going to find the next intermediate cache in a large statewide multi, and I figured I'd see if there were any regular caches in the area. Turns out there were a few - but one was only about 30-feet (!) away. I didn't think much of it until I went to log the regular cache.


I saw that many people looking for the regular cache had inadvertently found the cache that was part of the multi (it had no log or trinkets, just coordinates). Even the regular cache owner commented on it in the description... It's not clear who's at fault here or even if there is a fault. It's also not clear which cache was there first since the Regular cache owner mentions that he moved his cache.


The regular cache is "Mouse Trap" in case anyone wants to take a look.



Link to comment
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...