request-get rid of the 1/10 mile/528 feet rule only for Virtual caches

[Team Covalt]

While placing a virutal cache inside Death Valley National Park (Remember we can't place tradional caches inside NP Parks-Rangers will remove them), I was told of this rule "Geocaches must be a minimum of 528 feet or one-tenth of a mile from all existing Geocaches. We do this so that any given area does not become saturated." While I understand the saturated part for tradional caches, for virutals it's different, because in most cases you're looking for some sort of object or clue/verfication word to get credit for the cache.

 

For a place like Death Valley, especially like Scotty's Castle and Furance Creek Ranch area, there are lots of areas that are interesting that could become a virutal cache (Got to do something when the temps are over 100 degrees).

 

JMHO, hopefully others will agree.

 

Garmin Vista

Garmin Street Pilot

and a partridge in a pear tree

[+9Key]

Why not make a multi cache?

 

[Team Covalt]

This is a possibility, but will the 1/10 mile/528 feet rule still apply?

 

Garmin Vista

Garmin Street Pilot

and a partridge in a pear tree

[+Lil Devil]

What's the purpose of a virtual cache? Is it to stroke the ego of the placer? To give finders a chance to pad their find count? To "do something when the temps are over 100"? Give me a break. I think the reason should ONLY be to draw a cacher's attention to an interesting area.

 

Most of the virtuals I have done, did bring me to an interesting area that I had never seen before. In many cases, I spent some time and explored other stuff that was nearby. In one case I even commented about something I found nearby, and the owner wrote back that he hadn't noticed that thing before.

 

If there's already a virtual 400 feet from "your spot", chances are that anyone visiting "that other spot" will walk around a bit and see your spot, too. If your really feel that other spot shouldn't be missed, email the other owner and ask them to add something to their cache description.. "also check out the thing 400 feet west." Or place your own virtual 700 feet away and with it state, "make sure to check out the thing 300 feet east."

 

But please, above all, keep it interesting to everyone.

 

Lil Devil

[BassoonPilot]

I agree. Replace the 1/10th mile rule with a 1/2 mile rule that applies to ALL caches.

 

A year down the road we may need to consider replacing that with a 1 mile rule, and two years from now with a 5 mile rule.

 

Am I being facetious? I dunno ... check back in a year or two.

[+Renegade Knight]

1/2 mile? Heck no. Though in a year or two I might sign up for the automatic cache renewal thing just to get some churn going so I have something to find in my neck of the woods.

 

While LilDevil was as tactful as a butcher tenderizing a bloody red blob I do agree that if your other item of interest is 528 or less over from a cache odds are people will mosey on over and check it out anyway.

 

You could always rotate your virtuals. This lets you work around the rule, as you archive old virtual caches and bring new ones on line.

 

==============================

Wherever you go there you are.

[+9Key]

quote:

---

You could always rotate your virtuals. This lets you work around the rule, as you archive old virtual caches and bring new ones on line.

---

 

You didn't really have to post that silly idea did you?!

 

Silly person!

 

[+Nurse Dave]

I agree with LilDevil. Not EVERYTHING needs a cache. Not every view, not every info sign, not every interesting area. Be sparring in your requests and there should be no problem. If somebody is in a state park, chances are they will be looking around on their own and will find many places you want to put a virtual without you placing it.

 

---Real men cache in shorts.

[+Markwell]

From the requirements:

quote:

---

This is an arbitrary distance and is just a guideline, but the ultimate goal is to reduce the number of caches hidden in a particular area.

---

While it may no longer be true, the admins have maintained in the past that if there is a significant boundary (significant elevation change, major river, etc.) between the two locations, that they MAY approve the second one.

 

But I have to agree, especially with virtuals. Why place another one that close? If you want to take people to multiple spots that are cool (not just a spot), make it a multi-cache.

 

Markwell

Chicago Geocaching

[Team Covalt]

All good points and all well taken.

 

As a former National Park Ranger (Hence my geocacher name), you won't believe the number of people that are trying to see so much in such a short period (when they visit a park). My thought with placing virutal geocaches inside Parks would be to get people to see stuff that they might not normally be looking for.

 

But then we are placing geocaches for geocachers, a different breed of person. As geocachers we are always looking for a new place for a geocaches ("Hey look over there! Great spot for a cache!). So I guess in placing geocaches, I got to remember that we are a different breed.

 

Have a nice day everyone.

 

Garmin Vista

Garmin Street Pilot

and a partridge in a pear tree