Creating out of home area hides.

February 6, 2012

I am frequently on the road for many months at a time. I have seen many areas with all too many caches. I have also seen areas that are away from population centers with no caches that are crying out for a cache hide. I bring with me various supplies to provide repair to unmaintained caches, however, I often lament that I am unable to place new hides of my own in spots that so obviously are perfect for one. Because I am not "local" to any one area I can not engineer new caches and enjoy the experiences of others attempting there discovery.

Why should I not be able to enjoy a major part of geocaching because of my life style? Should I attempt to place a hide in one of these prime locations? It is unlikely that I would be able to revisit these hides without months passing. However, I see no difference between that and the hundreds of ill cared for caches that I have found which are not being kept in good condition by their "local" owners.

I recall having a problem placing a cache near my sister’s home and had to have her create a user ID to be the "local" co-owner so that there would be someone in the area with ownership care capability. Since she does not know where the caches are and has never needed to be called upon to service them that convention seems to be unnecessary.

Based upon the above should I attempt to place caches as I travel? Will they be approved and if not what issues will I face in getting any approved?

February 6, 2012

To me, there's a difference between a cache which CAN be maintained, but it neglected, and one that is placed from the start with no significant chance of being maintained. Groundspeak can only act in the former case by archiving caches which aren't maintained, but in the latter, can prevent it by now allowing placement.

I also have been places that would be perfect for caches, and regretted being unable to place them, but I understand and agree with the reasoning. A cache that isn't maintained is a waste, and should be prevented. A local co-owner, when used honestly, is a viable option. Otherwise, I'd say pass on those placement opportunities.

February 6, 2012

If you are in the same place for 3 months that's long enough for a cache under the permanent rules.

6.5k · February 6, 2012

The basis of the maintenance guideline is that caches have local maintainers to take care of them when there are needs. You don't need to have a geocaching.com account to be a maintainer, but it helps because then you will get the logs in your email if you watchlist that cache. Since you sister doesn't know where that other cache is located, how can she possibly maintain it for you?

If you can get one of your business contacts to agree to help you, that may be an adequate plan for your reviewer to agree to publish. Staying in one place for three months isn't a maintenance plan-that is the minimum requirement for the cache permanence guideline.

The guideline has probably been edited since the issue with your sister. Here's the relevant section of the current guideline:

It is best when you live within a manageable distance from the cache placements to allow for return visits. Geocaches placed during travel may not be published unless you are able to demonstrate an acceptable maintenance plan, which must allow for a quick response to reported problems. An acceptable maintenance plan might include the username of a local geocacher who will handle maintenance issues in your absence. Alternatively you might train a local person to maintain the cache. Document your maintenance plan in a Note to Reviewer on your cache page. This will auto-delete on publication.

February 6, 2012

Point being if you are going to be there for three months you can place a cache and then find someone to adopt it or care for it while you are gone or you can just archive it when you leave.

1.6k · February 6, 2012

I suspect that when processong caches for publication, reviewers look at your find radius and your home coordinates. If you have a history of finds in a certain area over a prolonged period of time, it is more likely to get approved than a location that is isolated hundreds of miles from your find history. Most likely if the latter is the case, the reviewer will ask you to provide a description of how you plan on maintaining the hide before considering for publication. Your best path forward (IMHO) is to contact the local reviewer, describe the situation hyonestly, and ask.

10.2k · February 6, 2012

Well, if you place parking lot micros, they don't check. :huh: Upon seeing one published like a mile from my house last summer, I went to the profile, and found the same account, who lived about 250 miles away from me, got away with yet another one about 200 miles from their home area, and these were in two different States with two different reviewers. And the CO themselves lived in a third State. But thats just an amusing little side, sorry to digress.

I realize your frustration, especially when I hear you talk about all the abandoned caches out there with absentee owners. I just don't think there is any feasable way for you to place these caches, and you're going to have to get "local maintainer's" just like you did for your Sister, at the cache near her house.

Edited February 6, 2012 by Mr.Yuck

8.6k · February 6, 2012

Personally, I think it best to let the locals place caches. "Vacation" caches are most always trouble down the road (pun intended).

I shan't address placing caches just for the sake of placing caches.

3.9k · February 6, 2012

The guidelines discuss cache maintanance quite extensively, especially with regard to a person's ability to visit the cache location on occasion. There is quite a bit of flexibility here, especially when you are dealing with a wide variety of containers, locations, and climate. An urban micro with 40 visits a month would have a full log book in a short time. Altoid tins in a lamp post get rusty after one rainy season and likely deasled shut after 2 or 3 seasons. An ammo can in the desert may see 3 visits a year and last many years without attention.

That said, reviewers look at 'normal caching range'. If you put a note that says you have mandatory meetings here every 3 months, then that may be OK.

On the flip side... I have had folks put a note stating "this cache will be taken care of by my cousin and I visit twice a year" only that it is 470 feet from a cache they didn't realize was there. On reciept of the email stating it's too close, they repsond with "please publish anyways, my cousin doesn't know where it is and I will not be back for a year or so". The trust factor goes to zero.

14k · February 6, 2012

The guidelines discuss cache maintanance quite extensively, especially with regard to a person's ability to visit the cache location on occasion. There is quite a bit of flexibility here, especially when you are dealing with a wide variety of containers, locations, and climate. An urban micro with 40 visits a month would have a full log book in a short time. Altoid tins in a lamp post get rusty after one rainy season and likely deasled shut after 2 or 3 seasons. An ammo can in the desert may see 3 visits a year and last many years without attention.

That said, reviewers look at 'normal caching range'. If you put a note that says you have mandatory meetings here every 3 months, then that may be OK.

On the flip side... I have had folks put a note stating "this cache will be taken care of by my cousin and I visit twice a year" only that it is 470 feet from a cache they didn't realize was there. On reciept of the email stating it's too close, they repsond with "please publish anyways, my cousin doesn't know where it is and I will not be back for a year or so". The trust factor goes to zero.

As I see it, the relevant portion of the guideline is "unless you are able to demonstrate an acceptable maintenance plan". Presenting a viable maintenance plan which demonstrates an understanding for why viable maintenance is necessary is likely going to increase the trust factor.

If a certain area is "crying for a cache hide", it would seem to me that local cachers would put one there. If the reason local cachers haven't placed one in the area is because there aren't many local cachers, who's going to find a cache placed by someone from outside the area?

19k · February 6, 2012

If you are in the same place for 3 months that's long enough for a cache under the permanent rules.

I don't think the cache permanance guideline was created for this situation. The point of the guideline is that caches are intended to be permanent, not temporary, and 3 months is used as a definition of minimal permanance.

February 6, 2012

A review of your current owned caches would indicate that you have had some difficulty in maintaining them. Roughly 30% of them have notes where months have gone by with no action to maintain the cache when problems were indicated, some of those were archived as a result. I think the guidelines are there for good reasons, and no I don't think you have made a good case here to change those guidelines to accommodate your "lifestyle" situation. You need to show that you or someone in the area can regularly and properly maintain them.

7.9k · February 7, 2012

If a certain area is "crying for a cache hide", it would seem to me that local cachers would put one there. If the reason local cachers haven't placed one in the area is because there aren't many local cachers, who's going to find a cache placed by someone from outside the area?

The above quoted phrase is usually code for 'There wasn't a cache within 528 feet' in our area. :mad:

The rest of NYPC's post is right-on however.

Perhaps the OP should consider Waymarking?

8.6k · February 7, 2012

If a certain area is "crying for a cache hide", it would seem to me that local cachers would put one there. If the reason local cachers haven't placed one in the area is because there aren't many local cachers, who's going to find a cache placed by someone from outside the area?

The above quoted phrase is usually code for 'There wasn't a cache within 528 feet' in our area.

The rest of NYPC's post is right-on however.

Perhaps the OP should consider Waymarking?

I see that (quote) to be indicative of the fact that the non-local is clueless about whether property is or isn't private, or the fact that there is some other real reason as to why a cache is not there!

1.6k · February 7, 2012

I guess you could say, I personally hate seeing caches that aren't maintained. If you signed up for this hobby and hide a cache, it's your responsibility to keep it maintained. So, you really shouldn't hide caches unless you have access to them on a daily basis or can immediately get to them on a spur of the moment notice.

Resist the urges to hide caches where you can't maintain them or don't have access to them regularly.

About every 6 months, I get out to all my caches (22) and put new logs in them, check their placement, and make sure the containers are still water proof. I change the logs regardless if they're full or not. I change the containers with newly painted ones... etc. People enjoy the caching experience when the hides/containers are maintained.

February 7, 2012

A review of your current owned caches would indicate that you have had some difficulty in maintaining them. Roughly 30% of them have notes where months have gone by with no action to maintain the cache when problems were indicated, some of those were archived as a result. I think the guidelines are there for good reasons, and no I don't think you have made a good case here to change those guidelines to accommodate your "lifestyle" situation. You need to show that you or someone in the area can regularly and properly maintain them.

First I applaud your efforts to give due consideration to this thread and your time to looks at my hides. Having said that there is always a story behind hides that are not apparent to those who have not visited them personally. Of the 3 hides you refer to one is a hide that was constantly muggled so I abandoned the idea of that hide. Another was in a tree that mother nature eliminated. The third was also eleminated when a record wind storm destroyed that portion of the tree it was hidden in.

Now consider that two of those hides are in a forrest mear where I currently have my residence and were slammed by record winds and weather. The other is within 150 miles of where I live and only 5 miles from where I useded to live and 10 miles form 3 of my daugeters residences (the hide that kept getting muggled).

Interestingly the caches I have placed in Montana and Canada and are seldom near (although I have support system in place for but never needed) are still going strong with finds.

Thanks again for your efforts and comments.

19k · February 7, 2012

Why should I not be able to enjoy a major part of geocaching because of my life style?

I'd imagine there are other tradeoffs that you make to have your life style of travelling, as well. That's life.

5.7k · February 7, 2012

I'm surprised no one has brought up King Boreas yet, who has caches over a wide area. I don't know the guy, but my impression was that he's constantly on the road.

To the OP, if you're revisiting areas and you'll return there periodically, it might be fine; best thing to do is contact the local reviewr(s) in the area(s) you're considering and ask them.

19k · February 7, 2012

I'm surprised no one has brought up King Boreas yet, who has caches over a wide area. I don't know the guy, but my impression was that he's constantly on the road.

To the OP, if you're revisiting areas and you'll return there periodically, it might be fine; best thing to do is contact the local reviewr(s) in the area(s) you're considering and ask them.

I believe that most of his more distant caches are his older ones. A reviewer somewhat reigned him in by insisting on what became known around here as the "KB Circle"... a 50 mile radius from his home.

7.5k · February 7, 2012

People enjoy the caching experience when the hides/containers are maintained.

+1

1.2k · February 7, 2012

Become very familiar with Earthcaches and their guidelines. A lot of areas need more Earthcaches and it's something that requires almost 0 physical maintenance outside verifying answers.

14k · February 7, 2012

If a certain area is "crying for a cache hide", it would seem to me that local cachers would put one there. If the reason local cachers haven't placed one in the area is because there aren't many local cachers, who's going to find a cache placed by someone from outside the area?

The above quoted phrase is usually code for 'There wasn't a cache within 528 feet' in our area.

The rest of NYPC's post is right-on however.

Perhaps the OP should consider Waymarking?

I see that (quote) to be indicative of the fact that the non-local is clueless about whether property is or isn't private, or the fact that there is some other real reason as to why a cache is not there!

Maybe that's why I wrote "If the reason local cachers haven't placed one..." and not "The reason that no caches exist in the area is because...".

A lack of knowledge about local property issues and policies is just another reason why it might not be a good idea to place caches far from home. That said, one *can* acquire that knowledge and develop a viable maintenance plan, but I still think that likelihood of maintenance issues is going to be higher whenever a cache is placed far from home.

1.2k · February 7, 2012

I'm surprised no one has brought up King Boreas yet, who has caches over a wide area. I don't know the guy, but my impression was that he's constantly on the road.

To the OP, if you're revisiting areas and you'll return there periodically, it might be fine; best thing to do is contact the local reviewr(s) in the area(s) you're considering and ask them.

I believe that most of his more distant caches are his older ones. A reviewer somewhat reigned him in by insisting on what became known around here as the "KB Circle"... a 50 mile radius from his home.

I will say, King Boreas does have a rather extensive list of local contacts in areas where some on his caches are placed as well.

..as can be said with anyone some of those contacts do work out better than others at times...

That being said, connect with some of the local cachers and you may be able to have them look over your cache...it may take a bit of work, but it can be done.

February 8, 2012

I'm surprised no one has brought up King Boreas yet, who has caches over a wide area. I don't know the guy, but my impression was that he's constantly on the road.

To the OP, if you're revisiting areas and you'll return there periodically, it might be fine; best thing to do is contact the local reviewr(s) in the area(s) you're considering and ask them.

I believe that most of his more distant caches are his older ones. A reviewer somewhat reigned him in by insisting on what became known around here as the "KB Circle"... a 50 mile radius from his home.

If I was limited to 50 miles from my house I would not be able to place many caches in high cacher density areas! It's farther than that to the closest Home Depo!

February 8, 2012

I just want to add another comment.

Just because an area has no resident cachers doesnot mean there are no cachers passing through that area. My lifestyle has changed and I am on the road 3 to 6 months a year. I have passed through many areas with little cache representation only to lament with other cachers met in RV parks that the area needed hides and nobody was able to place any. This is not a syptom of highly populated areas but after circling the US several times in 3 years I seen to find these areas a lot and this this thead.

19k · February 8, 2012

I'm surprised no one has brought up King Boreas yet, who has caches over a wide area. I don't know the guy, but my impression was that he's constantly on the road.

To the OP, if you're revisiting areas and you'll return there periodically, it might be fine; best thing to do is contact the local reviewr(s) in the area(s) you're considering and ask them.

I believe that most of his more distant caches are his older ones. A reviewer somewhat reigned him in by insisting on what became known around here as the "KB Circle"... a 50 mile radius from his home.

If I was limited to 50 miles from my house I would not be able to place many caches in high cacher density areas! It's farther than that to the closest Home Depo!

Actually, if you are on the road 3 to 6 months a year, you probably shouldn't be placing any caches anywhere. So-called "vacation caches" are not allowed because experience has shown them to be a very bad idea.

I think I understand what you're saying about finding great spots with no caches... it much get frustrating sometimes. But leave it to the locals. Put yourself in their shoes... a new geocacher starts up in that area... he finds a great spot for a cache, but its already taken up with a cache placed by somebody that lives thousands of miles away (and possibly not maintained very well, at that). That would also be very frustrating, no?

3.9k · February 8, 2012

ALso, visitors don't always know the area. That great spot for a cache just might be a puzzle or multi-cache FINAL. Get home, submit cache, and the reviewer says 'sorry exisitng cache too close'. Who is going to move it and get new coordinates?

February 9, 2012

First I applaud your efforts to give due consideration to this thread and your time to looks at my hides. Having said that there is always a story behind hides that are not apparent to those who have not visited them personally. Of the 3 hides you refer to one is a hide that was constantly muggled so I abandoned the idea of that hide. Another was in a tree that mother nature eliminated. The third was also eleminated when a record wind storm destroyed that portion of the tree it was hidden in.

Klipsch49er,

Your justification above is only reasons why your caches needed to be maintained or archived. This can be an issue with any cache hidden by any cacher. I doesn't, however, justify the delay in maintaining or addressing issues with these caches in a timely manor.

I really prefer to not be so blunt, but if you're away from home for that many months in a year, perhaps you shouldn't be hiding them there either. I'm sure your intentions are good, and I share your desire to create and share cool caches, but your life style may not be well adapted to hiding (and maintaining) caches. On the bright side, your travels allow you to find caches over a broader area than many of us will never find time to experience.

February 9, 2012

removing multiple post

Edited February 9, 2012 by medoug

3.6k · February 9, 2012

ALso, visitors don't always know the area. That great spot for a cache just might be a puzzle or multi-cache FINAL. Get home, submit cache, and the reviewer says 'sorry exisitng cache too close'. Who is going to move it and get new coordinates?

I agree. If someone is going to do this they should release it before leaving the area. Or contact the reviewer and ask them if the area is already taken.

I just released one in WA and I would not do that W/O being sure I have someone taking care of it. And before doing so posted a note to the reviewer who will be doing the maintenance.

Edited February 9, 2012 by jellis

Creating out of home area hides.

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation