How to avoid locating near Puzzle caches?

[+phantom_cyclist]

I found a gap in the geocaching map which has a lovely abandoned road through it. Ideal I thought for a cache. Looking around I found a branched tree which would make an ideal hide. I noted its co-ordinates and submitted the cache for review. After some discussion with the reviewer about whether the tree was actually on public land I went out to place the actual cache. I picked up some leaves to give it additional cover and spotted, lying on the ground another cache! I opened it and found its identity. Returning home I found that this was a puzzle cache solution.

I returned to the road and found another cache location and ensured that it was more than the minimum distance from the original site. I resubmitted the new location. Now the site is too close to the solutions of two different puzzle caches! Given that I can't solve any of these puzzle caches I have no idea where thier solutions are so am unable to move my cache to a safe distance. I have now archived the listing before it was even published. So a nice location for a conventional cache has been abandoned. I now have no idea how I set a new cache as unless I solve all the puzzle caches in the surrounding 2-3 miles - which, given the puzzles set in my area, is extremely unlikely

[+Isonzo Karst]

I now have no idea how I set a new cache as unless I solve all the puzzle caches in the surrounding 2-3 miles - which, given the puzzles set in my area, is extremely unlikely

 

Ouch. I feel your pain. At least you understand that if you see some bogus coords in the 2 mile range, you might be on/near the puzzle solution with your new cache.

There are counties in Florida with lots of puzzles. They can be really tough areas for new cache placements. See a "cache free" park? don't believe it, there are 3 puzzles in there ...

 

Here's the article on Checking for Cache Saturation

 

Note the advice at the end. Create a cache page with your proposed coords, and ask a reviewer for a check. Do this before putting a lot of energy into a new cache.

[+ngrrfan]

I find it interesting that in the initial discussion(s) with your reviewer they didn't mention that it was too close to another cache.

[+Moose Mob]

I find it interesting that in the initial discussion(s) with your reviewer they didn't mention that it was too close to another cache.

The reviewer tools don't work (i.e. detect nearby puzzle finals) until after the cache listing is submitted. This is why we ask that cache pages are submitted before/during inquiries be made. General questions get general answers. Sure, it is possible that you can't place a cache anywhere near that spot, but you can re-use the page in a different spot.

[+Team Taran]

I believe that reviewers may not be able to check easily on puzzle and multicaches that were placed before they began requiring additional waypoints to be included in cache submissions unless the cache owner has updated their cache submission,

[+ngrrfan]

I find it interesting that in the initial discussion(s) with your reviewer they didn't mention that it was too close to another cache.

The reviewer tools don't work (i.e. detect nearby puzzle finals) until after the cache listing is submitted. This is why we ask that cache pages are submitted before/during inquiries be made. General questions get general answers. Sure, it is possible that you can't place a cache anywhere near that spot, but you can re-use the page in a different spot.

Moose I'm going to disagree with you here for a bit.

 

If I tell my reviewer that I want to place a cache at Nxxx xx.xxx and Wyyy yy.yyy coords, they know exactly where that is. Their tools should now be able to say whether or not that spot is clear.

 

In the OP's case, there was a discussion between the OP and the reviewer as to whether or not the tree was on public land. I deduce/assume from this statement that the reviewer knew the coords of where the OP wanted to place the cache. How else could they discuss whether a particular tree was useable?

 

Using this train of thought/logic is how I arrived at my first comment. There might be more to all this than what we know, and that information may have influence on my statement.

[jholly]

I believe that reviewers may not be able to check easily on puzzle and multicaches that were placed before they began requiring additional waypoints to be included in cache submissions unless the cache owner has updated their cache submission,

If that is the case then how can they tell someone their placement is to close to a puzzle or multi? If they don't have the info they can make the call.

[+Lil Devil]

I find it interesting that in the initial discussion(s) with your reviewer they didn't mention that it was too close to another cache.

The reviewer tools don't work (i.e. detect nearby puzzle finals) until after the cache listing is submitted. This is why we ask that cache pages are submitted before/during inquiries be made. General questions get general answers. Sure, it is possible that you can't place a cache anywhere near that spot, but you can re-use the page in a different spot.

Moose I'm going to disagree with you here for a bit.

Moose Mob knows what he is talking about. In order to check if a set of coordinates is too close to any finals, those "test" coords need to be part of a cache. Some reviewers will take the time to enter the test coords into their own "test cache", while others will insist you create your own "test cache" that the reviewer will check.

[+Lil Devil]

I believe that reviewers may not be able to check easily at all on puzzle and multicaches that were placed before they began requiring additional waypoints to be included in cache submissions unless the cache owner has updated their cache submission,

Fixed.

 

If the final of a super-old puzzle is not in the system, there is no way we can check. I look at it as the fault of the hider of the super-old puzzle. Not my problem if his final gets stepped on.

 

That said, there was a period when the reviewers were asking for final coords, and getting them in a reviewer note or via email, but the Additional Waypoint feature still didn't exist. In those cases I will dig those coords out of the note and create an AW for the cache.

[+The A-Team]

I believe that reviewers may not be able to check easily on puzzle and multicaches that were placed before they began requiring additional waypoints to be included in cache submissions unless the cache owner has updated their cache submission,

If that is the case then how can they tell someone their placement is to close to a puzzle or multi? If they don't have the info they can make the call.

I'm guessing that the first puzzle they stumbled across fell under this category. After they moved to another spot, they probably came within range of the 2 other puzzle/multis that did have their final locations recorded.

[+Thrak]

I've only placed 4 puzzles but, in each case, I made sure to send the coordinates for the final to the reviewer. It only seems like the right thing to do...

[AZcachemeister]

I find it interesting that in the initial discussion(s) with your reviewer they didn't mention that it was too close to another cache.

The reviewer tools don't work (i.e. detect nearby puzzle finals) until after the cache listing is submitted. This is why we ask that cache pages are submitted before/during inquiries be made. General questions get general answers. Sure, it is possible that you can't place a cache anywhere near that spot, but you can re-use the page in a different spot.

Moose I'm going to disagree with you here for a bit.

 

If I tell my reviewer that I want to place a cache at Nxxx xx.xxx and Wyyy yy.yyy coords, they know exactly where that is. Their tools should now be able to say whether or not that spot is clear.

 

In the OP's case, there was a discussion between the OP and the reviewer as to whether or not the tree was on public land. I deduce/assume from this statement that the reviewer knew the coords of where the OP wanted to place the cache. How else could they discuss whether a particular tree was useable?

 

Using this train of thought/logic is how I arrived at my first comment. There might be more to all this than what we know, and that information may have influence on my statement.

 

He's also a reviewer, so I guess he (should) knows how the tools work, eh?

[+Moose Mob]

Thanks for covering for me guys. I was away reviewing caches for the 2/29 festivities.