Is this considered 'buried'?

[+*GeoPunx*]

Would a cache that's on the ground, but covered with leaves be considered buried?

I say no.

A friend says yes.

Opinions?

 

Brian

DizzKneePunks

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

NO!

 

It would be no different than covering it with sticks.

 

"Buried" in this case, generally refers to moving of dirt or soil, or otherwise placing it INTO the ground.

Edited December 29, 2012 by Gitchee-Gummee

[+ChileHead]

No.

[+*GeoPunx*]

NO!

 

It would be no different than covering it with sticks.

 

"Buried" in this case, generally refers to moving of dirt or soil, or otherwise placing it INTO the ground.

These were almost the exact words I said to my buddy. Thanks for confirming.

 

Brian

DizzKneePunks

[+Ma & Pa]

NO!

 

It would be no different than covering it with sticks.

 

"Buried" in this case, generally refers to moving of dirt or soil, or otherwise placing it INTO the ground.

 

How about this? A cache attached to the inside of this 3 inch drain which is then pushed into ground. The grass hides the green drain. No hole is dug and the cache is not in the ground, but on the surface on the inside of the drain.

 

[+NeecesandNephews]

In regard to the OP I would say "no". I don't see it as "buried" I would say (in that instance) it was "concealed". Just like hiding in a pile of rocks.

Regarding the last post. I have a hard time deciding with some caches like that. We recently got into a lively debate over a local power trail, in which film containers were placed in the bell end of pieces of pvc pipe, which had been pounded into the ground.

The final concensus was that such a hide would probably not be approved today, though it was when they were originally submitted.

[+The A-Team]

The final concensus was that such a hide would probably not be approved today, though it was when they were originally submitted.

How old are these caches? The buried guideline has been in place for a long time. I think it was only in the first couple of years that buried caches weren't explicitly banned.

[+Gustav129]

As for the green cover, the burying guideline also includes pushing items (PVC, stakes, etc) into the ground. If you create a hole, then it's not allowed.

 

There's a CO that has one of the green valve boxes in his yard, but it was put there by the sprinkler company. He popped the top and set his geocache into the valve box. That would be ok in my mind.

 

If I pulled the lid off to find a fake valve box, then it would not be ok.

 

I have a geocache container that I have to put out. I set it in concrete and spread it out. It's a mount of concrete with just the lid sticking out at the top. Then I'm going to strap it on my elk pack and pack it up into the mountains. That one isn't going to get muggled anytime soon.

[+NeecesandNephews]

The final concensus was that such a hide would probably not be approved today, though it was when they were originally submitted.

How old are these caches? The buried guideline has been in place for a long time. I think it was only in the first couple of years that buried caches weren't explicitly banned.

 

That was my thoughts and contribution to the discussion, but I was informed the particular wording "break ground" was just recently (within the last year) added. The argument presented to me (and dismissed by me) was "the container, i.e. the cache itself, was not buried, nor did it break ground. The cache holder did." I thought that was splitting hairs, but nevertheless. They got published.

 

edit to add: they were published 12/31/2011 The end of the pipe holding the container, and the container itself, are above the ground.

Edited December 29, 2012 by NeecesandNephews

[+MartyBartfast]

...

That was my thoughts and contribution to the discussion, but I was informed the particular wording "break ground" was just recently (within the last year) added.

...

 

And then it was removed again not long after because the wording/phrase was confusing, the Getting Started section on hiding a cache now says:

 

Geocaches are never buried, neither partially nor completely.

 

If one has to dig or create a hole in the ground when placing or finding a geocache, it is not allowed.

Edited December 29, 2012 by MartyBartfast

[+NeecesandNephews]

...

That was my thoughts and contribution to the discussion, but I was informed the particular wording "break ground" was just recently (within the last year) added.

...

 

And then it was removed again not long after because the wording/phrase was confusing, the Getting Started section on hiding a cache now says:

 

Geocaches are never buried, neither partially nor completely.

 

If one has to dig or create a hole in the ground when placing or finding a geocache, it is not allowed.

 

Thanks for pointing out the changes. I have been away from the game for a bit so haven't kept up. I might note, this was a conversation between cachers I was a bystander in. I was asked my opinion, gave it, was informed it was wrong, and politely let the conversation carry on without me. I have neither found nor logged any of the caches spoken about.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

The final concensus was that such a hide would probably not be approved today, though it was when they were originally submitted.

How old are these caches? The buried guideline has been in place for a long time. I think it was only in the first couple of years that buried caches weren't explicitly banned.

 

That was my thoughts and contribution to the discussion, but I was informed the particular wording "break ground" was just recently (within the last year) added. The argument presented to me (and dismissed by me) was "the container, i.e. the cache itself, was not buried, nor did it break ground. The cache holder did." I thought that was splitting hairs, but nevertheless. They got published.

 

edit to add: they were published 12/31/2011 The end of the pipe holding the container, and the container itself, are above the ground.

 

While the language in the no buried cache guideline has changed the intention has always remained the same, and that is to prevent a perception among land managers that geocaching is about buried treasure. A land manager doesn't really care what the language is used. They just don't want holes in the ground on the property they manage.

 

The fact that caches are published which do seem to violate the guideline is simply because we are not required to describe how a cache has been placed which submitting a new listing. It could be a pvc pipe shoved into the ground, or a six foot hold dug with a backhoe, but if it's not mentioned when submitting the listing it could still get published.

[+niraD]

It's easier to understand the "never buried" guideline if you think of it as a "no digging" guideline.

 

Caches can be "buried" under leaves, sticks, rocks, bark, or other loose material, but that doesn't violate the guideline. The guideline is intended to address land managers' concerns about people digging up their parks and open spaces looking for "buried treasure", so it is really about digging or creating a hole, either to place the cache or to find it.

 

And FWIW, I can see ways the drain cache might violate this guideline, and I can also see ways it could be placed without violating this guideline. It's similar to the sprinkler head caches I've found. Most of the ones I've seen have been within this guideline, supported by loose bark, attached to a flat board covered with dirt/bark/leaves, etc. Only one has been placed in a way that would involve digging or creating a hole in the ground. (But this isn't about sprinkler head caches, or the other issues with them.)

 

[edit: typo]

Edited December 29, 2012 by niraD

[knowschad]

While the language in the no buried cache guideline has changed the intention has always remained the same, and that is to prevent a perception among land managers that geocaching is about buried treasure. A land manager doesn't really care what the language is used. They just don't want holes in the ground on the property they manage.

 

The fact that caches are published which do seem to violate the guideline is simply because we are not required to describe how a cache has been placed which submitting a new listing. It could be a pvc pipe shoved into the ground, or a six foot hold dug with a backhoe, but if it's not mentioned when submitting the listing it could still get published.

 

Excellent summation!

[+Team Hugs]

Out of curiosity ... I've seen a number of caches in my area that are of the fake sprinkler head variety (e.g. http://www.amazon.com/Fake-Sprinkler-Key-Holder-Geocache/dp/B002TKBM2E). What's the feeling on these? I would expect that, most of the time, anyone placing one of these has to create a hole in the ground to house it ...

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

Out of curiosity ... I've seen a number of caches in my area that are of the fake sprinkler head variety (e.g. http://www.amazon.com/Fake-Sprinkler-Key-Holder-Geocache/dp/B002TKBM2E). What's the feeling on these? I would expect that, most of the time, anyone placing one of these has to create a hole in the ground to house it ...

Buried or not, there is a discussion in the "Rat Bait" thread regarding perception and copy cat caches where these have come up.

[+Don_J]

Out of curiosity ... I've seen a number of caches in my area that are of the fake sprinkler head variety (e.g. http://www.amazon.com/Fake-Sprinkler-Key-Holder-Geocache/dp/B002TKBM2E). What's the feeling on these? I would expect that, most of the time, anyone placing one of these has to create a hole in the ground to house it ...

 

When I found my first one I thought it was the coolest idea ever. I wanted to do one myself. Then, I went to look for a cache by the same owner and I guess someone else figured that it was sprinkler head as well because all of the heads in the area were taken apart. These had strong springs in them and were hard to put back together, so whoever took them apart just left them like that. Bad behavior belongs to the one displaying it, but why encourage it?

 

As far as harming the ground. I personally don't see any harm in sticking a pointy stake in the ground with a fake head on it, but I'm not the one controlling the local park. It's my guess that the one who is would prefer that we don't do this. Does it violate the guidelines? That has been debated through hundreds and hundreds of posts. If it is all about perception, I personally see more harm in using an existing hole, which is allowed, than in sticking a stake in the ground.

[+wvmarle]

...

That was my thoughts and contribution to the discussion, but I was informed the particular wording "break ground" was just recently (within the last year) added.

...

 

And then it was removed again not long after because the wording/phrase was confusing, the Getting Started section on hiding a cache now says:

 

Geocaches are never buried, neither partially nor completely.

 

If one has to dig or create a hole in the ground when placing or finding a geocache, it is not allowed.

 

That is quite a recent change then, as when I started caching (just over two years ago) I recall it explicitly mentioned that digging to place a cache was OK, as long as you could retrieve it without digging. So an ammo can partially dug in would be fine, as you could still open it without digging it up.

 

I don't understand why no digging for placements is allowed - especially if the land manager allows it.

[+MartyBartfast]

 

That is quite a recent change then, as when I started caching (just over two years ago) I recall it explicitly mentioned that digging to place a cache was OK, as long as you could retrieve it without digging. So an ammo can partially dug in would be fine, as you could still open it without digging it up.

 

 

Sorry but you're memory is deceiving you, it used to say:-

 

"Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate."

[+ShaunEM]

It has been established over and over on these forums that fake sprinkler heads in an area with real sprinkler heads is a bad idea.

 

Go place one in the woods! Then all is well...

 

I did run into a cache that was placed under a FOOT or more of wet fall leaves. Was that buried? I tend to think so.. i did have to DIG, only it was through wet gloppy leaves.

 

Shaun

[+*GeoPunx*]

I did run into a cache that was placed under a FOOT or more of wet fall leaves. Was that buried? I tend to think so.. i did have to DIG, only it was through wet gloppy leaves.

The cache my friend and I were disagreeing about was under no more than two inches of freshly fallen leaves.

 

Brian

[+briansnat]

That is quite a recent change then, as when I started caching (just over two years ago) I recall it explicitly mentioned that digging to place a cache was OK, as long as you could retrieve it without digging. So an ammo can partially dug in would be fine, as you could still open it without digging it up.

 

I've never seen the guidelines written that way, two years ago, or 10 years ago. It's been against the guidelines to dig, whether to hide or find a cache as long as I can remember.

[+niraD]

That is quite a recent change then, as when I started caching (just over two years ago) I recall it explicitly mentioned that digging to place a cache was OK, as long as you could retrieve it without digging. So an ammo can partially dug in would be fine, as you could still open it without digging it up.

I've never seen the guidelines written that way, two years ago, or 10 years ago. It's been against the guidelines to dig, whether to hide or find a cache as long as I can remember.

Yep. According to the Wayback Machine, the "in order to hide or find a cache" language goes back to 2002-07-03.

[+The A-Team]

That is quite a recent change then, as when I started caching (just over two years ago) I recall it explicitly mentioned that digging to place a cache was OK, as long as you could retrieve it without digging. So an ammo can partially dug in would be fine, as you could still open it without digging it up.

 

I've never seen the guidelines written that way, two years ago, or 10 years ago. It's been against the guidelines to dig, whether to hide or find a cache as long as I can remember.

I'm pretty sure that's correct, but there was one page that seemed to allow burying caches if permission was granted to do so by the land manager: "Guide to Creating and Hiding a Stash/Cache". From approximately March 2001 to January 2006, this page said the following:

Please do not bury the container unless you have express permission of the landowner or manager. If the cache is far enough away from trafficked areas, your cache should be fine. An exception would be covering the cache with dead branches, bark, etc. to conceal the container.

The guidelines at that time said that caches couldn't be buried at all (the pointy object version), but this page seemed to contradict that.