Red Herring Traditional

[+TheLegoFool&Missus]

I was thinking of creating a Red Herring Traditional cache, but I am not sure if this will work out not.

I was planning on placing 5 red herring containers near ground zero, each referring to where the actual cache was. Say within 10-15 feet of the actual.

 

Do I need to make any necessary mentions to the reviewer, or can I simply put them out?

 

Any help would be great

[+simpjkee]

I've found caches like this. Personally, I hate it when people do this to mock me, but I think some people like it. I guess if the red herrings helped me find the cache, I wouldn't mind it so much. I highly doubt any of the caches I've found like this had any special mentions to the reviewer about it.

[+NeverSummer]

Run it by your Reviewer.

 

But, personally, I don't like when there are "red herring" caches. I don't see many of them, but I have seen them before. I've also seen the red herring caches disappear, the actual cache get exposed to be more obvious, and all sort of become less and less like the owner intended I would guess.

 

Also, if it were me, I'd rationalize it as a multi or unknown/puzzle and not a traditional.

[+steben6]

Don't think you necessarily need to tell the reviewer.

We are also not very fond of these kinds of hides, but we have seen some that are well done.

[+dprovan]

Yeah, it's OK, but I'd discourage you. One cache I looked for had 3 incredibly tricky red herrings, so 3 times I thought I'd made a very clever find only to be disappointed. I thought it was a waste of 3 great hides. I never did find the actual cache.

 

On the other hand, I did find one cache that had fun with it, with several caches hidden in the same tree, each as obvious as the next. I enjoyed that one, but I suppose that's mainly because I walked right past the red herrings and picked out the right cache first thing before I'd even noticed the others. My 3 caching buddies all thought I'd overlooked the cache because each one of them spotted a different red herring and watched me go right past them all.

[+Panther&Pine]

Now if each red herring was a fake fish painted red, I'd be humored.

[+Mudfrog]

I have one placed like this where there are 5 "decoy" caches. I put little notes in them saying things like, "not here" and "try again". What i think makes a difference is that the cache page shows that it is regular sized cache. The decoys are all micros. It's up in the boonies so it doesn't get found a whole heck of a lot but the logs that do come in are all complimentary.

[+Moose Mob]

As long as the real cache was at Ground Zero. Anything else is something else.

 

Finding a 'red herring' at the posted coordiantes that leads you to the real location is a multi-cache. One can place red herrings at other nearby locations. When walking up to a small cache, seeing a pile of rocks under a bush and going for it, only to find it isn't the cache "piece of paper saying 'try again'" and looking at your GPS and seeing you are still 26 feet away from GZ.

 

By definition, a Traditional cache is found and logged *at* the posted coordiantes and requires no additional information. Some hides may be nearly impossible to find without some verbiage, but it needs to be possible.

 

Some geocachers like to be 'cute' and use posted coordiantes several feet away.. 20, 30, 50 feet; just so they can add a star of two of difficulty. Rightfully, these should be listed as Offset (Multi) caches. In reality, padlock combinations in the text or hints and such should make it a puzzle cache.

[+TheLegoFool&Missus]

As long as the real cache was at Ground Zero. Anything else is something else.

<snip>When walking up to a small cache, seeing a pile of rocks under a bush and going for it, only to find it isn't the cache "piece of paper saying 'try again'" and looking at your GPS and seeing you are still 26 feet away from GZ.

 

This is what I was planning on doing... there are three paths (proper ones) that lead to GZ.

When the cacher gets within 10 - 15 feet, I would hide my obvious Red Herrings... but the actual coordinates would be the true cache container

[+Moose Mob]

As long as the real cache was at Ground Zero. Anything else is something else.

<snip>When walking up to a small cache, seeing a pile of rocks under a bush and going for it, only to find it isn't the cache "piece of paper saying 'try again'" and looking at your GPS and seeing you are still 26 feet away from GZ.

 

This is what I was planning on doing... there are three paths (proper ones) that lead to GZ.

When the cacher gets within 10 - 15 feet, I would hide my obvious Red Herrings... but the actual coordinates would be the true cache container

Perfect

 

I've done a few of these with my daughter... funny seeing her yell 'found it' and dashing to the pile of sticks to the right, when my GPS arrow is pointing left.

 

I have seen and would expect folks to destroy to distractors. You will need to 'reset' on occasion.

[+Harry Dolphin]

And, some cachers will even sign the "Wrong. Try again" note, and claim a find.

[+whh0]

And, some cachers will even sign the "Wrong. Try again" note, and claim a find.

 

How very true, there was a cache placed with multiple drawers where you had to solve the puzzle to open the correct drawer and find the log, the others being empty. This was clearly explained in the cache description... the number of people that have written "found cache without difficulty but log is missing................

[Mr.Yuck]

As long as the real cache was at Ground Zero. Anything else is something else.

<snip>When walking up to a small cache, seeing a pile of rocks under a bush and going for it, only to find it isn't the cache "piece of paper saying 'try again'" and looking at your GPS and seeing you are still 26 feet away from GZ.

 

This is what I was planning on doing... there are three paths (proper ones) that lead to GZ.

When the cacher gets within 10 - 15 feet, I would hide my obvious Red Herrings... but the actual coordinates would be the true cache container

 

Yeah, you're good there. I will say however, that I will add my voice to the chorus of not being a fan of red herrings, or decoys as they're known in my neck of the woods. In my region, we have one guy who's done it 3 or 4 times, and fortunately, it never caught on. Don't be discouraged by those of us who say that though, you're doing it the right way, and go for it.

[+Bear and Ragged]

And, some cachers will even sign the "Wrong. Try again" note, and claim a find.

 

And stand by for the Red Herring note to 'disappear' and a new log be added and signed...

 

And then the cacher says something like "I thought it was a throw down from another cacher" when you point out the cache container size...

[+GrievousAngel]

I was thinking of creating a Red Herring Traditional cache, but I am not sure if this will work out not.

I was planning on placing 5 red herring containers near ground zero, each referring to where the actual cache was. Say within 10-15 feet of the actual.

 

Do I need to make any necessary mentions to the reviewer, or can I simply put them out?

 

Any help would be great

 

I've found several like that. I don't think much of them or of the CO's who find it clever to place them. They're almost as bad as caches which attain their difficulty rating through bad coordinates.

[+NanCycle]

And, some cachers will even sign the "Wrong. Try again" note, and claim a find.

 

And stand by for the Red Herring note to 'disappear' and a new log be added and signed...

 

And then the cacher says something like "I thought it was a throw down from another cacher" when you point out the cache container size...

 

Yeah, this.

[+niraD]

I've seen decoy containers acquire "replacement" logs too. If possible, I think it's better to use non-containers for things like this.

[+StarBrand]

I remember a good one like this south of Mesquite NV. Called "Rusty Bucket" (I think).

 

From a distance you could see a big rusty bucket off the edge of a side road on a slight mound. As you approached closer, it became apparent that there were about 15 to 20 of the rusty buckets laying within a 20 foot circle. Several of the buckets had -"Not This One" notes. I laughed.

 

I left an ice scraper.

[+Ike 13]

I've done 3 and they are generally well liked. Laminate the notes in the fakes so no one trys to log those. None of the ones that I've done has had an issue with replacement logs because all let you know in some way on the cache page what you're getting into.

[+bflentje]

This idea wouldn't bother me and I'd even welcome, SO LONG AS THE COORDS reflect where the REAL CACHE is located.

[+Planet]

Be prepared for cachers to destroy all the vegetation around Ground Zero looking for it. Your three paths to ground zero will become one wide swath. Is that what you are hoping to accomplish?

[+ras_oscar]

I went to a recently hidden cache, found a container that had a red herring note in it. Later I read the logs and found that there were 4 red herrings in the area. This is a pile of rip rap in a storm swale. combines 2 things i like least; needle in a haystack with someone horse laughing at me. It went right on my ignore list.

[+NeverSummer]

I went to a recently hidden cache, found a container that had a red herring note in it. Later I read the logs and found that there were 4 red herrings in the area. This is a pile of rip rap in a storm swale. combines 2 things i like least; needle in a haystack with someone horse laughing at me. It went right on my ignore list.

 

Be prepared for cachers to destroy all the vegetation around Ground Zero looking for it. Your three paths to ground zero will become one wide swath. Is that what you are hoping to accomplish?

 

This is the problem with "red herring" or "decoy" caches. Unless you are prepared for some guff from other cachers, as well as being willing to monitor the area around GZ and archive as soon as it starts to get torn up, I wouldn't do it.

 

You can, but do you really want to?

[+SwineFlew]

I find 'em annoying. Any CO that own one should be really careful about deleting logs. I had found a red herring container with missing note saying its not the real cache (someone very likely took the note out and put a log sheet in). When I ask another founder of where it was and he/she told me I found a red herring container. So far the CO havent deleted my log.

 

Why make more work for yourself as a CO? The maintenance is high and deleting logs will only cause more trouble than its worth. If you do it, don't make your finders feel "cheap." Good sense of humor is very important here.

[+TheLegoFool&Missus]

So I have reviewed all the comments and decided that I was going to do something a little different instead.

 

Originally I was going to use CD cases and have the "final" in the tree. Instead, I will hang all of them in the tree and have each one have a "Not Here", "Not this One" etc in the decoys. I plan on naming this one...

 

Hanging In There (See Dee Tree)

 

Is this a better idea?

[+Ambient_Skater]

Expect someone to sign the log in a red herring and log a find.

 

Also, since the red herrings are not an actual geocache, the geocaching guidelines of rehiding it exactly as found don't apply. So if someone doesn't like it, they can treat it like any other litter they find near a cache.

 

I think it's a bad idea. If you want to present a challenge then set up a puzzle or multi-cache, but don't make things harder for the searcher with fake difficulty.

[+WarNinjas]

I was on a FTF hunt with other cachers at one of these and we found all the red herrings but not the cache. One of the decoys had gotten broken already. The CO showed up and was disappointed that one had broken already and said maybe he would forget about that one. It was fun and fine but the CO within a few hours of it being published was already having to do maintenance on a part of the cache that wasn't even the cache. It is a cool idea but might just make you have more maintenance then is needed. If they don't give clues to the cache and you don't need to worry about them it should be OK.

[+ras_oscar]

To the OP:

 

I did another cache a while ago that was a large container filled with about 100 film cans. The neck of the large container was small, so only one would come out at a time. The film cans had notes that said "dang", "shoot", or "crud". Had to wade through all the film cans to find the actual log sheet. That one I didn't mind because i knew eventually I would find the log. If you do something like that, be sure its in a secluded spot where someone can sit down and go through all the containers to find the log.

[+ras_oscar]

I went to a recently hidden cache, found a container that had a red herring note in it. Later I read the logs and found that there were 4 red herrings in the area. This is a pile of rip rap in a storm swale. combines 2 things i like least; needle in a haystack with someone horse laughing at me. It went right on my ignore list.

 

Be prepared for cachers to destroy all the vegetation around Ground Zero looking for it. Your three paths to ground zero will become one wide swath. Is that what you are hoping to accomplish?

 

This is the problem with "red herring" or "decoy" caches. Unless you are prepared for some guff from other cachers, as well as being willing to monitor the area around GZ and archive as soon as it starts to get torn up, I wouldn't do it.

 

You can, but do you really want to?

 

IMHO no cacher ever has a proper excuse to tear up GZ. I could have found the cache by methodically checking each stone and then tossing it to the top of the swale, esswentially emptying the swale. I would have found it eventually. However, I cache to have fun, not perform manual labor. When its not fun any more i put it on my ignore list. That doesn't mean it's an invalid cache, it simply menas its not my cup of tea. No guff involved.

[+Chief301]

And, some cachers will even sign the "Wrong. Try again" note, and claim a find.

 

Hey, that gives me am idea. I'm going to hide an Unknown cache and name it "Wrong...Try Again". Then of course I'd put the name of the cache on the log sheet like a good CO...😊

 

I have found one red herring type cache that I actually awarded a Favorite point (and several other finders have too). On approach it looks like its going to be another LPC, but of course under the skirt is the first red herring. I would not have figured there were that many different ways to hide a cache on a lamp post. We must have gone through about 4 decoys before finding the "real" cache, all hidden on the same lamp post. Had us laughing by the end. 😄

[+niraD]

I did another cache a while ago that was a large container filled with about 100 film cans. The neck of the large container was small, so only one would come out at a time. The film cans had notes that said "dang", "shoot", or "crud". Had to wade through all the film cans to find the actual log sheet. That one I didn't mind because i knew eventually I would find the log.

Maybe. Maybe not. I found a cache that featured a couple dozen assorted micro-size containers in a larger container. They were ALL decoys. That one was a lot of fun once I figured out what was going on, but the CO has gone out of his way to make sure seekers know that they need to find and sign the correct log.

 

If you do something like that, be sure its in a secluded spot where someone can sit down and go through all the containers to find the log.

+1

[+lamoracke]

have seen some caches with red herrings have lots of favorite points (won't link it here though) and some well done, and some well scorned. I think if its obvious once you are looking for them, like one of 50 caps or one of 16 eggs, or something where you know you have to find the right one...but if the red herring is deliberately meant to deceive you, then those are annoying.

 

One of my favorite caches had like 400 wine corks to look through til you found the right one.

[+SwineFlew]

To the OP:

 

I did another cache a while ago that was a large container filled with about 100 film cans. The neck of the large container was small, so only one would come out at a time. The film cans had notes that said "dang", "shoot", or "crud". Had to wade through all the film cans to find the actual log sheet. That one I didn't mind because i knew eventually I would find the log. If you do something like that, be sure its in a secluded spot where someone can sit down and go through all the containers to find the log.

only 100?

 

This one was like 3.5k or more!

 

http://coord.info/GC278ME :laughing:

 

I will say the CO had trouble with some cachers were stealing the fake containers or throwing them in a corner. I get the humor of this cache, but some people dont. Plus, the CO did had trouble with some cacher that didnt find the cache but logged it anyway. (I was there when the CO was hunting for it with us)

Edited January 31, 2013 by SwineFlew

[+dprovan]

I get the humor of this cache, but some people dont.

I get the humor of it, but that doesn't mean I'm amused when I discover the joke when I get to GZ.