Favorite points on an illegal cache

[Pup Patrol]

So.. I have seen several caches placed under a pile of rocks or a cache disguised as a rock and placed in a pile of rocks often under a larger rock. Would that be considered "Buried" ?

 

Let's see what the Guidelines say:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx

 

3. 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.

 

 

B.

[+niraD]

So.. I have seen several caches placed under a pile of rocks or a cache disguised as a rock and placed in a pile of rocks often under a larger rock. Would that be considered "Buried" ?

It's easier to understand the "never buried" guideline, if you think of it as a "no digging" guideline, because what it really prohibits is digging. There are a lot of things that might commonly be thought of as "buried" (including the traditional Unnatural Pile of Sticks/Stones), but which do not violate the "never buried" guideline.

[+MisterE250]

It reminds me of this one:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=07c58bb0-e54f-4f74-bed7-8c45e41cc7ea

 

It's the oldest geocache in Georgia with the most favorites.

 

However, it's obviously 'buried' and placed in a hole in the ground. You would've had to dig to make that hole to place it in.

 

Wouldn't that make it against guidelines?

 

So.. I have seen several caches placed under a pile of rocks or a cache disguised as a rock and placed in a pile of rocks often under a larger rock. Would that be considered "Buried" ?

It's easier to understand the "never buried" guideline, if you think of it as a "no digging" guideline, because what it really prohibits is digging. There are a lot of things that might commonly be thought of as "buried" (including the traditional Unnatural Pile of Sticks/Stones), but which do not violate the "never buried" guideline.

Edited July 27, 2013 by MisterE250

[Pup Patrol]

It reminds me of this one:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=07c58bb0-e54f-4f74-bed7-8c45e41cc7ea

 

It's the oldest geocache in Georgia with the most favorites.

 

However, it's obviously 'buried' and placed in a hole in the ground. You would've had to dig to make that hole to place it in.

 

Wouldn't that make it against guidelines?

 

No. It's grandfathered.

 

Please be advised that there is no precedent for placing geocaches. This means that the past publication of a similar geocache in and of itself is not a valid justification for the publication of a new geocache. If a geocache has been published and violates any guidelines listed below, you are encouraged to report it. However, if the geocache was placed prior to the date when a guideline was issued or updated, the geocache is likely to be grandfathered and allowed to stand as is.

 

Help Center → Geocaching → Caches in General → Grandfathered Caches

3.9. Grandfathered Caches

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=63

 

The Guidelines have changed numerous times over the years. What is a current guideline now probably didn't exist back then.

 

There's plenty of history here in the forums, if one cares to search this stuff out.

 

 

B.

Edited July 27, 2013 by Pup Patrol

[+MisterE250]

Ah, as I thought it might be. Would be nice if they kept archives of previous guidelines, therefore allowing folk to look back and see for themselves.

 

It reminds me of this one:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=07c58bb0-e54f-4f74-bed7-8c45e41cc7ea

 

It's the oldest geocache in Georgia with the most favorites.

 

However, it's obviously 'buried' and placed in a hole in the ground. You would've had to dig to make that hole to place it in.

 

Wouldn't that make it against guidelines?

 

No. It's grandfathered.

 

Please be advised that there is no precedent for placing geocaches. This means that the past publication of a similar geocache in and of itself is not a valid justification for the publication of a new geocache. If a geocache has been published and violates any guidelines listed below, you are encouraged to report it. However, if the geocache was placed prior to the date when a guideline was issued or updated, the geocache is likely to be grandfathered and allowed to stand as is.

 

Help Center → Geocaching → Caches in General → Grandfathered Caches

3.9. Grandfathered Caches

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=63

 

The Guidelines have changed numerous times over the years. What is a current guideline now probably didn't exist back then.

 

There's plenty of history here in the forums, if one cares to search this stuff out.

 

 

B.

[+IdahoMan]

Ah, as I thought it might be. Would be nice if they kept archives of previous guidelines, therefore allowing folk to look back and see for themselves.

 

It reminds me of this one:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=07c58bb0-e54f-4f74-bed7-8c45e41cc7ea

 

It's the oldest geocache in Georgia with the most favorites.

 

However, it's obviously 'buried' and placed in a hole in the ground. You would've had to dig to make that hole to place it in.

 

Wouldn't that make it against guidelines?

 

No. It's grandfathered.

 

Please be advised that there is no precedent for placing geocaches. This means that the past publication of a similar geocache in and of itself is not a valid justification for the publication of a new geocache. If a geocache has been published and violates any guidelines listed below, you are encouraged to report it. However, if the geocache was placed prior to the date when a guideline was issued or updated, the geocache is likely to be grandfathered and allowed to stand as is.

 

Help Center → Geocaching → Caches in General → Grandfathered Caches

3.9. Grandfathered Caches

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=63

 

The Guidelines have changed numerous times over the years. What is a current guideline now probably didn't exist back then.

 

There's plenty of history here in the forums, if one cares to search this stuff out.

 

 

B.

 

I was just given this link about the Cache. It seems funny how this discussion is about a buried cache. If I remember my cache history, the very first cache hidden was a 5 gallon bucket with a lid that was buried in Oregon in 2000. And now there is a memorial in that very spot. But its illegal to bury a cache. Hmmmm.

[craigmusselman]

I dont care either way, but just for logics sake, how is a buried cache that is grandfathered, different in the eyes of a fastidious park ranger than one done yesterday? Wouldnt the cautuion, "just one might get the park banned of geocaches" be sort of lets say apocryphal, if to the ranger there is no difference? I mean if the opinion of geocachers is at stake, wouldnt the old be just as bad as the new? Shouldnt the old be archived along with the new, since the point of the rule is to prevent an outcome that both are equally likely to cause? Just because this discussion got stale...discuss.

[+emmett]

 

... If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

 

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large?

 

.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

... If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

 

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large?

 

.

 

IF a land manager or land owner chooses to nail something to a tree they still have control over how many trees will have nails or screws in them. If they allow anyone to put nails or screws into trees on the property they lose that control. The fact that GS has official policies which does not allow the use of nails in trees to place a cache may be an important reason for why a land manager even allows geocaching on the property.

 

 

[knowschad]

... If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

 

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large?

 

.

 

I know that they do this all the time, emmett, and I have done enough research to convince myself that a few nails are not going to kill a tree. But that is not the point, and you've been around here long enough to know that. The point is land manager perception. A few years ago, an entire city was banned for about two years from placing any goecaches because a land manager saw a fake birdhouse nailed to a tree. It happens.

[+emmett]

... If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

 

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large?

 

.

 

IF a land manager or land owner chooses to nail something to a tree they still have control over how many trees will have nails or screws in them. If they allow anyone to put nails or screws into trees on the property they lose that control. The fact that GS has official policies which does not allow the use of nails in trees to place a cache may be an important reason for why a land manager even allows geocaching on the property.

 

I think the common use of nails and screws in trees by land managers is an indicator that the prohibition of it is extreme. I understand there is disagreement on this but I am of the mind that the earth (an its woods) are here for our enjoyment. Respectful treatment is certainly warranted but extreme measures are not. A few nails and screws in trees here and there is no threat whatsoever to the ecosystem.

 

A completely unrelated PS - I noted your location and now can't get this song out of my head. Do you know it?

 

High above Cayuga's waters, there's and awful smell;

Some say it's Cayuga's waters, others say it's _______.

 

Also, how come I can remember that song from forty years ago but cannot remember the item my wife asked me to buy at the store ten minutes ago?

 

.

[+emmett]

... If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

 

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large?

 

.

 

I know that they do this all the time, emmett, and I have done enough research to convince myself that a few nails are not going to kill a tree. But that is not the point, and you've been around here long enough to know that. The point is land manager perception. A few years ago, an entire city was banned for about two years from placing any goecaches because a land manager saw a fake birdhouse nailed to a tree. It happens.

 

I was not aware of that. Was the nail the problem, or the birdhouse?

 

I do understand the thinking behind the GC rule but I still say a blanket condemnation in order to prevent a highly unusual reaction is extreme and unfortunate.

 

 

.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

... If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

 

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large?

 

.

 

IF a land manager or land owner chooses to nail something to a tree they still have control over how many trees will have nails or screws in them. If they allow anyone to put nails or screws into trees on the property they lose that control. The fact that GS has official policies which does not allow the use of nails in trees to place a cache may be an important reason for why a land manager even allows geocaching on the property.

 

I think the common use of nails and screws in trees by land managers is an indicator that the prohibition of it is extreme. I understand there is disagreement on this but I am of the mind that the earth (an its woods) are here for our enjoyment. Respectful treatment is certainly warranted but extreme measures are not. A few nails and screws in trees here and there is no threat whatsoever to the ecosystem.

 

The point is not whether or not nails or screws (or digging holes) causes damage. The point is if a land manager allowed *anyone* to put nails or screws into trees or dig holes to bury a container the have no control over how many trees get birdhouses or other object nailed to trees. I know of a few parks which have geocaching policies stricter than the GS policies and you can bet that if GS removed the guidelines which prohibited digging or putting nails or screws into trees a lot of parks would likely prohibit geocaching entirely in some of these parks.

 

I recently became aware of a rather large city which created a policy that required caches to be at least 500m a part and that was due to someone saturating one of the parks with caches every 528' around a lake.

 

 

A completely unrelated PS - I noted your location and now can't get this song out of my head. Do you know it?

 

High above Cayuga's waters, there's and awful smell;

Some say it's Cayuga's waters, others say it's _______.

 

Also, how come I can remember that song from forty years ago but cannot remember the item my wife asked me to buy at the store ten minutes ago?

.

 

If I were an alumni or student of Cornell university (rather than an employee of 18 years) I'd be pretty offended. The song you're referring to is an intentionally offensive rewrite of the lyrics of the Cornell alma mater. As a Cornell men's hockey season ticket holder I have watch a few thousand students and alumni stand arm-and-arm and loudly sing the *real* lyrics at every home game.

 

 

[knowschad]

... If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

 

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large?

 

.

 

I know that they do this all the time, emmett, and I have done enough research to convince myself that a few nails are not going to kill a tree. But that is not the point, and you've been around here long enough to know that. The point is land manager perception. A few years ago, an entire city was banned for about two years from placing any goecaches because a land manager saw a fake birdhouse nailed to a tree. It happens.

 

I was not aware of that. Was the nail the problem, or the birdhouse?

 

I do understand the thinking behind the GC rule but I still say a blanket condemnation in order to prevent a highly unusual reaction is extreme and unfortunate.

.

The nail was the problem, not the birdhouse.

 

I have seen entire forests with inventory tags nailed to each and every tree, but that is their business. If they want to cut down every tree, that is their business. I disagree that nails are a danger to trees, but I agree that they are a danger to geocaching.

[+emmett]

... If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

 

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large?

 

.

 

IF a land manager or land owner chooses to nail something to a tree they still have control over how many trees will have nails or screws in them. If they allow anyone to put nails or screws into trees on the property they lose that control. The fact that GS has official policies which does not allow the use of nails in trees to place a cache may be an important reason for why a land manager even allows geocaching on the property.

 

I think the common use of nails and screws in trees by land managers is an indicator that the prohibition of it is extreme. I understand there is disagreement on this but I am of the mind that the earth (an its woods) are here for our enjoyment. Respectful treatment is certainly warranted but extreme measures are not. A few nails and screws in trees here and there is no threat whatsoever to the ecosystem.

 

The point is not whether or not nails or screws (or digging holes) causes damage. The point is if a land manager allowed *anyone* to put nails or screws into trees or dig holes to bury a container the have no control over how many trees get birdhouses or other object nailed to trees. I know of a few parks which have geocaching policies stricter than the GS policies and you can bet that if GS removed the guidelines which prohibited digging or putting nails or screws into trees a lot of parks would likely prohibit geocaching entirely in some of these parks.

 

I recently became aware of a rather large city which created a policy that required caches to be at least 500m a part and that was due to someone saturating one of the parks with caches every 528' around a lake.

 

 

A completely unrelated PS - I noted your location and now can't get this song out of my head. Do you know it?

 

High above Cayuga's waters, there's and awful smell;

Some say it's Cayuga's waters, others say it's _______.

 

Also, how come I can remember that song from forty years ago but cannot remember the item my wife asked me to buy at the store ten minutes ago?

.

 

If I were an alumni or student of Cornell university (rather than an employee of 18 years) I'd be pretty offended. The song you're referring to is an intentionally offensive rewrite of the lyrics of the Cornell alma mater. As a Cornell men's hockey season ticket holder I have watch a few thousand students and alumni stand arm-and-arm and loudly sing the *real* lyrics at every home game.

 

I don't know the real lyrics. I only know what I posted. The words were taught to me by my older brother while he was attending Cornell. He considered it a harmless joke. I assumed that was the consensus view.

 

.

[+jellis]

It's also not just about if it will damage a tree or not. If it's not your property it is called Vandalism! Digging a hole is still vandalisim. Doing anything to public or private property to create a place for a cache is Vandalism. No different if someone goes around spray painting walls. And even if it's your property or you got permission then it becomes Monkey see Monkey do.

[+Uncle Alaska]

It's also not just about if it will damage a tree or not. If it's not your property it is called Vandalism! Digging a hole is still vandalisim. Doing anything to public or private property to create a place for a cache is Vandalism. No different if someone goes around spray painting walls. And even if it's your property or you got permission then it becomes Monkey see Monkey do.

A new trail (leading to a cache placement) through a once vegetated, undisturbed meadow is also what I consider vandalism...why is there no rule for this? The amount of disturbance to the soil and vegetation for many caches I find is actually quite "disturbing" to me. It is often easier to find many caches this day and age, just look for the huge dirt patch in the middle of the once vegetated area.

[+niraD]

A new trail (leading to a cache placement) through a once vegetated, undisturbed meadow is also what I consider vandalism...why is there no rule for this?

You mean like this?

 

Wildlife and the natural environment are not harmed in the pursuit of geocaching.

Geocaches are placed so that plant and animal life are safe from both intentional and unintentional harm. In some regions geocaching activity may need to cease for portions of the year due to sensitivity of some species.

[+Uncle Alaska]

A new trail (leading to a cache placement) through a once vegetated, undisturbed meadow is also what I consider vandalism...why is there no rule for this?

You mean like this?

 

Wildlife and the natural environment are not harmed in the pursuit of geocaching.

Geocaches are placed so that plant and animal life are safe from both intentional and unintentional harm. In some regions geocaching activity may need to cease for portions of the year due to sensitivity of some species.

 

A rule not nearly followed or zealously pursued as a nail in a tree...If I were to photo document and report all the caches I have found that disturbed the area around them, that is all I would be doing, and a lot of caches would be archived (assuming TPTB actually followed through with this non harmful rule)

[+TerraViators]

... If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

 

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large?

 

.

 

I know that they do this all the time, emmett, and I have done enough research to convince myself that a few nails are not going to kill a tree. But that is not the point, and you've been around here long enough to know that. The point is land manager perception. A few years ago, an entire city was banned for about two years from placing any goecaches because a land manager saw a fake birdhouse nailed to a tree. It happens.

I agree. A nail in a tree is not going to hurt it. Heck, I've seen trees growing completely around a t-post or rebar. They're going strong to this day. Now, if the tree objects, that's a different story.

[+jellis]

... If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

 

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large?

 

.

 

I know that they do this all the time, emmett, and I have done enough research to convince myself that a few nails are not going to kill a tree. But that is not the point, and you've been around here long enough to know that. The point is land manager perception. A few years ago, an entire city was banned for about two years from placing any goecaches because a land manager saw a fake birdhouse nailed to a tree. It happens.

I agree. A nail in a tree is not going to hurt it. Heck, I've seen trees growing completely around a t-post or rebar. They're going strong to this day. Now, if the tree objects, that's a different story.

It's also not just about if it will damage a tree or not. If it's not your property it is called Vandalism! Digging a hole is still vandalisim. Doing anything to public or private property to create a place for a cache is Vandalism. No different if someone goes around spray painting walls. And even if it's your property or you got permission then it becomes Monkey see Monkey do.

[+jellis]

It's also not just about if it will damage a tree or not. If it's not your property it is called Vandalism! Digging a hole is still vandalisim. Doing anything to public or private property to create a place for a cache is Vandalism. No different if someone goes around spray painting walls. And even if it's your property or you got permission then it becomes Monkey see Monkey do.

A new trail (leading to a cache placement) through a once vegetated, undisturbed meadow is also what I consider vandalism...why is there no rule for this? The amount of disturbance to the soil and vegetation for many caches I find is actually quite "disturbing" to me. It is often easier to find many caches this day and age, just look for the huge dirt patch in the middle of the once vegetated area.

Usually you find those in the parks info. Remember the posting I put for the video of a cache buried. Leave no trace. Some will say "stay on defined trails and don't create a new one" It may not be in GC rules but you still have to follow the rules of the parks you are placing or finding caches. If the CO placed it off trail it would be fine if there is some kind of deer or animal trail but cachers shouldn't be putting it somewhere so others end up creating new trails as you said.

[+colleda]

... If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

 

You mean like the nails and screws that land owners and land managers put into trees all the time? Or something outlandishly large?

 

.

 

I know that they do this all the time, emmett, and I have done enough research to convince myself that a few nails are not going to kill a tree. But that is not the point, and you've been around here long enough to know that. The point is land manager perception. A few years ago, an entire city was banned for about two years from placing any goecaches because a land manager saw a fake birdhouse nailed to a tree. It happens.

I agree. A nail in a tree is not going to hurt it. Heck, I've seen trees growing completely around a t-post or rebar. They're going strong to this day. Now, if the tree objects, that's a different story.

Would not a nail, or any metal fastener/object, present a future and potentially lethal hazard to someone cutting it up with a chainsaw?

[+Uncle Alaska]

 

Would not a nail, or any metal fastener/object, present a future and potentially lethal hazard to someone cutting it up with a chainsaw?

 

Not very likely...most modern chainsaws have anti-kickback devices on them. Also, it depends on the kind of nail. I put nails in trees for my job (inventory forester, we use soft aluminum nails) and I have cut down and planted thousands of trees with nary a problem. I have hit large pieces of metal with my saw, it mainly just damages or dulls the chain links when it happens.