"Hide a Key Sprinkler Head"?

[+akindofmagick]

We had an idea for hiding our first cache, and bought one of those "Hide a Key Sprinkler Head" containers. (Note that I am not an employee of Lowe's, nor am I endorsing this product.)

 

However, in reviewing the Groundspeak "Hiding a Cache" guidelines, we came across Rule #3:

 

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.

 

which would seem to preclude the use of this sort of container.. which is designed to be pushed into the ground... which does not exactly require digging, but would result in it being partially buried.

 

BUT - we've already found a largeish cache which consisted of a PVC pipe set vertically in the ground, masquerading as a garden drain - very cool - very tricky!

 

So - being newbies - we need your thoughts. Is this type of container allowed?

 

Tks!

[+T.D.M.22]

We had an idea for hiding our first cache, and bought one of those "Hide a Key Sprinkler Head" containers. (Note that I am not an employee of Lowe's, nor am I endorsing this product.)

 

However, in reviewing the Groundspeak "Hiding a Cache" guidelines, we came across Rule #3:

 

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.

 

which would seem to preclude the use of this sort of container.. which is designed to be pushed into the ground... which does not exactly require digging, but would result in it being partially buried.

 

BUT - we've already found a largeish cache which consisted of a PVC pipe set vertically in the ground, masquerading as a garden drain - very cool - very tricky!

So - being newbies - we need your thoughts. Is this type of container allowed?

 

Tks!

 

You may not be burying it, in your opinion, but you are creating a hole. See the bold. Also see what I've underlined, both the guidelines, and what you wrote.

 

I'll start by saying it is not a good idea-rule or not-to put a cache in a sprinkler head. After someone finds one, they may look at other caches and not find them. They may assume that it is in a sprinkler head and take apart one that is not a cache. And for what it's worth, the one I have found like that was not watertight at all. There was mud in the cache. But of course your milage may vary.

 

As for the guideline; I believe this is the best rule. Some argue it's ok if it's on their property, but I still don't think it is. There are two reasons here. One is to discourage the thought of buried treasure. Landowners may begin to think geocaching is buried treasure and not allow caches, when all the CO wanted is to place a LnL, because they thinks cacher will be digging holes everywhere.

 

The second reason is that people see one cache buried(or in the ground like your example) and they might put a similar cache, or a cache that is actually buried, in a place they have no permission to do so. And again people will be digging up land that isn't theirs. It causes damage, and even if it doesn't, we have people thinking of the buried treasure thing, and not allowing caches.

 

You will see caches that have been buried, stuck in the ground, and caches that may break other rules. There is, in the guidelines, a sentence that basically say "Because it has been allowed in the past, doesn't mean it will be allowed in the future."(See the red text)

 

And there are caches that slip through the cracks. People have buried caches, and people have murdered other people. Just because they got away with it, doesn't make it OK to do it-murder or caches that violate the guidelines.(See the red text)

Edited August 22, 2013 by T.D.M.22

[Keystone]

Geocaching.com no longer knowingly publishes "fake sprinkler" caches that are pushed into the ground. THANK YOU for reading the guidelines and asking here first!

[+BlackRose67]

Geocaching.com no longer knowingly publishes "fake sprinkler" caches that are pushed into the ground. THANK YOU for reading the guidelines and asking here first!

Just curious, when did this rule come into effect?

 

This weeks geocache of the week (published in early 2011) is definitely pushed into the ground.

[+Chief301]

Geocaching.com no longer knowingly publishes "fake sprinkler" caches that are pushed into the ground. THANK YOU for reading the guidelines and asking here first!

Just curious, when did this rule come into effect?

 

This weeks geocache of the week (published in early 2011) is definitely pushed into the ground.

 

I'm sure many get published even today, if the hider is vague (intentionally or not) about the style of the hide the reviewer may have no way of knowing that ground was broken to create it.

[+duncanhoyle]

Geocaching.com no longer knowingly publishes "fake sprinkler" caches that are pushed into the ground. THANK YOU for reading the guidelines and asking here first!

Just curious, when did this rule come into effect?

 

This weeks geocache of the week (published in early 2011) is definitely pushed into the ground.

 

I noticed that too.

 

The guidelines say that you're not allowed to dig a hole, but if one exists there already and you decide to use it then who's to know?

[+niraD]

It's also possible to place fake sprinkler caches without digging a hole (e.g., supported by a couple handfuls of landscape bark, or attached to a thin board with dirt/bark/leaves glued to it).

 

But I don't think it's a good idea, because it conditions people to take real sprinklers apart.

[+akindofmagick]

But I don't think it's a good idea, because it conditions people to take real sprinklers apart.

 

I rather doubt this would be an issue - the fake ones don't look anything like real sprinkler heads once you've seen one.

 

Thanks for the input, all.

[+niraD]

But I don't think it's a good idea, because it conditions people to take real sprinklers apart.

I rather doubt this would be an issue - the fake ones don't look anything like real sprinkler heads once you've seen one.

Maybe it's a regional thing. The fake sprinkler caches I've found have been made from real sprinkler heads. Usually, they're a different brand from the real ones in the area, or they're used in an area with no sprinklers at all, or you can pick it up (proving it's fake) before opening it. But they certainly look real.

[+T.D.M.22]

But I don't think it's a good idea, because it conditions people to take real sprinklers apart.

 

I rather doubt this would be an issue - the fake ones don't look anything like real sprinkler heads once you've seen one.

 

Thanks for the input, all.

 

True-the fake ones look different. There's still one problem; What about the real ones? I can buy a real sprinkler head and stick a bison tube, or micro in it. And for less than what you'd spend for shipping on the fake one. Anyway-lots of sprinkler head look different. Some people won't know until it's opened up.

 

I already pointed out three reasons in my first reply why not to do it. Both Keystone, and myself, had said they are not allowed. I even highlighted where you said your own idea was not allowed.

 

I get the feeling-and I may be wrong-that you are just wanting someone to say it's OK.

[+ngrrfan]

But I don't think it's a good idea, because it conditions people to take real sprinklers apart.

 

I rather doubt this would be an issue - the fake ones don't look anything like real sprinkler heads once you've seen one.

A sprinkler head is a sprinkler head is a sprinkler head. Many are not about to see if the one they suspect is different than the others around it.

In my own yard I have 4 different styles of sprinkler heads, all on the same circuit.

[+dprovan]

I rather doubt this would be an issue - the fake ones don't look anything like real sprinkler heads once you've seen one.

You have to keep in mind that the problem case is when the seeker cannot find the cache, so they aren't looking at the fake sprinkler head which you are claiming is obviously different, they are only looking at a real sprinkler head which they have to investigate to determine whether it's fake or not. At that point, one doesn't say "all fake sprinklers looked different," ones says, "I wonder if this CO uses fake sprinklers that look that real."

[+ChileHead]

I've found a lot of real sprinkler heads hidden near caches that are no longer functional because of overly aggressive finders.

[+akindofmagick]

But I don't think it's a good idea, because it conditions people to take real sprinklers apart.

 

I rather doubt this would be an issue - the fake ones don't look anything like real sprinkler heads once you've seen one.

 

Thanks for the input, all.

 

True-the fake ones look different. There's still one problem; What about the real ones? I can buy a real sprinkler head and stick a bison tube, or micro in it. And for less than what you'd spend for shipping on the fake one. Anyway-lots of sprinkler head look different. Some people won't know until it's opened up.

 

I already pointed out three reasons in my first reply why not to do it. Both Keystone, and myself, had said they are not allowed. I even highlighted where you said your own idea was not allowed.

 

I get the feeling-and I may be wrong-that you are just wanting someone to say it's OK.

 

Yes, you are indeed quite wrong.

 

Again, thanks for the input. I asked because I WANT to follow the rules - and I actually READ the rules before creating a cache. Since we've found caches that apparently violate the in-ground rule, I came here for clarification.

Edited August 24, 2013 by akindofmagick

[+The_Incredibles_]

No, they are against the guidelines. They are also a bad idea because they train geocachers to take apart sprinkler heads. I found a micro that was hanging in a bush and nearby a sprinkler head had been taken apart.

Edited August 24, 2013 by The_Incredibles_

[+kunarion]

Is this type of container allowed?

Does it have an o-ring seal? If it's roomier than a match container, and watertight, it could be part of a great cache.

 

You don't have to bury it in the ground. You could build it attached it to a PVC pipe and a base set on the ground so the container's 3 feet above ground. Or repurpose it, paint and camo so it's a creative hide other than a "sprinkler" (paint it just right and magnetically attach it to an old locomotive in a park, and you may have a winner). Look at all the "I'm Bored" topics around here, and you'll know that lots of people want to find something new.

Edited August 24, 2013 by kunarion

[4wheelin_fool]

You can hide a fake sprinkler head, but you just can't push it into the ground. Perhaps up in a tree, in a rock pile or bush, or in a hollow log would be nice. You could always leave it laying out on its side, but that leaves a risk of another cacher pushing into the ground and stabbing Mother Earth in her precious bosom, but what can you do?

[+Don_J]

Geocaching.com no longer knowingly publishes "fake sprinkler" caches that are pushed into the ground. THANK YOU for reading the guidelines and asking here first!

 

If this is a hard and fast rule, why don't they simply say so in the guidelines? Telling someone, "you can't do that", after it's been done, doesn't make a lot of sense.

[+ShaunEM]

I have seen them in the wild recently. I have seen them getting points from finders.

 

Put one out if you want, but not around genuine sprinkler systems. And perhaps place them in a garden patch or somewhere that can handle it being placed. You can also paint a GC logo on it.. if that helps.

 

But if you are looking for the company line.. then they are not allowed, period.

 

Shaun

[+Don_J]

You can hide a fake sprinkler head, but you just can't push it into the ground. Perhaps up in a tree, in a rock pile or bush, or in a hollow log would be nice. You could always leave it laying out on its side, but that leaves a risk of another cacher pushing into the ground and stabbing Mother Earth in her precious bosom, but what can you do?

 

So, I'm hiking along and I come to a nice shady spot and decide to rest. I stab my hiking pole into the ground so it doesn't fall over. Now I'm leaving and after I pull my stick out of the ground I realize that there is now a hole that was not made to facilitate a cache. I think I'll stick my fake sprinkler head in it.

 

I don't like fake sprinkler heads. I don't think that they really damage the dirt, but that they lead to many bad behaviors by cache seekers. I don't think that the risk of damage to the landscape and the other heads while trying to find the right one is worth it, and I have no problem if Groundspeak has decided to ban them outright. I just wish that they would say so and not leave so much wiggle room to get around what they do or don't want. Just say outright, "objects can not be pushed into the Earth".

[+Don_J]

I have seen them in the wild recently. I have seen them getting points from finders.

 

Put one out if you want, but not around genuine sprinkler systems. And perhaps place them in a garden patch or somewhere that can handle it being placed. You can also paint a GC logo on it.. if that helps.

 

But if you are looking for the company line.. then they are not allowed, period.

 

Shaun

 

I found one that was magnetized and stuck to the side of a big green electrical transformer box. I don't know what was more hilarious, the cache or the DNF logs that it generated.

[Keystone]

Geocaching.com no longer knowingly publishes "fake sprinkler" caches that are pushed into the ground. THANK YOU for reading the guidelines and asking here first!

 

If this is a hard and fast rule, why don't they simply say so in the guidelines? Telling someone, "you can't do that", after it's been done, doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

You can hide a fake sprinkler head, but you just can't push it into the ground. Perhaps up in a tree, in a rock pile or bush, or in a hollow log would be nice. You could always leave it laying out on its side, but that leaves a risk of another cacher pushing into the ground and stabbing Mother Earth in her precious bosom, but what can you do?

 

So, I'm hiking along and I come to a nice shady spot and decide to rest. I stab my hiking pole into the ground so it doesn't fall over. Now I'm leaving and after I pull my stick out of the ground I realize that there is now a hole that was not made to facilitate a cache. I think I'll stick my fake sprinkler head in it.

 

I don't like fake sprinkler heads. I don't think that they really damage the dirt, but that they lead to many bad behaviors by cache seekers. I don't think that the risk of damage to the landscape and the other heads while trying to find the right one is worth it, and I have no problem if Groundspeak has decided to ban them outright. I just wish that they would say so and not leave so much wiggle room to get around what they do or don't want. Just say outright, "objects can not be pushed into the Earth".

The listing guidelines already cover this: " 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."

 

The approach taken in the current listing guidelines is "less is more." It's hoped that short, common-sense guidelines might be read by more people than if an ever-growing rule book were to expand further as you have suggested.

[+T.D.M.22]

I just wish that they would say so and not leave so much wiggle room to get around what they do or don't want. Just say outright, "objects can not be pushed into the Earth".

 

If this is a hard and fast rule, why don't they simply say so in the guidelines? Telling someone, "you can't do that", after it's been done, doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

OK Really!! We all know you cannot dig. That's been the rule for a long time. People have gotten around it by not digging, but still creating a hole. So no making a hole. What do you guys want? You wnat them to list every possible way? No using a shovel. No using a pick. No using an excavator. No using explosives. No using a giant laserbeam to vaporize the ground. Honestly-the rule seem pretty simple. The wiggle room comes from people trying to lawyer it up. What if I don't dig, but push something into the ground? What if I use a pre-existing hole? It's all trying to get around the rule. If you are smart enough to find ways around it, you are smart enough to know it's wrong, however you do it.

Edited August 24, 2013 by T.D.M.22

[+Don_J]

I just wish that they would say so and not leave so much wiggle room to get around what they do or don't want. Just say outright, "objects can not be pushed into the Earth".

 

If this is a hard and fast rule, why don't they simply say so in the guidelines? Telling someone, "you can't do that", after it's been done, doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

OK Really!! We all know you cannot dig. That's been the rule for a long time. People have gotten around it by not digging, but still creating a hole. So no making a hole. What do you guys want? You wnat them to list every possible way? No using a shovel. No using a pick. No using an excavator. No using explosives. No using a giant laserbeam to vaporize the ground. Honestly-the rule seem pretty simple. The wiggle room comes from people trying to lawyer it up. What if I don't dig, but push something into the ground? What if I use a pre-existing hole? It's all trying to get around the rule. If you are smart enough to find ways around it, you are smart enough to know it's wrong, however you do it.

 

I want them to get rid of the wiggle room and say exactly what they mean so that people can't try to "lawyer it up". It would be a safe bet to say that out of all the guidelines, the "no digging/buried" guideline is the one that has been modified the most often and discussed the most on this forum.

 

I follow the guidelines and the forum and until just a few days ago, I have never seen, "Geocaching.com no longer knowingly publishes "fake sprinkler" caches that are pushed into the ground." I have seen individual reviewers give different interpretations of past versions of the guideline, but I have never seen a blanket statement as such. Obviously the OP read the guidelines but still needed clarification. How many would not get that clarification and simply buy one from cheesycontainers.com and stick it in the closest flowerbed?

[+akindofmagick]

Is this type of container allowed?

Does it have an o-ring seal? If it's roomier than a match container, and watertight, it could be part of a great cache.

 

You don't have to bury it in the ground. You could build it attached it to a PVC pipe and a base set on the ground so the container's 3 feet above ground. Or repurpose it, paint and camo so it's a creative hide other than a "sprinkler" (paint it just right and magnetically attach it to an old locomotive in a park, and you may have a winner). Look at all the "I'm Bored" topics around here, and you'll know that lots of people want to find something new.

 

Yes, it has an o-ring and a screw top - designed to keep keys dry. It's also only $2.97 at Lowe's. Bigger than a magnetic key box, and roomy enough for a sizable log, small swag, and small TBs. Can easily be repurposed.

[+kunarion]

Yes, it has an o-ring and a screw top - designed to keep keys dry. It's also only $2.97 at Lowe's. Bigger than a magnetic key box, and roomy enough for a sizable log, small swag, and small TBs. Can easily be repurposed.

That's pretty cool! It could be set up as a kind of "fixture" in many different ways.

 

I have two mud caches, and they are two too many. Neither is pressed into dirt (no digging, they aren't buried). One is wet and muddy all the time, the other depends on the weather. They each have O-rings so they could stay dry inside (if people would close the containers properly ). On the outside, they're a mess. So the "press it into the ground" idea would have to be carefully thought through -- unless you like the idea of inflicting a handful of mud on the finders . But I'm already considering some non-buried ideas for a fake sprinkler.

[4wheelin_fool]

I just wish that they would say so and not leave so much wiggle room to get around what they do or don't want. Just say outright, "objects can not be pushed into the Earth".

 

If this is a hard and fast rule, why don't they simply say so in the guidelines? Telling someone, "you can't do that", after it's been done, doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

OK Really!! We all know you cannot dig. That's been the rule for a long time. People have gotten around it by not digging, but still creating a hole. So no making a hole. What do you guys want? You wnat them to list every possible way? No using a shovel. No using a pick. No using an excavator. No using explosives. No using a giant laserbeam to vaporize the ground. Honestly-the rule seem pretty simple. The wiggle room comes from people trying to lawyer it up. What if I don't dig, but push something into the ground? What if I use a pre-existing hole? It's all trying to get around the rule. If you are smart enough to find ways around it, you are smart enough to know it's wrong, however you do it.

 

I want them to get rid of the wiggle room and say exactly what they mean so that people can't try to "lawyer it up". It would be a safe bet to say that out of all the guidelines, the "no digging/buried" guideline is the one that has been modified the most often and discussed the most on this forum.

 

I follow the guidelines and the forum and until just a few days ago, I have never seen, "Geocaching.com no longer knowingly publishes "fake sprinkler" caches that are pushed into the ground." I have seen individual reviewers give different interpretations of past versions of the guideline, but I have never seen a blanket statement as such. Obviously the OP read the guidelines but still needed clarification. How many would not get that clarification and simply buy one from cheesycontainers.com and stick it in the closest flowerbed?

 

They are still being published. Many reviewers don't ask questions about the hide. Don't ask, don't tell.

[+bflentje]

I have seen them getting points from finders.

 

Yep, in my experience, the most favorited caches, outside of oldies and virtuals, almost always violate a guideline in some fashion or another. << NOT an endorsement AT ALL.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I have seen them getting points from finders.

 

Yep, in my experience, the most favorited caches, outside of oldies and virtuals, almost always violate a guideline in some fashion or another. << NOT an endorsement AT ALL.

 

AAGRH! There's a magnetic numbers on an electrical box nearby. No log. Answer a question on the back of the magnetic piece. It has 8 favorites for being 'innovative'! It's not 'innovative'. It's against the guidelines, which require a log in a container of some sort. I've explained to the CO that it is not in compliance with the guidelines, and shown him an example of a similar cache nearby that does meet guidelines. But people love it for being innovative!

AARGH!

[4wheelin_fool]

I have seen them getting points from finders.

 

Yep, in my experience, the most favorited caches, outside of oldies and virtuals, almost always violate a guideline in some fashion or another. << NOT an endorsement AT ALL.

 

AAGRH! There's a magnetic numbers on an electrical box nearby. No log. Answer a question on the back of the magnetic piece. It has 8 favorites for being 'innovative'! It's not 'innovative'. It's against the guidelines, which require a log in a container of some sort. I've explained to the CO that it is not in compliance with the guidelines, and shown him an example of a similar cache nearby that does meet guidelines. But people love it for being innovative!

AARGH!

 

It will meet the guidelines eventually. Code word Lab caches do not use containers, and can be found at your nearest Mega event. This effluence will eventually run downhill.

[+defamily]

Oh. I didn't realise you couldn't make these caches anymore. I have one and it is a really popular cache

Will caches be archived if they are sprinkler heads?????

[+niraD]

Will caches be archived if they are sprinkler heads?????

That depends. Does one have "to dig or create a hole in the ground when placing or finding" your sprinkler head geocache?