Jump to content

Buried caches Allowed or Not?


jellis
Followers 6

Recommended Posts

Generalized warning: if you cannot post without insulting others and name-calling, then don't post. If you cannot refrain from posting such things, the moderators will assist.

 

Focus comments on the observed practice, pro and con, rather than on the people expressing the opinions.

Link to comment

I did many series caches that they never had to bury a cache. Pile of rocks, unders some bricks, hanging in bushes or in a tin containers under bushes. Only ones I came close to buried in the series and yes they were wrong was part of the ET Hwy and the series with the stakes. That doesn't make it right.

Edited by jellis
Link to comment

 

The true reason it was moved from the Carrizo Plain was stated in the cache. The caches kept getting muggled because despite clear instructions not to drive to the caches, people did it anyway. Also animals had made a complete mess of the whole series too because there were no SPORs on the cans.

Well I agree on that point.

You put caches out in high numbers and you think they are going to follow YOUR rules?

And as for the animals messing it up. I think you got that backwards. They were there first and you messed up their homes knowing cachers will come and tromp all over.

I a have never met a 37 year old coyote, so no, they weren't there first.

 

I'll let you guys get back to getting your panties in a bunch. Glad I could be the subject of your hand wringing for a day. You will soon move on to the next issue to get you all fired up and continue to give yourselves ulcers and gray hair. LOL.

Link to comment

 

The true reason it was moved from the Carrizo Plain was stated in the cache. The caches kept getting muggled because despite clear instructions not to drive to the caches, people did it anyway. Also animals had made a complete mess of the whole series too because there were no SPORs on the cans.

Well I agree on that point.

You put caches out in high numbers and you think they are going to follow YOUR rules?

And as for the animals messing it up. I think you got that backwards. They were there first and you messed up their homes knowing cachers will come and tromp all over.

I a have never met a 37 year old coyote, so no, they weren't there first.

 

I'll let you guys get back to getting your panties in a bunch. Glad I could be the subject of your hand wringing for a day. You will soon move on to the next issue to get you all fired up and continue to give yourselves ulcers and gray hair. LOL.

Has caching been around for 37 years?

Link to comment

 

The true reason it was moved from the Carrizo Plain was stated in the cache. The caches kept getting muggled because despite clear instructions not to drive to the caches, people did it anyway. Also animals had made a complete mess of the whole series too because there were no SPORs on the cans.

Well I agree on that point.

You put caches out in high numbers and you think they are going to follow YOUR rules?

And as for the animals messing it up. I think you got that backwards. They were there first and you messed up their homes knowing cachers will come and tromp all over.

I a have never met a 37 year old coyote, so no, they weren't there first.

 

I'll let you guys get back to getting your panties in a bunch. Glad I could be the subject of your hand wringing for a day. You will soon move on to the next issue to get you all fired up and continue to give yourselves ulcers and gray hair. LOL.

Buh bye.

Link to comment

There are 3 interpretations for the word 'buried'

 

1) The cache is completely under earth surface, so you need a shovel to find it

 

2) In order to hide the cache, the owner had to make a hole (hard to proof the hole wasn't there before)

 

3) The cache is partially under the earth surface, even if it's only 10%

 

The 1st intepretation is often effectively 2nd, because the owner can always say he used existing hole, while the 3rd can make even hare-grilled caches banned.

Link to comment

There are 3 interpretations for the word 'buried'

 

1) The cache is completely under earth surface, so you need a shovel to find it

 

2) In order to hide the cache, the owner had to make a hole (hard to proof the hole wasn't there before)

 

3) The cache is partially under the earth surface, even if it's only 10%

 

The 1st intepretation is often effectively 2nd, because the owner can always say he used existing hole, while the 3rd can make even hare-grilled caches banned.

 

I think judgement needs to be used with 3). If I place a heavy ammo can on soft ground, it will sink some into the ground, making itself "partially buried". And it probably sinks more (in absolute distance) than a bottle top with a nano attached which is gently pushed into the ground.

 

But I agree the cache in this thread is buried.

Link to comment

I think judgement needs to be used with 3).

 

The problem is, it would mean, many superb caches from Germany would need to be archived. Hiding the cache under the ground in some kind of construction (which protects the cache from touching directly the soil) is very popular, and there are many big things hidden in quite muggle areas, which otherwise wouldn't have the chance to survive).

 

But nobody asks, what we think, anyway...

Link to comment

I think judgement needs to be used with 3).

 

The problem is, it would mean, many superb caches from Germany would need to be archived. Hiding the cache under the ground in some kind of construction (which protects the cache from touching directly the soil) is very popular, and there are many big things hidden in quite muggle areas, which otherwise wouldn't have the chance to survive).

 

But nobody asks, what we think, anyway...

 

Popularity is not an exemption for compliance with the guidelines. We really don't want reviewers telling use "the cache might be popular therefore, even though it doesn't comply with the guidelines, I will publish it any way". Imagine what kind of feedback reviewers would get if they said, "I won't publish the cache because I don't think it is good enough".

Link to comment

Popularity is not an exemption for compliance with the guidelines. We really don't want reviewers telling use "the cache might be popular therefore, even though it doesn't comply with the guidelines, I will publish it any way". Imagine what kind of feedback reviewers would get if they said, "I won't publish the cache because I don't think it is good enough".

 

But those caches do comply with German guidelines.

Link to comment

Popularity is not an exemption for compliance with the guidelines. We really don't want reviewers telling use "the cache might be popular therefore, even though it doesn't comply with the guidelines, I will publish it any way". Imagine what kind of feedback reviewers would get if they said, "I won't publish the cache because I don't think it is good enough".

 

But those caches do comply with German guidelines.

 

You mean: the reviewer is not aware of it I'm sure. If I posted a NA on a buried cache in Germany I'm sure it would be archived.

Link to comment
Just don't try to make it the problem of folks that try to play the game the way it should be, and that then point out caches that give the game a bad rap!

Get a rope indeed!

 

The game should be played however you want to play it.

 

That's what wooden stake in the desert guy said. I think he had a power trail of about 1,000 wooden stakes, that people were supposed to sign with a sharpie. Even went all "it's environmentally sound" on the whole thing, as "film canisters seep chemicals into Mother Earth". And yes, he really said that. :huh:

 

I don't want to pile on the OP, and it appears from one of Keystone's posts he has been banned from further posting to this thread for excessive nastiness, but that really is a horrible attitude he exhibited, when told by the majority of posters that he was violating the guidelines.

 

And you can actually put me down with some of the naysayers, such as Uncle Alaska and Mannville Possum Hunters, that what we saw in that video was "no big deal". However, I've been around long enough to know that was a guideline violation, and if they caches were still hidden in that fashion, they would have been archived in less than 24 hours. :o

Link to comment

Popularity is not an exemption for compliance with the guidelines. We really don't want reviewers telling use "the cache might be popular therefore, even though it doesn't comply with the guidelines, I will publish it any way". Imagine what kind of feedback reviewers would get if they said, "I won't publish the cache because I don't think it is good enough".

 

But those caches do comply with German guidelines.

Where are these special German guidelines posted? I thought there were only one set, applicable for all.

 

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

Link to comment

What I don't understand is how a PVC pipe hammered into the ground with a preform inside of it, covered with a tin can, could be considered by anyone to be a quality and creative hide. Especially when done over and over, and with a video that gives it away. The owner thinks these lousy hides are great? :ph34r:

 

At least he left something entertaining up, so cut him some slack. :D

Link to comment

Where are these special German guidelines posted? I thought there were only one set, applicable for all.

 

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

 

And where are the special US or Polish guidelines posted? Nowhere. Reviewers have them in their heads.

Exactly - the guidelines posted are world-wide. And number 3 on the Placing Guidelines list is 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.

 

So, how does Germany wiggle out of "NEVER" and "NEITHER PARTIALLY"? And the explanation is part of it: "If one has to dig or create a hole in the ground when placing or finding a geocache, it is not allowed." Do these words mean something different when translated into German?

Link to comment

The problem is, it would mean, many superb caches from Germany would need to be archived. Hiding the cache under the ground in some kind of construction (which protects the cache from touching directly the soil) is very popular, and there are many big things hidden in quite muggle areas, which otherwise wouldn't have the chance to survive).

I don't see any unique situation in what you say that would require underground construction (which I am reading as "a box built into the ground"). We have high muggle areas in the U.S. as well. (I'm speaking as one that has a rather liberal view on the definition of "buried", by the way)

 

But nobody asks, what we think, anyway...

 

Enjoy your GIGA events.

Link to comment

 

Exactly - the guidelines posted are world-wide. And number 3 on the Placing Guidelines list is 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.

 

So, how does Germany wiggle out of "NEVER" and "NEITHER PARTIALLY"? And the explanation is part of it: "If one has to dig or create a hole in the ground when placing or finding a geocache, it is not allowed." Do these words mean something different when translated into German?

 

Nope, they say exactly the same. Imagine that reviewers had secret guidelines! It just doesn't work that way.

Link to comment

In the UK there are some written UK guidelines GAGB Guidelines

 

UK reviewers use these in addition. There is nothing here with conflicts with Groundspeak guidelines. These are additional, to address areas of concern for local landowners.

 

There MAY be some country specific guidelines for other countries.

 

But I would be very surprised if there was a written guideline for Germany which says buried caches are allowed.

 

However- in my experience local practices can vary to some extent (in general, not specific to burying). I've found for example in countries with very few caches more flexibility with respect to the commercial guidelines. (e.g. on a recent trip to Ghana, 2 out of 3 caches were inside shops, and this was clearly stated on the cache pages). It COULD be the case in some places reviewers are generally more relaxed about their interpretation of the burying guideline.

Link to comment
Nope, they say exactly the same. Imagine that reviewers had secret guidelines! It just doesn't work that way.

That's what I meant: the guidelines are worldwide; any regional guidelines are in someone's head (i.e. imagination). ;)

 

That said, there are some areas where interpretation of the guidelines might be different due to regional land management policies, but those policies are going to be more restrictive, not less.

 

Link to comment

 

However- in my experience local practices can vary to some extent (in general, not specific to burying). I've found for example in countries with very few caches more flexibility with respect to the commercial guidelines. (e.g. on a recent trip to Ghana, 2 out of 3 caches were inside shops, and this was clearly stated on the cache pages). It COULD be the case in some places reviewers are generally more relaxed about their interpretation of the burying guideline.

 

I've seen the same thing,though not with the burying guideline. Placing a cache inside a shop in order to ensure that it's not muggled is fairly common in some places with very few caches. I just took a look at Ghana (a country I hope to visit some day) and there are 15 caches in the entire country. Four out of five of the oldest caches in the country have never been found (one is from 2003).

 

There are a few reviewers (one is a regular participant here) that cover many locations that don't have a dedicated reviewer thus there is actually probably some consistency in how caches are reviewed in countries which have very few caches.

 

 

Link to comment

Popularity is not an exemption for compliance with the guidelines. We really don't want reviewers telling use "the cache might be popular therefore, even though it doesn't comply with the guidelines, I will publish it any way". Imagine what kind of feedback reviewers would get if they said, "I won't publish the cache because I don't think it is good enough".

 

But those caches do comply with German guidelines.

We know the German guidelines. Logging caches where they haven't been and logging Trackables they never seen from lists posted on bulletin boards.

Link to comment

Popularity is not an exemption for compliance with the guidelines. We really don't want reviewers telling use "the cache might be popular therefore, even though it doesn't comply with the guidelines, I will publish it any way". Imagine what kind of feedback reviewers would get if they said, "I won't publish the cache because I don't think it is good enough".

 

But those caches do comply with German guidelines.

Wow I just found this on a German Geocaching guidelines page.

 

Geocachelisting requirements / guidelines

I. HIDING guidelines: Guidelines for hiding geocaches that affect the physical location of the geocache.

 

Basic guidelines for hiding

All local laws and regulations documented land use must be respected.

You fetch you the permission of the land owner and / or manager before you hide a cache on private or public land.

Geocaches are never buried; either in whole, or in part.

Damage geocache hiding, deface or destroy any public or private

 

German guidelines

Link to comment

So...you can't have a buried cache even if on/in your own property?

 

Oh, my gosh, this has been mentioned so many times in the forums...

 

it's the "monkey see, monkey do" mentality that can come into play. Cacher finds buried cache, thinks "oh, how clever", and goes off to plant one exactly the same, because obviously "it's allowed".

 

Post a lot of info on the cache page that it's on your own property? Waste of pixels, as it seems that the majority of cachers today no longer read the cache page.

 

So, it might be allowed to dig a hole on your own private property, but it's not advised to do so.

 

The Guidelines don't specify property ownership in the "no buried" guideline.

 

 

 

B.

Link to comment

Also not sure what the true reason they moved the caches from the Carrizo Plain, but when I wanted to go visit it I read from the BLM website that they don't want anything left behind.

 

The Carrizo Plain is a grand and glorious place. Please help us in our efforts to maintain the integrity of the biological, cultural and historical resources found here. Please read and practice these "Leave No Trace" guidelines.

 

I would say caches would be considered something left behind. There are lots of caches out there.

This, to me, is key to the case. More so than the caches having been dug into the ground, it would seem to me that these caches are not aligned with the BLM web information.

 

We can, I hope, assume that the BLM land manager for that parcel was contacted about placement of geocaches, but I wonder if they know how they ended up being placed? I'm going to guess they didn't know...

Link to comment

And where are the special US or Polish guidelines posted? Nowhere. Reviewers have them in their heads.

 

You're joking, right?

 

 

B.

If that's the case, I'm positive we've uncovered what some of the problems might be for guideline consistency between regions. (Tells a lot of context for some other threads...) <_<

Link to comment

So the Guideline has been changed once again. I'm guessing that Groundspeak is trying to make this simple thing as clear as possible.

 

1. Fundamental Placement Guidelines

 

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.

 

That's slightly better than the old "pointy object" phrase, but apparently some folks still can't get their heads wrapped around the idea.

 

 

B.

Link to comment

 

Hilfezentrum : begraben

Buried Geocaches sind in Ordnung , solange sie nicht in den Foren erwähnt.

 

A quote that definitely needs provenance.

 

 

B.

 

It appears to have been deleted a few minutes after I posted it. ;)

 

Was it somewhere in the German forums? Posted by a particular member?

 

It's okay. I think I "get it". B)

 

 

B.

Link to comment

From this:

 

At time 0:25...

"that way it's kinda buried and animals aren't gonna take it out"

 

Kind of hard to argue, as a CO, that it isn't buried when you are the one saying it IS buried.

 

...to this:

Buried = completely hidden under ground.

 

Your local interpretation of guidelines may be stricter, and extend to partially buried caches.

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.

Now you know. :rolleyes:

 

...to this:

The holes were not dug. As was stated, they were scooped out of the soft earth by hand.

 

NTsOF.jpg

Link to comment

....The holes were not dug. As was stated, they were scooped out of the soft earth by hand. Further, those caches are no longer there. The title of the video was CPCS which no longer exists. All new placements are held down via SPOR. You have no case, but from your computer screen in Canada you think you do. Nice try.

....

OK, here is the guidline again

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.

Ok, I think I get it, you realised that you should not have "create(d) a hole in the ground when placing... (the) geocache." So now you have changed the hide style to Suspisious Pile Of Rocks (I would just call that a geo-pile). Good. I hope that we have all learned a valuable lesson not to make holes in the ground when hiding a geocache. Doesn't matter if it is just desert, just don't do it!

Edited by Andronicus
Link to comment

Man some people will never be happy until they take all the fun out of everything.

 

It really takes the fun out of things when land managers ban geocaching because of people being destructive. <_<

Wow...this is first time I have to agree with you.

 

<_<

 

Relevance? Why would you keep track of that?

Link to comment

Man some people will never be happy until they take all the fun out of everything.

 

It really takes the fun out of things when land managers ban geocaching because of people being destructive. dry.gif

Wow...this is first time I have to agree with you.

 

dry.gif

 

Relevance? Why would you keep track of that?

 

 

We all keep track of that here. Didn't you realize that?

 

I agreed with you once, last year, I think.

Edited by knowschad
Link to comment

What I don't understand is how a PVC pipe hammered into the ground with a preform inside of it, covered with a tin can, could be considered by anyone to be a quality and creative hide. Especially when done over and over, and with a video that gives it away. The owner thinks these lousy hides are great? :ph34r:

 

At least he left something entertaining up, so cut him some slack. :D

I am a moderator of a fishing site and I agree this guy should be banned for his comments but if that is the CO in the video he is to cool not to be allowed to post here! :laughing:

Link to comment

What about those little nanos with a coin, rock, or bottle cap glued to the top and pushed into the ground. Those seem to be popular, and similar to the cache in question in this thread..

 

Come on now ... The nanos you're referring to don't have to have a couple of shovels full of dirt spread around beside them from the hole that's been dug like the one in the video!

 

Buried is buried. If those little nanos meet guidelines, so does any other container.

 

As much as those annoy me, I displace more dirt just walking to most caches and I'm willing to let those types slide on the rules.

I think if something like a hand spade or shovel is necessary to install it, then that would be roughly where I would draw the line.

 

looks like the ones in question are buried in sand, no tools required to dig the hole, so let's just let them slide too. Besides, it's out in the desert anyway.

 

Have you ever came across one of those little nanos where the whole area has been raked up by geocachers looking for the cache? Not much dirt was moved hiding it, but a bulldozer was used to search for it. Sure, let's just let them slide, they do no harm.

 

Ummm...no, I have not. I personally cannot confirm that such a thing happens.

Link to comment

Buried = completely hidden under ground.

 

Your local interpretation of guidelines may be stricter, and extend to partially buried caches.

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.

Now you know. :rolleyes:

 

Actually, I don't believe that is totally true. As I understand, from a Reviewer, one can bury something that holds a geocache container if it is on the CO's property. It requires a phrase posted in the description... "This cache has been placed with special permission by Groundspeak, Inc." This is what was explained to me in correspondence with Reviewer.

 

I've not seen the cache in question, nor the video. I refer only to the statement about buried caches. There are many caches out there hidden inside pipes which are in the ground. They don't require digging to retrieve them, but digging was required when the pipe was originally put in the ground.

 

It doesn't sound like the cache in question meets the criteria of "on personal property", but it would seem that some see this as open to individual interpretation. As are the micro coin caches pressed into the ground. Exceptions always cause controversy.

Edited by Malemotives
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 6
×
×
  • Create New...