Can I put a geocache less than 0.1 miles (528 feet) from a geocache I placed?

[Taikoman]

I am trying to fill up paradise park, and I have nowhere to place another geocache. I want to know if I can place a geocache closer to a geocache I placed with my account

[+kunarion]

12 minutes ago, Taikoman said:

I am trying to fill up paradise park, and I have nowhere to place another geocache.

 

Mission accomplished.

[+Manville Possum]

Keeping up with maintaining them now may keep you busy. Park hide geocaches have always been tough for me. They get muggled. 

Good luck. And no, you can't place another cache closer than 528 feet from your other caches.

[+niraD]

20 minutes ago, Taikoman said:

I want to know if I can place a geocache closer to a geocache I placed with my account

It doesn't matter who placed the other geocache.

The saturation guidelines require that "containers and physical stages of different geocaches must be at least 0.1 miles (528 feet or 161 meters) apart."

If you place a single multi-cache, then containers and physical stages of that multi-cache can be closer than 528ft/161m from each other. But they must all still remain 528ft/161m from containers and physical stages of other geocaches, no matter who placed those other geocaches.

[+Touchstone]

30 minutes ago, Taikoman said:

I want to know if I can place a geocache closer to a geocache I placed with my account

Nope.

[+rosebud55112]

1 hour ago, kunarion said:

 

Mission accomplished.

Ok, that's funny!

[Taikoman]

2 hours ago, kunarion said:

 

Mission accomplished.

Yep

[+kunarion]

54 minutes ago, rosebud55112 said:

Ok, that's funny!

[Taikoman]

2 hours ago, niraD said:

It doesn't matter who placed the other geocache.

The saturation guidelines require that "containers and physical stages of different geocaches must be at least 0.1 miles (528 feet or 161 meters) apart."

If you place a single multi-cache, then containers and physical stages of that multi-cache can be closer than 528ft/161m from each other. But they must all still remain 528ft/161m from containers and physical stages of other geocaches, no matter who placed those other geocaches.

Thanks.

[+arisoft]

There is exception to this basic rule. You can place as many virtual waypoints as you wish. Virtual waypoints are used in some multicaches and most mystery caches. For example, if there is something interesting you want to introduce, you can put a virtual starting waypoint of multicache in that position without anything physical you have brought at the site.The real cache is somewhere else. For example final position of multi cache can be whereever you want, if it is 0.1 miles away from other physical waypoints.

Edited February 16, 2018 by arisoft

[+thebruce0]

1 hour ago, arisoft said:

There is exception to this basic rule. You can place as many virtual waypoints as you wish.

Not really an exception, but an extension of the rule. The op asked "can I place a geocache closer to a geocache I placed" -- the answer is always no.

The extension to that is regarding additional waypoints - while physical geocaches cannot be close to any other geocache, neither can any physical waypoints.  Virtual waypoints, having no physical element, can exist anywhere within their relevant placement guidelines.

Really the underlying mentality to consdier (rather than sticking to labels like geocache) is -- you can't put anything physical into the world and have it listed on geocaching.com if it is closer than .1 miles to anything else physical also listed on geocaching.com.

If you want to get really technical, physical waypoints in a multi-cache, are, by definition, additional "caches" associated with a single listing (hence "multi"-cache)

Personally, I think a "multi-cache" that is, for example, posted at a location at which you gather information to calculate the final cache location, should be listed as a Mystery/Unknown since it's really just an offset cache with 1 physical cache, not a multi-cache.  But that's picking nits

[+arisoft]

2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

Not really an exception, but an extension of the rule. The op asked "can I place a geocache closer to a geocache I placed" -- the answer is always no.

This is one interpretation but for many of us a virtual geocache is also a geocache. Especially when there is something interesting to see or something "hidden". For example markings in a statue etc. Finally all depends on the reason why the CO wants to put more caches on the same area. There must be something important which justify placing more caches.

Edited February 17, 2018 by arisoft

[+arisoft]

1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

Personally, I think a "multi-cache" that is, for example, posted at a location at which you gather information to calculate the final cache location, should be listed as a Mystery/Unknown since it's really just an offset cache with 1 physical cache, not a multi-cache.

It wasn't a long time ago when I had some wrong assumptions about differences between multi and mystery caches. If you are not familiar about the current guidelines, I suggest you to study this material. https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=127&pgid=559  There may be something you didn't already know in the "Multi-Cache or Mystery Cache?" section, if you read it very carefully. At least, when I have done few multi-caches following these guidelines, many experienced geocachers have argued that the cache type was wrong just because they didn't know about these guidelines.

Edited February 16, 2018 by arisoft

[+thebruce0]

Yes. I know the differences between a multicache and a mystery.  That's why I extended the point to physical objects.

However, if you using a blanket definition that "geocache = physical OR virtual", then yes, that distinction needs to be made for the OP.

I inferred "place" to indicate physically putting a geocache. As opposed to publish which I would use in reference to a virtual listing like an earthcache or virtual.

And I recognized that a multicache [listing] may consist of merely a virtual stage and a physical final. Thus I said, "Personally, I think a 'multi-cache' that is posted at a location at which you gather information to calculate the final cache location, should be listed as a Mystery/Unknown".

tl;dr for clarity:
1. Basic point - Understanding "Place a geocache" as putting a physical geocache in the world = No, not within .1 miles of another geocache, and no, no exception.
2. Extending to physical waypoints (this also covers point 1) - only if belonging to the same geocache listing can a physical waypoint be within .1 miles of another physical waypoint.
3. Understanding "Publish a non-physical geocache listing" as not putting anything physical in the world - Then yes, any waypoint may be within .1 miles of any other waypoint, physical or virtual.

If the OP understood "place a geocache" to also refer to publishing a non-physical listing like an Earthcache or an Event, then hopefully this clarifies things.

[+arisoft]

41 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Thus I said, "Personally, I think a 'multi-cache' that is posted at a location at which you gather information to calculate the final cache location, should be listed as a Mystery/Unknown".

We may have personal perferences but as far as I know, this is a classical example of offset multi-cache. It is so common cache type that it has its own name. In brief, if you must go to the listed waypoint, there is a possibility that the cache is a multi-cache, but vice versa it is a mystery, if you can not do anything at the listed coordinates.

Edited February 17, 2018 by arisoft

[+thebruce0]

Yes, I know

[BillyGeeee]

Of course you can. You just have to convince your reviewer, just like they do in the country I currently live in.

See GC2F653 and GC7HFD7; GC3XHMQ and GC74N3G.

If you give her/him a good reason then she/he will let you do it.

 

[Keystone]

38 minutes ago, BillyGee said:

Of course you can. You just have to convince your reviewer, just like they do in the country I currently live in.

See GC2F653 and GC7HFD7; GC3XHMQ and GC74N3G.

If you give her/him a good reason then she/he will let you do it.

 

Consider yourself lucky, as many reviewers would not have published either of those caches, myself included.  In addition, they are bad examples because your new caches are crowding existing caches hidden by other geocachers, not hidden by you.  While I will occasionally grant exceptions to the cache saturation guideline at distances close to 528 feet (like, 515, 522, etc.), I would never grant such an exception if the same geocacher owned both caches.  That's because the owner has complete control over both cache locations.  That is the situation that Taikoman is in for their caches in Paradise Park.

[Nomex]

2 hours ago, BillyGee said:

Of course you can. You just have to convince your reviewer, just like they do in the country I currently live in.

See GC2F653 and GC7HFD7; GC3XHMQ and GC74N3G.

If you give her/him a good reason then she/he will let you do it.

 

Both your examples had post publication coordinate updates. Not great examples IMO. 

[+Manville Possum]

I recently archived this geocache that was 404 and 414 feet away from two other traditionals.

[+barefootjeff]

3 hours ago, BillyGee said:

Of course you can. You just have to convince your reviewer, just like they do in the country I currently live in.

The Regional Geocaching Policies Wiki for Australia says:

Quote

No exceptions to the proximity guidelines except if the website would round the distance to 0.16km (156m and above)

That seems pretty clear-cut for this country at least.

[+Touchstone]

1 hour ago, Manville Possum said:

I recently archived this geocache that was 404 and 414 feet away from two other traditionals.

Hmmm...5 Star Terrain.  Let me guess, you were granted an exception back in 2008 due to the terrain rating, back when exceptions were granted for things like rivers and cliffs between physical caches (oh, and one I remember in a tunnel).  And this is relevant to our current conversation in what way?  Seems about as non sequitur as bringing up Moving Caches in the middle of the conversation.

[+Manville Possum]

1 hour ago, Touchstone said:

Hmmm...5 Star Terrain.  Let me guess, you were granted an exception back in 2008 due to the terrain rating, back when exceptions were granted for things like rivers and cliffs between physical caches (oh, and one I remember in a tunnel).  And this is relevant to our current conversation in what way?  Seems about as non sequitur as bringing up Moving Caches in the middle of the conversation.

 

I'm sorry if my comment was not relevant in your opinion, I was just joining the conversation about caches less than 528 feet. But what happened back in 2008 and why my cache was published I don't really recall. I had a brain injury a few years ago, but I can ignore you and your hateful comment.