Creating map/compass-only geocaches?

[mwpdx]

I'm curious if there is any interest in map/compass only geocaching.  What I have in mind would basically be a small compass course (start at point A, walk 140 ft on a bearing of 230 degrees, then walk 50 ft on a bearing of 170 degrees, etc etc) with a geocache at the end of it.  Is there a website or anything where these already exist? Would it be within the rules/etiquette of this website to post geocaches in that format? I guess the little icon on the map would be the starting point instead of the cache location.  I could see how this could potentially be against the rules on here though.

In searching for something like this, I came across 'letterboxing', which seems similar to what I have in mind but not quite the same.  It seems like these are usually just written directions to a cache instead of map/compass/orienteering instructions.  I'm guessing there's not a huge amount of interest in this, as I can't find much about it online (I've found a few forum posts similar to this one, with mostly unenthusiastic replies, but not much else).   

[+Great Scott!]

Sounds a lot like many of the older letterbox-hybrid caches. (the newer ones are mostly just traditionals with stamps in them)
 

[+Max and 99]

8 hours ago, mwpdx said:

I'm curious if there is any interest in map/compass only geocaching.  What I have in mind would basically be a small compass course (start at point A, walk 140 ft on a bearing of 230 degrees, then walk 50 ft on a bearing of 170 degrees, etc etc) with a geocache at the end of it.  Is there a website or anything where these already exist? Would it be within the rules/etiquette of this website to post geocaches in that format? I guess the little icon on the map would be the starting point instead of the cache location.  I could see how this could potentially be against the rules on here though.

In searching for something like this, I came across 'letterboxing', which seems similar to what I have in mind but not quite the same.  It seems like these are usually just written directions to a cache instead of map/compass/orienteering instructions.  I'm guessing there's not a huge amount of interest in this, as I can't find much about it online (I've found a few forum posts similar to this one, with mostly unenthusiastic replies, but not much else).   

I would like to think a cache like that would be allowed. I love the idea.

Keep in mind that with projections like you describe, it would be easy to solve without ever using a compass, despite your intent. GPS units and online resources could provide the next set of coordinates in seconds.

But I think it's a great ideas!

[Keystone]

Usage of GPS coordinates must be included at some point in the cache hunt.  If it's pointless for me to bring my GPS with me when I get out of the car, then it's not geocaching.  (Even the simplest guardrail or lamp post cache can be found with a GPS, if you feel like it.)

In a compass projection cache like you describe, there are two easy ways to satisfy the GPS usage requirement.  The first is if the starting point is defined by exact coordinates.  ("Go to N41 23.456, W078 12.345 and then go 140 feet on a bearing of 230 degrees.")  The other is if the letterboxing-style directions lead the geocacher to a container or tag that has GPS coordinates for the final container that has a logbook.

[+icezebra11]

You bet they can be done.  In your submittal you will need to provide GPS coordinates of physical containers but of course those waypoints can be hidden if you want to set up your cache that way.  Here is an example of one near me, it's a fun oldie. https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC28FE_gray-diamond-ghost-trail

It's a compass course with several physical stages.  It does live up to its rating.

And you'll be surprised at how many cachers have no clue about the difference in true bearings and magnetic bearings. 

It's great that you're thinking "beyond the lamppost"!

[Blue Square Thing]

I has a letterbox hybrid published last month which does more or less exactly what you describe. I'm not entirely certain that the multi above might be published today though.

The downside is that you need to stump up for a stamp.

Edited March 6, 2018 by Blue Square Thing

[+arisoft]

6 hours ago, Keystone said:

Usage of GPS coordinates must be included at some point in the cache hunt.

Quote

5.3. GPS usage

Each geocache published on Geocaching.com must include GPS usage for geocachers who look for that cache.

 

Coordinates are not mentioned in the guideline but GPS usage is. There are plenty of ways to use GPS to find a cache without using coordinates. For example: Intercaches, Wherigo caches and multi-caches using distances from reference points, are possible to find without knowing the GPS coordinates but definitely need GPS usage.

 

15 hours ago, mwpdx said:

What I have in mind would basically be a small compass course (start at point A, walk 140 ft on a bearing of 230 degrees, then walk 50 ft on a bearing of 170 degrees, etc etc) with a geocache at the end of it.  Is there a website or anything where these already exist? Would it be within the rules/etiquette of this website to post geocaches in that format?

This is a multi-cache and you can use geocaching.com to publish this kind of caches. Guidelines for multi-caches allows to follow a projection starting from coordinates in the field, which is exactly what you described here. (Do not forget to mention the magnetic deviation.) You need to use your GPS receiver to get coordinates for the starting point, which is the public waypoint in the cache description, and another coordinates for the final point which if the secret waypoint only for the eyes of the reviewer.

[+cerberus1]

22 hours ago, mwpdx said:

I'm curious if there is any interest in map/compass only geocaching.  What I have in mind would basically be a small compass course (start at point A, walk 140 ft on a bearing of 230 degrees, then walk 50 ft on a bearing of 170 degrees, etc etc) with a geocache at the end of it.  Is there a website or anything where these already exist? Would it be within the rules/etiquette of this website to post geocaches in that format? I guess the little icon on the map would be the starting point instead of the cache location.  I could see how this could potentially be against the rules on here though.

In searching for something like this, I came across 'letterboxing', which seems similar to what I have in mind but not quite the same.  It seems like these are usually just written directions to a cache instead of map/compass/orienteering instructions.  I'm guessing there's not a huge amount of interest in this, as I can't find much about it online (I've found a few forum posts similar to this one, with mostly unenthusiastic replies, but not much else).   

Some odd reason, your profile doesn't show any finds for me (Windows 7, IE11), yet member since Aug '13.  Curious if it's that weird thing not fixed yet with apostrophes and such not showing info. Couldn't see if you ever did a letterbox hybrid.

 I did a letterbox hybrid a while ago that was simply projected waypoints from a starting point at a couple benches, and was surprised at all the people who have no clue what their GPSrs can really do.  PQ, load 'em and go caching mostly it seems these days.  

I'd think a letterbox hybrid would fit.  GPS usage has to be involved somewhere, and most with a letterbox style we've seen were just the starting point.

Edited March 6, 2018 by cerberus1

[+arisoft]

1 hour ago, cerberus1 said:

I'd think a letterbox hybrid would fit.  GPS usage has to be involved somewhere, and most with a letterbox style we've seen were just the starting point.

For years I have been wondering what makes a geocache a letterbox hybrid until one day I figured it out. It is the rubber stamp.

Yes, you read it correctly. If you have ever thought that it is the poetic clue in the description then you have been wrong.

Quote

When you add a stamp to your cache, the cache type changes to Letterbox Hybrid but the guidelines for the underlying cache type still apply.

 +  = 

 +  = 

 +  = 

 +  = 

As you can see. Letterbox hybrid do not give any extra freedom. It is just an ordinary cache with the rubber stamp.

[+cerberus1]

22 minutes ago, arisoft said:

For years I have been wondering what makes a geocache a letterbox hybrid until one day I figured it out. It is the rubber stamp.

Yes, you read it correctly. If you have ever thought that it is the poetic clue in the description then you have been wrong.

As you can see. Letterbox hybrid do not give any extra freedom. It is just an ordinary cache with the rubber stamp.

I don't believe anyone would think your presentation is anything  new ...

I've found a couple that the only reason it's a "letterbox hybrid" is because of a stamp, also some that didn't, or never came with a stamp. Apparently you have too.

 

[+arisoft]

32 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

I don't believe anyone would think your presentation is anything  new ...

True, It was copied from the guidelines. Not a very new presentation.

35 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

I've found a couple that the only reason it's a "letterbox hybrid" is because of a stamp, also some that didn't, or never came with a stamp. Apparently you have too.

Yes, if you try to imagine what the Letterbox hybrid is by exploring existing Letter box hybrids, the conclusion may be skewed. Anyway, I did not get the idea why Letterbox hybrid could be any better cache type for a projection multi-cache as you suggested.

[+cerberus1]

12 minutes ago, arisoft said:

 I did not get the idea why Letterbox hybrid could be any better cache type for a projection multi-cache as you suggested.

There were already at least two before my post that said letterbox may be a good option (one a Reviewer), and I agree.  For many, the letterbox hybrid is one of the few they've experienced written direction with, rather than a straight-forward coordinates chain like a multi. Most solved puzzles have simple coordinates to the final as well, and we still know many who've never found a Wherigo yet.  We've only found two ourselves.

[Keystone]

1 hour ago, arisoft said:

For years I have been wondering what makes a geocache a letterbox hybrid until one day I figured it out. It is the rubber stamp.

Yes, you read it correctly. If you have ever thought that it is the poetic clue in the description then you have been wrong.

As you can see. Letterbox hybrid do not give any extra freedom. It is just an ordinary cache with the rubber stamp.

Some of us have known this for awhile:

On ‎7‎/‎9‎/‎2007 at 10:58 PM, Keystone said:

GPS use needs to be an "integral" part of the hunt, meaning more than "here's the parking lot, which you could have found anyways." It doesn't mean that you have to use a GPS every step of the way to the final container. So, whether your cache also includes a compass course or a set of letterboxing directions, if the hunt starts at a totally random spot along a trail that's defined only by GPS use, then it's all good.

... The distinguishing feature of a letterbox hybrid is the presence of a rubber stamp. ...

 

[+GeoElmo6000]

17 hours ago, Keystone said:

Usage of GPS coordinates must be included at some point in the cache hunt.  If it's pointless for me to bring my GPS with me when I get out of the car, then it's not geocaching.  (Even the simplest guardrail or lamp post cache can be found with a GPS, if you feel like it.)

In a compass projection cache like you describe, there are two easy ways to satisfy the GPS usage requirement.  The first is if the starting point is defined by exact coordinates.  ("Go to N41 23.456, W078 12.345 and then go 140 feet on a bearing of 230 degrees.")  The other is if the letterboxing-style directions lead the geocacher to a container or tag that has GPS coordinates for the final container that has a logbook.

I tried to hide a cache within the last year in which you use GPS to get to a starting point, and then follow a series of photos to the final location.  I was denied for the cache not having enough GPS usage.  In my idea, GPS would be used only for the starting point, not for the final location.  I'm not sure how my idea was different than the idea above.

[+arisoft]

15 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

I tried to hide a cache within the last year in which you use GPS to get to a starting point, and then follow a series of photos to the final location.  I was denied for the cache not having enough GPS usage.  In my idea, GPS would be used only for the starting point, not for the final location.  I'm not sure how my idea was different than the idea above.

This kind of things just happens. Maybe those images were too easy to locate? The easy fix is to use two caches. The first "final" cache gives coordinates to the real final.

[+hzoi]

52 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

I tried to hide a cache within the last year in which you use GPS to get to a starting point, and then follow a series of photos to the final location.  I was denied for the cache not having enough GPS usage.  In my idea, GPS would be used only for the starting point, not for the final location.  I'm not sure how my idea was different than the idea above.

We found this one in December that combined looking for what was in the imag3es and compass directions.  Maybe trying something like it would help get your idea published.

[+cerberus1]

13 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

I tried to hide a cache within the last year in which you use GPS to get to a starting point, and then follow a series of photos to the final location.  I was denied for the cache not having enough GPS usage.  In my idea, GPS would be used only for the starting point, not for the final location.  I'm not sure how my idea was different than the idea above.

We can't see your cache (so yeah, a Reviewer helps) to see the real issue,  but for starters, if parking lots, trailheads, doors or entranceways, or what a Reviewer may deem an arbitrary location, they often aren't allowed (and says so in the guidelines on GPS usage).  I'd think it's simply because you'd have to be there to start caching anyway.

What was your planned starting point?   We did one where the benches (the starting point) were inside the park from parking only around 20', but projected waypoints (as Keystone's example) lead to the next and so on ... and ended with the final. 

[Keystone]

1 hour ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

I tried to hide a cache within the last year in which you use GPS to get to a starting point, and then follow a series of photos to the final location.  I was denied for the cache not having enough GPS usage.  In my idea, GPS would be used only for the starting point, not for the final location.  I'm not sure how my idea was different than the idea above.

Was the starting point "meaningful"?

Parking lot, trailhead, front door of a library:  not meaningful.

Unique tree 400 feet down through the woods along the riverfront trail, random artsy object in the middle of the woods:  meaningful.

[+The A-Team]

14 hours ago, arisoft said:

Coordinates are not mentioned in the guideline but GPS usage is. There are plenty of ways to use GPS to find a cache without using coordinates. For example: Intercaches, Wherigo caches and multi-caches using distances from reference points, are possible to find without knowing the GPS coordinates but definitely need GPS usage.

Coordinates are implied by "GPS usage", since that's the way the Global Positioning System works. If you aren't using coordinates in some way, then you aren't using GPS.

While the seeker may not actually see the coordinates when doing an Intercache or Wherigo, there are still coordinates being used in the background. That's why those satisfy the guideline. On the other hand, if one were to create a cache description that described in words how to get to the cache (e.g. "Go to the town square, find the statue, go 50 metres at 68 degrees true"), then that would fail the "GPS usage" guideline.

[+arisoft]

56 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

Coordinates are implied by "GPS usage", since that's the way the Global Positioning System works

Yes, your GPS receiver is using coordinates, but the geocacher may not when using Wherigo player.

 

56 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

While the seeker may not actually see the coordinates when doing an Intercache or Wherigo, there are still coordinates being used in the background. That's why those satisfy the guideline.

Guidelines do not require using coordinates so it does not satisfy the guideline if you are using coordinates. You must use the GPS as stated in the guideline.

If you change the guideline to require using GPS coordinates, then you need only a WGS84 datum map to satisfy this requirement.

Edited March 6, 2018 by arisoft

[+icezebra11]

38 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

Coordinates are implied by "GPS usage", since that's the way the Global Positioning System works. If you aren't using coordinates in some way, then you aren't using GPS.

While the seeker may not actually see the coordinates when doing an Intercache or Wherigo, there are still coordinates being used in the background. That's why those satisfy the guideline. On the other hand, if one were to create a cache description that described in words how to get to the cache (e.g. "Go to the town square, find the statue, go 50 metres at 68 degrees true"), then that would fail the "GPS usage" guideline.

If that 50 meters was across an open park I can see where a GPS might not be necessary but what if that nano is hidden 50 meters into deep brush or timber?  Hard to imagine a person's odds of finding it would be very good without getting out the GPS, marking a waypoint at the statue, and doing a projection.  Or what if it was 500 meters instead of 50?  How many cachers would try do that with a compass and pacing rather than using a GPS to project a waypoint?  Seems to me that it shouldn't be automatic rejection solely because it's a narrative.  The Reviewer should be allowed discretion to approve it if there is a high likelihood a GPS will need to be used.

[+arisoft]

31 minutes ago, icezebra11 said:

 The Reviewer should be allowed discretion to approve it if there is a high likelihood a GPS will need to be used.

This is a question which have been wondering. There are caches, mostly Letterbox hybrids, which gives two options: Final coordinates or clue without precise starting point. It is up to the player to select which option to use. The only way, why this is allowed, is that only possibility to use GPS is mandatory. It is OK to give coordinates to the cache and also add image of the cache so everybody can locate it without using GPS. If this is true then why some caches are not allowed because there is possibility to find it without using GPS?

Edited March 6, 2018 by arisoft

[+arisoft]

1 hour ago, The A-Team said:

On the other hand, if one were to create a cache description that described in words how to get to the cache (e.g. "Go to the town square, find the statue, go 50 metres at 68 degrees true"), then that would fail the "GPS usage" guideline.

I have this kind of cache. No problems.

[+Isonzo Karst]

On 3/6/2018 at 2:55 AM, arisoft said:

Coordinates are not mentioned in the guideline but GPS usage is.

https://www.geocaching.com/play/guidelines#submissionandreview

Quote guideline, "For at least part of the search, the cache must require finders to navigate with a GPS-enabled device to specific coordinates necessary to finding the cache. See this article for examples.

Seems like mention of coordinates to me ;-) .

The article linked is the best thing I've seen the site produce on the subject of what will work and what won't in terms of offering coords. Parking coords, which likely could vary by hundreds of feet, no.... doorways (hey, use the other door).

For the opening post, a single of set coords that describes a discrete location, likely the beginning of the orienteering course might work.

Of course, if the bearings and distances were all offered on the cache page, I'd treat it as a mapping problem (Mystery cache) and leave the house with the final coords loaded. 

I used to teach map and compass with some orienteering.   (Agency asked me to add Geocaching to the end of this, which we tried, but it's just too much disparate info. ) Most bearing and distance Geocaches that I've seen show a lack of understanding on the subject.  They used to often say, "you need a compass for this". No, I have a gps - I don't need compass any more than I need a sextant. Now they commonly say, "you need to know how to project a waypoint". I  don't need to know how to project a waypoint .  I can just walk away from my first "goto" on the reverse bearing for the given distance, take  new goto, continue. 

 

 

[+arisoft]

4 hours ago, Isonzo Karst said:

Quote guideline, "For at least part of the search, the cache must require finders to navigate with a GPS-enabled device to specific coordinates necessary to finding the cache. See this article for examples.

This explain something, good point!

I have seen different version here https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=127&pgid=277

"Like all geocaches, Mystery Caches must involve GPS use."

No coordinates mentioned.

The main guideline has this kind of wording:

Quote

5.3. GPS usage

Each geocache published on Geocaching.com must include GPS usage for geocachers who look for that cache.

Your quote has different wording, but if you look it carefully, it does not require the player to use coordinates - only the device must be used fo navigate to specific (maybe hidden) coordinates for example using Wherigo player as the The A-Team explained earlier.

Edited March 7, 2018 by arisoft

[+NYPaddleCacher]

On 3/6/2018 at 2:55 AM, arisoft said:

 

Coordinates are not mentioned in the guideline but GPS usage is. There are plenty of ways to use GPS to find a cache without using coordinates. For example: Intercaches, Wherigo caches and multi-caches using distances from reference points, are possible to find without knowing the GPS coordinates but definitely need GPS usage.

Even when someone doesn't specifically looking at the coordinates they're still required by the GPS to provide a means of navigating from ones current position to those coordinates.  Sure, most GPS receivers these day have a built in compass but GPS usages, and marking a waypoint are still required for *publishing* the cache.