How many containers can you have at one GZ

[+Deepdiggingmole]

When I say how many containers, can you have more than one ? - I don't mean those instances where you have double potted containers as they are obviously in the one location and there for logsheet protection. 
I am referring to having a cache container in one location (GZ) and a second hidden a little way off as a back up container 

Is there a guideline/rule about this 

 

ddm

[+Smitherington]

The only time I have seen multiple containers is when one is for the log, one for trackables, and one for swag. 
 

if you have a backup container it should be labeled as ‘not the cache. Keep looking’. 

[+The_Jumping_Pig]

I was in San Fransisco earlier this year, and it seemed to be common practice to hide multiple containers. This traditional cache at lombard st had three containers at GZ, and then four other different containers around the street area in case those got muggled. There were similar things at other caches (although not as extreme).

 

Not sure if the guidelines have changed, though.

[+Deepdiggingmole]

2 hours ago, Smitherington said:

The only time I have seen multiple containers is when one is for the log, one for trackables, and one for swag. 
 

if you have a backup container it should be labeled as ‘not the cache. Keep looking’. 

Yup - but all in one location - I have such a cache but they are all contained withing one larger container - my query is with regard to two containers not at the same place and one regarded as a back up - for example a cache that is hidden inside a building (all legit) and subject to opening hours - another container hidden in a different location outside the building to be used when the building is closed ?

Edited May 4 by Deepdiggingmole

[+Deepdiggingmole]

1 hour ago, The_Jumping_Pig said:

I was in San Fransisco earlier this year, and it seemed to be common practice to hide multiple containers. This traditional cache at lombard st had three containers at GZ, and then four other different containers around the street area in case those got muggled. There were similar things at other caches (although not as extreme).

 

Not sure if the guidelines have changed, though.

Yea- thats the sort of thing - a trad so one cache one GZ - that is several different containers each with different co-ords - that was placed in 2003 so before proximity guidelines 
I am querying whether this would be allowed now and when the guidelines prevented this multi container situation 

[+fuzziebear3]

Really, there should be one container, and it is at the correct coordinates.  Anywhere else is the wrong coordinates.

 

But there are some caches that have decoys, but only one real container.   Sometimes the GPSr is a little off, sometimes there is more geosense than not, sometimes there are many hiding places that are close enough to each other to be 'in the zone'.   This is basically allowed.

 

There are other times that someone adds a throwdown, but the original container is still there, thus resulting in 2 containers.   This is not really a good scenario.

 

Inside and outside of a building doesn't seem right to me -- you should not need to interact with anyone, just leave it outside for better access.

 

[+DarkZen_EvilCowPie]

On 5/4/2024 at 9:56 AM, The_Jumping_Pig said:

This traditional cache at lombard st had three containers at GZ, and then four other different containers around the street area in case those got muggled.

I get that that is an older cache and maybe grandfathered in, but that seems a bit sketchy to me. 

[+wimseyguy]

The Help Center article on traditional caches defines them as "a container with a logbook, located at the posted coordinates".

The only correct answer can be one.

[+JL_HSTRE]

Occasionally multis will have multiple containers at the intermediate stages to decrease the caches the chain of stages is broken.

 

Decoys seem rare nowadays, but sometimes there would be more than one container yet only one was "real" with the logbook.

 

I thought about hiding a Mystery cache with two containers, determined by where my Garmin and my Droid thought GZ should be.

[+thebruce0]

On 5/8/2024 at 7:49 AM, JL_HSTRE said:

thought about hiding a Mystery cache with two containers, determined by where my Garmin and my Droid thought GZ should be.

Not quite the same but there's a Schroedinger's cache setup nearby where the last finder, after signing the log, is asked to place it back at one of the two predefined waypoints for the next finder. If you go to find it, the cache is (tongue in cheek) simultaneously in both locations and neither, until you choose to open one and find out if you chose wisely.   I think that was a special exception to publish, since you start at the center point between both waypoints (IIRC they were projections from posted). I'm not sure if both waypoints had to abide by proximity guidelines, or how new publishes nearby would be treated with two potential 'final' locations to be far enough from.

 

Point being, if the coordinates of the container (final or waypoint) are sufficiently accurate to imply ONE location even if there may be multiple containers, then that may not be an issue.  But if the coordinates imply one location, that needs to be the cache location. If instructions are provided for an alternate location, it would be another physical element in the cache listing and fall under its own proximity check. And providing instructions for another location may fall under letterboxing-style guidance.

 

Ultimately it may be a reviewer judgment call. But, I would guess generally this idea would be a no, especially if it's a Traditional cache. 1 container, 1 location.

 

Now it may also depend what you consider 'container'. Say, for example, the 'container' contains a number of possible places to sign. As big as perhaps a tree with multiple dangling logbooks and you only need to sign one. That may be allowed.  But I wouldn't see that happening more than the size of a small tree, where sufficient coordinates would all point to the tree.

 

But for example a library cache with an alternative outside the building for outside business hours? What's to stop people from just signing that location instead of doing it as intended within the library? You wouldn't be able to force people to do it rightly or it becomes an ALR. I doubt they'd allow you to request and require that library staff move the container itself inside and outside every day at opening/closing.

Every library cache I've seen simply states (or links to) its business hours. And if the reviewer deems it a publishable indoor cache, then that's how it'd work. This means that you must do the cache during the hours it's acceptable, no exception.  And if it's not a library, it almost certainly wouldn't be publishable today (if reviewers are being globally consistent).

 

Easy answer: Ask your local reviewer!

Edited May 9 by thebruce0

[+Deepdiggingmole]

On 5/6/2024 at 4:54 PM, fuzziebear3 said:

Really, there should be one container, and it is at the correct coordinates.  Anywhere else is the wrong coordinates.

 

But there are some caches that have decoys, but only one real container.   Sometimes the GPSr is a little off, sometimes there is more geosense than not, sometimes there are many hiding places that are close enough to each other to be 'in the zone'.   This is basically allowed.

 

There are other times that someone adds a throwdown, but the original container is still there, thus resulting in 2 containers.   This is not really a good scenario.

 

Inside and outside of a building doesn't seem right to me -- you should not need to interact with anyone, just leave it outside for better access.

 

 

Yup this is what I think

It is a trad and so one container one location - it is not a multi or a mystery which I accept can have several containers taking you to different stages- This is not a throwdown scenario either 

Inside a building is OK - though obviously will be time restricted (such as a library) - but in this instance when the building is closed and so the main container can't be accessed - they have placed a micro outside so that a finder can log it 24/7 - however for me this is not within the rules and this is what I am trying to ascertain
Strangly - only this last week I have across another similar scenario though not a time restricted one 
A Trad - but when you get to the given co-ords you find a container which has further co-ords written on it - not far away, but there you find another container and the logsheet 
So cache with logsheet not at the given co-ords and two 'containers' in essence !!!! 

 

[+nottins]

There are 2 cache containers at Ben Nevis summit. A winter cache and a summer cache as the winter one can be under several feet of snow at certain times of the year.

[+Deepdiggingmole]

23 hours ago, nottins said:

There are 2 cache containers at Ben Nevis summit. A winter cache and a summer cache as the winter one can be under several feet of snow at certain times of the year.

So why not just have the summer one where that is hidden and dispense with the winter one ? that way you have one container all year round 

[+M6216]

I found an LPC with 2 containers under the lamp-post, both containing logs. I also found a nano and a keyhider, with each having its own log.

Edited May 19 by M6216

[+CAVinoGal]

4 hours ago, M6216 said:

I found an LPC with 2 containers under the lamp-post, both containing logs. I also found a nano and a keyhider, with each having its own log.

Those sound more like throwdowns than something actually intended by the CO.

[+M6216]

7 hours ago, CAVinoGal said:

Those sound more like throwdowns than something actually intended by the CO.

The description on the LPC actually said that the containers were supposed to be there. Your probably right about the nano and keyhider though.

[+CheekyBrit]

There's an 'Azimov cascade' letterbox in Utah that is based on the trope of decoys making decoys making other decoys. At the final coordinates on a guardrail are like 8 different containers of varying levels of stealth that all say "nope" on them, except the correct one - the fake dog poop on the ground. Not quite the same - only one has a log.

[+nottins]

On 5/19/2024 at 12:14 PM, Deepdiggingmole said:

So why not just have the summer one where that is hidden and dispense with the winter one ? that way you have one container all year round 

The summer cache is an ammo can, you can't hide an ammo can in the eaves of the shelter. Also, I'm not the CO, please don't shoot the messenger.

[+Deepdiggingmole]

On 5/24/2024 at 9:06 AM, nottins said:

The summer cache is an ammo can, you can't hide an ammo can in the eaves of the shelter. Also, I'm not the CO, please don't shoot the messenger.

I wasn't shooting anyone - maybe dispense with the summer one then 

[+Deepdiggingmole]

On 5/21/2024 at 4:55 AM, CheekyBrit said:

There's an 'Azimov cascade' letterbox in Utah that is based on the trope of decoys making decoys making other decoys. At the final coordinates on a guardrail are like 8 different containers of varying levels of stealth that all say "nope" on them, except the correct one - the fake dog poop on the ground. Not quite the same - only one has a log.

Yes - not refering to caches that have decoys - that is a different matter
I am on about caches that have more than one container each with a logsheet in them all within a very short distance of each other 

[Ranger Fox]

Look at it from a finder's perspective.  I'm walking to a cache site, expecting to find a cache with a log book.  I get there and find one, sign the log.  I then see another cache a short distance away.  Confused, I go over and open it.  There's another log book inside.  I sign that.  I don't know whether I've found the original cache or some throwdowns.  I hope I found the cache the owner placed so my log isn't deleted when the owner audits the physical log against the online logs.  At times, I'd spend additional time in an area just to see if there are more caches hidden that I can find and sign.  (One other concern is this streak I have.  If I find multiple containers and none happens to be the original, there's a chance my streak will be broken simply because I didn't sign the right one.  Even if the cache owner doesn't delete my log, if I discover I didn't find the original container at the site and the original container was there at the time, I will delete my log myself.  So, to compensate for the problem, I'll usually find a second cache for that day.  Well, if you're going to play, you might as well play on hard mode with as many restrictions as possible.)

 

And there's a number run perspective.  When I've been with people on number runs and they find multiple caches at a location, they consider anything in excess of one cache to be throwdowns by others.  There's a high chance the team will take the throwdowns to use as replacements for missing caches elsewhere.  No one on the team reads the caches' descriptions, but they might look at the hints.  That's the only chance you have if you don't want your additional containers to be reduced to a single one.

 

A month ago, I visited a cache published just that previous day.  It was an LPC and I was not the first to find.  I lifted the skirt and found two containers.  One of them had the FTF's signature on it and the other did not.  I later called the cache owner about it (because I knew him).  It seems both he and the FTF barely lifted the skirt and just felt around, so did not notice someone had already placed a container under the skirt and, we guess, never had the cache published, likely due to proximity issues at the time.  Note this is an extremely rare situation.

 

So, in all these examples, having multiple containers with logs confuses people.  Even if a cache takes a good amount of looking, having multiple caches with logs can be confusing because a finder might notice the last signature on the physical log does not match the last online log.  If I find that, there's a chance I might publicly accuse the last online logger of not finding the cache, and this could be embarrassing for everyone involved if it turned out that the cache owner hid multiple caches.

 

Finally, I'll leave things with this.  I hid a cache where there were about twenty someodd bison tubes and seven ammo cans at the site.  It was a Christmas cache.  The bison tubes decorated an evergreen and the ammo cans were for people to drop off and take gifts.  The log book was a bunch of zip-tied Christmas cards, placed in an ammo can that was obviously different from the others.  Still, there was just one log book at the site.  It wasn't visited that much because I had to hide it in an inconvenient spot to access to cut down on the possibility of non-players coming across the place and looting it.  I bring this up because this is an alternative way to hide multiple containers at a site.

[+CheekyBrit]

I recon this concern of many final containers in one spot is different from a multi cache that has multiple stages in one spot. The multi cache scenario could have sequential stages in one spot, like a puzzle master large container that has a series of containers padlocked and opened by the combination from the previous puzzle. Another multi cache scenario could be multiple containers at different elevations on a cliff / in a tree that you find in sequence, each urging you to climb the appropriate height up and what to look for each time.

Those multi cache scenarios are different from what the OP and everyone else is talking about.