Buried Treasures

February 23, 2004

I have recently searched for a cache that the difficulty is a 5. I have talked to fellow cachers who when I say it must be buried, say you hit the nail on the head. Supposedly it is in a tube that is buried with the top flush with the ground. Correct me if I am wrong, first how could this cache be approved? I thought that the use of any kind of tool to hide a cache i.e. shovel, trowel, anything like that was off limits?

I just wanted to see what others thought........

38.2k · February 23, 2004

It wouldn't have been approved if the fact that it was buried was mentioned on the page. If it is indeed buried in the manner you suggest, it should be reported to your local admin.

Edited February 23, 2004 by briansnat

February 23, 2004

I have recently searched for a cache that the difficulty is a 5. I have talked to fellow cachers who when I say it must be buried, say you hit the nail on the head. Supposedly it is in a tube that is buried with the top flush with the ground. Correct me if I am wrong, first how could this cache be approved? I thought that the use of any kind of tool to hide a cache i.e. shovel, trowel, anything like that was off limits?
I just wanted to see what others thought........

Do you have the link to that cache?

1.8k · February 23, 2004

If you've verified that the cache truely is buried, this is one that you should probably report to the cache approver.

It is possible, however, that the cache owner happened to find a buried pipe and made use of it to hide the cache, so I wouldn't necessarily jump to any conclusions, unless it's obvious that the whole cache is newly buried.

2.3k · February 23, 2004

Yes! Yes! Quickly call the cache police and turn in your fellow cacher! They should be punished for stepping over the Party Guidelines. they could be a domestic terrorist! OMG! The humanity of it all!!! (Whispers in the shadows).

Stalinist times Part II.

Gimme a break.

1.8k · February 23, 2004

Yes! Yes! Quickly call the cache police and turn in your fellow cacher! They should be punished for stepping over the Party Guidelines. they could be a domestic terrorist! OMG! The humanity of it all!!! (Whispers in the shadows).

Stalinist times Part II.

Gimme a break.

I think it's a bit more serious than this. A lot of areas have difficulty with convincing land managers that geocaching is not as damaging as some people make it out to be. If this cache is in a state park and the ranger learns about it and goes to check it out and sees that its buried even though we claim that caches should never be buried, they may just call us a bunch of liars and put a flat out ban on caches in their parks.

There are a lot of rules that can be debated, but I think that this is one that most people agree is an approprite one. And agree or not, one of the requirements of having a cache listed here is that it is not buried. If this cache is found to be breaking the rules it should be archived.

38.2k · February 23, 2004

Yes! Yes! Quickly call the cache police and turn in your fellow cacher! They should be punished for stepping over the Party Guidelines. they could be a domestic terrorist! OMG! The humanity of it all!!! (Whispers in the shadows).

Stalinist times Part II.

Gimme a break.

Maybe you aren't concerned about the future of the sport, but a lot of us are. If the authorities find that we are digging holes to bury caches, it isn't going to be easy to convince them to allow the sport. I think a single buried cache is what got the NPS to implement the nationwide geocaching ban.

Edited February 23, 2004 by briansnat

February 23, 2004

I think it's a bit more serious than this. A lot of areas have difficulty with convincing land managers that geocaching is not as damaging as some people make it out to be. If this cache is in a state park and the ranger learns about it and goes to check it out and sees that its buried even though we claim that caches should never be buried, they may just call us a bunch of liars and put a flat out ban on caches in their parks.

There are a lot of rules that can be debated, but I think that this is one that most people agree is an approprite one. And agree or not, one of the requirements of having a cache listed here is that it is not buried. If this cache is found to be breaking the rules it should be archived.

Then why don't we change the rule - actually simplify them - by allowing buried caches if the land owner/authority approves? Why should we restrict ourselves further.

The first cache was buried.

One of the best caches I've found was buried.

I can understand "buried" in the sense of not having to dig to FIND it - that makes sense. But if it is partially buried to hide it, that is a pretty good reason to partially bury it.

February 23, 2004

Yes! Yes! Quickly call the cache police and turn in your fellow cacher! They should be punished for stepping over the Party Guidelines. they could be a domestic terrorist! OMG! The humanity of it all!!! (Whispers in the shadows).

Stalinist times Part II.

Gimme a break.

Maybe you aren't concerned about the future of the sport, but a lot of us are. If the authorities find that we are digging holes to bury caches, it isn't going to be easy to convince them to allow the sport. I think a buried cache is what got the NPS to implement the geocaching ban.

But I thought cachers were suppose to ask permission, so then how could the authorities not know?

For caches that did NOT get approval, well then not burying them would be prudent, yes.

6.4k · February 23, 2004

Yes! Yes! Quickly call the cache police and turn in your fellow cacher! They should be punished for stepping over the Party Guidelines. they could be a domestic terrorist! OMG! The humanity of it all!!! (Whispers in the shadows).

Stalinist times Part II.

Gimme a break.

Of course! Ignore it, and it will go away! Who NEEDS rules/guidelines/whatever? Those are for sissys (No offense to CR :smile: )! Go ahead and hide any type of cache you feel like, fug the rules. Personally, I like to take it a step further, I try to get people who search for my cache arrested for trespassing. HAHAHA! If they are dumb enough to get caught, they are too dumb to be geocaching. Burying caches is a great way to hide them, especially since with the error in consumer GPS you usually have a 35ft or greater search area. Man, I LOVE watching people dig holes all over a little park looking for caches! So WHAT if the land manager doesn't like it? Fug him too! It's our parks, we can do what we want!

38.2k · February 23, 2004

But I thought cachers were suppose to ask permission, so then how could the authorities not know?

I think you are mistaken on that point. This website reqires "adequate permission", which means permission where it is required. If it isn't reqired, you already have adequate permission.

Also, a person can place a cache with permission, then bury it against the wishes of the park authorities. Outside other geocachers policing the sport, there is nothing to stop them.

One of the selling points of our sport when we are dealing with the authorities is that most of us are responsible and we self police the sport.

February 23, 2004

People who feel the neccessity to bury caches should bury them about 6ft deep then hop in the hole with the cache! :smile:

February 23, 2004

I think you are mistaken on that point. This website reqires "adequate permission", which means permission where it is required. If it isn't reqired, you already have adequate permission.

Also, a person can place a cache with permission, then bury it against the wishes of the park authorities. Outside other geocachers policing the sport, there is nothing to stop them.

One of the selling points of our sport when we are dealing with the authorities is that most of us are responsible and we self police the sport.

And if you do not need permission to dig, you already have adequate permission to partially bury the cache. If you ask for permission and don't mention burying it, you really haven't asked permission properly, have you?

It seems to me you could bury a cache that is much less likely to be an eyesore or seem out of place by partly burying it.

Again, I don't mean anything requiring digging to find - that wouldn't work well.

February 23, 2004

There's a few cachers I'd like to bury.

1.8k · February 23, 2004

Then why don't we change the rule - actually simplify them - by allowing buried caches if the land owner/authority approves? Why should we restrict ourselves further.

The first cache was buried.

One of the best caches I've found was buried.

I can understand "buried" in the sense of not having to dig to FIND it - that makes sense. But if it is partially buried to hide it, that is a pretty good reason to partially bury it.

I'd make it a no-exceptions rule. Since the rules for GC.com have been formalized the mantra has been "caches are never buried". Even a few exceeptions here and there could raise the potential for problems, such as the obvious "Such-and-such a cache was buried and approved, so I'm going to bury mine, too!" not knowing that they had special permission to do so.

38.2k · February 23, 2004

What can I say Sammy boy. Go ahead and bury your caches (if you ever decide to place one). Just don't come whining here when the Texan parks authorities clamp down on our sport in your state.

February 23, 2004

I don't think we know what cache the topic starter was talking about, but it is possible that the tube, pipe or whatever was already in the ground and the hider simply used it.

February 23, 2004

I don't think we know what cache the topic starter was talking about, but it is possible that the tube, pipe or whatever was already in the ground and the hider simply used it.

Thats why I asked for the link earlier in this thread. But it sounds like its the ole "Give them an inch and they will take a mile" thing going on to me.

1.8k · February 23, 2004

If you've verified that the cache truely is buried, this is one that you should probably report to the cache approver.

It is possible, however, that the cache owner happened to find a buried pipe and made use of it to hide the cache, so I wouldn't necessarily jump to any conclusions, unless it's obvious that the whole cache is newly buried.

I don't think we know what cache the topic starter was talking about, but it is possible that the tube, pipe or whatever was already in the ground and the hider simply used it.

Which is what I stated above.

I don't think this was meant to be a debate on the merits of buried caches. I think the consensus is to have the original poster contact the local admin. (And maybe post a link to the cache so we know what we're discussing.)

7.2k · February 23, 2004

Those are for sissys (No offense to CR )!

You know how some 300lb plus guys are named "Tiny?"

Check out this cache and tell my if Sissy lives up to her name! :smile: :mad: Most of that was her idea--I only helped. This is another one. More of the same are in the works. She's got one in the works called "Chutes and Ladders" which she says is going to make Tube Torcher look like a walk in the park! She's still gathering locations.

Not many extreme caches in our area. Looks like Sissy is trying to solve that problem single-handedly!

Back on topic, I feel TPTB feel that it's easier to ban burying caches than it is to police appropriateness. I have to agree. A service like this has to cater to lowest common demoniator to function. There simply isn't enough resources.

On a more grand level, I see nothing wrong with burying caches in certain situations. The problem is defining the situation.

I think bringing up the problem of a buried cache listed on gc.com here in the forums is more of a problem than keeping silent. Geocaching.com has a policy against buried caches, but yet there are some. This wouldn't look good in the eyes of some land manager checking us out. Tells them they can't really trust what we say.

I feel any time there is a problem it should be discussed with an approver or the owner first. There might be situations where the cache was approved on a cacher's private lands and then grandfathered. But now it only looks like gc.com can't keep their word.

5.9k · February 23, 2004

Somewhere on the site there used to be a caveate that it was OK to bury a cache on a beach. In the beach sand that doesn't require a digging tool to find is allowed, or was.

My advice: MYOB and BYOB

Edited February 23, 2004 by Criminal

38.2k · February 23, 2004

Somewhere on the site there used to be a caveate that it was OK to bury a cache on a beach. In the beach sand that doesn't require a digging tool to find is allowed, or was.

I think that's still the case. It's also OK to bury a cache under leaves and duff. I think what they are trying to avoid is people bringing picks and shovels and digging up the forest to place caches.

I think you'll also get away with burying a cache on your own land.

2.2k · February 23, 2004

I looked through lists of caches near to where the topic starter is located and found this cache. Perhaps that is the cache he is referring to

2.3k · February 23, 2004

Maybe you aren't concerned about the future of the sport, but a lot of us are.

LMAO!! You are in no position to tell me what I am or am not concerned about....

5.9k · February 23, 2004

If you utilize a "natural depression" in the ground, you can bury the cache using forest debris. I think my next cache will utilize such a depression.

38.2k · February 23, 2004

LMAO!! You are in no position to tell me what I am or am not concerned about....

Sorry, but yes I am.

If you utilize a "natural depression" in the ground, you can bury the cache using forest debris. I think my next cache will utilize such a depression.

There ain't nothing wrong with this. Probably 20, or so of my hides use this method.

Edited February 23, 2004 by briansnat

2.3k · February 23, 2004

What an ego! LMAO@your "Cache Cop" attitude! Keep fooling yourself.

3.9k · February 23, 2004

Out of 30 + hides I have never had a reason to bury a cache. I think not being able to bury them forces you to use you imagination more. You should try it, it's fun. And even if the land manager gives you permission to bury it, (not that they would) GC.com says you can't. It's just not necessary. Pressing the cache into the ground or moving some dirt with your hand is one thing. That's not what I consider burying. Taking a post hole digger and hacking the ground up is just plain stupid.

38.2k · February 23, 2004

Keep fooling yourself.

Fool myself once, shame on me. Fool myself twice, shame on me again. :smile:

Edited February 23, 2004 by briansnat

February 23, 2004

sure he is.your post told us all that much

3.9k · February 23, 2004

What an ego! LMAO@your "Cache Cop" attitude! Keep fooling yourself.

I wouldn't call it an ego, (well maybe, but that's not the point :smile: ) I would say 95% of the people in these forums respect Brian's opinion. With 60+ hides I'd say he's earned it. There's no reason at all to bury a cache. Get over it. Yes the first cache was buried. Ya know what? It shouldn't have been. If you want to bury caches maybe this isn't the sand box for you to play in. I know this sport has changes a lot since you started and that might be frustrating for you. But all in all I think the changes have been necessary and positive.

Edited February 23, 2004 by JMBella

February 23, 2004

Burying a cache (in dirt underground) IMO is just a bad idea and should be an absolute LAST resort in hiding a cache. I would even go so far to say that written permission should be obtained with a copy of the document sent to gc.com, before a buried cache should be approved.

How would you like having a cache buried on your property and have cachers trampling around looking for the cache with shovels and pick axes? :smile:

February 23, 2004

Hey team360 it was when you turned the thread into an idiot fest with your overexaggerated post that things get out of hand. Did you need to post that? NO. so why? As far as buried caches we should go ahead and give the local admins a "headsup" if the word "report" is too official and rigid to you. Heck you don't even log your finds. Why do you even care?? :smile:

2.1k · February 23, 2004

But I thought cachers were suppose to ask permission, so then how could the authorities not know?

I think you are mistaken on that point. This website reqires "adequate permission", which means permission where it is required. If it isn't reqired, you already have adequate permission.

And how does one find out if permission is required? Ask the park manager if permission is required? Or is it that "there's no sign forbidding it", type of thing?

I went to a park the other day , here in Charlotte and there was no sign saying anything about erecting a building, but I would imagine it would be forbidden. Just because it isn't immediately noted as something that is not allowed, does not mean you can do it.

You can always go about it however you want. But you should be aware of any consequences that may arise. Whether it be fines or banment of the sport. But then again if you do ask, you could risk the chance of banment and/or other caches in that area of being removed and/or punishment sent the way of the owners of those said caches.

Darned if you do, darned if you don't. And your especially darned if you think about it...

2.3k · February 23, 2004

Just a reminder.

Personal Attacks and Flames will not be tolerated. If you want to praise or criticize, give examples as to why it is good or bad, general attacks on a person or idea will not be tolerated.

Thank you

CO Admin

6.4k · February 23, 2004

I went to a park the other day , here in Charlotte and there was no sign saying anything about erecting a building, but I would imagine it would be forbidden. Just because it isn't immediately noted as something that is not allowed, does not mean you can do it.

Just because you didn't see a sign, doesn't mean it's allowed, or banned. I'm sure your park in Charlotte has some sort of law on the books forbidding you from erecting a shelter/tent/structure without a permit. I'm sure it also has a law on the books regulating hunting. But, does it have one forbidding geocaching?

(PS, how's it feel to ge a good ol' boy again? :smile: )

February 23, 2004

IF we had burried caches I think I would get a hernia from carrying my backpack full of my usual goodies, GPS, pick, shovel, metal detector. I'd take a tiny micro over a burried cache anyday

2.1k · February 23, 2004

Just because you didn't see a sign, doesn't mean it's allowed, or banned. I'm sure your park in Charlotte has some sort of law on the books forbidding you from erecting a shelter/tent/structure without a permit. I'm sure it also has a law on the books regulating hunting. But, does it have one forbidding geocaching?

(PS, how's it feel to ge a good ol' boy again? )

First of all.... YEEE HAW!

Secondly, correct ammundo. Like you said, just because there is no sign does not mean it isn't allowed or banned. As well as because you don't see it written anywhere as well does not mean it's something that is prohibited. I think there should be more of a push for educating newer people to geocaching about it.

And by the way, if it is prohbited in that park, then I found 5 "outlaw caches"... :smile:

Edited February 23, 2004 by woodsters

February 23, 2004

Even if 6 feet is as accurate as a GPSr will go, do you really want to be digging for an item?

Everyone has my permission to hide a cache on my property (not that you would want to) but I sure as heck don't want you or anyone else digging up my opium plants.

February 23, 2004

Burying a cache (in dirt underground) IMO is just a bad idea and should be an absolute LAST resort in hiding a cache. I would even go so far to say that written permission should be obtained with a copy of the document sent to gc.com, before a buried cache should be approved.

How would you like having a cache buried on your property and have cachers trampling around looking for the cache with shovels and pick axes?

NO ONE that I have seen, except you people getting apoplectic about the displacement of an insignificant amount of dirt, is talking about having to dig to find the cache.

Not the example in the thread parent

Not the first cache

Not the cache I did

Not any one that I propose

This business of people digging up the land to find a cache is a straw man.

Edited February 23, 2004 by SamLowrey

February 23, 2004

Even if 6 feet is as accurate as a GPSr will go, do you really want to be digging for an item?

Everyone has my permission to hide a cache on my property (not that you would want to) but I sure as heck don't want you or anyone else digging up my opium plants.

What about a cache buried like what was described by the thread starter - with the top just above ground level so the cache is larger than a micro, yet doesn't stick out like a sore thumb?

Edited February 23, 2004 by SamLowrey

7.2k · February 23, 2004

There's no reason at all to bury a cache.

I have to disagree. I know of a full sized letterbox that is partially buried. It is within only 2 or 3 feet of the main path in a popular park. There is not enough cover to hide a full sized cache there, just wouldn't happen. It required a digging tool to put it in, but it doesn't require anything to retrieve it.

There is a distinct difference between digging to put it in and digging to access it.

I guess you could say there is no reason to put a box there, but really there is no reason for us to do what we do except we want to.

There are reasons to bury a cache. Mainly, it's to hide a larger cache in an area where there isn't enough cover to support it above grade. While the area might support a mirco or an offset, maybe the hider doesn't want to hide a small cache. Letterboxes need to be on the largish side to accomodate the logbook and stamp, so microboxes are a real challenge to put out.

That letterbox I mentioned above, you can access it, stamp up, and return the box to it's original state in a matter of only a few minutes. You'd never know anyone had been there. This box proves the argument of buried caches tear up the area because people dig holes has it's own hole in its logic.

With all of that said, I'm not trying to get gc.com to change their policy. For them, it's a good one. However, I take issue with the blanket statement of "there is no at all to bury a cache."

20.7k · February 23, 2004

This thread is just like the 'knives in caches' thread. :mad:

There is no reason to bury a cache. If you can't place a cache in a location without burying it, find a new location. :smile:

Oh yeah, don't put food in caches either. :mad:

February 23, 2004

This thread got me thinking... If i buried a cache at the center of the earth, what coordinates should i post? Also, the first person to place a cache on the moon better have some really awesome booty inside. The FTF prize should be a baseball sized replica of the moon made out of pure gold. And another thing, shouldn't it be called lunacaching as soon as its there instead of here?

Sorry, sometimes stream of consciousness is a lifestyle.

February 23, 2004

There is no reason to bury a cache.

By that reasonging, there is no "reason" to cache, either.

1.3k · February 23, 2004

Change of heart. :smile:

Edited February 24, 2004 by SBPhishy

20.7k · February 23, 2004

There is no reason to bury a cache.

By that reasonging, there is no "reason" to cache, either.

I think its important to tie in my next sentence, which was 'If you can't place a cache in a location without burying it, find a new location.'

This is just like the knife or food discussions. 'Put in something else, or nothing.'

7.2k · February 23, 2004

If you can't place a cache in a location without burying it, find a new location.

What if I really, really like that spot and the land owner is okay with it?

Quite frankly, if it's bury it or not place it, I'll bury it and just not list it here. It'd get visited enough.

3k · February 23, 2004

There is no reason to bury a cache. If you can't place a cache in a location without burying it, find a new location.

Oh yeah, don't put food in caches either.

Right!

I think this requires folks to think outside of the box which is not for everyone and not always the easiest to do.

You can say the same about burying a cache requires someone to think outside of the box to place/hide it but I don't see the creativity in a buried cache (read: simple hole with cache placed/buried in it)

With the letterbox example being right next to the trail I can see arguments that can be made about that but how about this example; hollowing out a log and placing that same cache in it and have that right next to the trail or use a log that is already hollowed out.

I see and understand the arguments being made but I think we're going to get to a point where its ok to "agree to disagree"

February 23, 2004

No one answered the question posted earlier. What if the pipe the owner placed the cache in was all ready buried? What if he was just using the pipe as a hiding spot and didn't actually dig. No one posted a link to the cache in question. If you could I would appreciate it, I would like to see the page for it.

Also, 'buried' can mean a few different things. Buried in the dirt, buried under some dead leaves, buried in a natural depression and covered with sticks...etc.

Are you sure the cache owner actually meant it was buried in the ground, completely covered?

Just askin' :smile:

Buried Treasures

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment