New Geocache Type?

[+crc32]

Hey, we have traiditional caches, we have multi-caches, we have travel bugs... what about an itinerant cache? The idea is that: when you find it, you move it to a new location, and post that new location here. Unlike a travel bug, the cache is intended to remain in the same locality (city, county, 10-mile radius, whatever). Or it could travel a circuit of pre-defined locations (randomly or in sequence).

 

Any comments?

[+jeff35080]

I'll let others do the Markwell

[GrandpaCannon]

They have already been named moving caches and they are no longer allowed with the exception of a few that are grandfathered in. Sorry.

[lowracer]

Great idea. Some have called them Moving caches or Roving caches. They're a whole lot of fun and WILDLY popular, and do not cause the demise of geocaching as we know it. Case in point, The Rock That Rolls:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...33-4f0bd1cbb21a

 

Unfortunately, they are also not being approved anymore.

 

I'll step aside as the usual crowd of experts chime in with their list of reasons why they believe these caches will cause the sky to fall.

[Pipanella]

Personally, I think they sound like fun, and can't imagine what the harm is in them. But I'll bet someone will tell me.

[+crc32]

Whoops! Usually I'm such a stickler for reading the FAQ totally, but I must have skipped over the "Cache Permanance" section the first time. Does seem a pity though that these aren't allowed.

[+stu_and_sarah]

I imagine there could be a lot of dissapointed finders who go for the cache but someone has previously taken it and not logged its new location yet.

 

What would the timescales be for:

 

1. Taking the cache.

2. Rehiding it.

3. Reporting its new position.

4. Waiting for approval of its new position.

 

I guess the cache would be unavailable more often than it was actively seekable.

 

Cheers,

 

Stu

[Pipanella]

I imagine there could be a lot of dissapointed finders who go for the cache but someone has previously taken it and not logged its new location yet.

 

What would the timescales be for:

 

1. Taking the cache.

2. Rehiding it.

3. Reporting its new position.

4. Waiting for approval of its new position.

 

I guess the cache would be unavailable more often than it was actively seekable.

 

Cheers,

 

Stu

Very true. But maybe these could be hunted as a bonus when you're hunting other caches. If it's still there, yay! If not......well, you understood that could happen.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

This can't happen any longer. Against the rules. Only those grandfathered in are around.

[lowracer]

I imagine there could be a lot of dissapointed finders who go for the cache but someone has previously taken it and not logged its new location yet.

Go read the logs for The Rock That Rolls. You'll find this isn't the case. People KNOW they're looking for a moving cache, so they expect that one outcome is that it will be already gone. It becomes a part of the fun, part of the challenge to be first to find it. Read the logs.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Why can't we do moving caches anymore:

• Only approvers can change coordinates past a certain distance
  
• Approvers need to verify that the moved cache still meets the guidelines (not in a National Park, too close to another cache, too close to railroad tracks, etc)
  
• Cachers might tear up or trample an area looking for something that isn't there. (They will spend more time looking around if they can't find it, even if they know it may have moved. They want to be thorough in their search)
  
• It takes some people several days to report that they have moved the cache. This makes weekly pocket queries useless
  

I'm sure there are more, but these are the main ones I've read about before.

[Pixie_Tracker]

I think that moving caches are great and there is a lot of potential for very clever ideas/modifications on the theme. It's a loss for the sport that GC doesn't approve them. Someone should build a Moving Cache database website and those are the only caches listed. It wouldn't compete with GC and provide an added value to the geocaching community

[lowracer]

Navicache will let you post moving caches. Problem is, no one uses Navicache, so very few people will try to find your cache.

[Pipanella]

Navicache will let you post moving caches. Problem is, no one uses Navicache, so very few people will try to find your cache.

Well, then, that greatly reduces the possibility of the cache not being where it's supposed to be, doesn't it?

[+hikemeister]

Interesting idea, but sure to cause frustration.

 

Consider this -- I print out 10 geocache pages at 11 PM, then get up the next morning and go hunting. I arrive at the location of the roving cache, hike a mile or so to the point where it is supposed to be, search for 45 minutes, find nothing, go back to post a DNF, and see that someone has logged a find and moved it (or worse, yet, not logged yet).

 

You would have to establish some very careful rules about how many times per week it could be found and moved and the time limit for posting the new coordinates.

 

I suspect these are the reasons they do not allow this type of cache -- not to mention that every time you move it, someone has to approve the new location!

[+Shoebugs]

will re-post..didn't get all of the "paste info" the first time

Edited April 22, 2004 by Shoebugs

[Pipanella]

Okay, you've convinced me. Bad idea.

[+OzGuff]

Shoebugs:

 

I have two bugs similar to your idea Hide and Seek and Hide and Seek II. At the time I released the first one I tried to get it approved as a traveling cache in addition to its existence as a TB so that anyone who made the extra effort to find it would get a smiley face too. Que sera sera.

 

Good luck with yours!

[+Right Wing Wacko]

We have moving caches. They are called Travel Bugs

[+WindChill]

Actually there is a way to get the fun of being able to move the cache without a lot of the other headaches. Simply make it a two-stage multi.

 

The first stage is at a fixed location and has its own logbook. The second stage gets to move and its new coordinates get recorded in the first-stage logbook.

 

See this cache.

[+bigredmed]

I wonder if an experimental cache could be set up where there was space and suitable places to hide the cache in which you played 3-card monte with the cache.

 

You get three coords and you have to guess where the cache is. The goal being not just to find it, but to find it on your first try.

 

After you find it, you have to move it to one of the other two locations, without mentioning which place you put it in your log.

 

Something like this might serve a couple of beneficial outcomes, if you said that the three locations were limited to no more than 2 minutes apart (for a total of 4 minutes between the far ends), you could use a definable space and limit the treading on the ecology.

[+Renegade Knight]

It's a variation of a moving cache but seems to solve the problem. If it's on a travel circuit the points could be pre-known and pre approved like they are on a multi cache.

 

All in all while I think this is a viable variation of a moving cache.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

I picked up a moving cache TB a couple of days ago. I will fit in .50 cal ammo cans easily, and could fit in .30 cal cans if they aren't very full. Since it has a TB tag, it is tracked in the GC system. Since it can only be placed into a cache, no one will be hunting for something that isn't there (unless the cache is plundered, of course). Even if someone has picked up the TB cache before you get there, you still get to find a cache. Problem solved