+Sparrowhawk Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 (edited) Yesterday, I and a stonemason of a geocacher visited with the manager of a certain property who gave us the go-ahead to place a cache there. The site was very public and needed some REAL cool camo, so I worked with the other geocacher who came up with a brillant idea which we then implimented yesterday. He built a very tough open box (out of that plastic wood decking material) with a kind of angled chute on one side. That would be the cache box holder. We then dug a hole, placed the cache holder inside with the top of the box level to the ground, added gravel and rocks for drainage and stability. We then topped it with a 300-pound (!!!) landscape boulder and filled the dirt and barkdust back in. When we were done, we had what only looked like a big, nice-looking, boring landscape rock in the middle of some really unremarkable landscaping. To get the cache, ya sit facing forward on the rock, reach behind you, move the protective flagstone out of the way and grab the cool, ammo can from it's hiding place directly underneath the boulder. When done, ya drop it back into the chute, push the can back into place undeneath and put the flagstone back to cover the chute hole. It is a schweeet setup. That's the good news. I took LOTS of pics of the work process. Now the bad news is my worrying about posting the pics of the construction of the little cache cave. These are pics of: Hole. Shovel. Dirt pile. Work site. Possible resulting accusation: "YOU WERE BURYING A CACHE!! EVIL! EVIL! EVIL!" Arrrggh... that's wasn't burying a cache, it was creating a cool little camo cache cave FOR the cache. Groundspeak, fellow cachers, should I worry? Or should I just not post the cool pics as a way to avoid knee-jerk-reaction criticism? Thanks for any thoughts... Edited September 28, 2004 by Sparrowhawk Quote Link to comment
+bob&emily Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 I think it sounds awesome and would like to see the photos! Quote Link to comment
+geojeeper74 Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 If you told the land manager exactly what you were doing and obtained proper permission, then you are fine. I would like to see some pix, sounds like a very cool idea. Quote Link to comment
+Sagefox Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 (edited) This sounds like a very fun cache. I wouldn't post any photos (edit: on the cache page) because that would spoil the "moment of elation" for finders of the cache. I would also be sparse with clues unless people can't find it. Leaving some item a little out of place is a more fun way of leaving a clue. Edited September 28, 2004 by Team Sagefox Quote Link to comment
+CO Admin Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 (edited) Caches will be quickly archived if we see the following (which is not inclusive): Caches on land maintained by the U.S. National Park Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (National Wildlife Refuges) Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate. Caches placed on archaeological or historical sites. In most cases these areas are highly sensitive to the extra traffic that would be caused by vehicles and humans. Caches hidden in close proximity to active railroad tracks. In general we use a distance of 150 ft but your local area’s trespassing laws may be different. All local laws apply. Caches near or on military installations. Caches near or under public structures deemed potential or possible targets for terrorist attacks. These include but are not limited to highway bridges, dams, government buildings and airports. You would need written permission from the land owner that indicated the land owner understood that there might be several holes made by others looking for your cache. Since the guidelines state not to bury the cache and the cache box is part of the cache why : 1: would you bury it in the first place? 2: As here if you should hide the fact that its buried? Psssst Arrrggh... that's wasn't burying a cache, it was creating a cool little camo cache cave FOR the cache. Since you created the cool camo cave FOR the cache to be placed in. It IS burying the cache. If you had found a great little cave that would not be burying. But making the Great little cave IS burying. Edited September 28, 2004 by CO Admin Quote Link to comment
+worldtraveler Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 I think it's safe to say the spirit and intention of the "no burying" rule it to prevent damage/defacement to the environment by both hider and seeker. From your description, it sounds like you obtained proper permission and hid the cache responsibly. I would only suggest that if you give indication in your cache description that it is hidden underground, you also make it clear that it can be found WITHOUT digging or damaging the landscape. Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 (edited) Did the person you got permission from know you would be digging holes on the land? Edited September 29, 2004 by briansnat Quote Link to comment
+Gaddiel Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 I posted this similar thread a few weeks ago. The debate continues... Quote Link to comment
+Robespierre Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 First ON THE CACHE PAGE have a prominent note that NO DIGGING SHOULD BE DONE. Second, be sure that your approver knows about your permission, whatever that takes to satisfy. Second, this kind of hide is great from my perspective. Safe, lasting, ingenious... or else.... just list the cache, saying to the approver that it is placed in a cavity under a large boulder, and no digging is required. Don't post in the forums, be very quiet about it. (I did not say that). (You don't know where you heard it.) (The Devil made you do it.) Quote Link to comment
OuttaHand Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 I think it sounds like a great cache! I do think, however, that you've opened a can of worms by posting here that you did, in fact, dig a hole. Perhaps it would be wise to wait a given amount of time and then just submit the cache as new. If any questions, you could say that you happened to find a place where a stump had been dug out and removed by the landowner, and then moved the boulder onto it and did the rest. No, it's not entirely honest. But it DOES end up describing the set-up fairly accurately. Oh -- and if that's near me, please wrap the boulder in some kind of cushion because I KNOW I'll end up knocking my head against it in frustration trying to find that thing! Quote Link to comment
CoyoteRed Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 I'm echoing BS's query, too. That's a lot of work if the manager didn't know what is going on. I think it would be a cool cache to do. The vast majority of people know you can't be digging holes, BUT you can use "found" holes. People know caches can be below grade, but not to dig. You could be very conversative with your discriptions and call it "Crawl back under that rock!" or some such. The encrypted clue could be "flagstone." That would probably (without knowing anything else about the cache) be a 1.5 or 2 stars, or so, depending on the description. I think it can be done without tons of disclaimers and giving away the location. Good luck getting past the approvers, though. If it doesn't get approved, I'd leave as is and make it a bonus cache or other variation. Of course, it can't be logged here, but it sounds like such a cool cache that it shouldn't be abandoned. Email me for more ideas. Quote Link to comment
+Sparrowhawk Posted September 28, 2004 Author Share Posted September 28, 2004 It's kinda partially my fault... there WAS an existing alternative, coulda left the shovel, put gravel and hider box in that and call it good, but I just HAD to chime in and whine: "But this spot looks better than that one!" Duh. Time to uproot and take advantage of what was there to start with... Quote Link to comment
CoyoteRed Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 No, it's not entirely honest. That's not to mention approvers can see archived caches, too. Quote Link to comment
+CO Admin Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 No, it's not entirely honest. That's not to mention approvers can see archived caches, too. And that the reviewers read the forums too Quote Link to comment
Team Misguided Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 Perhaps it would be wise to wait a given amount of time and then just submit the cache as new. If any questions, you could say that you happened to find a place where a stump had been dug out and removed by the landowner, and then moved the boulder onto it and did the rest. The problem with that is that the reviewers read the forums and we also get out and cache as often as we can. We also have networks of concerned cachers that tend to let us know when somethings been listed that is contrary to the guidelines or spirit of the guidelines. Quote Link to comment
+bob&emily Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 I came across a cache that was on a beach and most of it was under the sand except for the lid. They let that one slide with no problem. I suppose it was not actually totally buried though and out of sight......... Quote Link to comment
+worldtraveler Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 (edited) ...We also have networks of concerned cachers that tend to let us know when somethings been listed that is contrary to the guidelines or spirit of the guidelines. Some questions for approvers to mull over and reach/announce a consensus on: Must a cache (knowingly) comply with both the letter AND the spirit of the guidelines in order for you to approve it, or would you possibly approve it if it clearly met the spirit but not the letter? Does THIS cache comply with the spirit of the "no burying" guideline? IF proper permission has been obtained for placing this cache and (as far as you know) it is in compliance with all other guidelines, would you approve it? I'm not trying to paint you into a corner, I'm not trying to push the envelope, and I don't have a hidden agenda for this or any other cache; I just think this type of topic is worth discussing. If the cache description is accurate, it appears to me it would be a boon rather than a bane to the geocaching community and pretty much environmentally neutral. I'd hate to see it disallowed if it meets the spirit/intent of the guideline. Edited September 28, 2004 by worldtraveler Quote Link to comment
virgo91967 Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 If it doesn't get approved, I'd leave as is and make it a bonus cache or other variation. Of course, it can't be logged here, but it sounds like such a cool cache that it shouldn't be abandoned. or have it posted at that "other" site Quote Link to comment
+bob&emily Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 WHAT other site? The NAV one???? DO TELL!!!!! Quote Link to comment
+Sparrowhawk Posted September 28, 2004 Author Share Posted September 28, 2004 (edited) Perhaps it would be wise to wait a given amount of time and then just submit the cache as new. If any questions, you could say that you happened to find a place where a stump had been dug out and removed by the landowner, and then moved the boulder onto it and did the rest. The problem with that is that the reviewers read the forums and we also get out and cache as often as we can. We also have networks of concerned cachers that tend to let us know when somethings been listed that is contrary to the guidelines or spirit of the guidelines. Yeah... I'm too honest for my own @#$@% good anyway... I woulda found a way to admit it one way or another whether I like it or not... I'm born too bleepin' transparent. I would make a really BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD scam artist. "Hi! This is THE gizmo that your life needs desperately! Works GREAT! Actually it's kinda empty, and has just one wire in it. Well maybe you can store something in it. Could you pretend it works amazingly and pay me $$$ anyway? That would be really nice!" (re-edit): There's an Ebay joke in there... somewhere... Edited September 28, 2004 by Sparrowhawk Quote Link to comment
+crash331 Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 Rock of Ages is buried, and it got approved. Rather good cache, too. Quote Link to comment
+Team Perks Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 All you gotta do is remove the cache. Then next week, put the cache back. Then you can honestly say you were just using an existing hole, and it meets the letter of the guidelines. Or dig the hole for another purpose (looking for old coins? worm hunting?), and then place the cache there. That meets the letter of the guidelines too. Quote Link to comment
Keystone Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 I was caching once in a neighboring state when a particular hide had frustrated a very experienced group of hunters for going on 30 minutes. Finally I looked down, thought that the flat rock on the ground looked a bit odd, flipped it over and the buried cache was revealed. The hole was maybe five inches across by eight inches deep. Immediately I said "oh oh, buried cache, I need to report this." (People probably avoid going caching with me for this reason, although it may also have something to do with the fact that I have no personality.) I was quite relieved to see a nice note inside the cache saying how it had been hidden with the full participation and permission from the local park where it was hidden -- right down to the park logo. In isolated cases like that one, permission changes everything. But I wouldn't like to see the cache page saying "this is sooo cool, it is a hunt for buried treasure!" because others might read the page and get the wrong idea about how the overwhelming majority of geocaches are hidden. "People are burying things" is one of the top five misperceptions that I hear when dealing with land managers who are new to geocaching. And that is why we have a fairly strict guideline against this. Quote Link to comment
+CO Admin Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 All you gotta do is remove the cache. Then next week, put the cache back. Then you can honestly say you were just using an existing hole, and it meets the letter of the guidelines. Or dig the hole for another purpose (looking for old coins? worm hunting?), and then place the cache there. That meets the letter of the guidelines too. Ummmmm sure Quote Link to comment
+Robespierre Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 The problem with that is that the reviewers read the forums and we also get out and cache as often as we can. We also have networks of concerned cachers that tend to let us know when somethings been listed that is contrary to the guidelines or spirit of the guidelines. Some of you approvers better take a trip to the geocaching desert (Crawford County, Ohio) and check up on my caches. Who knows what I'm gettin' away with. I can take the heat. All you gotta do is remove the cache. Then next week, put the cache back. Then you can honestly say you were just using an existing hole, and it meets the letter of the guidelines. I never thought the cat was that kind. Quote Link to comment
+CO Admin Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 The problem with that is that the reviewers read the forums and we also get out and cache as often as we can. We also have networks of concerned cachers that tend to let us know when somethings been listed that is contrary to the guidelines or spirit of the guidelines. Some of you approvers better take a trip to the geocaching desert (Crawford County, Ohio) and check up on my caches. Who knows what I'm gettin' away with. I can take the heat. All you gotta do is remove the cache. Then next week, put the cache back. Then you can honestly say you were just using an existing hole, and it meets the letter of the guidelines. I never thought the cat was that kind. Naw too much work, Ill just archive them all until you can provide me with photo proof that they are legal caches Quote Link to comment
+Team Perks Posted September 28, 2004 Share Posted September 28, 2004 Naw too much work, Ill just archive them all until you can provide me with photo proof that they are legal caches That's why the approvers need to physically visit each cache before they approve it. And remember, you have 48-72 hours to do it. Quote Link to comment
+fly46 Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 Personally, I think if you have permission, then why not bury it? The keyword there is permission. Quote Link to comment
+GreyingJay Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 I thought the guidelines were referring to the use of tool for burying caches; i.e. if you can bury it in, say, loose sand (using just your hands and no tools) then it's fair game. I found a cache almost completely hidden in a rock pile at an event a few weeks ago; it drove me nuts trying to find because I was under the impression that it would not be "buried". Quote Link to comment
+evergreenhiker! Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 If you told the land manager exactly what you were doing and obtained proper permission, then you are fine. I would like to see some pix, sounds like a very cool idea. I agree! Cool idea!! Quote Link to comment
+CO Admin Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 Naw too much work, Ill just archive them all until you can provide me with photo proof that they are legal caches That's why the approvers need to physically visit each cache before they approve it. And remember, you have 48-72 hours to do it. NP I didnt need those 8 hours of sleep I was wasting each night Ill get right on it Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 Personally, I think if you have permission, then why not bury it? The keyword there is permission. If the authorities find out that we're digging holes to hide caches, permission might not be as easily obtained. Permission to place a cache doesn't mean permission to dig a hole. If express permission to dig a hole was given, then I guess this cache would be OK, but the OP hasn't said he received permission to dig a hole, only to place the cache. There is a good chance that the land manager might be shocked to find a hole had been dug to conceal the cache should he decide to visit it. That would probably mean the end of geocaching there. Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 Permission and placment requirements that come from the land manager trump a lot of rules that exist to prevent the denial of permission. If the land manager says "dig here" you will dig there, or you won't be placing a cache. Same with a lot of other rules they come up with. I've seen where the NPS has agreed to a virtual cache and pointed out what they wanted on the cache description. That's the way the ball bounces. Quote Link to comment
Shoobie & the Sand Crabs Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 As long as you don't have to use some type of pointy object your in the clear. Quote Link to comment
+The Jester Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 As long as you don't have to use some type of pointy object your in the clear. Use a spade - flat blade - and there's no problem! Quote Link to comment
+Mazellan_Trailblazer Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 Look Who's talking Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 Permission and placment requirements that come from the land manager trump a lot of rules that exist to prevent the denial of permission. If the land manager says "dig here" you will dig there, or you won't be placing a cache. Same with a lot of other rules they come up with. I've seen where the NPS has agreed to a virtual cache and pointed out what they wanted on the cache description. That's the way the ball bounces. Sure , in the unlikely instance where a land manager demands that you dig a hole, I guess you have to dig a hole. But I don't see where the OP was told he had to dig a hole to hide his cache. I don't even see where he was told it was OK to do. Quote Link to comment
+Mazellan_Trailblazer Posted September 29, 2004 Share Posted September 29, 2004 Sorry my mistake this Link will tell you whos talking who is really CO Admin! Quote Link to comment
+mtn-man Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Sorry my mistake this Link will tell you whos talking who is really CO Admin! Hello Mazellan_Trailblazer. Welcome to the forums. I am glad to see that you have figured out something that 95% of the people in the forums have known for about a year or more. It is great that you are giving a go at participating, but in the future it would be nice if you would stay on topic and add something relevant to the discussion in the topic. Quote Link to comment
+El Diablo Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Sorry my mistake this Link will tell you whos talking who is really CO Admin! You might want to hook up with Sept1c_tank...he could give you a lot of pointers. Back on topic. If you have permission to dig...is it allowed? El Diablo Quote Link to comment
+worldtraveler Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 (edited) ...Back on topic. If you have permission to dig...is it allowed? El Diablo Hey! No cutting in line! I'm still waiting for the approvers to answer MY questions edit: On second thought, good luck; I'm still waiting for answers to MY questions. Edited September 30, 2004 by worldtraveler Quote Link to comment
+Sparrowhawk Posted September 30, 2004 Author Share Posted September 30, 2004 Back on topic. If you have permission to dig...is it allowed? El Diablo Even better yet, if the land manager PREFERRED that you dig, because they wanted a nice-looking certain result, as happened in this particular case? Interesting question! Still working on a Groundspeak-legal site for the record... Quote Link to comment
+IV_Warrior Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Back on topic. If you have permission to dig...is it allowed? El Diablo Even better yet, if the land manager PREFERRED that you dig, because they wanted a nice-looking certain result, as happened in this particular case? Well, I'm not a reviewer, but if the land manager WANTED you to dig a hole, "plant a rock", and oh, while you at it, go ahead and hide your cache under the rock, I'd say the hole was dug to "plant" the rock for the land manager, hiding the cache was just using an existing hole or not, but still I think it should be approveable if it was done with land manager permission/encouragement. Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Back on topic. If you have permission to dig...is it allowed? El Diablo Even better yet, if the land manager PREFERRED that you dig, because they wanted a nice-looking certain result, as happened in this particular case? Interesting question! Still working on a Groundspeak-legal site for the record... That changes things. It's the first time you said the land manager wanted it buried. If I were an approver however, I might want an official letter from the land manager giving express approval for digging though. Just something to hold on to in case the land manager changes, or changes his mind. Quote Link to comment
+Riddlers Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 I like IV's suggestion. You were just doing landscaping and helping the landowner make a good base for the boulder so that it wouldn't rock or move and hurt someone. Quote Link to comment
+WeightMan Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 What it really sounds like is the land manager did some landscaping and in the process made a hole for the cache to go into. The fact that sparrowhawk helped is not really relevant since the land manager wanted it done that way. Quote Link to comment
+CO Admin Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 The important thing to remember is that permission or not, Burying caches is not a good thing. We as cache reviewers are constantly battling the impression that caches are routinely buried. Land managers have this in their head and we start off in the hole trying to dig our way out of a misconception. Yes if you have expressed permission you can bury a cache. But I would ask that you NOT bury any caches in the interest of the long term impressions of the sport. While a buried cache may seem like fun it is not worth the damage that it does to everyone in the minds of uneducated land managers and the general public. Please for all of our sakes. Do not bury caches. Thank you Quote Link to comment
+dasein Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 In my opinion, the cache is NOT buried since one doesn't have to dig to find it. Hey, it's under a rock, and there's LOTS of those caches out there (the rock is just much bigger)! Be sure to note on the cache page that no digging is needed to find the cache. So Sparrowhawk, now that we know the secret to this cache, we'll be looking for its approval. Thanks for the explicit hints! --laurak Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 (edited) In my opinion, the cache is NOT buried since one doesn't have to dig to find it. Hey, it's under a rock, and there's LOTS of those caches out there (the rock is just much bigger)! The reason that "buried" caches aren't allowed is because if land managers find us out there digging holes, they'd put a stop to this sport pronto. The issue is the digging of holes and digging holes to hide caches is not allowed. In fact TPTB in their wisdom covered this in their guidelines: Caches that are buried. If a shovel, trowel or other “pointy” object is used to dig, whether in order to hide or to find the cache, then it is not appropriate Buried caches are technically allowed. If you cover a cache with leaves, it is essentialy buried, but legal. The issue is digging and digging is verboten. Edited September 30, 2004 by briansnat Quote Link to comment
maddog1404 Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 I have one question, Would this rock keep bad critters out?? Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.