Apparently Ok To Burry Waypoints.

[+Mr. Snazz]

So far as I can tell, nothing as actually been done about this (yes, I contacted an approver). So I'm posting here to see what you folks think and to whine that my will hasn't been imposed upon others yet.

 

There is a multi-waypoint cache consisting of one waypoint and the final cache location here in Bend, Oregon. The waypoint is a glass container, burried in the ground in the middle of a green grass area at a park.

 

Photo:

http://img.Groundspeak.com/user/6b23a910-3...38ea40f7335.jpg

 

The question: Is it appropriate to use this technique to place a waypoint? And if not, what should have been done to correct the situation?

[+StarBrand]

Was it an existing hole that was used??

 

So long as we don't use a "pointy" object to hide or search - should be ok.

[+Mr. Snazz]

If it was an existing hole, it was perfectly sized; the jar is in there pretty tight.

[+mtn-man]

Did you post a "Should Be Archived" note with an explanation?

 

EDITED: No, that container should not be buried like that unless they found an existing hole, and even then it is bad practice.

Edited April 26, 2005 by mtn-man

[+Gas Guys]

Do you need to pull that out of the ground or just read off the numbers? If you just need to read the numbers, then the part of the waypoint that is useful is above ground. If you need to get into the bottle, that's a different story.

[+Mr. Snazz]

Did you post a "Should Be Archived" note with an explanation?

 

EDITED: No, that container should not be buried like that unless they found an existing hole, and even then it is bad practice.

I contacted a local approver directly, who indicated that it wasn't OK and that he was dealing with it. This was a month ago though...

[+hydee]

Without knowing what cache we are talking about I cannot tell you what should or shouldn't have been done. If permission was given to place a container in that way then the cache would be just fine. If the owner took it upon themselves to dig a hole then the cache should be archived. And there are many other scenarios of this type....so it is hard to say.

 

Mr. Snazz, please PM me the waypoint name for the listing and I will look into the cache.

[+blazerfan]

This sounds like an issue to take up with the cache owner...

 

edit: to remove incomplete comments

Edited April 26, 2005 by blazerfan

[+cache_test_dummies]

The question: Is it appropriate to use this technique to place a waypoint?

Pre-existing hole or not, it never would have occurred to me to install any kind of glass object in the grass or on the ground in a public park. If it breaks, you’ve got a hole full of broken glass.

 

Until somebody steps on it. Then you’ve got a hole full of bloody broken glass.

[+Mr. Snazz]

blazerfan: cache owner has been totally unresponsive to e-mails regarding his other caches, so I skipped him this time.

 

hydee: thanks, waypoint sent.

[Angst]

hydee: thanks, waypoint sent.

Darn, I didn't get here soon enough

[+Renegade Knight]

hydee: thanks, waypoint sent.

Darn, I didn't get here soon enough

It would of been a boring thread anyway. I agree with Hydee's take and Snazz's concern.

[+The Commissar!]

Hydee, did you mean to imply that it is ok to dig a hole if you have landowner permission? That is how I read it but I thought that that was not the case...

 

I agree with Mr Snazz's concern too...an accident waiting to happen.

[+mtn-man]

Yes, if you have the land owners permission you can do that. I have found a few that were like that and they say on the cache page that the hide is done with the owner's permission. They were plastic containers though, not glass.

[+Mr. Snazz]

My greater concern, rather than broken glass, is copycats. New cachers tend to place caches which are similar to their first find(s). If they found an ammo box, they tend to place ammo boxes. If they found filmcan micros, they tend to place filmcan micros.

 

This particular cache is very, very accessible and is likely to be a first find for many people, who might not realize that it isn't OK to go around burrying things (we all know how many of us actually read the rules before hiding caches).

[+StarBrand]

My greater concern, rather than broken glass, is copycats. New cachers tend to place caches which are similar to their first find(s). If they found an ammo box, they tend to place ammo boxes. If they found filmcan micros, they tend to place filmcan micros.

 

This particular cache is very, very accessible and is likely to be a first find for many people, who might not realize that it isn't OK to go around burrying things (we all know how many of us actually read the rules before hiding caches).

Good Point

[Keystone]

For the reasons just expressed, we are told to be extra insistent about proof of permission when the cache is buried. This means going beyond a statement from the hider that "yeah, I obtained permission." We have a dialogue with the owner and land manager about how and why buried caches are discouraged. Then I ask to see clear, direct evidence of the landowner's permission, not just for the cache placement, but also for the hiding technique. Finally, that permission needs to be mentioned right on the cache page.

 

I went through this exercise recently and it was the first buried cache that I've listed in my territory in at least a year -- other than any where the cache owner didn't disclose to me how the cache was hidden. We rely upon the community to let us know about caches that slipped through that way.

 

All of this caution is warranted due to the misperception of many land managers that geocaching is a destructive "hunt for buried treasure."

[+Marky]

The waypoint is a glass container, burried in the ground in the middle of a green grass area at a park.

 

Photo:

 

That grass isn't looking too green. Maybe you meant in the brown grass area?

 

A glass container in an area of grass that might be used by children playing is just a bad idea, period. I kinda wish there was a guideline that said no glass containers. I've seen a few of them smash and it's not pretty.

 

--Marky

[+Sputnik 57]

I think we can all agree that it's a bad idea. What struck me most is Mr. Snazz's discretion in not listing the waypoint or flaming the owner, and Hydee's equally tactful request to look into it without taking it public.

 

Nice job, all.