Subterraineous vs Buried

[+tangeloe]

I have an idea for a cache that involves making a stone box with dirt surrounding it and a rock on top for a lid. This method of hiding is integral to the story of the cache. Technically the cache would be below ground level but the thing hiding it would be above ground level. Could I make this if I found a pre-existing dip in the ground and filled in the gaps with soil (not digging a hole but filling one)? I have seen caches with tubes that go into the ground with a rock or shell attached to the top of them. How are those not considered buried? Are they just "stuck in the ground"?

[+T.D.M.22]

I have an idea for a cache that involves making a stone box with dirt surrounding it and a rock on top for a lid. This method of hiding is integral to the story of the cache. Technically the cache would be below ground level but the thing hiding it would be above ground level. Could I make this if I found a pre-existing dip in the ground and filled in the gaps with soil (not digging a hole but filling one)? I have seen caches with tubes that go into the ground with a rock or shell attached to the top of them. How are those not considered buried? Are they just "stuck in the ground"?

 

Nope. First, if you have to get around the rules, it's more likely than not against the (spirit) of the rule. Second, it doesn't say caches are not buried, and that's the end of it. It says (I can't recall the exact wording) that if you have to dig or create a whole to find or place..it's not allowed. IMO if you get the dirt without digging then it doesn't violate the wording-but see my first sentence.

 

Perhaps it will help to understand why this rule is in place. First-do you have permission to hide it like that? Second, even if you do, it's the image. They don't want a bad image, so people will see a cache buried and either copy it without permission, or for muggles, they think all caches are buried. They won't want people digging around their land. Cachers have caused damage without digging. While those caches you mentioned with the tube pushed into the ground violate the wording, if that's the extent, most people won't mind those, as the damage when removed in not noticeable unless you are an ant. But it's bigger caches like what you are hiding that cause bigger problems.

 

How then are there buried caches? The reviewers don't go out and look at every cache. And some even make mistakes-usually the reviewers that are dogs get distracted by cats. But if reported may be archived without chance to change it.

 

 

Just saying is all. At the end it's your decision to attempt the hide, and the reviewers to publish it. Any doubt, ask your reviewer-it won't matter what the rest of us say.

Edited August 27, 2014 by T.D.M.22

[+niraD]

And of course, some volunteer reviewers actually read the forums, so you may find that your cache is being reviewed by someone who is already familiar with your desire to hide a subterranean cache in a subterranean stone vault.

[+J Grouchy]

How then are there buried caches? The reviewers don't go out and look at every cache. And some even make mistakes-usually the reviewers that are dogs get distracted by cats. But if reported may be archived without chance to change it.

 

Questions:

Wasn't that rule/guideline written in later? Was there a time when a buried cache was not expressly discouraged or forbidden? Reason I ask is on a few occasions I've found ammo cans that are "submerged" in the earth - usually caches that have been around for years and years - with no real comments about the fact that they're technically violating the current guidelines. (example: http://coord.info/GLCP4PCV)

[+T.D.M.22]

How then are there buried caches? The reviewers don't go out and look at every cache. And some even make mistakes-usually the reviewers that are dogs get distracted by cats. But if reported may be archived without chance to change it.

 

Questions:

Wasn't that rule/guideline written in later? Was there a time when a buried cache was not expressly discouraged or forbidden? Reason I ask is on a few occasions I've found ammo cans that are "submerged" in the earth - usually caches that have been around for years and years - with no real comments about the fact that they're technically violating the current guidelines. (example: http://coord.info/GLCP4PCV)

 

Don't know. Obviously at least one cache was buried(the first one) But again, unless one gets reported how will the reviewer know? And as with certain other caches, rules are broken bent to keep those caches alive. Even if it means being disabled for 2 years, for example.

[Keystone]

I have an idea for a cache that involves making a stone box with dirt surrounding it and a rock on top for a lid. This method of hiding is integral to the story of the cache. Technically the cache would be below ground level but the thing hiding it would be above ground level.

That design is not allowed under the "buried caches" guideline.

Could I make this if I found a pre-existing dip in the ground and filled in the gaps with soil (not digging a hole but filling one)?

It's important to keep in mind WHY we have this listing guideline. One of the top three objections by land managers when asked if they'll permit geocaches on their property is "we don't want people digging for things." From the land manager's perspective, digging a hole versus finding a dip and filling in dirt around your container will both look the same from the surface.

I have seen caches with tubes that go into the ground with a rock or shell attached to the top of them. How are those not considered buried? Are they just "stuck in the ground"?

Those are buried caches, too. Keep in mind that reviewers don't actually visit the cache sites prior to publishing new caches. Sometimes we catch issues like this prior to publication and sometimes caches slip through and are published with a guideline violation. Also, the language and interpretation of the guideline has changed a couple of times over the past 12 years.

 

That's why the listing guidelines say that the publication of any one cache does NOT serve as precedent for any other cache.