It strikes me that this reasoning (which is sound, IMO) outweighs, or at least counters, the reasoning that by not showing archived caches at all people will stay out of sensitive areas.
Here's an example...
Maybe that's a better example for why not to show archived caches. That cache brought people to the site of a plane wreck that the forest service considered "a protected historic site". In general, the forest service does not like letting the general public know where these sites are - whether they are on planewrecks.com or geocaching.com - because they see any additional traffic as potentially damaging to the site. By allowing one to search for archived caches it might be possible to find the site of the wreck. Even if all you got was the link to the archived cache, that could encourage additional traffic. So what if you can't place another cache there - wouldn't you be interested in visiting the "forbidden" site. You might even place a cache nearby and encourage people to visit the wreck when they go to your cache. By making it hard to search for such caches GC.com may help prevent more damage. Of course, the reviewers still have access to the nearest archived caches, so if another cache was placed there they could deny that placement under the current guidelines.
There may be other examples where knowing that a landowner/manager objected to a previous cache would be useful to someone contemplating placing a cache. Not every instance should the locations be hidden. But you picked a bad example to make your point.
Maybe that's why the "Archived Search" should be allowed. Our public land managers are using the tool of closure and exclusion more and more instead of actual management.
Don't want to deal with the public on public lands? Just lock 'em out.
Want to create a new Wilderness Area. Just erase the 4wd tracks and minng ruins from the map. Voila an area untrammeled by man suitable for a new Wilderness Area.
Geocaching is a historical part of our public lands, albeit a very brief and most likely insignificant part, along with all the other human uses of our public lands.
Some of us a very interested in what WAS there, even if it was only a few years ago.
Another VOTE for the archived search.