Sagefox

Good suggestions here and there will be more, no doubt. One good source can be dollar stores. There you can get packages with two to 10 items and some, surprisingly, make for good trading. If you also go to a craft store and buy packs of small ziploc bags in several different sizes you can then put your trading items in those bags and it makes them more like little gifts and the bags keep your items clean.

I agree totally. I always suspect this is the case. That there is a low percentage of people that go over to the dark side but it always seems like an epidemic when cases are constantly presented here. I often get sucked into this perception but then I keep stepping back to ask myself how widespread is it, really? I don't think we can ever know fully because the number of cachers is staggering and the good practices don't get press.

But that is not really what grandfathering is all about. The idea is to phase out the cache type through attrition. When site conditions, logging abuse and owner inattention compromise a webcam or virtual then it is time to put it down. Grandfathering was a gift and I appreciate it but it should not be abused and I support archiving these caches when they turn into junk. I am quite aware of what grandfathering is. But until reviewers stop perpetuating disabled webcams for months on end, my OPINION stands. Either make them work or purge it like any regular cache. Stop the in between status. I think it is not the responsibity of reviwers to "make them work" in any event and especially by allowing someone to take over another nearby webcam. Like virtual caches, once the feature is compromised or removed that should be the end of it. It would be ideal if the process of demise was quick and clean but it can drag on sometimes. I don't see how it is that the reviewers are "perpetuating" the problem unless they aren't taking action when someone posts a NA.

Yikes! My posting ran amok. I'd better get back to finishing hanging the new exterior door before it rains.

Yes, this is very common. It is fun to make up a name for the day or for that group whenever they cache together. It is easier to log with one name and it saves room on small log sheets. It's a camaraderie thing. If a group is going to get together and form a team, why does the team dissolve at the end of the day when it comes to logging finds? It's an integrity thing. I might not have made my point clearly. There is no actual team. The "team" is a group of cachers just like any of the thousands of other groups of people who cache in groups except that they sign logs with a team name out of convenience. It is not an integrity issue any different from any other group of people go out caching together.

Thanks. I should have said I'm not interested in calling anyone out - just incidents only with no names. [snip] I lost the "non-traditional" cache part when replying but see now what your point was. I could comment on that but would rather keep this post shorter. This is not my experience for the Cache Machines nor from any talk with other cachers who both group and power trail cache. The statement is too generalized and is unfair to a lot of people, most people I believe, that don't have an anything goes attitude or caching practice. In the forums we constantly hear of a few examples, which typically are not substantiated, but it doesn't mean it is happening to any great extent out on the trails. Even with more examples of teams logging caches individually that they did not, in fact, visit it would be very difficult to know how widespread the practice is and what percentage of all power cachers do this. I don't know how anyone could know that.

Yes, this is very common. It is fun to make up a name for the day or for that group whenever they cache together. It is easier to log with one name and it saves room on small log sheets. It's a camaraderie thing. I've read this here from time to time but I am skeptical about how often it actually happens out in the world. I feel certain this is not the common practice of for-the-day teams. This could be as you suggest but it more likely is that they had four cars worth of searchers on the ground at each cache site which typically makes for faster finds. If they were finding caches separately and then logging them as all found I wouldn't think they would advertise that fact. I am not convinced. The example is speculative and it would help if specific examples could be presented. You could search through the individual logs of some of the team members for that day and see if any of them spilled the beans about going off in different directions and then logging caches they didn't actually visit. It would be interesting to hear back from you on this.

But that is not really what grandfathering is all about. The idea is to phase out the cache type through attrition. When site conditions, logging abuse and owner inattention compromise a webcam or virtual then it is time to put it down. Grandfathering was a gift and I appreciate it but it should not be abused and I support archiving these caches when they turn into junk.

No thanks. While our goal is to eventually host a CITO, it just has not been feasible to do so in the 8 1/2 years we've been caching. It would be more than a little insulting to force me to host a CITO at this point before I'm allowed to publish another cache. Well, my post was more directed at new users, and a bit more germane to the topic, but I find it curious that you perceive volunteering your time to those agencies that take care of our public lands as an insult? I think what they mean is that it would completely infeasible to expect anyone to host an event prior to placing a cache.

This is really it in a nut shell.

...Just ensures they die quicker. I think that is the idea. Not that they die off "quicker" but that they eventually go to archive heaven rather than be kept alive forever and I don't disagree with that concept. The gift from "grandfather" seems to get lost in these discussions. It has allowed everyone, new to the game or oldtimer, to get in on the virtual and webcam action while it lasts.

I think much of the debate is about the fact that apparently the OP has NOT been maintaining it since he is only now trying to enforce the ALR. And... they weren't aware of the change that had happened years ago. It was a shock to find out and they posted the rant before doing some research. I understand that. I've been there too.

No problem. NM and NA logs will take care of it if the cache remains in bad condition. The email notice simply gives the CO a heads up that Volunteer Reviewers might step in and sets up a chance that the work might get done before that action is needed. But, as your #2 observation points out, the Volunteer Reviewers already have plenty to do and there are far too many caches that warrant the email notice. It is not reasonable to expect volunteers to add this level of review to their exixting work load.

...but I think Pup Patrol's comment was intended to be neutral about the procedure... A rather harsh review and not exactly an accurate picture. I hesitate to answer for Pup Patrol, but I didn't take this comment as negative, merely a statement of fact... I might have read too much into PP's post. Sorry about that. That full post and a couple of other PP posts here come off, to me, as unnecessary complaints about a new proceedure instituted to help with cache maintenance issues that will not, in my opinion, have a "major" effect on anyone. PP seemed to be in a snit about not having advance notice of this proceedure. "How are we supposed to know about major changes like this?" "Caught one cache owner off guard." I don't see these as problems. If we keep our caches maintained we will never see the email and if we are a bit late getting to maintenance then we will get a gentle nudge that: It might seem major to someone who owns a lot of unmaintained caches if they get a batch of these reminders all at once but that would be a price paid for not responding to strings of dnfs or NMs. Something positive happend to improve the game and I just don't see why it should warrant complaints.

This is a very nice addition to the game. How could anyone be unhappy about that? We will all learn, soon enough, that there is a new procedure. A rather harsh review and not exactly an accurate picture. [snip] It is nice when volunteer reviewers happen to take on an NM during a quite moment but it is not a high priority in my mind. They should be allowed to spend that time on their "other life".

I think your interpretation is a bit too technical, actually. I appreciate the thought you put into it though. I don't think you will find many who agree with you. I am interested and quite surprised that some folks believe this. I never heard of this until this forum topic. I never would have thought of this interpretation and I've been at this game for almost 14 years.

Pretty much sums it up. They work and doggone it, people like them.

I know it doesn't sound right. It's the perception of a problem that seems to be the reason for all the flak. PTs are a different animal from regular geocaching and people seem happy to visit them and are more than willing to replace damaged or missing containers. I'm not intending to be a PT defender by any means. I just think the maintenance angle is not the same for a PT as for regular caching and probably not worth all this concern. I didn't care for the PT cache linked above where the CO requested that people replace missing caches but I have no problem with people wanting to do that. It seems that if you build a PT they will come... and they will replace.

So you haven't heard this actually happens? I would not be surprised if some people did it this way but there sure are a lot of signatures in those containers on the ET and R66 trails. I think most people don't make the pilgrimage to the major power trails just to drive by and log them all without stopping and opening the containers. It seems it is more of a mutually beneficial activity and finders are fully willing partners. It is not like the CO's didn't or don't do any work. Can you imagine the effort that goes into collecting all those containers, preparing the logsheets, finding and recording the locations, filling out the submittal forms and then receiving all that email and sorting through it to make sure you don't miss important messages? The CO's did this so cachers could have a different kind of fun and the finders respond by keeping the containers viable.

While we are on the subject of maintenance, here is a photo from outside Rachel, NV on the ET Highway: I think this shows some cache owner committment to the power-trail.

Since this post got a lot of mileage I will add my bit: The percentage of power-trail cachers who slip down this slope past the second step is approximately...?? Is it more than 1%, 5%? It is popular to say this stuff here and to agree with it but does it happen at any kind of rate that could be really be considered alarming? That's what I would like to know before I get concerned. We drove the entire ET Highway a couple of years back and found a whopping 10 by car and 10 on foot after dark when we stayed overnight at The Little A'Le'Inn. It was a blast. I really wanted to swap containers during the walking part but I just didn't have a starter container with me. :DB)

I've scanned this entire topic, rather too quickly I fear, but has anyone reported this guy's activity to HQ?

I agree totally and practice this myself. I would add that I might not be willing to abandon my search for a cache simply because muggles are about. Please, cache owners, don't expect me to walk away because you chose to hide a cache in a high traffic area. I will do all I can to protect your cache but I will most likey not stop my search because you chose a vulnerable area. I have some tricks for stealthy searching and will use them but there are no guarantees that I won't be seen.

I agree with the masses here. You found a geocache and you should get credit for that find. If you found a geocache and have it in your hand (unless your are within a few feet of others you were searching with and they have it in their hands) and have the container open then you have FOUND the cache. Signing the log is proof for others that you found it and people can be quite insistent that you sign the log - including me sometimes. But having it in hand and open is always a find in my book. It's a cache, you have it open in your hands, it's a find.