Jump to content

Archiving Old "stale" Caches To Freshen Up Game


TeamAO
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

Two things come to mind.

 

Typical post that someone is moving their cache and should they submit a new page. Usual response: If the caching experince is different then yes submit a new page.

 

Adopting Archived caches. So where's the cry for protecting the history? Place a new cache already, okay?

That's a good question about protecting the history of caching. I think the logs, both on line and in the original logbook records the history of a cache. You don't have to leave a seldom visited cache in place.

 

El Diablo

I don't want to get flamed for this metaphor, so if you feel the urge, resist.

 

Getting rid of some old caches that would be very worthwhile would be senseless. Archiving it because it is old, is like pushing elderly people out of society because they do not have as much production as younger people do. In Europe, they think that when an elder in the community dies, it is like a library burning down. Alot of knowledge and history fades. Don't archive a cache because it's old, archive it because it no longer, or possibly never has, been suffice to call itself a geocache. If it's an old Gatorade container from 2001 placed in a stump, where the cache has sustained substantial water damage, the log hasn't been replaced, "swag" value has depleted, then archiving it and waiting for a new cache to come along may be a good idea. We can't be selfish with our 528 foot circles and lay claim on them forever, but sometimes a cache is so good, the locals wouldn't want that cache archived for the world.

I'm not talking about archiving a cache because it's old. There are a lot of caches out there that are old and still viable.

 

My thought is that if the cache has been found by the majority of the locals, then it has lived it's life.

 

The very first cache I ever found is still in place, I even help maintain it. There are great seniments attached to that cache. It is owned by a very good friend. Now the question is, should it be archived to open up the area? Yes! As much as I would miss seeing the very first cache that I found archived, I think it should be. It gets less than a log every month or two.

 

El Diablo

Well, the Gatorade container with the waterlogged and...the whole "anti climatic" description was my first find. After getting so hyped into geocaching, finding that one really made me think I over anticipated it. And every cache since I liked, but my first find, I want that cache archived, to save others from the pain of seeing the cache. :lol:

Link to comment
...My thought is that if the cache has been found by the majority of the locals, then it has lived it's life....

I agree with this. A remote cache can live for years and years I'm learning and still have a lot of life left in it as the locals cycle throug the caches. Urban ones can be burnt out in a year or so. It all depends. I would never make the process of archiving old caches automatic since the caches 'time' is so variable depending on things we are still learning about. However there is a time when it's day in the sun is over and it's time to archive it.

Link to comment
Two things come to mind.

 

Typical post that someone is moving their cache and should they submit a new page. Usual response: If the caching experince is different then yes submit a new page.

 

Adopting Archived caches. So where's the cry for protecting the history? Place a new cache already, okay?

That's a good question about protecting the history of caching. I think the logs, both on line and in the original logbook records the history of a cache. You don't have to leave a seldom visited cache in place.

 

El Diablo

I don't want to get flamed for this metaphor, so if you feel the urge, resist.

 

Getting rid of some old caches that would be very worthwhile would be senseless. Archiving it because it is old, is like pushing elderly people out of society because they do not have as much production as younger people do. In Europe, they think that when an elder in the community dies, it is like a library burning down. Alot of knowledge and history fades. Don't archive a cache because it's old, archive it because it no longer, or possibly never has, been suffice to call itself a geocache. If it's an old Gatorade container from 2001 placed in a stump, where the cache has sustained substantial water damage, the log hasn't been replaced, "swag" value has depleted, then archiving it and waiting for a new cache to come along may be a good idea. We can't be selfish with our 528 foot circles and lay claim on them forever, but sometimes a cache is so good, the locals wouldn't want that cache archived for the world.

I'm not talking about archiving a cache because it's old. There are a lot of caches out there that are old and still viable.

 

My thought is that if the cache has been found by the majority of the locals, then it has lived it's life.

 

The very first cache I ever found is still in place, I even help maintain it. There are great seniments attached to that cache. It is owned by a very good friend. Now the question is, should it be archived to open up the area? Yes! As much as I would miss seeing the very first cache that I found archived, I think it should be. It gets less than a log every month or two.

 

El Diablo

Well, the Gatorade container with the waterlogged and...the whole "anti climatic" description was my first find. After getting so hyped into geocaching, finding that one really made me think I over anticipated it. And every cache since I liked, but my first find, I want that cache archived, to save others from the pain of seeing the cache. :lol:

Your log doesn't make it seem so painful

 

" July 4 by Team AlphaOmega (42 found)

Very nice hike yesterday in later day around 7PM. The primitive camping area was very pretty. A tip for any of you reading this, the GPS will point you downhill towards the lake to get there, instead stay uphill for the walk is much easier. Alot of bushwacking and the mosquitoes were swarming, but the hike was pretty and the coordinates were dead on. Everything is perfect inside, no water damage or anything. Thanks for the nice short hike."

Link to comment
Two things come to mind.

 

Typical post that someone is moving their cache and should they submit a new page. Usual response: If the caching experince is different then yes submit a new page.

 

Adopting Archived caches. So where's the cry for protecting the history? Place a new cache already, okay?

That's a good question about protecting the history of caching. I think the logs, both on line and in the original logbook records the history of a cache. You don't have to leave a seldom visited cache in place.

 

El Diablo

I don't want to get flamed for this metaphor, so if you feel the urge, resist.

 

Getting rid of some old caches that would be very worthwhile would be senseless. Archiving it because it is old, is like pushing elderly people out of society because they do not have as much production as younger people do. In Europe, they think that when an elder in the community dies, it is like a library burning down. Alot of knowledge and history fades. Don't archive a cache because it's old, archive it because it no longer, or possibly never has, been suffice to call itself a geocache. If it's an old Gatorade container from 2001 placed in a stump, where the cache has sustained substantial water damage, the log hasn't been replaced, "swag" value has depleted, then archiving it and waiting for a new cache to come along may be a good idea. We can't be selfish with our 528 foot circles and lay claim on them forever, but sometimes a cache is so good, the locals wouldn't want that cache archived for the world.

I'm not talking about archiving a cache because it's old. There are a lot of caches out there that are old and still viable.

 

My thought is that if the cache has been found by the majority of the locals, then it has lived it's life.

 

The very first cache I ever found is still in place, I even help maintain it. There are great seniments attached to that cache. It is owned by a very good friend. Now the question is, should it be archived to open up the area? Yes! As much as I would miss seeing the very first cache that I found archived, I think it should be. It gets less than a log every month or two.

 

El Diablo

Well, the Gatorade container with the waterlogged and...the whole "anti climatic" description was my first find. After getting so hyped into geocaching, finding that one really made me think I over anticipated it. And every cache since I liked, but my first find, I want that cache archived, to save others from the pain of seeing the cache. :lol:

Your log doesn't make it seem so painful

 

" July 4 by Team AlphaOmega (42 found)

Very nice hike yesterday in later day around 7PM. The primitive camping area was very pretty. A tip for any of you reading this, the GPS will point you downhill towards the lake to get there, instead stay uphill for the walk is much easier. Alot of bushwacking and the mosquitoes were swarming, but the hike was pretty and the coordinates were dead on. Everything is perfect inside, no water damage or anything. Thanks for the nice short hike."

Actually, the one you mentioned is Bedford's First Cache and is a very nice cache. That is the second cache I found, there was a cache I found just an hour earlier than that. For respect for the cacher I'm not going to bring up the name of the cache or the name of the cacher, but it was disappointing, nevertheless.

Link to comment
...First Cache and is a very nice cache. That is the second cache I found, there was a cache I found just an hour earlier than that. For respect for the cacher I'm not going to bring up the name of the cache or the name of the cacher, but it was disappointing, nevertheless.

The state of the cache has nothing whatsoever to do with, it's viablity as a unique and interesting find for every local cacher who would choose to enjoy it for as long as it's destined to last.

Link to comment

If you dont like the fact that the cache is archived just hide one there yourself. A local cacher around this area is archiving most of his caches. Most of them were good. Very good. I dont like that they are being archived, BUT - he has 180 hides. 180. He is welcome to archive what he pleases, in my opinion, after GIVING so much to the sport. Its silly to get annoyed when you can just hide other caches in their place - and improve them, if possible. After I hide 100+ caches, I will probably know EXACTLY why he is archiving them.(if I dont know already)

Edited by 4wheelin_fool
Link to comment
...

My thought is that if the cache has been found by the majority of the locals, then it has lived it's life.

...

But at what point do you say "the majority of the locals" have found it. There are always new cachers who haven't found them. I adopted one that for a bit I was thinking of archiving so I could place a different one nearby, but all of a sudden it is getting a whole lot of action and great comments (the hide changed some about the time I adopted it). So should I archive it so I can replace it with a tougher hide (that may not get the traffic this one is getting)?

Link to comment

But at what point do you say "the majority of the locals" have found it.  There are always new cachers who haven't found them.

Unless an area is saturated with caches that generally prove to be a disappointment, people seem to pick up local caches within the first month or two of publication. After six months, it seems that most caches have been logged and forgotten or are being ignored by the locals, and languish until the next media piece leads to a new wave of cachers.

 

I think, to most newcomers, the history of geocaching starts with their first find. They are looking for the nearest cache, or (what appears to be from the cache description) an interesting nearby cache. They aren't interested in placement dates, who the hider is, the caches that had previously been located nearby, etc.. Perhaps a few of them become interested in the local history (and/or politics) of geocaching later on.

Edited by Yankees Win!
Link to comment

Archiving a cache just because it has been there for while does not make a lot of sense to me. So another cache pops up in the same general area, it is still the same area. :lol:

 

There are better reasons to archive a cache.

1) The cache has been muggled on a regular basis

2) To many cachers have had a problems due to poor sattelite reception

3) The owner of the caches moves to a new area and will not be able to maintain the cache any longer.

 

My self I just moved a few months ago and while I can still maintain my caches I have archived some of them due to a history of maintanace problems which were not much of a problem when I was liviong just a few miles from them.

 

Besides, maintance can be a lot of work and I want to hide some caches closer to my new home. :lol:

 

I have also added logs to any caches that I was planning to archive if anyone had them on a watch list so that they would know in advance that the cache was going to be removed so that they would have a chance to find it. :lol:

Edited by JohnnyVegas
Link to comment
Archiving a cache just because it has been there for while does not make a lot of sense to me.

I would tend to agree, if the cache was still frequently sought, its owner remained active, and the cache has been well maintained.

 

Unfortunately, that's rarely the case; such caches appear to constitute a very small minority.

Edited by Yankees Win!
Link to comment
So another cache pops up in the same general area, it is still the same area

 

And with the trend these days the nicely stocked ammo box is likely to be replaced with a film canister with a damp slip of paper inside.

I hadn't thought about it that way, but I would much rather find a cache with little to no good trade items, than a micro in the woods.

 

Micros+Deep Woods=Bad Idea :D

Link to comment
I feel sorry for the newbies to the game. They want to hide a cache and they look around to put it in a nice spot, guess what? There's one already there. It's been there 3 years and maybe once a month or every other month someone logs it.

 

So they are left with very little alternatives. They have to hide lame caches. Let's face it. There are only so many good spots to place a cache. At the explosion rate of this sport, they are disapearing fast.

 

I'm trying to explain my thoughts, not sure I'm doing it right.

 

El Diablo

What I like most about caching is that it allows me to discover areas I didn't know about. A new cache hidden in the same place as an older one isn't going to bring that same sense of adventure and discovery.

 

I disagree with the effect of 'cache saturation' on newbies. It doesn't force you to put out uninspired micros; It forces you to expand your caching boundaries. Most cities and suburbs in Texas are pretty much saturated with caches. All the good spots are taken. Most of us live in suburbs. If you turn around and face the other direction, the 40 to 50 miles away from the city instead of the 40 to 50 miles across the city where you're caching, chances are there are miles and miles of virgin territory just waiting for that special cache.

Link to comment

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...