Cache Approving And Disabled Caches

[+docdesi]

After finding about 640 caches and hiding about 10..i finally feel able to comment on this....In the area i live there are a lot of cachers, placing a lot of caches (not a bad thing..but follow my rant/logic here for a sec)....but in the habit of people trying to place more and more...there are a lot of disabled caches in my area....at least 15 within 10 miles. Now normally i wouldnt have a problem with that....but there are people placing caches who have had disabled ones for several months. My proposal to Jeremy or the approvers would be that one cannot have a new cache placed if say they have a disabled cache for greater then a month (or other finite period of time) To have a new cache placed and have a disabled cache for 3 or 4 months yields to more geotrash in my book. I know it is hard to fix a cache in the winter or other inclement weather, but if you can place a new one..certainly you can fix an old one.....sorry for my rant......back to your regularly scheduled program...

[Lt32]

Have to agree with ya.

[+mailman72432]

I agree. Go fix your old caches BEFORE you place new ones.

[Keystone]

There are lots of reasons why a cache might be temporarily disabled. It is fine, for example, to have a cache disabled for six months or more due to winter closures, construction projects, etc. If your suggestion were adopted, then cache reviewers would need to review each hider's list of previous hides whenever a new cache is submitted, and then make an evaluation of each disabled cache to see if it is a "good" or "bad" situation. This would be time consuming. And do you really *want* more regulation in the hands of the site volunteers?

 

It's better, I think, to keep after the owners of disabled caches. Here in Pennsylvania, cache owners receive a reminder after two or three months, and if no good explanation is provided, the cache is archived a few weeks later. If you think there's a lot of disabled caches near you, imagine living someplace where the site volunteers don't affirmatively enforce the cache maintenance guidelines.

[+Henki]

In theory, I think it's a great idea. However, after Hurricane Katrina hit this area, some areas were closed to the public and caches couldn't be checked on. Most cachers chose to disable those caches (some didn't) until the areas were reopened. Surprisingly enough, many caches survived while nearby buildings didn't. There's a park in this area that was commandeered for recovery efforts and closed to the public. Parts of it just reopened this week. There are A LOT of caches in that park, and I know that at least some have survived.