Unvisited (cold) Caches

[gerboa]

Topic/Description says it all.

Appreciate Advice

[+Markwell]

Nah - others will eventually find it.

[+Team Neos]

If it's just been too long since it's been found and I want to archive a cache so someone else can place a new cache there, I write a note on the cache page warning everyone that they only have until ______ date to find the cache. I give at least two weeks notice, so it will show up on weekly PQs.

[gerboa]

Nah - others will eventually find it.

 

"eventually" the web site that predictss your date of expiry in seconds, from bmi and age gives me less than three years...post mortem finds OK?

If it asked about my geocaching struggles it might make a downward revision...or upwards?

[+Cooties!]

Recently, I've taken an interest in trying to find these "cold" caches.

I look at past logs, the difficulty, and the last time it was logged and found. A lot of them seem to be findable, but might take a little more effort than the casual cacher is willing to give it.

It's a great feeling to log a find on a cache that hasn't been found in over a year!

[+Mudfrog]

We have placed a few that we know won't get hit too often. This is our preference since we placed them in places that are a challenge to get to and the few logs that we do get from these are always great fun to read. In our case, it would make no difference if we archived then someone else set up a cache there. Would still be very little visitation because of the challenge of just getting there. Well, i suppose that placing really great swag for the first few finders might up the visits some.

 

I agree, we love going after cold caches. Just feels like we added something to the find when we get them. To find one after a year or more of inactivity is way cool to my notion!

[+briansnat]

I think as long as the owner is interested in maintaining the cache, then it can stay there as long as the owner likes. I have caches that go 4-5 months betwen finds and a couple that are lucky to get a find or two in a year.

 

I leave them there because the few finders seem to enjoy them.

[+JohnnyVegas]

I have one cache that only gets found 0nce or twice a year. It is a cache that takes about 2.5 - 3 hours of hiking to find. With several hundred cache in that area that only take a few minutes to find it is no surprise that my cache that requires a long hike does not get found on a regular basis.

 

Just leave the cache and don't worry about it

[+Nuwati]

It is my goal in life to fill the cache full of caches that take folks away from their cars and into the woods. I don't care if they are ever found. My hope is that folks will tire of seeing them on their maps, and have to go and find them because they have run out of P&Gs. Down with P&Gs. DOwn with cars and wasteful fuel habbits. Lets use our bodys instead. Archive some of them instead.

 

Nuwati

[+NetworkCacher]

Cold caches, or those with few or infrequent visits, are fascinating to me. The ones that go unfound for months at a time feel like FTFs when you go looking for them. What's more curious than a cache that has been found before but hasn't been found again for months (or longer).

[rbrugman]

I love finding caches that have been sitting for a long time! I do see what you mean though. There are a lot of caches that have simply gone missing and no one has bothered to check on it. I'd say that 90% of the "cold" caches in my area have plenty of DNF's and the owners simply have chosen not to do anything about it.

 

My first, and to this point only cache is quite hard to find. It's a multi, but it takes quite a while to get to the final stage and its not exactly kid-friendly, so I think a lot of people just choose not to look for it. That doesn't mean that no one maintains it. I'm there every few weeks to check on the status of the stages and make sure everything is there and that nothing is damaged by water.

[+Quiggle]

Topic/Description says it all.

Appreciate Advice

 

No, there are no guidelines regarding caches that aren't being visited.

 

Unmaintained? Yes.

Unvisited? No.

[+Stunod]

My first cache hide is still in place after almost 3 years. It doesn't get many visitors anymore, but everytime I think about archiving it someone new hits it and I decide to let it live a little longer.

[+markp99]

I take pride in finding caches that have not been found in a while. One in particular had a few DNF's against it over the last ~year, with one guy placing it on his DNELFTCA (Do not ever look for this cache again) list after 3 DNF's in a row.

 

I spent an hour hunting for that thing and FOUND it. Sweet - one of my favorite finds! It was as old canning jar with a rusted cover and wet, skinky contents. But, it was a great find nonetheless!

 

This was probably a good archive candidate; the owner has not been seen for a couple years with no new hides/finds, but I'd vote to leave it as-is and let the next guy enjoy the find.

 

Lately I've been looking for the "oldest" caches in my radius. I've been hitting 100% on them. Most have been wet and stinky after the wet spring and summer, so I've been carrying extra ziplocks and trash out all the wet junk.

 

It's nice to refresh an old cache!

[+KKTH3]

About half the caches in this area are found very infrequently. There are only about 60 caches within 35 miles of here so once a new one is placed, pretty much all of the active cachers have found it within a month and it will just sit there until a new cacher takes up the hobby or someone travels through. That could result in only 3-4 finds a year. For some of the more difficult caches it could result in even fewer finds. If there is a multicache or unknown cache tag - it will probably only get found a couple times in its whole lifetime - even if the difficulty isn't too tough. As far as I know, there have only been three unknown caches placed within 50 miles of here. They have only registered 5 finds in over 2 years of combined active service. and 2 of those finds were at the same time by cachers working together. Despite all of that, I know of cachers that are actively working on finding those caches and eventually there will be more visits.

 

We are more likely to replace or retire a cache if it is creating maintenence issues, suffers cronic muggling or vandalism, or is too small of a cache in an area that can handle a much larger cache. "Not being found enough" in itself isn't a valid reason in our opinion.

[+Mule Ears]

If a cache is found infrequently, what's the benefit of archiving it? To release the location for another cache which would presumably also be infrequently found?

[+Davispak]

I think if it is your cache and you feel that due to circumstances that you will no longer maintain the cache then by all means archive it. I would suggest putting it up for adoption first and see if anyone out there wants to give it a good home. If not then yes a one month time table is a good lead time. In either case, if you archive it make sure you go get it. Don't leave geolitter.

[+Ambrosia]

We have placed a few that we know won't get hit too often. This is our preference since we placed them in places that are a challenge to get to and the few logs that we do get from these are always great fun to read. In our case, it would make no difference if we archived then someone else set up a cache there. Would still be very little visitation because of the challenge of just getting there. Well, i suppose that placing really great swag for the first few finders might up the visits some.

 

I agree, we love going after cold caches. Just feels like we added something to the find when we get them. To find one after a year or more of inactivity is way cool to my notion!

We have several caches that are only found 2 or 3 times a year because of a bit higher terrain difficulty. It's like it becomes an icon....and we enjoy seeing when people actually get out to them. The logs are always great.

[+zeobandit]

I would much rather try to find a cold cache then one that gets found constantly. There is more satisfaction to finding the more difficult/remote caches.

[+Jhwk]

I purposely "target" caches that haven't been found in a while, or have a number of DNF's attached. I usually find the cache (because I hate losing) and post a note saying that all is well and good. Most of my DNF's result in the owner popping in to check the cache, because if I can't find it, it's generally not there - but that's beside the point. I have a remote/difficult cache that went ~6 months between finds. But then who wants to hunt for a small cave on a rugged hillside in the dead of winter? Let the owners decide when enough is enough.

[+Clyde1140]

I purposely "target" caches that haven't been found in a while, or have a number of DNF's attached. I usually find the cache (because I hate losing) and post a note saying that all is well and good. Most of my DNF's result in the owner popping in to check the cache, because if I can't find it, it's generally not there - but that's beside the point. I have a remote/difficult cache that went ~6 months between finds. But then who wants to hunt for a small cave on a rugged hillside in the dead of winter? Let the owners decide when enough is enough.

 

I agree, I have one near me that was placed a little over a year ago and has one finder.... it is very high on my list to find soon!

[+Renegade Knight]

I'd say that cache will have a good and long life. There are people who like extreme caches. Unfound caches qualify in that others have bypassed them because they are not easy enough by whatever yardstick they are using.

[+Glock22]

I'd say that cache will have a good and long life. There are people who like extreme caches. Unfound caches qualify in that others have bypassed them because they are not easy enough by whatever yardstick they are using.

 

Some of the DNF's are due to timing i have found. Night Time Or muggles. but we have a few that are gone and not archived. The owner has not been on in along time one that my son and i repaired and reset is gone but it does not belong to me so I can't archive it. (the whole Tree is gone) is there a way to get these removed?

 

Thanks

 

Greg

Edited July 26, 2006 by Glock22

[+FamilyDNA]

I'd say that cache will have a good and long life. There are people who like extreme caches. Unfound caches qualify in that others have bypassed them because they are not easy enough by whatever yardstick they are using.

 

Some of the DNF's are due to timing i have found. Night Time Or muggles. but we have a few that are gone and not archived. The owner has not been on in along time one that my son and i repaired and reset is gone but it does not belong to me so I can't archive it. (the whole Tree is gone) is there a way to get these removed?

 

Thanks

 

Greg

If you're pretty sure it's gone, and the owner is inactive, you can post a "needs archived" log to alert the local reviewer.

[+TheManInStripes]

Nah - others will eventually find it.

 

...the web site that predictss your date of expiry in seconds, from bmi and age gives me less than three years...

 

Can anyone direct me to this site?

[+Jhwk]

Nah - others will eventually find it.

 

...the web site that predictss your date of expiry in seconds, from bmi and age gives me less than three years...

 

Can anyone direct me to this site?

It may be the death clock here.

[hide & seekers]

I'm not sure how long it takes for a cache to be "cold," but in March my husband and I found several caches in Florida. Two of those caches haven't been found since. For one, maybe both, we were the first finders of 2006. Made me proud to find these caches -- I have them on my watchlist now out of curiousity. Both caches were of merit, just took a bit more effort to get to them.

[+edscott]

As long as there is not a long string of DNFs why archive it? If it is there it will be found.

[+Harry Dolphin]

My first hide has had 19 logs in 23 months. Not bad. Of course, it was hyped by the local geocaching organization, which helps. And 19 cachers have seen the view that I found so interesting (including the idiot who did it in waist-deep snow...)

Of coure, we've also done a tough one that has had 8 finds since five years ago (and 5 DNFs) out of 23 logs. In Manhattan, no less. Come on, NYC geocachers, it's still there waiting to be found. When we found it, it hadn't been found in almost a year. This is one the ones where, when you find it, you stick a feather in your cap, and

If I get a few finds a year on a cache that I'm proud to have hidden, that's enough reward for me! New one in the works. Hee hee hee!

[+Tsmola]

in my area of West Michigan there seems to be this imaginary line about 10 miles north of my home. Now, there are a handful of dedicated cachers who will regularly cross this line. The rest who live about 10 miles North of the line, rarely...if ever cross it to cache.

 

I've been saying for months I'm gonna hide more caches North of that line so I can have one with some more logs, everytime I go to hide one, I find a sweet, out of the way spot waaayyyy south of the line.

 

Needless to say, I end up hiding it in the sweet spot south of the line. None of the caches I've placed (not counting the adopted ones) have more than 30 visits because 90% of the cachers refuse to cross the imaginary line and stick just to ones that get put in their area. So I'm left with visits just from the dedicated.

 

I've learned to accept it, my caches get fewer visitors. If I were to place more to the North I'd get more logs, but because the best spots up there are taken I'd have to deal with lesser locations. In the end, I'm happier since my caches are better quality in the less-visited areas.

 

I regularly check on all of these caches, some have gone for months without a find, I don't want my caches archived for not being visited. It's not my fault some people are too lazy or stubborn to drive or walk a ways for a cache, I've worked hard on these caches and I did so knowing they'd go with less visits but I did so knowing that those who did visit would appreicate it, I know there will be more visits to those caches, the finds may be few and far between, but they will be found again. Just gotta give people time and maybe the caches being on their lists unfound and in PQs will eventually annoy them to the point they finally come down to visit.

[Mr Walker]

I am assuming that unvisited means just, that not simply a number of DNF's. Caching in a rural area of Australia, I find that, once my caches have been visited by the handful of local cachers, they may go up to a year before other cachers find them. It is worse with the more remote ones, but even caches along the main highway wll not be visited for months. It has got worse since the rise in petrol prices, but I noted this trend on the Australian forum late last year. I don't have any problem with this, as my 30 or so caches are all relatively close, and I visit them regularly for maintenance etc. I sometimes find caches have gone missing, but there is no evidence of this in the logs. DNF's are different. In Australia after about 3 DNF's (depending on the expertise of the cachers) the protocol is for the owner to check the cache personally or by proxy. If this is not done, one of the reviewers will suggest making it unavailable until a check is done, or even do so them selves. This seems to work well, but I don't know how the system works in the U.S. I sympathise with Tsmola, but luckilly I get as much fun out of placing caches, as I do in finding them

[gerboa]

This thread has not attracted anything like contumely.Is this a record?