"temporarily" disabled?

[+Bad_CRC]

About 1/4 of the caches in my zipcode are "temporarily disabled" many of which don't appear to have any intention of being fixed/replaced.

 

it's kind of annoying, as those spots could house new caches if they were archived.

 

is this normal? seems like the owners should just archive them, but perhaps they are just "saving" their spots in case they decide to eventually put another cache out.

[+loungelions]

If they have been "temporary disabled" for a long time, the only way to get someone's attention is to ask for it to be archived. The reviewers apparently don't see the "needs maintenance" requests, only the "should be archived" requests. If you have a spot that you might want to put another cache into and it is being blocked, then perhaps you should request that it "should be archived". Then the reviewer will look at it and try to contact the cache owner. If the owner doesn't respond in a reasonable length of time, the reviewer can archive it and then you could put your cache there.

[+DaveA]

The Groundspeak guidelines suggest that caches be temporarily disabled when they need maintenance or if the land is off limits for some reason temporarily. The time they should be in this state is "a few weeks".

 

From here it depends on your local reviewers. In my area they have stepped in and archived the cache and placed a note in the logs that they will unarchive it if contacted. In the meantime you can place a cache there, BUT it is a good idea to email the local approver first to see if they want to give the current cache owner more time.

 

If you want to put a cache in a location where there is currently a disabled cache and it has been that way for more than a month drop your local reviewer a note and work with them. Just be patient and keep in mind that if it were your cache and you dropped out of the 'scene' for a couple months (for whatever reason) and came back to find someone else's cache had replaced yours you might be upset. So, be patient, play nice and email the local approver to see what can be worked out.

[+Renegade Knight]

I had two caches in construction zones that were disabled. Construction lasted over a year. I used to have a cache that I disabled every year for the winter. No Logs, No Way, No How. That was due to the potential for hibernating animals. Sometimes people have great intentions and life throws a few curveballs.

 

Each disabled cache has to be assessed on it's own merits.

[+msrubble]

If the cache has been "temporarily disabled" for more than 6 months, give reviewer Surfer Joe a heads up. He's been contacting owners of long-disabled caches. If you are certain that the cache will not be reactivated, you can post a "Needs Archived" note with your reasons. Or you could contact the owner if you'd like to "adopt" a cache.

[+Harry Dolphin]

There are 'temporarily disabled caches', and there are 'temporarily disabled caches'. I disabled one for three months due to park construction. Then had to move it 27 feet to keep people from tromping through the new garden. Oh, well.

On the other hand, there are people who don't seem to have any interest in maintaining caches once they have disabled them. Those need some push. I seem to get negative reactions when I SBA caches, so it might be easier to bring it to your reviewer's attention. Dear Reviewer, cache GCXXXX had been temporarily disabled for three months now. The reviewer will usually post a note "It has been brought t my attention that...", and with no repsonse for the owner in a few weeks or months, the reviewer will usually archive it.