When does it become litter?

[+El Diablo]

At what point do you consider a cache geo-litter? I've seen lots of posts that say if a cache is abandoned or archived that it is now geo litter. There are caches in my area that are still active and logged frequently, yet the owners haven't been active for years. Is this litter?

 

At what point does a cache become litter? I've seen lots of active caches that I would call litter.

 

El Diablo

[+BlueDeuce]

It's geo-litter the moment it's archived. It's not a cache and somebody has a responsibility to either remove it or restore it.

 

How much time does the owner have to clean it up is the real question.

 

Two weeks.

[+welch]

I think its litter the moment it stops being cared about and tended to when needed. If the cache is damaged, wet, missing or otherwise has a problem is besides the point, but does make it much easier to identify the ones that need removed.

[Clan Riffster]

I guess if a cache gets archived, left behind by the owner, and they have dropped out of the game, I'd call it litter. Anything else would rate a maybe. An archived cache left behind by an active owner would probably qualify, unless they were waiting for a convenient time to retrieve it. An active cache, left behind by an inactive owner often gets many finds before it deteriorates into a McCrap storage facility.

[+Rebel]

When a cache is archived either by the owner or TPTB, then it is litter. In my neck of the woods we tend to back each other up by repairing caches, replacing stages of multis, etc. Only once do I recall any of us going out and retrieving a dead cache. It does beg the question, though, of if a cacher is inactive and their cache is now litter, who picks up the trash? I'll have to think about that a bit.

[+BlueDeuce]

I think its litter the moment it stops being cared about and tended to when needed. If the cache is damaged, wet, missing or otherwise has a problem is besides the point, but does make it much easier to identify the ones that need removed.

 

ayep.

[+badlands]

If it's geo liter when it is no longer being maintained, when is it safe to log the find and cito the cache?

[+El Diablo]

I think its litter the moment it stops being cared about and tended to when needed. If the cache is damaged, wet, missing or otherwise has a problem is besides the point, but does make it much easier to identify the ones that need removed.

 

ayep.

 

I'll agree with that. However if it's still in good shape...then what?

 

El Diablo

[Captain Chaoss]

Our area has a number of caches which have been "abandoned" in the sense of the owners no longer caching. Yet, through the efforts of caring cachers who visit, some of these well-placed caches have endured for years.

 

Wet logs, worn out pens, cracked containers - I've seen all posted by a visitor, and the next cacher who comes through replaces it. One of my own tupperware containers which had been stepped on by a cacher, was replaced within a couple days with an ammo can by the next cacher through.

 

realize this is probably more an exception than a rule, especially in highly saturated areas, but it really makes me proud of the people in my home area.

 

I guess the point I want to make then, is analyze the local situation. If your caches are cracked, wet, full of moldy swag - junk it out. Let an active cacher put in a new one. If a great cache has become an institution, maintained because people want it to - go with it.

[+Right Wing Wacko]

If you beleive the US National Park Service; it's litter the instant it's placed.

[Mushtang]

It's geo-litter the moment it's archived. It's not a cache and somebody has a responsibility to either remove it or restore it.

 

How much time does the owner have to clean it up is the real question.

 

Two weeks.

How would you know it's not listed on another site? Being archived here doesn't mean it's automatically litter.

 

It could be just a cache that the owner has left for friends and family, and it's not listed on any site.

 

I think it can only really be considered litter if the cache owner says it's no longer an active cache, and asks someone to pick it up. That's a poor way to do it in my opinion, but it's been done before.

[+tozainamboku]

I disagree with the idea that a cache is litter the minute it is archived.

 

Around my area we had a legendary cache hider who quit in a huff over some of his caches being removed by a land manager. He promptly archived all his cache, even those in areas where there was no dispute with land managers. Many of his caches continue to be maintained and found. Since he had archived them and effectively committed geocide the caches were not available for adoption. Some maintainers chose to create a new cache at same location as the now archived one while others felt it better to maintain the original cache.

 

Cachers who commit geocide and archive all their caches because of a dispute with GC.com, might list them on another listing site or maintain the cache as a private cache. Unless you know for sure that a cache is abandoned, I wouldn't remove the "geolitter". The one exception would be when the cache was archived because a land owner or manager requested it and asked for the cache to be removed.

 

Letterboxes don't appear on geocaching.com, should I remove a letterbox that I find because it's not listed here?

Edited October 21, 2006 by tozainamboku

[+Bad_CRC]

well all caches really are litter. what are they really, other than a box full of junk left out in the woods?

 

But I'd say as long as it's functional, and being used, it's a different class of litter. There's a cache near here with over 200 finds, and the cache owner has been gone for 2 years now, but cachers keep putting in new logs and using it, so it's worth keeping around.

 

if the cache is archived, disabled, or stolen and thrown somewhere nobody can "use" it anymore, then it's litter with no purpose.

[+briansnat]

Well all caches really are litter. what are they really, other than a box full of junk left out in the woods?

 

Main Entry: lit·ter

 

Function: noun

 

1. A condition of disorder or untidiness: We were appalled at the litter of the room.

2. a : trash, wastepaper, or garbage lying scattered about <trying to clean up the roadside litter> b : an untidy accumulation of objects

 

If you go by the actual definition, a geocache is anything but litter. Rather than being an "untidy accumulation of objects" or "trash lying scattered about", a geocache is meticulously assembled and carefully hidden from view. When you think about it, what litter receives regular visits and the owner purposefully leaves contact information?

[+BlueDeuce]

 

How would you know it's not listed on another site? Being archived here doesn't mean it's automatically litter.

 

It could be just a cache that the owner has left for friends and family, and it's not listed on any site.

 

I think it can only really be considered litter if the cache owner says it's no longer an active cache, and asks someone to pick it up. That's a poor way to do it in my opinion, but it's been done before.

 

 

I think the OP wants to debate a mostly undefinable question.

 

Come find me when I remove geolitter and I'll show you, case by case.

 

edit: quotes.

Edited October 21, 2006 by BlueDeuce

[Neos2]

It's geo-litter the moment it's archived. It's not a cache and somebody has a responsibility to either remove it or restore it.

 

How much time does the owner have to clean it up is the real question.

 

Two weeks.

How would you know it's not listed on another site? Being archived here doesn't mean it's automatically litter.

 

It could be just a cache that the owner has left for friends and family, and it's not listed on any site.

 

I think it can only really be considered litter if the cache owner says it's no longer an active cache, and asks someone to pick it up. That's a poor way to do it in my opinion, but it's been done before.

I could be any of those things. If it is left there intentionally, it should be noted somewhere in the container. If it was listed with any of the listing services, the cache page should also have a short note stating that the cache has been left where there intentionally --and instructing folks not to log the cache as of x date.

 

Now how often do you think that happens?

 

All that said, there are lots of caches in my area that had owners who stopped caching ages ago. The caches remain and are being taken care of by the community at large. We even have a program set up to take care of caches in need of TCL (abandoned or not). Those caches aren't litter at long as they are tended to. Of course, our usual reviewer knows who to contact if there is a problem with one of the unclaimed caches and that helps make that possible. I suppose we could adopt them, but we like having the names of the original owners still on the caches. Perhaps we are still hoping they'll come back and start caching again.

Edited October 21, 2006 by Neos2

[+wavector]

Geotrash has nothing to do with the condition of a hide nor is it related to the success of the finders. The lack of an owner who responds when required is the only distinguishing characteristic of all geotrash.

 

If a cache owner does not respond when it is required then the cache is geotrash, even if it is full of good swag and hidden in a great spot.

 

The community can and does maintain many caches on a day by day basis. If a cache has a problem then the reviewer will address the owner, not the community. The presence of an owner who responds when it is required is what separates a geocache from a piece of geotrash. Owners don't have to be active seekers and they don't have to visit the website, there is no need to be out geocaching, but if there is a problem and a response is required they have to provide that response.

 

The lack of an owner's response when it is required is the only defining characteristic of all geotrash.

[+Sagefox]

Tons of caches are left behind by owners, especially those pesky vacation caches and weekend visitor drop-offs. Not all of them are abandoned though. Many of these are maintained by the local community for several years after the original placer faded away. I've seen this in Oregon and Washington towns and rural areas along I-5. It is actually fun to participate in keeping those caches alive.

 

Well over 50% of the caches in our visitor destination area are weekend drops and I have been keeping them alive, some for over 4 years.

 

Just because the owner flaked long ago doesn't mean that the cache is "litter" or that it needs to be automatically whacked.

 

Try as hard as we may to find one tidy answer that fits all situations (abandoned caches in this instance) it just doesn't work. Life is just not tidy that way.

[Mushtang]

 

How would you know it's not listed on another site? Being archived here doesn't mean it's automatically litter.

 

It could be just a cache that the owner has left for friends and family, and it's not listed on any site.

 

I think it can only really be considered litter if the cache owner says it's no longer an active cache, and asks someone to pick it up. That's a poor way to do it in my opinion, but it's been done before.

 

 

I think the OP wants to debate a mostly undefinable question.

 

Come find me when I remove geolitter and I'll show you, case by case.

 

edit: quotes.

Are you talking about stealing caches when you've taken it upon yourself to decide they're no longer useful to the owner, or are you removing caches at the request of an owner?

 

Give an example since I'm obviously not going to come find you when you remove one.

[+BlueDeuce]

 

Are you talking about stealing caches when you've taken it upon yourself to decide they're no longer useful to the owner, or are you removing caches at the request of an owner?

 

Give an example since I'm obviously not going to come find you when you remove one.

 

That's right, I'm stealing caches. Standby for an example.

[+BlueDeuce]

OK, here's an example of an archived cache. I haven't had a chance to go retrieve the container yet. If I'm ever back in the area I will.

 

Is it geotrash or not? Would I be 'stealing' it if I went and cleaned it up?

 

Twin Springs

 

Edited to note that if I found a nice container with a dry logbook, etc I wouldn't touch it.

 

But considering the shape it was in when I found it two years ago, I'm pretty certain it's becoming part of the forest floor.

Edited October 21, 2006 by BlueDeuce

[+Bad_CRC]

another reason all caches should be ammo boxes.

 

seems a lot of people don't think twice about leaving a dirty broken peanutbutter jar or gladware out in the woods, but I'm guessing you'd have no shortage of people ready to go pick up an abandoned ammobox to use it in a new cache.

 

[+BlueDeuce]

Ammocan example?

 

Okay how about this one? I happen to know the can is still out there.

 

Cedar River Cache

 

Geotrash or not?

 

(I'll give the details later)

[CoyoteRed]

As has been pointed out by Mushtang and tozainamboku, the issue is much more complex than simply being archived on this site. It's a difficult and complex issue that is not easily defined.

 

My personal idea of geo-litter is a cache that is abandoned, no longer maintained, and no longer a viable cache. I suppose a cache could be elevated to litter status with just one of those points, but certainly all three would put it as litter in my mind.

 

I don't really see being listed as an active cache having anything to do with it. Otherwise, it would be a "chicken and egg" issue. A cache that is litter certainly warrants an SBA log, but being archived doesn't mean it is litter.

[CoyoteRed]

Ammocan example?

 

Okay how about this one? I happen to know the can is still out there.

 

Cedar River Cache

 

Geotrash or not?

 

(I'll give the details later)

 

From what I've read, no, it's not litter. The only problem I see is a small one in the log baggie. No other complaints. Stale data users probably would not have any idea this cache is archived or has any significant issue.

 

...again, from the information presented, of course.

[+BlueDeuce]

The container and the location had been offered to three separate cachers (one after the other) who just never just around to claiming it. The first two finally decided they were too busy to visit the location and either move it or open a new listing. The third just never got around to it and since then another cache has been placed within 200ft, so it’s going to have to be pulled for sure.

 

Now, if that other owner had found the cache and said “I found a container from a cache that was archived over a year ago so I removed it.” I wouldn’t be upset in the slightest. I wouldn’t say they stole it. In fact they are welcome to re-use it or toss it. I didn’t provide any status or list it at another site.

 

Now, if I happen to remove an unusable cache container cracked open, the logbook a moldy ball, left for over a year and the owner shows up a year later accusing me of stealing their cache, I’m going to explain to them they had every chance to maintain their cache and since it’s a pile of garbage, I removed it.

[+Bad_CRC]

dadgum too far south. A bit farther north and I'd have been happy to pick it up today.

 

 

edit: and why archive an ammo can cache because of a hole in a plastic bag? I don't even put logbooks in plastic bags when they are in ammo cans.

Edited October 21, 2006 by Bad_CRC

[+BlueDeuce]

dadgum too far south. A bit farther north and I'd have been happy to pick it up today.

 

 

edit: and why archive an ammo can cache because of a hole in a plastic bag? I don't even put logbooks in plastic bags when they are in ammo cans.

 

The cache had been in place since 2002 and would go long stretches without being found. There were people living closer who were getting into places caches, so I opened up the spot so a new cache could be placed and bring people back to the park. (Including a fully functional ammocan available for immediate use)

 

Took a while for people to notice the location but just in the last few months 13 caches have been placed within 1.5 miles of my old one.

[+Bad_CRC]

well that's legitimate I guess, though as a new cacher, I enjoy finding ancient. caches even more than new ones. And I do think that leaving an unused container out in the woods for that long is littering, even if it's a nice container. Would be good to go pick it up or arrange for it.

[+BlueDeuce]

well that's legitimate I guess, though as a new cacher, I enjoy finding ancient. caches even more than new ones.

 

It was an okay cache. (I adopted it), the newer caches are much more fun to find.

 

And I do think that leaving an unused container out in the woods for that long is littering, even if it's a nice container. Would be good to go pick it up or arrange for it.

 

I completely agree. I don't see much difference between forgeting it's there or remembering it's there. The owner needs to either use it or remove it.

[+skisidedown]

 

How would you know it's not listed on another site? Being archived here doesn't mean it's automatically litter.

 

It could be just a cache that the owner has left for friends and family, and it's not listed on any site.

 

I think it can only really be considered litter if the cache owner says it's no longer an active cache, and asks someone to pick it up. That's a poor way to do it in my opinion, but it's been done before.

 

 

I think the OP wants to debate a mostly undefinable question.

 

Come find me when I remove geolitter and I'll show you, case by case.

 

edit: quotes.

Are you talking about stealing caches when you've taken it upon yourself to decide they're no longer useful to the owner, or are you removing caches at the request of an owner?

 

Give an example since I'm obviously not going to come find you when you remove one.

 

How about this cache "The Howe to Cache" as mentioned in this topic. It is near enough to this cache that I can see them both on screen when my etrex Vista is at 5m overzoom!

 

I need the exercise, so a walk may be in order to retreive the container.

 

Will this count as a CITO event?

 

Skisidedown

[+nfa]

as soon as it's archived, or if it's judged to be placed against either gc.com guidelines or local laws/regs...

 

jamie - nfa

[4wheelin_fool]

It's "litter" the moment a muggle finds it. If a cacher finds it, it's just a moldy, archived cache, that ought to be removed if it is not listed anywhere or active anymore. If it is active, it still is not litter - just a moldy cache that someone needs to fix or remove.

Edited October 21, 2006 by 4wheelin_fool

[Mushtang]

OK, here's an example of an archived cache. I haven't had a chance to go retrieve the container yet. If I'm ever back in the area I will.

 

Is it geotrash or not? Would I be 'stealing' it if I went and cleaned it up?

 

Twin Springs

 

Edited to note that if I found a nice container with a dry logbook, etc I wouldn't touch it.

 

But considering the shape it was in when I found it two years ago, I'm pretty certain it's becoming part of the forest floor.

That's a good example of a cache that probably was abandoned by the owner, and is litter. I'm sure over 90% of the caches that get archived due to inactivity on this site are now litter.

 

I was only trying to say that it's possible that the caches are not litter, and we shouldn't automatically assume the caches that have been archived should be removed by someone else.

 

Having a broken container, soggy unusable log book, and a years worth of no activity at the cache by the owner does suggest that it's litter. I'll agree there.

[nonaeroterraqueous]

It's like that which makes a plant a weed. It all depends on where it is and if it's wanted.

[+welch]

I think its litter the moment it stops being cared about and tended to when needed. If the cache is damaged, wet, missing or otherwise has a problem is besides the point, but does make it much easier to identify the ones that need removed.

 

ayep.

 

I'll agree with that. However if it's still in good shape...then what?

 

El Diablo

If you like it, call it your own. Make sure it stays and good condition, and get make it apperent it is yours (like getting it linked to your account if possiable).

[+Mule Ears]

At what point do you consider a cache geo-litter? I've seen lots of posts that say if a cache is abandoned or archived that it is now geo litter. There are caches in my area that are still active and logged frequently, yet the owners haven't been active for years. Is this litter?

 

At what point does a cache become litter? I've seen lots of active caches that I would call litter.

 

El Diablo

 

Replying specifically to the portion in bold, no, those are community-sustained caches. Some caches don't require a lot of maintenance, and are visited infrequently. When they do get a visitor, that visitor performs whatever maintenance is needed. To declare these caches "litter" just because the original owner is inactive would be an injustice. I can think of one cacher in particular who is no longer active but left a legacy of more than 40 excellent wilderness caches in scenic, remote areas of Arizona. His caches are excellent, and, thanks to volunteer maintenance, remain viable. Are you suggesting that they're "litter" and should be archived and removed unless formally adopted? I'd oppose that, strongly.

[+kayak-cowboy]

Ammocan example?

 

Okay how about this one? I happen to know the can is still out there.

 

Cedar River Cache

 

Geotrash or not?

 

(I'll give the details later)

 

I personally would consider this as litter. Even though it is in an ammo can with a small hole in the bag is immaterial. Yes you tried to have it adopted which is good. But this cache has been archived for well over a year with out being picked up which makes it geo-litter. Of course if it is listed on one of the other sites then it is not litter. Just going by the info given and the info on the cache page is how I came to my determination.

Like I said it is only my opinion.

[+Renegade Knight]

When it's not listed on any listing site and the owner isn't going to retreive it..ever. Then it's litter.

 

Which reminds me, I've got one I need to pick up that I forgot about.

[+wavector]

Replying specifically to the portion in bold, no, those are community-sustained caches.

 

This is a rose coloured view and doesn't reflect reality.

 

Generally if a listing service reviewer is required to contact a cache owner, for any reason, and the cache owner does not respond the cache is litter. There may be areas where the community is the resource that the reviewer attempts to contact but I am not aware of any. Any cache, no matter how well maintained by the community or how well visited, can end up being deemed geotrash if the owner doesn't respond when it is required.

There is no way for a geocacher to make the determination if a cache is litter. If the log book is wet and the owner doesn't respond to my email that means nothing but if the listing service reviewer sends an email regarding the log book, or any other matter, and receives no answer, then the cache is litter.

[+Mule Ears]

Replying specifically to the portion in bold, no, those are community-sustained caches.

 

This is a rose coloured view and doesn't reflect reality.

 

Generally if a listing service reviewer is required to contact a cache owner, for any reason, and the cache owner does not respond the cache is litter. There may be areas where the community is the resource that the reviewer attempts to contact but I am not aware of any. Any cache, no matter how well maintained by the community or how well visited, can end up being deemed geotrash if the owner doesn't respond when it is required.

There is no way for a geocacher to make the determination if a cache is litter. If the log book is wet and the owner doesn't respond to my email that means nothing but if the listing service reviewer sends an email regarding the log book, or any other matter, and receives no answer, then the cache is litter.

 

I should have been more specific: I am not talking about garden-variety caches, but rather very remote mountaintop and backcountry caches. These are more akin to summit registers that just happen to have a listing on Geocaching.com. This type of cache is visitor-maintained. It might receive two or three visitors a year, and none of these visitors gives a rat's patootey about trading trinkets; they just sign the log, maybe snap a hero pic, and start the long hike back.

 

Summit registers are similarly visitor-sustained, and some I've seen have been in place for 40 years. In fact, their longevity is the major threat to their continued existence--eventually somebody's going to covet them for the famous old signatures they contain.

 

Anyhow, I'm not disputing the basic point that most caches need regular maintenance and a reliable sponsor to take care of them. But I disagree strongly with the notion that any cache whose sponsor has left Geocaching has been transmuted into litter. Some of the best caches out there--the ones in wild, remote places--have no current sponsor and are just fine.

[+Sagefox]

But I disagree strongly with the notion that any cache whose sponsor has left Geocaching has been transmuted into litter. Some of the best caches out there--the ones in wild, remote places--have no current sponsor and are just fine.

 

I definitely agree with this.

 

As stated earlier by others, as long as the cache is viable then there is no need to archive and remove it. There are several factors that determine viability and they vary from cache to cache. It is always a site specific call – there can’t be a one-answer-fits-all conclusion to this topic.

[+Wellhungfish]

yeah as long as people who do the cache clean up a little it'll be fine

[+Renegade Knight]

...Generally if a listing service reviewer is required to contact a cache owner, for any reason, and the cache owner does not respond the cache is litter. ...

 

I'm not with you on that. If the cache owner maintains the cache it's not litter. The cache has to be abandoned. A bad or changed email address that hasn't been figured out or fixed yet doesn't make the cache litter. Current contact info is a separate problem. Partly created because this site doesn't really desire to have more information than that.

 

The cache community can prevent a cache from being abandoned even if the owner is MIA.

Edited October 24, 2006 by Renegade Knight