Jump to content

Archived cache still there.


Recommended Posts

My granddaughter and I were looking for (and finding) caches this morning and while in the neighborhood, checked a cache that we had found some time ago. It was still there and granddaughter traded a very nice shell necklace and 4 quarters for a puzzle and a small cookbook. I was just trying to log our visit and found it is archived. Should I go back and remove it or, at least remove the items she left? Can it be reactivated? I hesitate to list the archived cache coordinates here, lest it be confiscated by unknowns.

Link to comment

It is Geotrash essentially - grab it and contact the owner for instructions on what to do with it. He may or may not wish to have it back.

 

It is possible that he believed it to be muggled and then archived it too.

Alternatively, it could be listed on a different geocaching website and archived on this one.

 

Don't just take it without trying to contact the owner.

Link to comment

Then again, a lot of people leave geocaching, and never remove their geotrash. (Of course, this is also true of some active geocachers.)

What is the listed reason for the Archival? Has anyone signed the log since it was archived? I've seen a few where the first stage of the multi disappeared, and the cache got archived. Final stage was/is still there months after the archival, complete with travel bug. (Travel Bug Rescue Mission!) (Got a few more on my list...)

Sometimes caches get archived for strange reasons, complicated by owner non-maintenance. I'm watching one in New Hampshire. Several people complained that it was not at Ground Zero. Nope, if you read the logs, it's about fifty feet off. Owners marked it 'temporarily unavailable'. I don't think they're active, so it'll probably get archived soon. Which is a shame. It's a nice cache in a nice area, and not that hard to find. Oh, well.

Link to comment

I went and checked out the cache you were talking about and it appears that the owner is simply MIA, contact your local reviewer and if you want to adopt the cache they may allow you to do that but if you don't want to i would just contact the owner just incase and then go back and retrieve it, maybe you can use it to hide your own cache.

Link to comment

And when/if you don't hear from the owner (they haven't signed in on that account since last November) drop a note to the reviewer. If the person has a new caching name, the reviewer may know about it.

And apprently a new email address? :rolleyes:

Why not? I know of several local cachers who have switched names since the switch over at gc where you couldn't just change the name and keep the same account. They changed email addresses as well at some point (not at the same time and not because they changed the account name, but just because the local cable company finally made it our way! Of course, they left notes on their caches, or adopted them over to themelves at the new account.

Link to comment

A couple of things:

 

Don't assume the cache is dead.

Yes, there are other listing sites out there so don't automatically assume that an active though archived cache is geotrash. It could very well be active elsewhere. I have a hybrid I archived and made into a pure letterbox for instance. Don't simply go around picking up archived caches without thoroughly investigating the player's status. This should include talking to your local group and players--they might have information you don't or have suggestions on how to proceed.

 

In this instance, I don't think this is the case. Just by peeking around the user's account it simply appears she dropped out. Folks do it all the time and for various reasons. When it happens I always hope it is for happy reasons or just got bored with it.

 

Regardless of the reason the player appears to be inactive, if the cache is in good shape I'd leave it.

 

Don't assume a cache is missing even if you or a previous finder can't find it.

From the looks of the things the cache in question was archived because a previous finder couldn't find it. The owner didn't respond for whatever reason. The reviewer assumed the cache is missing and archived.

 

Well, the cache wasn't missing.

 

Something similar happened to us. We got a couple of DNFs on a very, very easy cache. We went and checked on it and, sure enough, the cache wasn't in its spot. We took it offline and while we debated archiving it, lo an d behold, a find log came in. I felt like my face did this: :rolleyes: I emailed the finder and asked him to describe exactly where he found it. Yep, it was there--in the wrong spot only a 30' away!

 

We never did figure out who or why it was moved. I mean the hiding spot was very unique to the area and unless you have absolutely no short-term memory you can't make the mistake of putting it under the wrong tree. It might have been moved because the finder thought the cache was too exposed. Maybe they couldn't replace it because of muggles, but could put it where they did. I don't know.

 

Lessoned learned: caches get moved for various reasons. When you as an owner or as a previous finder go to check on a cache don't assume it is missing simply because it's not where you last seen it. Break that laser vision, pretend it's a new hunt, fan out and find that sucker. Then, when you come up empty it's safer to assume it is truly gone.

 

Two more reason the cache might not be in its spot: owner just picked it up for maintenance and you're operating on stale data. The other is another cacher might have found it and stepped around the bend or bush to sign in--plenty of folks follow the "move away from the hiding spot to trade and sign in" theory to reduce the chances of compromising the hide. Keep these in mind, too.

Link to comment

Here is what I would do if I'm in a proactive mood. Scenerio is revisiting a cache, finding it, and seeing that it has been archived. I also assume that the cache is clearly marked as a geocaching.com entity.

 

I would send an email to the owner and post a note on the cache page saying that it was found and state that if the cache isn't removed or reinstated in two weeks that I would remove it. If there is no activity after two weeks, I would send an additional email and wait an additional week. If there is still no activity, I would remove it, send another email and post another note, and place the cache in my closet for three months in case the owner finally contacts me. After three months, I'd throw it away.

 

Corner cases brought up in the thread:

 

What if it is a part of another website? If so, it should be clearly marked as belonging there. If not, how can I, as a geocacher, or someone else, as a muggle, know that it is a game piece for that site and not trash?

 

What if the owner changed accounts or their email no longer works? The owner needs to be available to answer queries about their caches and needs to keep this information on their caches and profile up to date. I think the burden should be on the owner to be available and not on the cacher to have to do a full blown detective style investigation to find out who this person is and where they are.

 

Chances are that I would not be in a proactive mood and I would just leave it and forget about it. The lack of any guidelines or cohesive answers when posing these kind of questions makes it difficult to decide on how to act. Doing nothing is always safe, trying to help always risks offending someone or uncovering an obscure corner case you would never have thought about.

 

Maybe there should be adopted community guidelines to cover these issues. I would be much more proactive if I could simply look this up and have a step-by-step guide on what to do. There are plenty of caches out there and more coming every day. Caches that are archived, not maintained, or owned by an inactive cacher need to be fixed, adopted, or removed.

Link to comment

Here is what I would do if I'm in a proactive mood. Scenerio is revisiting a cache, finding it, and seeing that it has been archived. I also assume that the cache is clearly marked as a geocaching.com entity.

 

I would send an email to the owner and post a note on the cache page saying that it was found and state that if the cache isn't removed or reinstated in two weeks that I would remove it. If there is no activity after two weeks, I would send an additional email and wait an additional week. If there is still no activity, I would remove it, send another email and post another note, and place the cache in my closet for three months in case the owner finally contacts me. After three months, I'd throw it away.

 

Corner cases brought up in the thread:

 

What if it is a part of another website? If so, it should be clearly marked as belonging there. If not, how can I, as a geocacher, or someone else, as a muggle, know that it is a game piece for that site and not trash?

 

What if the owner changed accounts or their email no longer works? The owner needs to be available to answer queries about their caches and needs to keep this information on their caches and profile up to date. I think the burden should be on the owner to be available and not on the cacher to have to do a full blown detective style investigation to find out who this person is and where they are.

 

Chances are that I would not be in a proactive mood and I would just leave it and forget about it. The lack of any guidelines or cohesive answers when posing these kind of questions makes it difficult to decide on how to act. Doing nothing is always safe, trying to help always risks offending someone or uncovering an obscure corner case you would never have thought about.

 

Maybe there should be adopted community guidelines to cover these issues. I would be much more proactive if I could simply look this up and have a step-by-step guide on what to do. There are plenty of caches out there and more coming every day. Caches that are archived, not maintained, or owned by an inactive cacher need to be fixed, adopted, or removed.

Your post contained a bunch of 'what ifs'.

 

What if I start geocaching and list my cache on two websites: GC.com and not-GC.com. I later become disenchanted with GC.com and archive my cache there, leaving it available at non-GC.com. Time goes by and I learn that gmail is better than yahoo email, so I change my email to yahoo. Naturally, I change my not-GC.com info to reflect this, but I don't change it on GC.com because neither myself nor my cache is active over there.

 

Should a GC.com-only cacher have the right to remove my cache and put it in his closet? I'm leaning towards 'no'. This is one of those rare times that I agree with CoyoteRed.

 

Before doing anything, I would consider the condition of the cache and whether it has shown activity since being archived on GC.com.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

And when/if you don't hear from the owner (they haven't signed in on that account since last November) drop a note to the reviewer. If the person has a new caching name, the reviewer may know about it.

And apprently a new email address? :rolleyes:

Why not? I know of several local cachers who have switched names since the switch over at gc where you couldn't just change the name and keep the same account. They changed email addresses as well at some point (not at the same time and not because they changed the account name, but just because the local cable company finally made it our way! Of course, they left notes on their caches, or adopted them over to themelves at the new account.

I have nothing against people that change email addresses, but they should be responsible for themselves and update the site or leave an really easy to find note about the change somewhere. Otherwise I have little sympathy for them when they don't get things sent to their old address :rolleyes:.

Do what you can do to find JoeCacher before removing or adopting their caches, but if they can't be found do what you think best for the caches :unsure: .

Link to comment

...

Should a GC.com-only cacher have the right to remove my cache and put it in his closet? I'm leaning towards 'no'. This is one of those rare times that I agree with CoyoteRed.

 

Before doing anything, I would consider the condition of the cache and whether it has shown activity since being archived on GC.com.

I see no difference between a cacher that quit caching, and one that stopped answering the email. Just because a cache gets archived is not strictly a reason to go pick up the cache, but lack of maintenance is, and answering the email is IMO part of maintenance. The difference between geocaches and litter is that people periodically check on the cache and tend to it if needed. No one ever bothers to check on litter, nor does anyone bother to dry out soggy litter :rolleyes: .

 

I would agree though, if the logbook is still being signed long as its been archived then something is up. And it deserves to look into more.

Link to comment
...

Should a GC.com-only cacher have the right to remove my cache and put it in his closet? I'm leaning towards 'no'. This is one of those rare times that I agree with CoyoteRed.

 

Before doing anything, I would consider the condition of the cache and whether it has shown activity since being archived on GC.com.

I see no difference between a cacher that quit caching, and one that stopped answering the email. Just because a cache gets archived is not strictly a reason to go pick up the cache, but lack of maintenance is, and answering the email is IMO part of maintenance. The difference between geocaches and litter is that people periodically check on the cache and tend to it if needed. No one ever bothers to check on litter, nor does anyone bother to dry out soggy litter :rolleyes: .

 

I would agree though, if the logbook is still being signed long as its been archived then something is up. And it deserves to look into more.

Neither do I. Of course, that is why I carefully chose the sequence of events in my hypothetical example.
Link to comment

Your post contained a bunch of 'what ifs'.

 

What if I start geocaching and list my cache on two websites: GC.com and not-GC.com. I later become disenchanted with GC.com and archive my cache there, leaving it available at non-GC.com. Time goes by and I learn that gmail is better than yahoo email, so I change my email to yahoo. Naturally, I change my not-GC.com info to reflect this, but I don't change it on GC.com because neither myself nor my cache is active over there.

 

Should a GC.com-only cacher have the right to remove my cache and put it in his closet? I'm leaning towards 'no'. This is one of those rare times that I agree with CoyoteRed.

 

Before doing anything, I would consider the condition of the cache and whether it has shown activity since being archived on GC.com.

 

I guess I didn't answer my "if"s. If the cache is clearly marked as a non-GC.com cache also, then I would either research that site or most likely, just leave it alone. And I would hope there is some information posted that the cache was archived at gc.com but is still in play elsewhere.

 

I'm not sure where these whole "rights" issues come in. There are no "rights". By geocaching, you are not granted anything. Does a muggle have the right to remove a cache that is in play? I dont think the word "right" makes sense. A muggle throwing away a cache thinking it is trash is not using a "right" to do so, he or she wasn't informed on what that item was or misunderstood its use.

 

I posted what I would do because I didn't see a concrete answer. I'm trying to help further the discussion which could eventually lead to an answer to the question posed by the OP. Only listing corner cases of what "could" be going on and describing stories of certain incidents helps but doesn't fully answer the question. If there are no concrete definitions of when something becomes geotrash it will just accumulate and look bad on everyone. Remember, this is all in the context of when the cache has a problem (being archived) and the owner isn't available.

Link to comment
Your post contained a bunch of 'what ifs'.

 

What if I start geocaching and list my cache on two websites: GC.com and not-GC.com. I later become disenchanted with GC.com and archive my cache there, leaving it available at non-GC.com. Time goes by and I learn that gmail is better than yahoo email, so I change my email to yahoo. Naturally, I change my not-GC.com info to reflect this, but I don't change it on GC.com because neither myself nor my cache is active over there.

 

Should a GC.com-only cacher have the right to remove my cache and put it in his closet? I'm leaning towards 'no'. This is one of those rare times that I agree with CoyoteRed.

 

Before doing anything, I would consider the condition of the cache and whether it has shown activity since being archived on GC.com.

I guess I didn't answer my "if"s. If the cache is clearly marked as a non-GC.com cache also, then I would either research that site or most likely, just leave it alone. And I would hope there is some information posted that the cache was archived at gc.com but is still in play elsewhere.
Most caches aren't clearly labeled with any site. I certaintly wouldn't find the absense of such labeling to be proof that it isn't listed anywhere.
I'm not sure where these whole "rights" issues come in. There are no "rights". By geocaching, you are not granted anything. Does a muggle have the right to remove a cache that is in play? I dont think the word "right" makes sense. A muggle throwing away a cache thinking it is trash is not using a "right" to do so, he or she wasn't informed on what that item was or misunderstood its use.
Please replace the word 'rights' in my original post with 'business'. Either way, a cache is the property of it's owner. As such, he has property rights to it.
I posted what I would do because I didn't see a concrete answer. I'm trying to help further the discussion which could eventually lead to an answer to the question posed by the OP. Only listing corner cases of what "could" be going on and describing stories of certain incidents helps but doesn't fully answer the question. If there are no concrete definitions of when something becomes geotrash it will just accumulate and look bad on everyone. Remember, this is all in the context of when the cache has a problem (being archived) and the owner isn't available.
Unfortunately, there is never an easy answer. In general, however, I would say that is it is in good condition, it is reasonable for geocachers to believe that it is still owned, even if it has been archived on GC.com and the owner doesn't return your emails.
Link to comment

Most caches aren't clearly labeled with any site. I certaintly wouldn't find the absense of such labeling to be proof that it isn't listed anywhere.

 

Maybe it is a regional thing, but most caches that I find are clearly labeled. On the container, on an info sheet inside the container, on the log book or log sheet. Sometimes only in one place, sometimes in two or all three places. Actually, I can't recall any off the top of my head that we not clearly labeled. Labeling is important to identify that cache and to inform non-geocachers what it is if accidentally found. If a muggle finds an unlabeled container and doesn't know what it is, he or she may throw it away. It is the burden of the cache owner to make sure it doesn't appear to be trash. The absence of labeling doesn't prove that it isn't listed anywhere but it doesn't help to prove that it is not trash.

 

Please replace the word 'rights' in my original post with 'business'. Either way, a cache is the property of it's owner. As such, he has property rights to it.

 

Unfortunately, there is never an easy answer. In general, however, I would say that is it is in good condition, it is reasonable for geocachers to believe that it is still owned, even if it has been archived on GC.com and the owner doesn't return your emails.

 

Sometimes there isn't an easy answer but what I was saying is that there needs to be some kind of answer. Also, most of this discussion has been with the hypothetical. Having an archived cache but cross-listed and still active on another site still seems like a corner case to me. If it is not labeled with the other site, is marked as archived here without any additional information and the cacher makes an extended attempt to contact the owner to find out what is going on and is unable to find out anything, what else can the cacher do? I don't think you could fault the cacher for trying to remove the cache at this point. It is much easier as a cacher to not care and simply leave it there and let it rot. Taking the time and effort to do all that, concluding that it should be removed, and then going back to take it is a responsible thing to do to prevent geotrash from accumulating. Simply labeling the cache, rebranding the cache, or putting some information in the archival note or in the cache itself that it is still active elsewhere is all it takes to prevent the cache from being removed. I would think that the common case is that the cache owner is no longer maintaining the cache and did not remove it.

 

Even in the cache is still in good condition (which is subject to interpretation anyway) doesn't prove it is listed elsewhere either. But if it is no longer in play, it needs to be removed. If a cacher can't coordinate with the owner on this, I don't see it being a problem for the cacher to remove it. If it is not cross listed and three years down the road when the cache is long forgotten, destroyed by animals, with swag strewn all around the site, who will reclaim it? If land managers start finding a lot of archived caches like that, they might get the impression that cachers love to hide things but not to clean up after themselves. Cachers have the right to own property, but placing caches on land they do not own is a privilege that can be revoked at any time.

 

Conflicting statements, inconsistent information, differing points of view, and questions not completely answered tends to happen a lot with questions like these and this must mean, as you said, that there is not an easy answer. But, because of this I've been known to walk away from caches pretending they were surrounded by an SEP field. I'd rather not do that and try to help improve things out there but it seems so hard to do and so easy to offend someone or do something wrong in someone's view point that it isn't worth the time or effort. Communication with a cache owner is all it takes to resolve issues, but the caches that have problems are the ones I don't get email replies to. I always get replies from the owners of active and maintained caches.

Link to comment

Here's another way to look at it:

 

Let's assume for a moment that the cache owner got appropriate permission to place his cache (whatever that is). That permission doesn't hinge on whether the cache is listed on this site, that site, or any site. It matters not to the land manager if that cache ever gets found by anyone. It's a box that was placed appropriately in the woods and is owned by the person who placed it. In very few cases is it up to me to second guess that cache owner.

 

That being said, I have made two cache rescue missions to remove geolitter. In neither case did I make my decision based on what the cache note said or what was scribbled on the outside.

 

Regarding labeling the outside of the cache, it's been my experience that most caches aren't labelled beyond scribbling geocache or DRR on them with a sharpie. (Just kidding TAR!!!)

Link to comment

Well....the plot has thickened some. I contacted the reviewer that archived the cache. I was told it had no owner and that I could "adopt it or pick it up. I wrote back that I would pick it up and place it in a different area as my first cache with new goodies.

 

We picked it up this morning and noticed that it had "Geocache.com" and a "*****" (title of the cache or name of cache owner). This name was not the name of the cache that was originally hidden there and I began to wonder if it was a later cache. A search of the name as name of the cache as well as the name of a cache owner turned up nothing. There was a one page log with two finder names and a search of those names did not bring up anything either. Can't be a new cache.....one finder logged the date as 3/31/07 and stated that there was no log, so he wrote on a piece of paper and left it in the container. The other found it accidentally and logged 7/17/07 (on that same piece of paper). Neither "finder" has logged anything on geocache.com that links to this cache although they both have recent entries of other finds.

 

When we first found a cache in this place one year ago, it was in a plastic jar and called "Dead Tired". When we located it this week, it was in an Army surplus ammo can.

 

At any rate, our reviewer knows that I have it in my possession.

Link to comment

Well....the plot has thickened some. I contacted the reviewer that archived the cache. I was told it had no owner and that I could "adopt it or pick it up. I wrote back that I would pick it up and place it in a different area as my first cache with new goodies.

 

We picked it up this morning and noticed that it had "Geocache.com" and a "*****" (title of the cache or name of cache owner). This name was not the name of the cache that was originally hidden there and I began to wonder if it was a later cache. A search of the name as name of the cache as well as the name of a cache owner turned up nothing. There was a one page log with two finder names and a search of those names did not bring up anything either. Can't be a new cache.....one finder logged the date as 3/31/07 and stated that there was no log, so he wrote on a piece of paper and left it in the container. The other found it accidentally and logged 7/17/07 (on that same piece of paper). Neither "finder" has logged anything on geocache.com that links to this cache although they both have recent entries of other finds.

 

When we first found a cache in this place one year ago, it was in a plastic jar and called "Dead Tired". When we located it this week, it was in an Army surplus ammo can.

 

At any rate, our reviewer knows that I have it in my possession.

Much of what you have cited is strong evidence that a newer cache has been emplaced at or near the spot of the older GC-listed cache with which you were familiar, and that the newer cache which is currently there is either a cache which is listed on one of the four other (and much smaller) cache listing services (and not on GC), or that you have stumbled upon a private cache. In either case, I would strongly urge you NOT to remove the cache, as you would -- if either of the above two scenarios are true -- have no business nor authority to do so, else all you have done is committed cache piracy.

Link to comment

Here's another way to look at it:

 

Let's assume for a moment that the cache owner got appropriate permission to place his cache (whatever that is). That permission doesn't hinge on whether the cache is listed on this site, that site, or any site. It matters not to the land manager if that cache ever gets found by anyone. It's a box that was placed appropriately in the woods and is owned by the person who placed it. In very few cases is it up to me to second guess that cache owner.

 

That being said, I have made two cache rescue missions to remove geolitter. In neither case did I make my decision based on what the cache note said or what was scribbled on the outside.

 

Regarding labeling the outside of the cache, it's been my experience that most caches aren't labelled beyond scribbling geocache or DRR on them with a sharpie. (Just kidding TAR!!!)

Very well put. Exactly. Just because a cache is not listed at GC listing service does not mean that the OP has the authority or the right to remove it, and, in fact, such acts are usually labeled "cache piracy".

 

Having said that, I have, while working in concert with our local geoacaching society, several times removed abandoned GC-listed caches from their nesting spots, but this is only after all parties concerned had been advised by the original cache owner that they had abandoned the cache, usually because of a move to a distant state or because they had left the sport/hobby, or because of their impending shuffle off this mortal plane. This "truly abandoned cache" scenario is quite different from the rather worrisome picture which is being painted by the OP.

Link to comment

Let's assume for a moment that the cache owner got appropriate permission to place his cache (whatever that is). That permission doesn't hinge on whether the cache is listed on this site, that site, or any site. It matters not to the land manager if that cache ever gets found by anyone. It's a box that was placed appropriately in the woods and is owned by the person who placed it. In very few cases is it up to me to second guess that cache owner.

 

At first I didn't understand this and was kind of confused by the angle. But it clicked and now everything is crystal clear. I was viewing things from the completely opposite way. This has totally answered my question here and all my other questions that I have and has even eliminated the paradox of the TB hotel that confused me for so long. I can now geocache with complete confidence. If summarized and posted somewhere, that could answer a lot of the questions people keep asking on the forums.

Link to comment

This has been a worrysome thing for me......being accused of piracy, theft, etc......so with a little more research I've found the following:

 

!. This cache owner last logged on to Geocaching.com Nov. 23, 06

 

2. This cache owner last posted to any (geocaching.com) log Oct. 21, 05

 

3. This cache was first reported missing and confirmed on Oct 1, 06

 

4. A note on the cache posting apparently written by the cache owner the last time she logged on, (see 1. above) state "Original Cache container was cracked and leaked... but it hobbled along for a while. On a recent trip to reveiw the cache, I was unable to locate it. So, I put a new container with new toys and treasures out." This explains the different container.

 

5. This cache was archived because it was reported missing again (although it had only been moved) and repeated attempts to contact the owner went unanswered.

 

6. Two of the three caches by this owner have been archived, both due to neglect.

 

7. This cache has been found twice since it was archived Feb. 13, 07. Once by grandpa noodle on 3/31/07. Grandpa noodle left two pages stating that "there was no log & we took nothing" Curious as to why there was no Internet log entry, I checked grandpa noodles log entries and found his entry in a California cache with the same date......that cache had a similar name as this one. See his Geocaching.com entry here on the date he visited "Dead Tired" in Oregon. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...b1-9dbd6891472a The second time it was found accidently and logged by trail hound.

 

7. I contacted the person (reviewer) that archived this cache and was told, via email that it no longer had an owner and has been abandoned. Further, I was told that I could either adopt the cache or retrieve it. I indicated that I would retrieve it and place it in a new place as my first cache.

 

Here, in Oregon and the Western states, a vast majority of land is public and, I believe, rarely is permission obtained to place a cache. This cache was most probably located on county owned land and was outside of the fenced in area of the cemetery alongside the junction of a highway and road to the cemetery. If this were on private land then I would agree that it should not be removed by anyone except the owner or land owner.

 

On public land, however, should we leave abandoned geo litter behind or clean it up? Our roadsides and forests have enough garbage and if geocaches are abandoned and left to add to that litter, our pastime, sport or what ever it is will soon draw criticism and the ire of those that have to clean up after us.

 

I think the rules have been ignored in this case and it is the responsibility of geocachers to police their own or suffer the consequences. When you find a cache that has been neglected, report it. If it isn't taken care of after a reasonable time (in this case over 6 months) then further action should be taken, such as was done in this case.

 

This website reinforces my views presented here. http://forestry.about.com/od/mappinggis/p/fed_geocache.htm

This paragraph in particular....."Is Geocache Considered Littering by the Feds?: According to the Code of Federal Regulations, burying or abandoning personal property in national parks and forests is prohibited due to issues concerning littering. Geocaching supporters argue that caches are not abandoned because people monitor them consistently on the Web and are bound by an unwritten code to keep their "personal" cache in order, with frequent visits and continuous upkeep. The debate is still out on this but actions of geocachers will surely determine any future outcome."

 

If we (active geocachers) don't clean up abandoned caches, who will???? Park Rangers? Forest Service personnel? County road crews??? What will the consequences of our non-action be???? I say REMOVE ABANDONED CACHES from public property after determining for certain they are abandoned and have been archived for good reason. Leaving litter behind goes against everything I believe in and have practiced most of my adult life.

Link to comment

This has been a worrysome thing for me......being accused of piracy, theft, etc......so with a little more research I've found the following:

 

!. This cache owner last logged on to Geocaching.com Nov. 23, 06

 

2. This cache owner last posted to any (geocaching.com) log Oct. 21, 05

 

3. This cache was first reported missing and confirmed on Oct 1, 06

 

4. A note on the cache posting apparently written by the cache owner the last time she logged on, (see 1. above) state "Original Cache container was cracked and leaked... but it hobbled along for a while. On a recent trip to reveiw the cache, I was unable to locate it. So, I put a new container with new toys and treasures out." This explains the different container.

 

5. This cache was archived because it was reported missing again (although it had only been moved) and repeated attempts to contact the owner went unanswered.

 

6. Two of the three caches by this owner have been archived, both due to neglect.

 

7. This cache has been found twice since it was archived Feb. 13, 07. Once by grandpa noodle on 3/31/07. Grandpa noodle left two pages stating that "there was no log & we took nothing" Curious as to why there was no Internet log entry, I checked grandpa noodles log entries and found his entry in a California cache with the same date......that cache had a similar name as this one. See his Geocaching.com entry here on the date he visited "Dead Tired" in Oregon. http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...b1-9dbd6891472a The second time it was found accidently and logged by trail hound.

 

7. I contacted the person (reviewer) that archived this cache and was told, via email that it no longer had an owner and has been abandoned. Further, I was told that I could either adopt the cache or retrieve it. I indicated that I would retrieve it and place it in a new place as my first cache.

 

Here, in Oregon and the Western states, a vast majority of land is public and, I believe, rarely is permission obtained to place a cache. This cache was most probably located on county owned land and was outside of the fenced in area of the cemetery alongside the junction of a highway and road to the cemetery. If this were on private land then I would agree that it should not be removed by anyone except the owner or land owner.

 

On public land, however, should we leave abandoned geo litter behind or clean it up? Our roadsides and forests have enough garbage and if geocaches are abandoned and left to add to that litter, our pastime, sport or what ever it is will soon draw criticism and the ire of those that have to clean up after us.

 

I think the rules have been ignored in this case and it is the responsibility of geocachers to police their own or suffer the consequences. When you find a cache that has been neglected, report it. If it isn't taken care of after a reasonable time (in this case over 6 months) then further action should be taken, such as was done in this case.

 

This website reinforces my views presented here. http://forestry.about.com/od/mappinggis/p/fed_geocache.htm

This paragraph in particular....."Is Geocache Considered Littering by the Feds?: According to the Code of Federal Regulations, burying or abandoning personal property in national parks and forests is prohibited due to issues concerning littering. Geocaching supporters argue that caches are not abandoned because people monitor them consistently on the Web and are bound by an unwritten code to keep their "personal" cache in order, with frequent visits and continuous upkeep. The debate is still out on this but actions of geocachers will surely determine any future outcome."

 

If we (active geocachers) don't clean up abandoned caches, who will???? Park Rangers? Forest Service personnel? County road crews??? What will the consequences of our non-action be???? I say REMOVE ABANDONED CACHES from public property after determining for certain they are abandoned and have been archived for good reason. Leaving litter behind goes against everything I believe in and have practiced most of my adult life.

As I have noted in the past, I am wholeheartedly in favor of removing truly abandoned caches from WHEREVER they were placed, and very quickly at that, and have done such abandoned cache rescue missions myself in concert with our state geocaching organization. I am still not sure that what you removed was truly an abandoned cache, or rather, a private cache or a cache listed on another listing service, but I do appreciate your having researched this matter further and having provided this additional information (above.) Thank you.

Link to comment

As I have noted in the past, I am wholeheartedly in favor of removing truly abandoned caches from WHEREVER they were placed, and very quickly at that, and have done such abandoned cache rescue missions myself in concert with our state geocaching organization. I am still not sure that what you removed was truly an abandoned cache, or rather, a private cache or a cache listed on another listing service, but I do appreciate your having researched this matter further and having provided this additional information (above.) Thank you.

 

You're welcome......I think you might be convinced if you actually saw the site. Perhaps you missed the fact that the lid of the container is clearly marked "www.geocaching.com" and there are no other caches listed on geocaching.com near this sight. A search for words on the lid for other caches and user names turns up nothing. Another fact to consider is that this lady posted 154 "finds" in 2005 ...none in 2006 and none in 2007. For what ever reason, (lack of interest, illness, accident, etc.) she is no longer active in geocaching.

 

Edited to delete incorrect statement.

Edited by jackddavis
Link to comment

I can't understand why the reviewer would archive this cache because of only one DNF and then a followup note by the same DNF poster saying the cache was missing??? Obviously it was there, as it is currently being logged. What was the rush to archive in the first place?

Link to comment
As I have noted in the past, I am wholeheartedly in favor of removing truly abandoned caches from WHEREVER they were placed, and very quickly at that, and have done such abandoned cache rescue missions myself in concert with our state geocaching organization. I am still not sure that what you removed was truly an abandoned cache, or rather, a private cache or a cache listed on another listing service, but I do appreciate your having researched this matter further and having provided this additional information (above.) Thank you.
You're welcome......I think you might be convinced if you actually saw the site. Perhaps you missed the fact that the lid of the container is clearly marked "www.geocaching.com" and there are no other caches listed on geocaching.com near this sight. A search for words on the lid for other caches and user names turns up nothing. Another fact to consider is that this lady posted 154 "finds" in 2005 ...none in 2006 and none in 2007. For what ever reason, (lack of interest, illness, accident, etc.) she is no longer active in geocaching.

 

Edited to delete incorrect statement.

I completely agree with V&ST. I would also have removed this cache. That being said, I have some concern that you (jackddavis) are still ignoring the slim possibility that the cacher went on to another listing service. GC.com is the big kahuna and, in my opinion, is the best caching alternative, but people have been known to shuffle off to other ones. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

In this neck of the woods, almost all of the caches are GC exclusive (at least as far as I can tell). Makes it a bit easier.

MiGO (Michigan Geocachers Org.) has a Rescue Mission set up. If a cache is archived, the one of the reviewers looks to see if the cache has been picked up (based on the logs). If he can't tell, he adds it to the Rescue Mission, and adds a note to the cache page:

This cache has been added to the Rescue Mission list at the Michigan Geocaching Organization website.

 

Archived Cache Rescue Mission: When a Geocache is archived in Michigan, MiGO (Michigan Geocaching Organization) makes a commitment to tracking those archived caches where the proper removal of the cache container cannot be confirmed through log entries or by other means.

 

If the information is inconclusive as to the fate of the geocache, it will be listed on the MiGO Archived Cache Rescue Mission list to ensure that it is on their radar screen and eventually a MiGO member will visit the site and verify that it is gone.

 

Having your cache on this list is not a derogatory comment about anyone's ability to maintain their caches. It is simply a list that is maintained by volunteers to ensure that no geocaches in Michigan become geotrash.

 

You can visit the website for the MiGO Rescue Mission at the link below: (visit link)

 

IMPORTANT: If you cache is active on another listing service or you would like it removed for any other reason, please respond to this notice via my profile and I will work with MiGO to have the listing removed from the Rescue Mission.

Now, if the hider isn't getting e-mails from here any longer, for whatever reason, (s)he obviously won't see this message. Bummer; you should have changed your e-mail address.

We are rather ruthless about cleaning up the geo-trash. Check for the container, CITO the area (cache/non cache stuff), etc.

We're running a 93% recovery rate. There's 23 caches still listed as needing recovery, and 351 confirmed cleaned up. Many of those are probably just plain not there any more. That doesn't count caches that the owner (or somebody else) has removed before/during archiving the cache.

 

I'd probably have picked up the cache, too. I think it's important for us to clean up after ourselves. If not us, who will?

Link to comment

Here's another way to look at it:

 

Let's assume for a moment that the cache owner got appropriate permission to place his cache (whatever that is). That permission doesn't hinge on whether the cache is listed on this site, that site, or any site. It matters not to the land manager if that cache ever gets found by anyone. It's a box that was placed appropriately in the woods and is owned by the person who placed it. In very few cases is it up to me to second guess that cache owner.

...

Should we further assume that the deal the made with the park included that the "geocache" would be intact, and periodically visited? If the cache becomes damged, or is attacked by animals it may slowly spread litter over the area around the cache. As for being visited... thats subjective of course, since some caches only get visited a few times a year anyway, but I would doubt the person went and said "I want to put an above ground time capsule out in the park :unsure: ".

Link to comment

...Should I go back and remove it or, at least remove the items she left? Can it be reactivated? ...

 

Email the owner and ask if they are going to pick it up. If they aren't then you can go pick it up and recycle it. If they are, you're work is done.

 

You CAN take the coods and list a "new" cache there that's amazingly like the old cache. BUT it will need to meet the current guidelines. It can also be reactivated by the old owner but again, it has to meet the current guidelines.

 

Lastly if it's listed on another site, one the cacher owners the property, a clue in an active cache. It's good to go and nothing needs to be done.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment

...I guess I didn't answer my "if"s. If the cache is clearly marked as a non-GC.com cache also, then I would either research that site or most likely, just leave it alone. And I would hope there is some information posted that the cache was archived at gc.com but is still in play elsewhere. ...

My caches tend to be marked "Geocache" though I may drop it to just Cache. They are all (geo)caches regardless of what site they are on.

 

I can't see a reason to mark a cache "Geocache", Terracache, Navicache, GPSGamesCache Opencache, Geocaching.ru cache, geocaching.hu cache, etc.

Link to comment

i'd say leave it.

 

if it's in reasonable condition it very well might be listed elsewhere.

 

i know of at least one archived cache that has not been removed. cachers in the area know it's there. they look for it, they visit it. it just isn't listed here. if you email the owner, you will likely as not encounter a blank silence.

Link to comment

In this neck of the woods, almost all of the caches are GC exclusive (at least as far as I can tell). Makes it a bit easier.

MiGO (Michigan Geocachers Org.) has a Rescue Mission set up. If a cache is archived, the one of the reviewers looks to see if the cache has been picked up (based on the logs). If he can't tell, he adds it to the Rescue Mission, and adds a note to the cache page:...

 

When I asked MIGO about how they handle the rescue missions, they didn't do the homework needed to not remove caches cross listed else where. Perhaps it has changed but their approach was "Everthing her is GC.com so we don't feel the need".

 

I like the concept of CRM caches. Just not how MIGO goes about it.

Link to comment

In this neck of the woods, almost all of the caches are GC exclusive (at least as far as I can tell). Makes it a bit easier.

MiGO (Michigan Geocachers Org.) has a Rescue Mission set up. If a cache is archived, the one of the reviewers looks to see if the cache has been picked up (based on the logs). If he can't tell, he adds it to the Rescue Mission, and adds a note to the cache page:...

 

When I asked MIGO about how they handle the rescue missions, they didn't do the homework needed to not remove caches cross listed else where. Perhaps it has changed but their approach was "Everthing her is GC.com so we don't feel the need".

 

I like the concept of CRM caches. Just not how MIGO goes about it.

? but if they use the posted logs to 'determine' if the cache was ever picked up or not, then the simple answer seems to be for the owner just to say 'relisted at _____ site' :P:P

Link to comment

 

? but if they use the posted logs to 'determine' if the cache was ever picked up or not, then the simple answer seems to be for the owner just to say 'relisted at _____ site' :P:P

 

you might think so, but have you been reading the peanut butter thread?

Link to comment

...? but if they use the posted logs to 'determine' if the cache was ever picked up or not, then the simple answer seems to be for the owner just to say 'relisted at _____ site' :P:P

 

That's what the owner should do.

 

To do it right, This sight would have a Final Disposition Log. Somethinge where they say they will pick it up, list it somehwere else, or they will never get to it again. Then you would know and MIGO could mesh their program. Though I'd love to see this site do the CRM cache type for the ones that really are abandoned and need picked up.

Link to comment

I can't see a reason to mark a cache "Geocache", Terracache, Navicache, GPSGamesCache Opencache, Geocaching.ru cache, geocaching.hu cache, etc.

 

If a GC and non-GC cache are in the same area and both are unlabeled and unidentified, how can you tell that you found the correct cache? Unless all the sites coordinate with each other to keep them spaced out.

Link to comment

I can't see a reason to mark a cache "Geocache", Terracache, Navicache, GPSGamesCache Opencache, Geocaching.ru cache, geocaching.hu cache, etc.

 

If a GC and non-GC cache are in the same area and both are unlabeled and unidentified, how can you tell that you found the correct cache? Unless all the sites coordinate with each other to keep them spaced out.

You might not be able to tell them apart. That being said, they might also be the very same cache.

Link to comment
I can't see a reason to mark a cache "Geocache", Terracache, Navicache, GPSGamesCache Opencache, Geocaching.ru cache, geocaching.hu cache, etc.

 

If a GC and non-GC cache are in the same area and both are unlabeled and unidentified, how can you tell that you found the correct cache?

This is the reason it is important to properly identify you caches.

 

Unless all the sites coordinate with each other to keep them spaced out.
I don't see this happening any time soon. The 800lb gorilla in the room will not open its data base to keep caches apart. I doubt they would ever start checking other sites. There was a cache recently approved here that is less than 200' from one I've listed elsewhere.

 

Besides, if all caches where properly labeled you wouldn't need to space them out for reasons of confusion.

Link to comment

I can't see a reason to mark a cache "Geocache", Terracache, Navicache, GPSGamesCache Opencache, Geocaching.ru cache, geocaching.hu cache, etc.

 

If a GC and non-GC cache are in the same area and both are unlabeled and unidentified, how can you tell that you found the correct cache? Unless all the sites coordinate with each other to keep them spaced out.

Here most owners mark the log book with the name of the cache. Beyond that they match the clue. The only time I've had a problem was a clue that described exactly where a letterbox was located. The cache was actually in the weeds 10' away. I suspect letterboxer foul play.

Link to comment

 

? but if they use the posted logs to 'determine' if the cache was ever picked up or not, then the simple answer seems to be for the owner just to say 'relisted at _____ site' :(:laughing:

 

you might think so, but have you been reading the peanut butter thread?

I read the first page when it was new, but didn't add my own "PB suck as caches, but some people are stuck on 'free' containers. If your allegeric to something be on the lookout for it" response. Are people demanding container type be explained ahead of time or something??

 

...? but if they use the posted logs to 'determine' if the cache was ever picked up or not, then the simple answer seems to be for the owner just to say 'relisted at _____ site' :D:o

 

That's what the owner should do.

 

To do it right, This sight would have a Final Disposition Log. Somethinge where they say they will pick it up, list it somehwere else, or they will never get to it again. Then you would know and MIGO could mesh their program. Though I'd love to see this site do the CRM cache type for the ones that really are abandoned and need picked up.

I think we agree very much RK :(

 

I can't see a reason to mark a cache "Geocache", Terracache, Navicache, GPSGamesCache Opencache, Geocaching.ru cache, geocaching.hu cache, etc.

 

If a GC and non-GC cache are in the same area and both are unlabeled and unidentified, how can you tell that you found the correct cache? Unless all the sites coordinate with each other to keep them spaced out.

Well maybe you could use the logbook to see who had previsouly found the cache... of course if previous visitors were themselves signing the wrong one then that won't help. Which leads us back to the trying to use the description, location, and hint to figure out which is which. Thats part of the justification for gc.com rule which says different caches or parts of different caches must be at least 528ft apart... but since the reviewer process doesn't even attempt to stay away from things not listed here they may end up near another sites geocache, or a letterbox.

Link to comment

What about a cache that seems to be MIA with many DNFs and no response from owner from several DNFers. It was in a location that I covet because I am doing a series in that area. This has been going on for 9 months. At least 1 person asked the reviewer to do something, I don,t know if there was a private response to that.

Link to comment

What about a cache that seems to be MIA with many DNFs and no response from owner from several DNFers. It was in a location that I covet because I am doing a series in that area. This has been going on for 9 months. At least 1 person asked the reviewer to do something, I don,t know if there was a private response to that.

Post an SBA.

Link to comment

Just a note to bring all up to date on the disposition of the topic cache "Dead Tired". It turns out it IS a Geocaching.com cache and the person who found it accidently was able to contact the previous owner of the cache and has decided to "adopt it". He notified the reviewer of his intentions and the reviewer asked me to contact him. I'm attempting to do so now and will, gladly, give it up to the "new owner". I've even added several items to sweeten the pot.

 

All's well that ends well and everyone is happy.

 

Thanks to all for the opinions and suggestions.

Link to comment

I can't see a reason to mark a cache "Geocache", Terracache, Navicache, GPSGamesCache Opencache, Geocaching.ru cache, geocaching.hu cache, etc.

 

If a GC and non-GC cache are in the same area and both are unlabeled and unidentified, how can you tell that you found the correct cache? Unless all the sites coordinate with each other to keep them spaced out.

 

If the sites coordinated, that would be nice.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...