Planting Caches while traveling

[+Fogtripper]

Looking to future vacations my wife and I plan, is it acceptable to plant caches which would be difficult or impossible to maintain? Would it be acceptable to put a note in the cache notice (online) that it is a distant cache from the "owner" and that voluntary maintenance is encouraged?

[+StarBrand]

Have you read through the guidelines??

 

You might have missed the part about cache maintenance. You need to be able to respond within a reasonable (short) amount of time to possible issues with the cache.

 

One thing you can do is find a local cacher that is willing and able to go perform any needed maintenance for you. List that person in the description as a maintainer.

[+Fogtripper]

Have you read through the guidelines??

 

You might have missed the part about cache maintenance. You need to be able to respond within a reasonable (short) amount of time to possible issues with the cache.

 

One thing you can do is find a local cacher that is willing and able to go perform any needed maintenance for you. List that person in the description as a maintainer.

 

Hmmm...reading up on it all now.

[+briansnat]

Its best to leave the cache hiding to the locals and enjoy finding them while traveling.

[+Bamboogirl]

While vacation caches are bad for a huge pile of reasons, planning on helping a few in need along the way is a very good idea.

 

When we are heading somewhere on a trip we try to have a bag of repair supplies along - clean logs, fresh ziplocks, stuff to dry a damp cache with, etc. It's also nice to bring a bag of fun trading stuff local to your home to drop off. Caches in Hawaii, for example have huge problems with dampness and rampant tourists tearing up an area. Pretty easy to fix one up as a way to thank the locals for placing one in an intersting spot. (I've left some odd stuff in Singapore and it's pretty fun)

 

Plus you don't have to scout new locations, you just trust the locals to know where the good spots are. And dropping off cool doo-dads in a new spot will be appreciated by the cache owners as well.

[+cbearw]

Quite a few of the caches ourselves and others had difficulties with turned out to be caches someone living a long ways away placed. Quite often these caches were not even disabled or archived after many logs had been posted saying the cache was missing.

Reminds me of an abandoned crab traps that keep on fishing! For this reason I am not a big fan of caches placed so far away that the owners cannot properly maintain them.

[+Fogtripper]

Quite a few of the caches ourselves and others had difficulties with turned out to be caches someone living a long ways away placed. Quite often these caches were not even disabled or archived after many logs had been posted saying the cache was missing.

Reminds me of an abandoned crab traps that keep on fishing! For this reason I am not a big fan of caches placed so far away that the owners cannot properly maintain them.

 

All good points.

Will limit it to posting coordinates and photos of beautiful locations.

Edited October 8, 2007 by Fogtripper

[+Team Cotati]

How would placing a cache so far from ones home turf that maintenance is not possible.....ever get past a reviewer?

[+wimseyguy]

...and then instead of a cache placed on vacation it becomes geotrash instead...

 

Bad Idea, very bad idea.

Thanks for reading and understanding the guidelines before leaving on your trip. Have a great time on your vacations and enjoy finding the caches there. Often they will take you to very enjoyable places that you might not find on your own.

[+Lacomo]

I would never place a cache I couldn't maintain. I keep mine pretty close to home and usually fix anything wrong within a couple days. I'm sure everyone can't do this but that's just how I do mine.

[Mushtang]

Will limit it to posting coordinates and photos of beautiful locations.

... and searching for silver and gold, and finding an island of misfit toys, and meeting an elf dentist, and fighting a bumble....

[+Fogtripper]

Will limit it to posting coordinates and photos of beautiful locations.

... and searching for silver and gold, and finding an island of misfit toys, and meeting an elf dentist, and fighting a bumble....

 

Do not mock me. You've SEEN what I can do to a Bumbles.

[+traildad]

 

All good points.

Will limit it to posting coordinates and photos of beautiful locations.

How do you go about posting coordinates and photos? Or do you mean here in the forum? Just wondering.

[+benh57]

How would placing a cache so far from ones home turf that maintenance is not possible.....ever get past a reviewer?

 

Happens often around here. Our local reviewers approve so many caches, sometimes they don't notice the home location of the hider.

[+briansnat]

How would placing a cache so far from ones home turf that maintenance is not possible.....ever get past a reviewer?

 

If maintenance is not possible it shouldn't be published. But sometimes it is when:

 

- The hider regularly visits the area. Might be an airline pilot, trucker, businessman or someone with family in the area.

 

- The placer has enlisted a local geocacher to maintain the cache for him.

 

There are people who can place a cache far from home and are able to maintain it. If they are able to prove that to satisfaction of the reviewer their cache has a chance of being published.

[+Team Cotati]

How would placing a cache so far from ones home turf that maintenance is not possible.....ever get past a reviewer?

 

If maintenance is not possible it shouldn't be published. But sometimes it is when:

 

- The hider regularly visits the area. Might be an airline pilot, trucker, businessman or someone with family in the area.

 

- The placer has enlisted a local geocacher to maintain the cache for him.

 

There are people who can place a cache far from home and are able to maintain it. If they are able to prove that to satisfaction of the reviewer their cache has a chance of being published.

 

Well in those cases maintenance IS possible now isn't it?

[+Team Cotati]

How would placing a cache so far from ones home turf that maintenance is not possible.....ever get past a reviewer?

 

Happens often around here. Our local reviewers approve so many caches, sometimes they don't notice the home location of the hider.

 

Hopefully some concerned cacher, can't imagine who though, has/will notify the local reviewers of these problematic cache hides.

Edited October 9, 2007 by Team Cotati

[+cache_test_dummies]

 

All good points.

Will limit it to posting coordinates and photos of beautiful locations.

How do you go about posting coordinates and photos? Or do you mean here in the forum? Just wondering.

Perhaps Waymarking is the answer.

[+Fogtripper]

 

All good points.

Will limit it to posting coordinates and photos of beautiful locations.

How do you go about posting coordinates and photos? Or do you mean here in the forum? Just wondering.

 

Welp, I have just (in the past few days) set up a blog on my web server. I mainly intend to use it to show off my photography. Will be easy enough to post the photos with coords I imagine.

 

May even create a page solely to list such locations on my site.

 

So far I have nothing posted, and am a bit busy processing RAWs, but will be up and running..."soon".

 

Future home of the Foggy Blog.

 

Ah, would also post on the Waymarking site as well!

Edited October 9, 2007 by Fogtripper

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

Quite a few of the caches ourselves and others had difficulties with turned out to be caches someone living a long ways away placed. Quite often these caches were not even disabled or archived after many logs had been posted saying the cache was missing.

Reminds me of an abandoned crab traps that keep on fishing! For this reason I am not a big fan of caches placed so far away that the owners cannot properly maintain them.

 

All good points.

Will limit it to posting coordinates and photos of beautiful locations.

Take a look at the game "Shutterspot" at gpsgames.org. you can create these with no commitment to maintain the site

[+wandererrob]

One thing you can do is find a local cacher that is willing and able to go perform any needed maintenance for you. List that person in the description as a maintainer.

 

There was a guy in Kauai that did this. He'd found all the caches on the island, so he encouraged visitors to hide caches which he could find then he'd adopt and maintain the caches for them.

 

Win-win situation there. I'm not sure how willing others are though. This is a somewhat unique situation.

[+Nachtraaf]

It sounds like the poster wants to have the fun of hiding a cache, but does not want to do the "dirty" job by maintaining it... :-)

[+sbell111]

It sounds like the poster wants to have the fun of hiding a cache, but does not want to do the "dirty" job by maintaining it... :-)

Keep reading...

[+Fogtripper]

It sounds like the poster wants to have the fun of hiding a cache, but does not want to do the "dirty" job by maintaining it... :-)

 

 

Sounds like somebody's got a case of the Mondays.

[+Stargazer22]

Nay.

Voluntary maintenance can't be relied on.

[+Team Cotati]

Nay.

Voluntary maintenance can't be relied on.

 

There is some other type of maintenance?

[+sbell111]

Nay.

Voluntary maintenance can't be relied on.

 

There is some other type of maintenance?

[+Kryten]

There's nothing worse than a visitor passing through an area and having that "I can't believe there are no caches here!" brainwave, and so a vacation cache gets placed.

 

Meanwhile the hider moves returns home and eventually submits the details for approval only to discover there is a ban on placements in that area. Then the reviewer has to organise a local to stop by and remove the box before the landowner finds out.

 

Worst of all is when a badly hidden box is found and handed to the landowner who contacts the reviewer to politely ask why the placement ban they thought they had agreed has not been respected.

 

Vacation caches, don't do it.

[+sbell111]

There's nothing worse than a visitor passing through an area and having that "I can't believe there are no caches here!" brainwave, and so a vacation cache gets placed.

 

Meanwhile the hider moves returns home and eventually submits the details for approval only to discover there is a ban on placements in that area. Then the reviewer has to organise a local to stop by and remove the box before the landowner finds out.

 

Worst of all is when a badly hidden box is found and handed to the landowner who contacts the reviewer to politely ask why the placement ban they thought they had agreed has not been respected.

 

Vacation caches, don't do it.

Worse than that are sock puppets.

[+Team Cotati]

There's nothing worse than a visitor passing through an area and having that "I can't believe there are no caches here!" brainwave, and so a vacation cache gets placed.

 

Meanwhile the hider moves returns home and eventually submits the details for approval only to discover there is a ban on placements in that area. Then the reviewer has to organise a local to stop by and remove the box before the landowner finds out.

 

Worst of all is when a badly hidden box is found and handed to the landowner who contacts the reviewer to politely ask why the placement ban they thought they had agreed has not been respected.

 

Vacation caches, don't do it.

Worse than that are sock puppets.

 

Man have you nailed that one. Those darn sock puppets are the worst.

Rather have a hang nail that see a sock puppet. Dang them sock puppets anyway.

[+Zeevious]

I think there is another aspect that I haven't seen mentioned, and that is cache quality and saturation. I have come across a couple Park-N-Grab micro caches that were obviously hastily placed, right near an area that would be great for a multi or something with interesting waypoints and scenery. But, as the guidelines promote, caches should not be within 1/10th of a mile of each other. By hastily placing a cache on vacation, you are "using up" an area that someone with more time and knowledge of the area could perhaps do better. Of course, there are scenarios where someone has lots of time and knowledge on vacation and is skilled and could do a great job, but I think that in general, a cache placed on-the-go is going to have a lower quality than one placed by a local.

[E3Chief]

I did a cache while on vacation in Colorado in 2001. In fact, it's the only cache I have ever placed. The sport was still really new back then and there weren't any guidelines on placing a cache far from home. I'm from Oklahoma City. Anyways, it's still there over 6 years later and has 180 finds on it. The last one was Sept 29th. At the time, it was the only cache within about 30 miles of Cripple Creek, CO. See "View Above Cripple Creek". GC1BAF. But I wouldn't do that now days. My old cache container which was a tupperware box has been replaced a couple times. It is now an ammo box! It's a cool site. I've never been back, but I'm planning to stop through there on my way to Burningman next year!

[+Fogtripper]

I think there is another aspect that I haven't seen mentioned, and that is cache quality and saturation. I have come across a couple Park-N-Grab micro caches that were obviously hastily placed, right near an area that would be great for a multi or something with interesting waypoints and scenery. But, as the guidelines promote, caches should not be within 1/10th of a mile of each other. By hastily placing a cache on vacation, you are "using up" an area that someone with more time and knowledge of the area could perhaps do better. Of course, there are scenarios where someone has lots of time and knowledge on vacation and is skilled and could do a great job, but I think that in general, a cache placed on-the-go is going to have a lower quality than one placed by a local.

 

I'd like to start off by thanking the folks who answered the question within the first 2 or 3 posts.

(Which I acknowledged way back then)

 

That said, please do not take this into a direction that it never would have gone in any event. Had I been "hasty", I never would have been here asking about it. Nor would I have not checked the local cache locations prior. Lastly, I'm not sure where you are pulling that last statement from. I would presume that each person hiding a cache would put as much effort into the setup/hide regardless of where they happen to be. If they did not have the motivation to make it a good cache, then why on earth would they feel strongly enough to do it in the first place.

 

The question (long since answered) was if it was accepted to place a cache on vacation far from home. Not if it was acceptable to be hasty, sloppy, or otherwise.

 

By the by, Happy Friday!

[+Zeevious]

Hey, no offense. I did not mean to antagonize you or imply *you* would do a bad job, I was simply discussing my thoughts on the quality issue of caches, since that's an issue that resonates with me. Since this is your thread I will wgo away now.

[tmike2552]

...I think that in general, a cache placed on-the-go is going to have a lower quality than one placed by a local.

 

...I'm not sure where you are pulling that last statement from. I would presume that each person hiding a cache would put as much effort into the setup/hide regardless of where they happen to be. If they did not have the motivation to make it a good cache, then why on earth would they feel strongly enough to do it in the first place.

 

I can see where Zeevious is coming from. When I think of a cache placed "on-the-go" I picture someone tossing a cache out the window as they are driving down the road.

 

Also, people might just hide caches to increase their numbers. They aren't thinking, "Wow, this is a good spot." They are thinking, "Number 100! woo hoo!"

[ImPrettyDumb]

Looking to future vacations my wife and I plan, is it acceptable to plant caches which would be difficult or impossible to maintain? Would it be acceptable to put a note in the cache notice (online) that it is a distant cache from the "owner" and that voluntary maintenance is encouraged?

 

The answer you'll get here (and got) is, no way, vacation caches = bad.

 

There are plenty of people here who actually don't believe this. But those people are ostracized for having 'incorrect' beliefs. The discussion usually goes: "I want to place a vacation cache". The response is "You can't maintain it, and besides, it's against the guidelines."

 

The idea of maintaining caches is not intuitive. It is simply the evolution of the game. Check out letterboxing - that community sees no problem with vacation plants. If you're willing to carve a stamp and put it in an area you'll never return to - more power to you. Sure, there are downsides to this. But there are upsides too, but this issue isn't up for discussion in these forums.

 

Certain topics can't be discussed here, too much momentum going.

 

Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.

[+simpjkee]

if you can't maintain your cache within two weeks then you shouldn't place. It's that simple.

[+Kit Fox]

 

The answer you'll get here (and got) is, no way, vacation caches = bad.

 

There are plenty of people here who actually don't believe this. But those people are ostracized for having 'incorrect' beliefs. The discussion usually goes: "I want to place a vacation cache". The response is "You can't maintain it, and besides, it's against the guidelines."

 

If you actually read the guidelines, you'll realize that Vacation Caches can and do get published. Why are you hiding under a Sockpuppet account?

 

From the Guidelines:

 

As the cache owner, you are also responsible for physically checking your cache periodically, and especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.). You may temporarily disable your cache to let others know not to hunt for it until you have a chance to fix the problem. This feature is to allow you a reasonable time – normally a few weeks – in which to arrange a visit to your cache. In the event that a cache is not being properly maintained, or has been temporarily disabled for an extended period of time, we may archive or transfer the listing.

 

It may be difficult to fulfill your maintenance obligations if you place a cache while traveling on vacation or otherwise outside of your normal caching area. These caches may not be published unless you are able to demonstrate an acceptable maintenance plan. It is not uncommon for caches to go missing, areas to be cleared, trails to be blocked or closed, objects used for multi-cache or puzzles to be moved or removed, etc. Your maintenance plan must allow for a quick response to reported problems.

 

The territory in which a geocacher is able to maintain caches responsibly will vary from one person to the next. An active geocacher who regularly visits areas hundreds of miles apart can demonstrate their ability to maintain a cache 100 miles from home. A geocacher whose previous finds and hides are all within 25 miles of their home would likely not see their cache published if placed 250 miles away from their home.

 

If you have special circumstances, please describe your maintenance plan on your cache page. For example, if you have made arrangements with a local geocacher to watch over your distant cache for you, that geocacher’s name should be mentioned on your cache page.

 

 

The idea of maintaining caches is not intuitive. It is simply the evolution of the game.

 

So unmaintained caches placed by cachers from far away that have problems are simply products of evolution?

 

I have plenty of examples of Vacation caches with needs maintenance logs, that are ignored by their "out of state" owners.

 

Check out letterboxing - that community sees no problem with vacation plants. If you're willing to carve a stamp and put it in an area you'll never return to - more power to you. Sure, there are downsides to this.

 

Like LBers looking for nonexistant boxes, that sounds like fun!

Edited November 4, 2007 by Kit Fox

[+briansnat]

if you can't maintain your cache within two weeks then you shouldn't place. It's that simple.

 

Ideally yes, but we all have busy lives and sometimes geocaching goes on the back burner. I'd probably say a month is more reasonable.

 

And that depends on the severity of the problem. Not long ago I let a cache go for a bit over 2 months because finders said the log was damp, but usable. Because they said it was usable I didn't see a need to run right out there. A more serious problem would have had me out there a lot faster.

[+simpjkee]

if you can't maintain your cache within two weeks then you shouldn't place. It's that simple.

 

Ideally yes, but we all have busy lives and sometimes geocaching goes on the back burner. I'd probably say a month is more reasonable.

 

And that depends on the severity of the problem. Not long ago I let a cache go for a bit over 2 months because finders said the log was damp, but usable. Because they said it was usable I didn't see a need to run right out there. A more serious problem would have had me out there a lot faster.

 

if the log is usable, I can see the cache remaining active beyond two weeks before maintainence. However, if you logged that the cache was gone, then I think you should replace it within two weeks.

 

I agree. it does depend on the severity of the problem.