Jump to content

how to find archived caches?


klossner
Followers 7

Recommended Posts

While some may not have a use for it, we definitely need the ability to list archived caches. Why? Here are a few reasons:

 

1. Recovery of the geolitter. Local geocaching organizations can help maintain a positive image for geocaching by making sure old caches are recovered from the field, instead of leaving them behind as trash.

 

2. Seeing where caches were formerly placed can be helpful when working with land owners/authorities on authorizing new caches.

 

3. Some cachers are thinking of creative ways to use the archived cache listings in new caches.

 

If it can't be done by the maps then how about a PQ modification?

 

I think that being able to see where caches once were could help avoid bad areas. If I am looking at a spot to place a cache, I would sure like to know if there had been a cache nearby and why it has been archived. Especially if it was due to excessive muggle activity. The logs in the archived listing may give a placer an idea of what to expect.

Link to comment
About a week before the loss of the old maps, I had started a bookmark of archived caches that might be of interest in my area. I have started expanding it by fishing through profiles of cachers who have been caching longer & have many more finds than I. I'm sticking with a 30-40 mile radius for my list at this point, and am up to 41 archived caches. Many have "Final Logs" that sound like the cache is still in place...
An update:

 

I've been running pocket queries for inactive caches from my home coordinates and comparing the lists. Any cache that falls off the list I check to see if it is active or archived. Happily, the majority are being activated!

 

"The List" is now up to 55 archived caches. 12 of those have logs indicating that the cache was there well after archival. 7 caches (other than the 12) have new caches listed at the exact coordinates of the original. At least 4 of those 7 used the abandoned container from the original.

 

With the ability to find archived caches, 13% got a new cache.

 

There is another 22% of the 55 that likely have containers out there.

 

Total of rehabbed caches and ones needing possible retrieval: 35%.

 

One in Three.

 

When (If) a landowner gave permission for a geocache to be placed on their property, I don't think they had the abandoned, moldy box that they will stumble across if we don't remove or maintain them. I know it is the cache placer's responsibility to remove the cache after archival, but that won't matter to the landowner when the next cacher approaches them for permission. :anicute:

 

I realize that there are sensitive areas that we don't want to draw attention to, but those areas are off limits because a landowner said no to geocaching. Let's not give any more landowners reason to dislike the sport. We need to make sure archived caches get picked up.

Link to comment

I was going to go out and place a cache today. I know there was a cache in this park a couple years ago, I saw it on the old geocaching.com maps awhile ago. Well, I wanted to check in it again to see why it was archived and what do you know there's no way of finding it!

 

To say that I can browse area cacher's find logs is a JOKE when I don't even know what the cache name was.

 

I used this feature and want it back. This is very frustrating.

I found a cache that had been abandoned since 2004 earlier this summer and reactivated it because of the ability to see archived caches in the area.

 

This is very, very disappointing.

Link to comment

I was going to go out and place a cache today. I know there was a cache in this park a couple years ago, I saw it on the old geocaching.com maps awhile ago. Well, I wanted to check in it again to see why it was archived and what do you know there's no way of finding it!

 

To say that I can browse area cacher's find logs is a JOKE when I don't even know what the cache name was.

 

I used this feature and want it back. This is very frustrating.

I found a cache that had been abandoned since 2004 earlier this summer and reactivated it because of the ability to see archived caches in the area.

 

This is very, very disappointing.

 

Yeah, really Groundspeak's logic for hiding the mapping of these listings is very questionable, especially since the caches are still accessible via people's profiles. In fact, it can cause the opposite from their intent. (cause new caches to get placed where they should not be)

 

Archived caches should be findable on the maps -- and if an archived cache listing is so dangerous that it should not be seen at all, it can be 'un-approved' as i've seen done several times, which REALLY hides it.

If you want to 'fuzz' the coords to within 250 feet, then do that.

 

-Ben

Link to comment

I can see that TPTB have valid reasons for hiding archived caches that were in forbidden locations. But I have seen no valid justification in this forum for hiding archived caches that were archived for some other reason. I have seen good arguments for allowing archived caches that are not in forbidden locations to be viewable.

 

It appears to be that TPTB took the easiest way to solve a problem without considering better alternatives to solving the problem. That is how bureaucracies work, not how a well run business should work.

Link to comment

I removed a stage of a LONG archived (and abandoned) multi a few years back (couldn't find the other stage or I would have CITOed that too). I wouldn't have been able to clean up that geotrash today since we can't view archived caches anymore.

 

I do understand the sentiment of "hiding the evidence" of archived caches that were placed illegally or in sensitive areas, but I have to wonder how many caches actually fit that description. Most are placed in a fine, legal area but were just not maintained. If there are cache placements of that degree of concern, they aren't just archived, they are stricken from the record completely, so they wouldn't show up on the "archived" map anyway.

Link to comment

I can see that TPTB have valid reasons for hiding archived caches that were in forbidden locations. But I have seen no valid justification in this forum for hiding archived caches that were archived for some other reason. I have seen good arguments for allowing archived caches that are not in forbidden locations to be viewable.

 

It appears to be that TPTB took the easiest way to solve a problem without considering better alternatives to solving the problem. That is how bureaucracies work, not how a well run business should work.

Valid to whom?? They have made the business decision to not easily provide archived cache data. I seriously doubt it had anything to do with "hiding" geo-litter. The vast majority of archived caches around here got that way by being missing. No geo-litter. The few others were permission issues.

Link to comment

I'd like to echo Too Tall John's original statement. I don't understand the argument about hiding archived caches that were in forbidden areas. Wouldn't it make more sense to show those archived caches so others don't make the same mistake? I don't think the argument that the ability to view archived listings will increase traffic to those forbidden places is valid at all. The number of people viewing archived listings is small and, as evidenced by this thread, focused on scouting potential new hides.

 

True, archived caches are usually just missing, but doesn't the simple existence of archived geo-litter reason enough to allow viewing them? I thought we were pro conservation here! There are a LOT of lazy cachers around that will not bother to check to see if a hide is truly gone after a couple DNFs that express concern that it is missing.

 

I suppose the reviewers have an easy way of seeing archived caches and we don't?

If so, that's pretty lame. B)

Link to comment

I think it's not only useful, but important to see archived caches on a map when placing a new cache.

 

I like to read the logs for archived caches in the area where I considered placing a new cache, to see first off why it was archived (if it didn't work out because of a problem with the location, that's a very important bit of information to stop a new cache from duplicating the same problem) then to see the logs of the finders of that cache to determine whether they had fun finding a cache in that location.

 

The first cache I placed (you have to place a cache before finding out if it can be placed) was not approved for a reason that I would have known if I had the ability to see archived caches in the area. A waste of my time and the reviewer's.

 

 

put me on the list of people who would really like to see it return.

Link to comment

Add my vote to the list to return them.

 

And my comments on some postings:

 

1) Getting them added to PQ's in order to exclude them from GSAK isn't likely to generate any positive response - TPTB have consistently said they don't want us maintaining any kind of offline data base of caches. There are ways around this, however.

 

2) Unless I missed it, TPTB haven't seemed to have commented on this issue.

 

3) I don't see how land managers really have any right to tell any website "We don't want information posted about our land", especially public lands. The plane crash example above is a perfect example. Just because a manager for public lands doesn't like information being made public (ah-hem... "public lands!"), there's no reason to hide it. There are many other ways to protect sensitive areas - hiding them from the public, whose land it is, just doesn't make sense. And I don't agree with the people who say that it is being responsible to follow requests from these managers to disguise or hide this information. I believe it is reponsible to the general public, (again) whose land it is, to NOT hide this information. I have always believed in the freedom of information.

 

4) How easy it is to find the information is irrelevant. In my county, tax information for houses was posted online and a bunch of people went wacky. The same information was available for free by going to the courthouse and asking - but since it was easier to find, some people had a problem with it. Same with when saleries of public employees (myself included) were published in the local newspaper and online a while back. It is public information - so what if it was made available to the public? That's the point!

 

In the end, unless I'm missing something, we really don't know why they removed that feature. I hope it returns. And I hope it wasn't removed in support of keeping public information private, for the reasons listed above.

Link to comment

When I realized this feature had been taken away, I was Ranting and raving!

 

I had just gotten rid of my DB of DEAD(Archived)caches. Course, that DB went back 4 Years. It has allowed me to do all the above, but I deleted the DB.

 

I REALLY REALLY REALLY VOTE FOR THIS FEATURE BE BROUGHT BACK!

 

Of course, I do realize the reasons that caches are archived do vary, but to have a way to find out Why there are no caches in a rahter blank part of the area would be REALLY Nice!

 

I Vote to have this feature reinstated.

 

The Steaks

Link to comment

I'll add my vote to return the ability to find archived caches. I don't use the feature too often, but here it is two months after it was stopped that I noticed it was gone and I miss it. I think it could be a google map "unchecked by default" option. I do prefer the google move the map by the hand grab to the old click on the direction that you want to move the map way. I would like TPTB to comment on why the feature is not there. It may be that it went away because they did away with the geocaching maps and had not thought about the archive caches feature. Hal

Link to comment
I would like TPTB to comment on why the feature is not there.
Hi Nate,

Thanks for responding to my post.

 

As AndrewRJ said and I mentioned further up in my post, the one feature of the old maps that was very useful to some of us, was the ability to search for archived caches. When I'm thinking of hiding a cache, I like to research the area to see what caches have been there before and what if any problems they had. The old maps allowed me to do this. Now, unless I'm mistaken, there is no way to find archived caches.

 

This is less of a complaint and more of a feature request. I really like the new maps and would only rarely use the old ones for the above reasons if they were available.

I can certainly appreciate that you found viewing archived caches useful before, but for some very important reasons we won't be showing archived caches on the google maps.

 

Many caches are archived because they are in sensitive areas. Some are archived because the area is dangerous or offlimits. In these cases we don't want people visiting the location because they may get in trouble/hurt themselves/hurt the environment. Therefore, we don't advertise archived caches.

 

I don't know why the old maps allowed you to view archived caches in the first place, since it has always been Groundspeak's policy to hide them from public view. I'm sure someone can Markwell several threads discussing this in excruciating detail.

There ya go. I happen to think they threw the baby out with the bath water, but... :P
Link to comment

Those who have been denied access to history are doomed to repeat it.

 

"Found cache surrounded by used syringes, broken beer bottles, and fresh condoms. TNLNSLTFTC"

 

There are caches in my hometown that if I knew they were w/in a few hundred feet of one I'd recalled visiting would immediately go on my ignore list (which is many times older than the sites ignore list) or the SBA list.

 

The history of the sport (and for every "I left the sport" archive, there are more interesting "because this is a terrible spot" archive) is important to the seekers. It's unfortunate to see it being suppressed.

 

Signed,

Winston

"He who controls the past, controls the future."

Link to comment

Was just looking up caches in a park using the google maps (which by the way, do seem to be working better for me now days :P ) and saw that everything showing was unfound by me. In otherwords, the 5 or 6 caches that i had found before are evidently archived now so i was curious as to where they were in relationship to where all these new ones are now.

 

I scanned through the replies of this thread looking for something posted from tptb but didn't see anything. Have tptb given their reason for taking this feature away?

 

To tptb, please consider reinstating some way for us users who are interested, to look up archived caches... :laughing:

Link to comment

I'll add my bit...I, too, wish there was a way to PQ archived caches, if only to elimante them from my gsak database.

Case in point, I regularly delete all disabled caches from the database knowing that if they do not return with the next pq then most likely they have been archived.

But while doing a cache run in Leesville, La, we came upon one that was not disabled but had several DNF's. Regardless of that we stopped an looked a few minutes but decided that if "that" cacher didn't find it, it probably wasn't there.

Once I got back home I looked at the cache on-line and discovered that it went from active to archived with no disabled in the middle. That eliminated my way of taking care of archived caches since it never disabled in GSAK.

The reason for the drastic change was the owner had moved away and just was no longer able to take care of the cache.

Had I been able to run a pq for the area for archived caches I this one would have shown up.

 

There's a very simple way to 'update your GSAK database'.

If you use the column, 'Last Updated' and you see caches that have not been updated in a long time then you can be sure that they are probably archived and not just temporarily disabled. I'm not talking about 'last log'. I think there is a macro for this also. But to be honest you should erase your complete database each time before importing a new PQ. Unless you are trying to maintain an offline database which Groundspeak does not support and frowns upon.

Link to comment

There's a very simple way to 'update your GSAK database'.

If you use the column, 'Last Updated' and you see caches that have not been updated in a long time then you can be sure that they are probably archived and not just temporarily disabled. I'm not talking about 'last log'. I think there is a macro for this also. But to be honest you should erase your complete database each time before importing a new PQ. Unless you are trying to maintain an offline database which Groundspeak does not support and frowns upon.

I disagree with this suggestion since PQs only have five Past Logs. If new PQs are added to the existing database in GSAK, the number of Past Logs increases. Sometimes it is the sixth or twelfth Past Log in Cachemate on my Palm m500 that gives me just the hint I need to locate the cache.

 

The best way to keep your GSAK database up to date is to first, set up your PQs by "Date Placed" as opposed to setting them up by location centerpoints. This is especially important if you live in a cache-rich area where there are many more than 500 caches in your search area. For a 50 mile radius in my area, it takes me two days to do this since I need seven PQs to get all the caches.

 

Tnen, after you get all the "Date Placed" PQs to refresh your database, create a "Last .gpx Update" filter to find the caches that didn't update, or just toggle the "Last .gpx" column to bring the non-updated caches to the top of your database. Those are the caches you need to delete before sending the caches to your GPS unit. Since it is now difficult to find Archived caches, you might want to create an "Archived" database in GSAK and move the newly-archived caches to that database.

 

Another way to help keep your database is up-to-date is to sign up for Instant Notifications for "Archived" and "Disabled" caches. That way you'll know, between getting the full compliment of "Date Placed" PQs, which caches are no longer available.

Link to comment

After re-reading the logs for the thread, I decided to add up the results as of now.

 

BRING BACK ARCHIVED SEARCH(in one way or another): 44

Don't bring this great feature back: 3

Post did not confirm either way: 4

 

Hey, TPTB, Can we get this feature back? Do I have to re-request this feature in the other forums?

 

The Steaks

Link to comment

The ability to see the archived caches on the geocaching maps and then be able to view these caches' history was a feature I used quite regularly - sometimes I used it when I was planning a new cache placement, other times it was just interesting to go back in history to see all the caches that had been placed in a particular park over the years. I really do miss the feature. My vote is for this feature to come back. It doesn't have to be the same implementation, but I really miss being able to look up archived caches that had been hidden near a specified location.

Link to comment

It's funny. By reducing the functionality of the official database, Groundspeak is effectively encouraging us to create and use our own databases (eg, GSAK) to fill in the gaps. As mentioned above, GSAK can help you find archived caches.

 

I always thought Groundspeak hated the idea of people maintaining their own databases.

Link to comment

Grrrrrr.....we've been meeting with a Land Trust and Conservation Commission to try to get some caches approved. I was hoping to be able to show them examples of past CITO events along with the log photos.

 

Of course, the events are now past and archived. I thought I could use the archived cache map featue to find them - but noooooooo, things just have to be difficult.....

Link to comment

Given the number of requests to show archived caches on google maps, it has been decided to return this feature. I'm afraid there has been no date set for their return yet, but I will let you all know when work on this is resumed. Thank you for expressing your feelings.

 

Edit: I should mention also that this will be a Premium Member feature, as before.

Edited by OpinioNate
Link to comment

Given the number of requests to show archived caches on google maps, it has been decided to return this feature. I'm afraid there has been no date set for their return yet, but I will let you all know when work on this is resumed. Thank you for expressing your feelings.

 

Edit: I should mention also that this will be a Premium Member feature, as before.

 

Nate and others. I want to thank you very much for bringing this back and give another example of why this is a good idea.

 

A few months ago before this feature went away a new cache was approved nearby in an area where I knew there had been issues between cachers and the land managers. I quickly contacted the local approver so that the cache could be retracted and did some research using this feature. I was able to locate the nearby archived cache, determine why there had been a problem in the past AND who I should contact. Long story short, I was able to contact the land manager and get the approval through. The land manager was very happy to have someone contact him about approvals and this cache and several new ones in the area are doing well.

 

Thanks for bringing this big feature back!

 

GO$Rs

Link to comment

Given the number of requests to show archived caches on google maps, it has been decided to return this feature. I'm afraid there has been no date set for their return yet, but I will let you all know when work on this is resumed. Thank you for expressing your feelings.

 

Edit: I should mention also that this will be a Premium Member feature, as before.

Nate

 

It is always great to know that our requests are being listened to. Whatever the result. I would like to thank you for bringing back this feature in one form or another. I know it may take a while to get implimented but it is great knowing that it is on the list.

Link to comment

A quote from OpinioNate

I can certainly appreciate that you found viewing archived caches useful before, but for some very important reasons we won't be showing archived caches on the google maps.

 

Many caches are archived because they are in sensitive areas. Some are archived because the area is dangerous or offlimits. In these cases we don't want people visiting the location because they may get in trouble/hurt themselves/hurt the environment. Therefore, we don't advertise archived caches.

If this is the real issue, then why not add a new feature where a cache can be labeled as "unallowable location" when archived. That way, when cachers view archived listings, they can clearly see that the area the cache was hidden in is off limits. I have to imagine that this represents a rather small percentage of archived caches.

Edited by Grunriese
Link to comment

Given the number of requests to show archived caches on google maps, it has been decided to return this feature. I'm afraid there has been no date set for their return yet, but I will let you all know when work on this is resumed. Thank you for expressing your feelings.

 

Edit: I should mention also that this will be a Premium Member feature, as before.

 

Thank you so much! It was honestly one of the main reasons we "went premium".......

 

Now if they could bring back virtuals and webcams......... :)

Link to comment

 

Thank you so much! It was honestly one of the main reasons we "went premium".......

 

Now if they could bring back virtuals and webcams......... :)

 

Haha - Somehow, I don't think any amount of pleading is gonna change this one... :) - But I'll put my vote in if it would...

Link to comment

Given the number of requests to show archived caches on google maps, it has been decided to return this feature. I'm afraid there has been no date set for their return yet, but I will let you all know when work on this is resumed. Thank you for expressing your feelings.

 

Edit: I should mention also that this will be a Premium Member feature, as before.

 

Thank you so much! It was honestly one of the main reasons we "went premium".......

 

Now if they could bring back virtuals and webcams......... :)

Put in a third vote for for bringing back Virtual caches, especially since the California's largest state park, encompassing more than 600,000 acres, has just banned physical caches. :)

 

Some caches recently removed and thrown away by the Rangers had been in place for nearly seven years . . . now those thousands of acres are off-limits for caching . . . unless they can become Virtual caches.

 

A spectacular location like this one I hiked to yesterday, deserves a cache!

 

6a9afdf2-8b55-4a25-8468-aa71fde8e01d.jpg

Link to comment

This thread is about "how to find archived caches." Many are following it because of Groundspeak's recent announcement that the ability to view archived caches on the Geocaching.com Google maps will someday return for premium members.

 

This thread is NOT about virtual and webcam caches. Please remain on topic. You're welcome to open this month's thread about bringing back virtual and webcam caches, should you care to do so.

Link to comment

This thread is about "how to find archived caches." Many are following it because of Groundspeak's recent announcement that the ability to view archived caches on the Geocaching.com Google maps will someday return for premium members.

 

This thread is NOT about virtual and webcam caches. Please remain on topic. You're welcome to open this month's thread about bringing back virtual and webcam caches, should you care to do so.

 

Where can more info be found about the Groundspeak announcement about the archived cache viewing feature?? thanks!

 

:unsure::blink:

Link to comment

I wish to add my thanks that the archived caches will be able to be seen again. Being able to see them really does help the experience. I also concur with the previous thought that those areas that are not allowed should be so labeled when it is archived. (I'll go looking for the webcam/virtual cache discussions to add my opinion about that topic on those forums.) I would like to see the explanation on how to see the archived set of caches in the geocaching FAQ. Hal

Edited by halhal
Link to comment

.......

If it can't be done by the maps then how about a PQ modification?

The pitfall of that is that many Geocachers simply load up thier GPSr and take off to go caching without reading anything. Hunting for a cache that a landowner requested archival could lead to serious problems.

 

I think you have some valid points, however. It would be nice if some mechinism allowed at least an overview of where archived caches once were.

 

I think you are dead on about the land owner concerns, so how about showing where these dead caches are until someone logs it 'removed'. Surely if the land owner wants the cache to be archived he may also be open to the possibility of that one last person comming to remove the cache and repair any sign of it's existance. Maybe our efforts to clean up after our community and respect the land owner could improve the general image of geocaching and persuade some land oweners to allow is in.

Link to comment
If you go to the Profiles of people who have been caching in your area for a long time, and go to the Profiles of the people who were most likely to attend past CITO Events, you can find links to the Archived CITO Events. B)

 

True. Good suggestion, but two problems with that.

1) It assumes that I know people who were most likely to have attended a CITO event

2) I would really want CITO events that were in neighboring or nearby communities (for maximum effect)

 

My rant was not that it was impossible to find this information. My rant was that loss of archived caches on the maps made this more difficult than it had to be. B)

 

In any case, it looks like the archived cache feature will be returned. So, thanks Groundspeak!

Link to comment

Given the number of requests to show archived caches on google maps, it has been decided to return this feature. I'm afraid there has been no date set for their return yet, but I will let you all know when work on this is resumed. Thank you for expressing your feelings.

 

Edit: I should mention also that this will be a Premium Member feature, as before.

 

Thanks!

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 7
×
×
  • Create New...