Maintaining somone else's cache

[Sparky2726]

There is a cache I found the other day. (GCH00H) Its in a real nice location, but the owner has apperently abandoned it. He has not logged in since 2004, and the cache is in bad need of maintainance. The container is cracked, and the logbook is saturated.

 

I have emailed the owner about adopting it, but have got no response. Would I be out of line by replaceing the contaner, and maintained the cache, as if its my own?

 

TNX

 

Lee

Edited October 29, 2008 by Sparky2726

[+ethanbl]

I certainly don't think so. If a cache is really in need of maintinance, and the owner is MIA, I would just fix it! Give it a new container, and send the owner an e-mail letting him/her know that you have done so. Maybe try to get the owner's phone number, and call them. I feel that it's ok, as long a s you are doing it in the best interest of geocaching, and thjat you are making sure everyone has a safe, and enjoyable caching experience.

[+Wild Thing 73]

Contact the reviewer and explain the situation and if the reviewer archives the cache, then you can submit the cache for review and you would be the cache owner. I would say that would happen in a heart beat. Good Luck...

[+climbstuff]

Contact the reviewer and explain the situation and if the reviewer archives the cache, then you can submit the cache for review and you would be the cache owner. I would say that would happen in a heart beat. Good Luck...

 

That isn't always the favored end state. When a cache has some historical significance (like a 6 digit GC code or less) it would be better IMHO to save the original cache. I recommend 'you' just donate your own time and materials to fix the problem...

[+jc_hook]

I agree with you climbstuff and ethanbl. A couple of us took care of an ageing cache GC533C. haggaeus gave it some TLC and so did I. It really is worth it to keep the record going even if the CO is AWOL. It's also cool to watch how the Geo-community chips in to take care of things on behalf of others. It's still limping along in a "Needs maintenance" state even though it's in good shape for other cachers' adventures. (POFE can you take a look at it?)

 

I do have to say though, Wild Thing 73 is right too. It's sad to say, but caches can run their course and have had a "good run" as Brian Snat likes to say. Sometimes a location needs a fresh idea and frees the area up to give other folks an oportunity to have there very own cache.

Edited October 29, 2008 by jc_hook

[+WRASTRO]

If the hide is worth saving for reasons other than simply being old then I would certainly recommend doing the needed maintenance. A couple of emails to previous finders should give you a feeling about the cache and if it should be saved. Along the same line of thinking, reading the logs for the cache should give you a very good feeling about the cache and if it should be saved.

[+Renegade Knight]

... Would I be out of line by replaceing the contaner, and maintained the cache, as if its my own? ...

 

 

No you wouldn't. You have done the legwork to give the owner a chance to maintain it. Now if you want to be even nicer...well heck by all means. You would be making the world a better place for your efforts.

[+briansnat]

Sometimes a cache just needs to be put out of its misery. Absentee owner, terrible shape - I'd issue a Should Be Archived and if I liked the area I'd hide my own once this one was archived.

[+StarBrand]

Sometimes a cache just needs to be put out of its misery. Absentee owner, terrible shape - I'd issue a Should Be Archived and if I liked the area I'd hide my own once this one was archived.

Agreed - I've never understood why some feel they need to "preserve" on old listing when the owner is long gone and the cache is in disrepair.

[+Prime Suspect]

Would I be out of line by replaceing the contaner, and maintained the cache, as if its my own?

Yes, you would.

 

The owner and the maintainer should either be the same person, or at least the owner and maintainer should be in contact with each other. The situation you want to avoid is a where the owner is getting notified to remove the cache, but the cache remains because of the disconnect between the owner and maintainer.

 

If it's in bad shape, post a SBA and wait for it to be Archived. Then you can put out your own cache. That's the best way to handle it.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I agree with you climbstuff and ethanbl. A couple of us took care of an ageing cache GC533C. haggaeus gave it some TLC and so did I. It really is worth it to keep the record going even if the CO is AWOL. It's also cool to watch how the Geo-community chips in to take care of things on behalf of others. It's still limping along in a "Needs maintenance" state even though it's in good shape for other cachers' adventures. (POFE can you take a look at it?)

 

Interesting. Yes, it's a fairly old cache. But hardly a classic. Rather run-of-the-mill. Not in good shape three years ago when I found it. Not terribly interesting. But if you like it, go for it.

Cache owner found 33 caches in her high school years. And hid two. Neither terribly interesting. Found three in her first year in college, and hasn't been heard of in six years. Basically, a short-termer.

It's not like she was a major contributor to the sport, like bigbill600, or The Artful Dodger, or cache_ninja to name a few. (I did replace one of bigbill600's cracked containers ones. It was a nice cache!)

But, hey, if it makes you happy, go for it!

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Seems to be a mixed response on this one but without knowing the specifics of the cache it's hard to recommend what to do.

 

I agree with those that have said if the cache is worth maintaining that keeping it around is worth the small amount of effort it takes. If a cache has been around a long time (for example, a couple in my area that were placed in 2001 that are essentially maintained by the local community) there is a reason that they've stood the test of time. It's probably got a good container and is hidden in a spot such that muggles haven't found it.

 

One of the other reasons I suggest maintaining an older cache is that there are lots of new geocachers coming along all the time and it gives them the opportunity to find a cache that has out there for many many years. Having it archiving it and replacing it with a new cache might bring new cachers to the same area but there is just something a little special about finding a cache with a 5 or even 4 character GC code. The number of caches with 4 character GC goes is only going to get fewer and fewer.

[Sparky2726]

Thanks for all the replies. I was all ready to fix up an ammo can, and head up there. I got an email from the owner yesterday, and he is gonna fix it.

 

Thanks for the help.

 

Lee

[+Forest Guy]

I have that exact scenario going on now, cache was the first I ever found, before I knew what geocaching is. It was placed in 2002, and is really a great cache in a great location. But the container was a clear glass jar, and a previous visitor dropped the jar cracking it in half. I found it, and took it upon myself to replace the container. I emailed the owner for approval but no reply, his last activity on the site was 2006. The cache has a 'needs maintenance' flag but other than that it is now in good shape, I just check on it every now and then.

[+The Find Its]

I have run across the same scenario in our area.

One of the first caches that we found was a wet mess in a nice spot. I tried contacting the CO a couple of times and have not had a response. He had been a member for about a year and a half and has not logged on for over two years.

Finally I replaced the cache with a new container and swagged it up. I put the cache on my watch list so I can keep an eye on it.

It is right down the street from our house so no problem maintaining it, and think that every positive effort made is valuable to any endeavor.

 

Just MHO

[+Prime Suspect]

I DNFed a cache today. When I got home, and was able to see all the logs, that's where I read that some "helpful" person replace the cache (which was listed on the cache page as tin CD case), with a much larger container, in a different location.

 

I spent my time looking in places where something thin and flat could be placed. And I did that because the person who placed the cache didn't have the ability to update the cache page. That's why caches should be maintained by their owners.

 

If it's not yours, leave it alone.

Edited November 2, 2008 by Prime Suspect

[+Forest Guy]

I DNFed a cache today. When I got home, and was able to see all the logs, that's where I read that some "helpful" person replace the cache (which was listed on the cache page as tin CD case), with a much larger container, in a different location.

 

I spent my time looking in places where something thin and flat could be placed. And I did that because the person who placed the cache didn't have the ability to update the cache page. That's why caches should be maintained by their owners.

 

If it's not yours, leave it alone.

 

Well I think that's a much different scenario. I didn't change my cache from an ammo box to a micro and move it somewhere different! LOL that's way out of line. I would never move someone else's cache, in my case the cache container was destroyed so I simply changed the container to an equivalent size and put it in the exact same location with all the contents of the previous container. Pretty straightforward. I think a little common sense needs to come into play when 'adopting' a cache. Again, I could've done an archive request and then gone through the process to reset the cache under my ownership but this cache has been active since 2002 and has a pretty good find history going, so why not enable it to 'live on'?

[+Prime Suspect]

I DNFed a cache today. When I got home, and was able to see all the logs, that's where I read that some "helpful" person replace the cache (which was listed on the cache page as tin CD case), with a much larger container, in a different location.

 

I spent my time looking in places where something thin and flat could be placed. And I did that because the person who placed the cache didn't have the ability to update the cache page. That's why caches should be maintained by their owners.

 

If it's not yours, leave it alone.

 

Well I think that's a much different scenario. I didn't change my cache from an ammo box to a micro and move it somewhere different! LOL that's way out of line. I would never move someone else's cache, in my case the cache container was destroyed so I simply changed the container to an equivalent size and put it in the exact same location with all the contents of the previous container. Pretty straightforward. I think a little common sense needs to come into play when 'adopting' a cache. Again, I could've done an archive request and then gone through the process to reset the cache under my ownership but this cache has been active since 2002 and has a pretty good find history going, so why not enable it to 'live on'?

And how do you know the land owner didn't email the cache owner that he wanted the cache removed, who then decided to just abandon it? You replaced a cache, just as if you were the owner, but you don't get the owner's email.

 

If you want to put out a cache there, it's real simple. Let it get archived, and then you can DO IT THE RIGHT WAY.

[+Forest Guy]

I DNFed a cache today. When I got home, and was able to see all the logs, that's where I read that some "helpful" person replace the cache (which was listed on the cache page as tin CD case), with a much larger container, in a different location.

 

I spent my time looking in places where something thin and flat could be placed. And I did that because the person who placed the cache didn't have the ability to update the cache page. That's why caches should be maintained by their owners.

 

If it's not yours, leave it alone.

 

Well I think that's a much different scenario. I didn't change my cache from an ammo box to a micro and move it somewhere different! LOL that's way out of line. I would never move someone else's cache, in my case the cache container was destroyed so I simply changed the container to an equivalent size and put it in the exact same location with all the contents of the previous container. Pretty straightforward. I think a little common sense needs to come into play when 'adopting' a cache. Again, I could've done an archive request and then gone through the process to reset the cache under my ownership but this cache has been active since 2002 and has a pretty good find history going, so why not enable it to 'live on'?

And how do you know the land owner didn't email the cache owner that he wanted the cache removed, who then decided to just abandon it? You replaced a cache, just as if you were the owner, but you don't get the owner's email.

 

If you want to put out a cache there, it's real simple. Let it get archived, and then you can DO IT THE RIGHT WAY.

 

I know this because the cache in question is located in a state forest. The cache is still hit up on a regular basis, so in this case I stand by my decision to replace the cache container. The original container was a 5 gallon glass pickle jar and had lots of swag inside. When I found it, the jar was split in two. Once I returned home I noted the last finder mentioned he accidentally dropped the jar, and I couldn't get ahold of the cache owner to replace the jar. So I replaced it. The cache has had other finders post-maintenance, so everything appears to be back to normal. If I don't hear back from the original cache placer in six months, I'll let the reviewer know.

[+Prime Suspect]

And how do you know the land owner didn't email the cache owner that he wanted the cache removed, who then decided to just abandon it? You replaced a cache, just as if you were the owner, but you don't get the owner's email.

 

If you want to put out a cache there, it's real simple. Let it get archived, and then you can DO IT THE RIGHT WAY.

 

I know this because the cache in question is located in a state forest. The cache is still hit up on a regular basis, so in this case I stand by my decision to replace the cache container. The original container was a 5 gallon glass pickle jar and had lots of swag inside. When I found it, the jar was split in two. Once I returned home I noted the last finder mentioned he accidentally dropped the jar, and I couldn't get ahold of the cache owner to replace the jar. So I replaced it. The cache has had other finders post-maintenance, so everything appears to be back to normal. If I don't hear back from the original cache placer in six months, I'll let the reviewer know.

You know the cache owner hasn't been getting email about the cache because... it's in a state forest??? Because of where it is, you somehow become imbued with mystical knowledge of someone else's email?

 

That it's in a state forest just underlines the problem. Should a social trail start to form, and the Ranger involved wants it relocated, his emails to the absent owner are ending up in the bit bucket. Which makes the owner appear to be a bad steward of his cache, and makes geocachers as a group look bad.

[+Forest Guy]

And how do you know the land owner didn't email the cache owner that he wanted the cache removed, who then decided to just abandon it? You replaced a cache, just as if you were the owner, but you don't get the owner's email.

 

If you want to put out a cache there, it's real simple. Let it get archived, and then you can DO IT THE RIGHT WAY.

 

I know this because the cache in question is located in a state forest. The cache is still hit up on a regular basis, so in this case I stand by my decision to replace the cache container. The original container was a 5 gallon glass pickle jar and had lots of swag inside. When I found it, the jar was split in two. Once I returned home I noted the last finder mentioned he accidentally dropped the jar, and I couldn't get ahold of the cache owner to replace the jar. So I replaced it. The cache has had other finders post-maintenance, so everything appears to be back to normal. If I don't hear back from the original cache placer in six months, I'll let the reviewer know.

You know the cache owner hasn't been getting email about the cache because... it's in a state forest??? Because of where it is, you somehow become imbued with mystical knowledge of someone else's email?

 

That it's in a state forest just underlines the problem. Should a social trail start to form, and the Ranger involved wants it relocated, his emails to the absent owner are ending up in the bit bucket. Which makes the owner appear to be a bad steward of his cache, and makes geocachers as a group look bad.

 

You know, I've been posting to these forums for all of a week and you're the second 'old timer' who seems afwully jaded and cynical to someone taking an interest in the hobby. What gives, Mr. wet blanket? How would the 'ranger' email the cache owner without an email address anyway? There was no indication in the cache that it was a geocache other than signatures in the logbook. I printed out the geocache form from this website and included it when i repaired the cache. Somehow this gets interpreted as actions which would make geocachers look bad. I don't get it, I really don't. It would have been better for me to remove the cache completely, since by all indications it was abandoned, and I volunteer my time and effort for trash removal in the forest 3 seasons each year, as well as work with several groups including the local mountain biking and native american groups which utilize and maintain the forest. Then when people who already have the cache set up in their GPS and find NOTHING instead of a nice clean cache where they would expect one, this is somehow making the geocachers group look bad?

 

Just my opinion here, I may be wrong, but I think your bad experience with someone completely changing a cache and moving it is tainting your view of the scenario I'm presenting. Maybe it's a bad idea to try to integrate into this community, as i'm beginning to get a vibe that geocaching newbs are not particularly welcome and somehow we are tainting your hobby. I'd like to be snide and say 'well next time i'll just take a garbage bag and clean out the broken glass, wet log book and trinkets littering my local forest' but realistically, I plan to continue to maintain this cache in a good condition whether or not I have approval of someone on this message board. When I first found this cache, I was a 'muggle' who never knew what geocaching was and it piqued my interest in the hobby, and for that reason I have a special interest in keeping this cache from falling into the memory hole.

[+welch]

You know, I've been posting to these forums for all of a week and you're the second 'old timer' who seems afwully jaded and cynical to someone taking an interest in the hobby. What gives, Mr. wet blanket? How would the 'ranger' email the cache owner without an email address anyway? There was no indication in the cache that it was a geocache other than signatures in the logbook. I printed out the geocache form from this website and included it when i repaired the cache. Somehow this gets interpreted as actions which would make geocachers look bad. I don't get it, I really don't. It would have been better for me to remove the cache completely, since by all indications it was abandoned, and I volunteer my time and effort for trash removal in the forest 3 seasons each year, as well as work with several groups including the local mountain biking and native american groups which utilize and maintain the forest. Then when people who already have the cache set up in their GPS and find NOTHING instead of a nice clean cache where they would expect one, this is somehow making the geocachers group look bad?

Uh? How about the ranger tries emailing the cache owner threw the owner link on the gc.com cache page?

If you had removed the damaged cache completey you would have better grounds for getting the cache listing archived. Getting the listing taken care of would be part of the maintance IMO.

 

Just my opinion here, I may be wrong, but I think your bad experience with someone completely changing a cache and moving it is tainting your view of the scenario I'm presenting. Maybe it's a bad idea to try to integrate into this community, as i'm beginning to get a vibe that geocaching newbs are not particularly welcome and somehow we are tainting your hobby. I'd like to be snide and say 'well next time i'll just take a garbage bag and clean out the broken glass, wet log book and trinkets littering my local forest' but realistically, I plan to continue to maintain this cache in a good condition whether or not I have approval of someone on this message board. When I first found this cache, I was a 'muggle' who never knew what geocaching was and it piqued my interest in the hobby, and for that reason I have a special interest in keeping this cache from falling into the memory hole.

Newbs are welcome. Stubborn people that think their idea is the best ever and can't see anyone else's point on anything are welcome also. (though they will probably spend a lot of time butting heads )

 

I happen to agree to Prime Suspect, if you have no chance of ever getting control of the cache page, then work on getting the old one archived and start over with your own.

There doesn't have to be something as severe as the location being changed to need to make some changes that you need page control to do. There are many things the owner is expected to do, that involve control you won't ever have .

What if something written in the descrption needs change?(what the container was, or its color size shape) What if the hint/clue needs to be changed? What if someone can't find the cache and emails the owner asking for help? How about adding some new features to the page like attributes or waypoints? What happens if the area has a rock fall, or forest fire, or some other thing happens that you want people to stay away for a while? Do you plan on removing obvisous fake logs from really bored germans? How long will logs with porn/spam/obscene langage sit there till you can get a friendly reviewer to remove them?

[+Forest Guy]

You know, I've been posting to these forums for all of a week and you're the second 'old timer' who seems afwully jaded and cynical to someone taking an interest in the hobby. What gives, Mr. wet blanket? How would the 'ranger' email the cache owner without an email address anyway? There was no indication in the cache that it was a geocache other than signatures in the logbook. I printed out the geocache form from this website and included it when i repaired the cache. Somehow this gets interpreted as actions which would make geocachers look bad. I don't get it, I really don't. It would have been better for me to remove the cache completely, since by all indications it was abandoned, and I volunteer my time and effort for trash removal in the forest 3 seasons each year, as well as work with several groups including the local mountain biking and native american groups which utilize and maintain the forest. Then when people who already have the cache set up in their GPS and find NOTHING instead of a nice clean cache where they would expect one, this is somehow making the geocachers group look bad?

Uh? How about the ranger tries emailing the cache owner threw the owner link on the gc.com cache page?

If you had removed the damaged cache completey you would have better grounds for getting the cache listing archived. Getting the listing taken care of would be part of the maintance IMO.

 

Just my opinion here, I may be wrong, but I think your bad experience with someone completely changing a cache and moving it is tainting your view of the scenario I'm presenting. Maybe it's a bad idea to try to integrate into this community, as i'm beginning to get a vibe that geocaching newbs are not particularly welcome and somehow we are tainting your hobby. I'd like to be snide and say 'well next time i'll just take a garbage bag and clean out the broken glass, wet log book and trinkets littering my local forest' but realistically, I plan to continue to maintain this cache in a good condition whether or not I have approval of someone on this message board. When I first found this cache, I was a 'muggle' who never knew what geocaching was and it piqued my interest in the hobby, and for that reason I have a special interest in keeping this cache from falling into the memory hole.

Newbs are welcome. Stubborn people that think their idea is the best ever and can't see anyone else's point on anything are welcome also. (though they will probably spend a lot of time butting heads )

 

I happen to agree to Prime Suspect, if you have no chance of ever getting control of the cache page, then work on getting the old one archived and start over with your own.

There doesn't have to be something as severe as the location being changed to need to make some changes that you need page control to do. There are many things the owner is expected to do, that involve control you won't ever have .

What if something written in the descrption needs change?(what the container was, or its color size shape) What if the hint/clue needs to be changed? What if someone can't find the cache and emails the owner asking for help? How about adding some new features to the page like attributes or waypoints? What happens if the area has a rock fall, or forest fire, or some other thing happens that you want people to stay away for a while? Do you plan on removing obvisous fake logs from really bored germans? How long will logs with porn/spam/obscene langage sit there till you can get a friendly reviewer to remove them?

 

Your hypotheticals don't apply to the cache I'm talking about. Boy, now I really feel like I opened up a can of worms. Tell you what - go into my profile, look at my notes for the cache. You want to initiate an archive, go ahead. Whatever makes you feel better. Next time I won't waste my time and money helping my fellow local cachers who enjoy this cache, which happens to be one of the oldest in the immediate area. I thought that was important, but whatever I'm a newb. I'll just stick to caching rather than wasting time here, it's not worth it.

[+Renegade Knight]

... Would I be out of line by replaceing the contaner, and maintained the cache, as if its my own?

 

TNX

 

Lee

 

Not at all. Just remember that if the owner ever rediscovers caching, you have been maintaining the cache for them out of courtesy. Not ownership. That way there won't be any hard feelings on your part for being nice.

 

Edit: Forgot that I answered this before. Same answer. Different angle.

Edited November 4, 2008 by Renegade Knight

[+Prime Suspect]

Your hypotheticals don't apply to the cache I'm talking about. Boy, now I really feel like I opened up a can of worms. Tell you what - go into my profile, look at my notes for the cache. You want to initiate an archive, go ahead.

 

I did check out the cache. I notice that it now has a Needs Maintenance icon attached to it, even though it apparently has been fixed. I wonder why that is. Oh, now I remember.... THERE'S NO ACTIVE OWNER TO REMOVE IT!!!!!!

[Dj Storm]

My name is Dj Storm, I'm a geocacher, and I maintain a cache who's owner is missing.

 

I started geocaching in late 2006, and put on my todo list a cache placed in 2001. A few months later, someone bragged about destroying it, followed several weeks later by a found it log, saying that the cache is still there, logbook and swag, but the cache container was stolen (only the lid remained). As nobody replaced the container (the finders suggested that the next seeker should bring one), I brought a tupperware with me for my find.

When I found the cache, I decided on the spot to unofficially 'adopt' it. There were many reasons for my decision:

- it was the first cache placed in the area;

- it was in a scenic location;

- it was in a historic location;

- the hiding spot was excellent (the logbook was dry after going through a winter in a plastic bag);

- the hiding spot was well chosen - not far from the trail, but not visible from it; also, the area around the cache could support extensive trampling without being affected.

I decided at that time to ask for a forced adoption after my third maintenance visit, to prove that I have the will and possibility to maintain it; unfortunately, forced adoption was banned a year later.

 

How about the ranger tries emailing the cache owner threw the owner link on the gc.com cache page?

If the ranger emails the cache owner, he won't receive an answer, no matter if the cache is maintained or not. However, if he uses the info inside the container, he could email me.

 

What if something written in the descrption needs change?(what the container was, or its color size shape)

On my second maintenance visit I replaced the container with one matching the description.

 

What if the hint/clue needs to be changed? What if someone can't find the cache and emails the owner asking for help?

If the seeker did a minimum of work, he would have noticed the hint, and the spoiler photo. Some less obvious hints can be found in the logs of the other finders. If I receive a request for help, I will direct the seeker to the cache page. I I receive a "send me the codez" type email, I will ignore it - I'm not helping lazy people (or arrogant ones).

 

How about adding some new features to the page like attributes or waypoints? What happens if the area has a rock fall, or forest fire, or some other thing happens that you want people to stay away for a while?

The fact that the cache description was correct was one motive in favor of not asking for immediate forced adoption. Minor events (like a downed tree) won't affect the geocaching experience, and major ones (like forest fires) are rare enough, and I will deal with that when (if) the situation arises.

 

Do you plan on removing obvisous fake logs from really bored germans? How long will logs with porn/spam/obscene langage sit there till you can get a friendly reviewer to remove them?

There were only 3 fake finds: 1 from Germany, 1 from the US, and one from UK - the UK one is actually a second online "found it" for a valid find. By a twist of fate, as several finders didn't log online, the number of physical finds is equal with the number of online finds, so this doesn't really bother me.

 

I did check out the cache. I notice that it now has a Needs Maintenance icon attached to it, even though it apparently has been fixed. I wonder why that is. Oh, now I remember.... THERE'S NO ACTIVE OWNER TO REMOVE IT!!!!!!

My cache had the "needs maintenance" attribute (ironically placed by the cache muggler); after the second maintenance visit I politely asked the reviewer to remove it (and he did - many thanks!)

 

I won't maintain every cache I find (will add ziplocks and dehumidifiers if needed, but the rest is up to the cache owner). I definitely won't replace a missing cache, and I recommend archiving for these ones; I have no problem letting or requesting a cache to be archived when the cache needs to be put out of its misery. But if someone considers a cache significant enough to maintain it, I say: DO IT! Thank you for caring!

[albertbowen]

OOPS.. Double click = double post! Sorry...

Edited November 5, 2008 by albertbowen

[albertbowen]

Good topic... sounds like the community should have a vote (if this forum system supports polling) and decide upon a rule for this situation. Reading through the comments here, I see both sides of the argument, and though some blood pressures have risen slightly, I believe ALL are interested in the best interests of the geocaching community.

 

Having said all that, it seems to me part of being an active, valid cache is the link to the owner/maintainer through geocaching.com. What is a cache, simply a charted box in the woods? Or would you include in the description of "cache" an active link to an owner who remains available to take care of what he/she has placed? It IS rather special to have these older caches in the community, but to me it's value is quite decreased when the owner link is broken.. It's not the end of the world when a cache has to be retired, regardless of its age; a cache should have every functionality available to it since the day it was created, and to me that means an active link to an active owner is just as vital to it being considered a valid cache as a lid, logbook, and location listing.

 

Barring a change to our online system to change ownership details and contact info for a cache, perhaps after a 'probationary' period for the original owner to wake up and respond, I vote the best way to handle it is retirement and replacement. We just made history with an election, perhaps we need a vote or a geocaching congress to further define rules and procedures?

 

That's my $.02 and I'm sticking to it.. though I'm a newbie, I'm an old newbie and want the best for a fascinating sport to make it better for all involved. Salute to all of you for caring enough about geocaching to ruffle a few feathers over it.

[+welch]

You know, I've been posting to these forums for all of a week and you're the second 'old timer' who seems afwully jaded and cynical to someone taking an interest in the hobby. What gives, Mr. wet blanket? How would the 'ranger' email the cache owner without an email address anyway? There was no indication in the cache that it was a geocache other than signatures in the logbook. I printed out the geocache form from this website and included it when i repaired the cache. Somehow this gets interpreted as actions which would make geocachers look bad. I don't get it, I really don't. It would have been better for me to remove the cache completely, since by all indications it was abandoned, and I volunteer my time and effort for trash removal in the forest 3 seasons each year, as well as work with several groups including the local mountain biking and native american groups which utilize and maintain the forest. Then when people who already have the cache set up in their GPS and find NOTHING instead of a nice clean cache where they would expect one, this is somehow making the geocachers group look bad?

Uh? How about the ranger tries emailing the cache owner threw the owner link on the gc.com cache page?

If you had removed the damaged cache completey you would have better grounds for getting the cache listing archived. Getting the listing taken care of would be part of the maintance IMO.

 

Just my opinion here, I may be wrong, but I think your bad experience with someone completely changing a cache and moving it is tainting your view of the scenario I'm presenting. Maybe it's a bad idea to try to integrate into this community, as i'm beginning to get a vibe that geocaching newbs are not particularly welcome and somehow we are tainting your hobby. I'd like to be snide and say 'well next time i'll just take a garbage bag and clean out the broken glass, wet log book and trinkets littering my local forest' but realistically, I plan to continue to maintain this cache in a good condition whether or not I have approval of someone on this message board. When I first found this cache, I was a 'muggle' who never knew what geocaching was and it piqued my interest in the hobby, and for that reason I have a special interest in keeping this cache from falling into the memory hole.

Newbs are welcome. Stubborn people that think their idea is the best ever and can't see anyone else's point on anything are welcome also. (though they will probably spend a lot of time butting heads )

 

I happen to agree to Prime Suspect, if you have no chance of ever getting control of the cache page, then work on getting the old one archived and start over with your own.

There doesn't have to be something as severe as the location being changed to need to make some changes that you need page control to do. There are many things the owner is expected to do, that involve control you won't ever have .

What if something written in the descrption needs change?(what the container was, or its color size shape) What if the hint/clue needs to be changed? What if someone can't find the cache and emails the owner asking for help? How about adding some new features to the page like attributes or waypoints? What happens if the area has a rock fall, or forest fire, or some other thing happens that you want people to stay away for a while? Do you plan on removing obvisous fake logs from really bored germans? How long will logs with porn/spam/obscene langage sit there till you can get a friendly reviewer to remove them?

 

Your hypotheticals don't apply to the cache I'm talking about. Boy, now I really feel like I opened up a can of worms. Tell you what - go into my profile, look at my notes for the cache. You want to initiate an archive, go ahead. Whatever makes you feel better. Next time I won't waste my time and money helping my fellow local cachers who enjoy this cache, which happens to be one of the oldest in the immediate area. I thought that was important, but whatever I'm a newb. I'll just stick to caching rather than wasting time here, it's not worth it.

1. I was giving generalized things that people that assume maintance role CAN NOT do.

2. Looking at the specific cache, crator, I think at least 3 of the things I meantioned could be done to this cache, but won't happen because the person who has control of the page isn't around.

3. You seem to be easily offended, so yea get out of the forums before you get ticked off. Have fun caching!

[janx]

Good topic... sounds like the community should have a vote (if this forum system supports polling) and decide upon a rule for this situation. Reading through the comments here, I see both sides of the argument, and though some blood pressures have risen slightly, I believe ALL are interested in the best interests of the geocaching community.

 

Having said all that, it seems to me part of being an active, valid cache is the link to the owner/maintainer through geocaching.com. What is a cache, simply a charted box in the woods? Or would you include in the description of "cache" an active link to an owner who remains available to take care of what he/she has placed? It IS rather special to have these older caches in the community, but to me it's value is quite decreased when the owner link is broken.. It's not the end of the world when a cache has to be retired, regardless of its age; a cache should have every functionality available to it since the day it was created, and to me that means an active link to an active owner is just as vital to it being considered a valid cache as a lid, logbook, and location listing.

 

Barring a change to our online system to change ownership details and contact info for a cache, perhaps after a 'probationary' period for the original owner to wake up and respond, I vote the best way to handle it is retirement and replacement. We just made history with an election, perhaps we need a vote or a geocaching congress to further define rules and procedures?

 

That's my $.02 and I'm sticking to it.. though I'm a newbie, I'm an old newbie and want the best for a fascinating sport to make it better for all involved. Salute to all of you for caring enough about geocaching to ruffle a few feathers over it.

 

I concur. I do see Prime's point, though I believe he's being a bit harsh.

 

It has always been my experience that helping to fix a damaged cache is a good thing.

 

Had the cache been "normal' and the finder found it wet and cleaned it, everyone would be happy. Had the finder left it (not his), and gone home to archive it, what then? WHo goes back to clean it up?

 

Just fixing unmaintained caches is one path.

Archiving unmaintained caches is another.

 

In any event, it would be awfully nice if somebody FIXED it or REMOVED it after geting it archived (requiring yet another trip). And I suspect removing a cache would come under equal flak.

 

Personally, I'd be happy to maintain a cache, making multiple trips. I would not be happy to find somebody's unmaintained cache, have to leave it (so I don't steal it), contact the owner, wait for that to fail, request an SBA, wait for it to be archived, and then have to go back out to remove it, just to DO THE RIGHT THING.

 

Bear in mind, if I'm going to shut down a cache, I'm prolly not interested in going through the hassle of making a new cache and posting it.

 

fact is, a cache ought to have multiple contacts, in case the first one drops out.

 

Fact is, there are folks who LIKE the adoption method, and the COMMUNITY ought to have a VOTE on whether they want that policy instituted in GC.COM's code.

[+Prime Suspect]

Barring a change to our online system to change ownership details and contact info for a cache, perhaps after a 'probationary' period for the original owner to wake up and respond, ...

Based on GCs explanation of why they no longer do non-consensual adoptions, I don't see that happening, ever. The reasoning is that the cache is the physical property of the owner, and they don't the the right to assign ownership of someone's physical property to someone else. All they can do is de-list (archive) it. If their is no physical property (cache is missing), then there is nothing to be adopted. It should be archived, and anyone can then put out their own cache.

Edited November 6, 2008 by Prime Suspect

[+TeddyR]

Neglected caches by inactive cachers sure is irksome...

[joboblouis]

Seems like far too many rules for a laid back sport. Having to worry about all of this reminds me of Mark Twain's (I think) quote about golf being a good walk spoiled. I'm new to geocaching and don't really want my good walks spoiled so think I'd just try to do what seems right and move on to the next cache.

[joboblouis]

dp, sorry

Edited November 10, 2008 by joboblouis