Archiving caches

[+Harry Dolphin]

Wondering what is up with Pofe? She doesn't seem to have archived any long missing caches, or caches with warnings, in over six months now.

[+avgraphics]

This is not entirely accurate HD.. one example I can think of is "Nurture the Trees", a long neglected cache near my home - owned by my caching buddy puma732. It was archived last month by Pofe - here's a link to the log. This occurred only 6 or 7 weeks ago (not even close to 6 months.. let alone over)..

 

 

[+jc_hook]

I was hoping Pofe would NOT archive a cache GC533C, but now I'm starting to wonder if it's time since the location isn't what might be called "pristine" and the CO hasn't checked in since September 10, 2005. Pofe are you out there?

[+Harry Dolphin]

I was hoping Pofe would NOT archive a cache GC533C, but now I'm starting to wonder if it's time since the location isn't what might be called "pristine" and the CO hasn't checked in since September 10, 2005. Pofe are you out there?

 

Okay. Sorry if I were blunt on that one. If you like it, go for it! It doesn't have an SBA, or a warning.

 

A few random samplings from the red caches on my GSAK:

GCGZXD Warning May 14

GCMF99 Warning May 14

GCHEA6 Warning May 1

GCXKFJ Warning May 14

GCV01J Warning May 14

 

Picked at random. Okay. Only 5 and a half months.

 

Or, maybe I should just shut up?

[+Packanack]

Or, maybe I should just shut up?

 

Harry

I think not , this is one of the sticking points for those who view our hobby as problematic. Stuff left behind and unattended. This is a topic that needs to be fleshed out by local clubs. Certainly Geocaching.com has no ability to exact conformity from disappearing owners, so it may be necessary for local clubs to pick up the slack. NNJC what is your position ? Before you know it people will get the idea that if geocachers can leave their junk behind in the woods , then they surely can build fire rings where they like and can leave beer bottles behind too. This topic requires discussion.

 

Or, maybe I should just shut up?

Edited October 30, 2008 by Packanack

[+MountainRacer]

Perhaps there's been a swing in Groundspeak policy to let problem caches slide for longer. Circumstances lead me to doubt that there's a problem with Pofe personally, since publishing hasn't slipped. Maybe one of the other local reviewers could weigh in on the situation...?

[+HaLiJuSaPa]

Perhaps there's been a swing in Groundspeak policy to let problem caches slide for longer. Circumstances lead me to doubt that there's a problem with Pofe personally, since publishing hasn't slipped. Maybe one of the other local reviewers could weigh in on the situation...?

 

I think you are right, because I have noticed the same thing with NY Admin as well (caches seem to slide for a lot longer or rarely/never get archived by him(?)).

 

But I agree wtih Packanack that this is a problem because it builds the perception of "geolitter" being left out in the woods, etc.

[Keystone]

Keeping up with maintenance issues is an entirely optional job for volunteer cache reviewers.

 

Many choose to sweep through disabled caches that have been "temporarily" down for too long. It's pretty easy to do that by running a pocket query for the country or state which returns only disabled caches.

 

Some choose to also look for caches with "needs maintenance" attributes. (Remember, reviewers are not notified when these are logged.) Usually it takes multiple pocket queries for this, and the process is error-prone. These "sweeps" would be less frequent. My last NM sweep was in December 2007. (New cache reviews slow way down for me in the winter months.)

 

Still fewer reviewers sweep through for caches which OUGHT to be disabled or archived, but simply have a bunch of DNF logs and no finds for a long time. I've just started one of those sweeps, which I'll work on for an hour here and an hour there throughout the winter months. At the same time, I'm moving clearly missing trackables out of the cache page inventory and into an "unknown location."

 

If someone is troubled about a cache, and the owner is not responsive to requests, then log a "needs archived." This sends a notice to the responsible reviewer. Responding to these requests is a higher obligation than the voluntary tasks outlined above. Some reviewers rely quite heavily on these logs as the primary means of alerting them to problem caches.

 

So, from the above accounts, POFE is doing a superb job in reviewing caches - which is a *reviewer's* primary role. Whether he/she/it (many reviewers are dogs) chooses to volunteer extra time for existing cache maintenance issues is entirely up to him/her/it.

[+Packanack]

Whether he/she/it (many reviewers are dogs) chooses to volunteer extra time for existing cache maintenance issues is entirely up to him/her/it.

 

With that said, it would appear that the local clubs should carry the greater part of the burden of regulating and overseeing what become problems of geolitter.

[+tadpole379]

I have seen a cacher with several hides in an area relocated to another state, and when they move they archive all their listings because they no longer have the ability to maintain these caches. Except that many of these caches are simply archived from www.geocaching.com, and not physically removed from their hiding spots in the woods. I don't know how often this happens, but Walkin' Ed and myself took a trip into Harriman to physically remove two caches that had been archived but left in place because of this situation. It is possible that this cacher has other archived caches still in place.

 

In this case a reviewer wouldn't be alerted to any problem since the cache were archived (and presumably) removed by the CO. On these caches, the owner did not mention that he was unable to retrieve the caches or that they were still in place, he simply archived the listings.

 

I think it really needs to be up to the local cachers/groups to monitor the caches in their area, and to alert a reviewer if their in a problem with a listing or TB that they can't fix themselves. People move away, stop caching, etc, and leave behind caches that need to be taken care of in order to preserve the good name of geocachers and to prevent the negatives perceptions that we are leaving "geolitter" and that cachers are up to no good.

[+HaLiJuSaPa]

I have seen a cacher with several hides in an area relocated to another state, and when they move they archive all their listings because they no longer have the ability to maintain these caches. Except that many of these caches are simply archived from www.geocaching.com, and not physically removed from their hiding spots in the woods. I don't know how often this happens, but Walkin' Ed and myself took a trip into Harriman to physically remove two caches that had been archived but left in place because of this situation. It is possible that this cacher has other archived caches still in place.

 

In this case a reviewer wouldn't be alerted to any problem since the cache were archived (and presumably) removed by the CO. On these caches, the owner did not mention that he was unable to retrieve the caches or that they were still in place, he simply archived the listings.

 

I think it really needs to be up to the local cachers/groups to monitor the caches in their area, and to alert a reviewer if their in a problem with a listing or TB that they can't fix themselves. People move away, stop caching, etc, and leave behind caches that need to be taken care of in order to preserve the good name of geocachers and to prevent the negatives perceptions that we are leaving "geolitter" and that cachers are up to no good.

 

This would be a good reason for Jeremy to bring back the ability for Premium members the option to see Archived caches on the maps. It was the main reason we "went premium" (though we kept it both in the hope that it will come back and the site certainly deserves our $30/year otherwise).

[+brian b]

I have seen a cacher with several hides in an area relocated to another state, and when they move they archive all their listings because they no longer have the ability to maintain these caches. Except that many of these caches are simply archived from www.geocaching.com, and not physically removed from their hiding spots in the woods. I don't know how often this happens, but Walkin' Ed and myself took a trip into Harriman to physically remove two caches that had been archived but left in place because of this situation. It is possible that this cacher has other archived caches still in place.

 

I, too, have removed caches from a local cacher who is no longer local (probably the same one that Ed and you removed in Harriman). I would say that our job as responsible geocachers, those who are actively involved in the game, is to not only hide worthy caches, but to clean up the messes made by those who are unwilling to play by the rules.

[+Packanack]

It should not be that much of a problem to post a cache note and forum note asking the next finder to pick it up, before going off to wherever. Some times it happens suddenly that a person can not attend to their caches as in the case of , injury or illness and many times the easiest way to handle it would be to ask for a pick up.