Should I report these 2 bad caches?

[+SparksGuy]

Should I report these 2 bad caches?

Or what should I do?

 

Cache #1

Hidden: June 2007

December 2007 log is full. Posted by a finder.

December 2007 by owner - Temporarily Disable Listing

Jan. 2009 - This cache is STILL temporarily unavailable after 14 months!

 

Cache #2

Posted Coordinates are wrong, very wrong.

Owner ADDED to the cache description "moved cache to ...".

There is NO notice that the cache is not at the posted coordinates. The difference is 2.489 miles! At first I was sure there was a typo or two. I have emailed the owner stating my confusion and detailing the process of updating coordinates. I have since talked to other finders who confirmed the cache moved over 2 miles.

 

Opinions please;

SparksGuy

[+Keruso]

1. yes. sounds like the guy gave up on caching. BUT you should at least go for the cache first to see if it's still there and check out what the problem is. Then maybe post an SBA

 

2. did he post that the cache was actually, physically moved and given new coords? Otherwise, no, don't SBA this one until you are absoultly sure about it

[+SparksGuy]

1. yes. sounds like the guy gave up on caching. BUT you should at least go for the cache first to see if it's still there and check out what the problem is. Then maybe post an SBA

Nano Log was full.

 

 

2. did he post that the cache was actually, physically moved and given new coords? Otherwise, no, don't SBA this one until you are absoultly sure about it

Posted location is wrong in any form of down load.

The words "not at the posted coordinates" are not used on the cache page.

This cache is not a mystery cache; it is a traditional.

Right above the hint, the long cache description says: "I had to move the cache to a different spot...New coords are as follows... N latitude, W longitude". (I removed the numbers to protect the guilty.)

 

SparksGuy

[+9Key]

1. yes. sounds like the guy gave up on caching. BUT you should at least go for the cache first to see if it's still there and check out what the problem is. Then maybe post an SBA

Nano Log was full.

Help out and place a new log.

 

2. did he post that the cache was actually, physically moved and given new coords? Otherwise, no, don't SBA this one until you are absoultly sure about it

Posted location is wrong in any form of down load.

The words "not at the posted coordinates" are not used on the cache page.

This cache is not a mystery cache; it is a traditional.

Right above the hint, the long cache description says: "I had to move the cache to a different spot...New coords are as follows... N latitude, W longitude". (I removed the numbers to protect the guilty.)

 

SparksGuy

Email your local cache reviewer. They can change the coordinates.

[+Rross1973]

I would report them. I was recently on a Boardman, Ohio run with several others and I requested that 3 caches be looked into for maint. because we were with a guide who knew the area and found all the caches we were going after. The three in question have not been found in months and the cache owner has not logged into geocaching.com for months and never responded to the main. request. I think that if your going to hide caches you need to look after them and post acurate information about them. There are three others in my area where they have not been found since spring 2008 and have many DNF's.

[+Too Tall John]

Log the 1st one as a SBA.

 

Write a note to your reviewer for the 2nd.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Should I report these 2 bad caches?

Or what should I do?

 

Cache #1

Hidden: June 2007

December 2007 log is full. Posted by a finder.

December 2007 by owner - Temporarily Disable Listing

Jan. 2009 - This cache is STILL temporarily unavailable after 14 months!

 

Cache #2

Posted Coordinates are wrong, very wrong.

Owner ADDED to the cache description "moved cache to ...".

There is NO notice that the cache is not at the posted coordinates. The difference is 2.489 miles! At first I was sure there was a typo or two. I have emailed the owner stating my confusion and detailing the process of updating coordinates. I have since talked to other finders who confirmed the cache moved over 2 miles.

 

Opinions please;

SparksGuy

Well, for #1, since you obviously have more than enough free time and energy to find such situations and report them to us, and since it sounds like the owner is still somewhat busy with matters other than geocaching (yes, it happens!), I suggest that you use a bit of that time and energy to drop by the cache and replace the logbook (I usually leave the old logbook in place in the container, and simply add a new logbook, marked "Replacement logbook, started January nn, 2009"). And then, upon my return home, I would post a note on the cache listing page stating that I had replaced the logbook and that the owner, if they wish, is free to enable the listing once again.

 

What you describe for cache #2 was apparently at one time rather common practice in some regions of the USA and elsewhere, and I found this situation more than once while caching during my consulting trip to Malaysia in July 2008, in caches that were quite a few years old! For this one, if it bothered me, I would likely file an SBA on the cache, stating that the cache container has been moved over 2 miles, but that the waypoint coordinates have not been updated, and that the cache listing page is rather confusing. Doing so will likely save some future seekers some heartache!

[+badlands]

Yes, report away. An SBA is in order.

[+KJcachers]

I report maintenance need when I feel they are needed. I log SBA as well if maintenance is not done or owner is MIA. Reviewers can take it from there. Of course, I have been accused of trying to be a Cache Police so take what I say with a grain of salt.

[+undertree]

I replace logs on micros all the time. Not a big deal and if its not a bad hide keep it going. Yes its not your responsibility but neither is holding the door open for a lady.

 

The other one I would email your reviewer and let him know about the coord change. I did this once because it kind of irks me when folks change coords without going through the correct process. I have no problem with contacting a reviewer about anything that has not had a legitimate find for 10+ months and is in a urban setting. If the owner doesn't respond to emails and has not logged on for a long time then stick a fork in it, its done.

[+briansnat]

I'd say drop a note to your reviewer about both and let him decide what should be done. My guess is that he will update the coords of #2 and archive #1 after giving the owner a few weeks to fix it.

[Clan Riffster]

Both caches could, conceivably, rate an SBA, if you are the type to post such logs. One possible deciding factor, (at least it is for me), is the quality of the hide. Naturally, this is often a matter of personal bias, but most folks can tell a carpy cache from an awesome one. A film canister in an uninspired spot, with a seven word cache page would, (in my utterly biased view), lend itself more toward an SBA than an ammo can hidden at a waterfall, when all other factors are equal.

 

I have no qualms about keeping what I consider to be a quality hide alive by repairing containers, adding swag, logbooks, etc.

Carpy hides, not so much.

[+9Key]

The problem with posting an SBA on a cache that just needs maintainence is that if it gets archived it becomes trash. Who is going to remove it if the owner is MIA? If the cache is close to you just put in a new log and be done with it.

[+SparksGuy]

Thanks to all who replied. You have all given me much food for thought. This is a difficult and complicated subject. I don’t want to post an SBA. What I really want is for owners to do occasional maintenance. Cache #1 owner left it disabled for over a year. Cache #2 could be corrected from the owners computer (or GC admin. reviewer). So, my decision is to turn both over to my local reviewer. I’ll let him call me the bad guy that complained, if he wants to.

 

I am not one who likes a never ending thread so, PLEASE let us call this one closed.

SparksGuy

[+Renegade Knight]

1. yes. sounds like the guy gave up on caching. BUT you should at least go for the cache first to see if it's still there and check out what the problem is. Then maybe post an SBA

Nano Log was full.

 

 

2. did he post that the cache was actually, physically moved and given new coords? Otherwise, no, don't SBA this one until you are absoultly sure about it

Posted location is wrong in any form of down load.

The words "not at the posted coordinates" are not used on the cache page.

This cache is not a mystery cache; it is a traditional.

Right above the hint, the long cache description says: "I had to move the cache to a different spot...New coords are as follows... N latitude, W longitude". (I removed the numbers to protect the guilty.)

 

SparksGuy

 

On the first, the cache is viable. A nano log is hardly a reason to ask that it be archived. Swap out the log, email the owner and offer to get them the log. If that doesn't work post a scan of the log to your log and call it a day.

 

As for the second. It doesn't quite fit the rules, but it's not broken either. I'd go to the new location and find the cache and log my find when I finally got around to it.

[Skippermark]

Lots of times if it's a cache someone hasn't found and the owner doesn't cache anymore, people will hike out and replace the damaged container. Technically, the cache should be archived because the owner isn't maintaining it, but there are a lot of "hidden heros" who would rather replace the container or drop in a new log and not see the cache get archived.

[+andGuest]

 

On the first, the cache is viable. A nano log is hardly a reason to ask that it be archived. Swap out the log, email the owner and offer to get them the log. If that doesn't work post a scan of the log to your log and call it a day.

 

As for the second. It doesn't quite fit the rules, but it's not broken either. I'd go to the new location and find the cache and log my find when I finally got around to it.

 

I completely disagree with the comment above when it comes to caches that have absent cache owners. If the OP replaces, then who is responsible for replacing it the next time it is full? Replacing logs for irresponsible CO just perpetuates the poor behavior. If it is a good spot then let it get archived and put a well maintained cache there instead.

 

In the second instance it sounds to me like it may just be a novice cacher. They may not be aware of the feature to update the coords. I fall in the category of notifying the reviewer and have them update the coords since they are listed on the cache page.

[Clan Riffster]

I completely disagree with the comment above when it comes to caches that have absent cache owners.

I sorta agree. Cache with issues + absent owners = SBA. The exception would be personal bias. If it was a cache I really enjoyed, I'd keep it alive so someone else could share the experience, maintaining the historical integrity of the original, rather than replacing an archived one with a new one.

[+SparksGuy]

On the first, the cache is viable. A nano log is hardly a reason to ask that it be archived.

Agreed, a full log is not reason to archive. But it has been disabled over a year! No maintenance. I turned it over to the reviewer who archived it. BTW, it was not a quality cache, just an LPC of sorts.

 

As for the second. It doesn't quite fit the rules, but it's not broken either.

Again, I turn this over to my reviewer who Fixed the location. I had already emailed the owner with help, including that they could ask the reviewer to fix it.

 

Both may be examples of owner apathy.

 

This thread should now die a peaceful death. Start a new one if you wish.