Re-Visited Caches

[+The 5 of us]

I want to get peoples opinions on re-visited cache areas. Talk about just trying to run your numbers up Bradford PA is a good place to live. The link below is just one of many re- caches in that area. Do you think a cache in the same place and same type of hide should get you an extra smiley? I am not against any cache types but once you have found the cache, you found it, move on. My girlfriend and I love getting our numbers up but we also like figuring out the tough puzzles and going for those long hikes. We live about an hour from Bradford and I just think it is rediculous to archive a cache just to publish a new one so people can get that extra smiley. If you have found every cache in that area go exploring new places. The Alleghany National Forest is close by and there are thousands of acres of woods to hide a "new" cache.

 

This is a quote from the cache page.

 

"This cache replaces another that we archived. Bradford has so many and the cachers around here need to travel to get more, so we figured we'd archive some of ours and place new ones so cachers could get some nearby."

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...f2-774c7cc08d3a

[+Team Perks]

I don't think it's necessarily ridiculous. If you're in a fairly small town (as Bradford seems to be) and you and your friends happen to enjoy hiding caches for each other to find during your lunch breaks or in the evenings after work, eventually you'll start running out of good places to hide them. So either you archive existing caches and hide another one nearby or you start hiding caches in really lame places. Or you just don't hide any more caches. No matter what, evidently you'll hear someone complain about it (as this topic shows!).

 

Now, do you know that it's the same cache? The coordinates show it 30 feet away from the old hide. That could make it an entirely different cache. Either way, the only way you'd know is if you went looking for it again.

 

(Random story: Several years ago, after some friends took us out caching for the day, I hid a cache near their house as a token of my appreciation. Turns out there had been not just one but TWO old, archived caches in the exact same rock formation, in the exact same hidey-hole as we hid ours in.)

[+The 5 of us]

I am not sure if it is the same exact hide or not. I never found either one I just was looking at the map and read the page. The one below I have actually looked for but I have never found. It is in the middle of there "town square" and there are always too many muggles around to do a good search. I am the type of cacher that looks at the map and tries to get as many done in an area as possible while I am there. I don't want to have to go back and "re-visit" the same spot. I just want to look at the map and see there are none left in a town then move on to the next town but its hard enough with actual new caches coming out all the time. Its not about numbers to me I just enjoy going and seeing different areas not the same ones over and over.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...43-98319c87df5d

 

"This cache is hidden the same as the first veterans square cache. Those that logged it orginally may do so again."

[+Gamaliel]

Personally, I'm not a fan of new hides in the same spot. What was wrong with the old one? No need to revisit the same rock, tree stump, lamp post, electrical box, whatever, all over again, and a decent sized park or wilderness area will usually have new caches frequently enough to make another visit worthwhile.

 

But if a cacher wants to put out a new hide, that is his or her prerogative. A new hide and a new GC number makes a new smiley fine from my point of view, even if it's in the same spot.

[Mr.Yuck]

Edited in favor of my other post below.

Edited April 9, 2009 by TheWhiteUrkel

[+roziecakes]

Sometimes if I revisit a site I'll just post a note, I didn't even know you could log a smiley twice. If that is possible I suppose there are people that do it... I'm in it for the experience rather than the numbers myself, but I know that's not true for everybody.

 

Wow I had no idea you could log a cache twice... I guess I learn new things every day.

 

-Rozie

[Mr.Yuck]

Sometimes if I revisit a site I'll just post a note, I didn't even know you could log a smiley twice. If that is possible I suppose there are people that do it... I'm in it for the experience rather than the numbers myself, but I know that's not true for everybody.

 

Wow I had no idea you could log a cache twice... I guess I learn new things every day.

 

-Rozie

 

Oh no, you can log a cache as found twice. Even one you own! What they are talking about is archiving a cache and submitting a new listing for the same spot.

 

By the way, I was surfing the area on Geocaching.com Google maps, and it's not like a huge trend or anything. I think you found the only two with such verbage in the whole area.

[+Star*Hopper]

But see, you can't do somethin' again.

You c'n do sump'n similar!

~*

Edited April 9, 2009 by Star*Hopper

[+roziecakes]

That is really something else... I will never do it, but it does make me wonder about some folks.

 

-Roz

[+BCandMsKitty]

I've done it with two or three of my caches that ended up being too low in higher than normal water levels this Spring!

I moved them anywhere from 30 to 100 feet and hid them in different containers and with different camo methods. In other words, entirely different caches, even though they are in what you would say is the same place. Old caches archived, new caches published with a new smiley for whoever finds them.

See... there can always be a good reason for something, even if you don't see it yourself.

[+roziecakes]

I've done it with two or three of my caches that ended up being too low in higher than normal water levels this Spring!

I moved them anywhere from 30 to 100 feet and hid them in different containers and with different camo methods. In other words, entirely different caches, even though they are in what you would say is the same place. Old caches archived, new caches published with a new smiley for whoever finds them.

See... there can always be a good reason for something, even if you don't see it yourself.

 

Actually, when you put it that way it does make sense. Thank you! I appreciate you posting this.

 

-Rozie

[+sbell111]

I can think of three occasions over the years when I have been looking for a relatively new cache and had gotten serious deja vu when approaching ground zero. At least one of these new caches was hidden in the exact same spot as the old cache, but by a cacher who hadn't even started caching yet.

 

On each occasion, I happily logged my find.

[+briansnat]

I want to get peoples opinions on re-visited cache areas. Talk about just trying to run your numbers up Bradford PA is a good place to live. The link below is just one of many re- caches in that area. Do you think a cache in the same place and same type of hide should get you an extra smiley? I am not against any cache types but once you have found the cache, you found it, move on. My girlfriend and I love getting our numbers up but we also like figuring out the tough puzzles and going for those long hikes. We live about an hour from Bradford and I just think it is rediculous to archive a cache just to publish a new one so people can get that extra smiley. If you have found every cache in that area go exploring new places. The Alleghany National Forest is close by and there are thousands of acres of woods to hide a "new" cache.

 

This is a quote from the cache page.

 

"This cache replaces another that we archived. Bradford has so many and the cachers around here need to travel to get more, so we figured we'd archive some of ours and place new ones so cachers could get some nearby."

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...f2-774c7cc08d3a

 

The term I've heard for that is "cache churning". I know some cache owners who do it. I think submitting a new listing for an identical cache in the same spot by the same owner is silly.

 

I've also seen owners turn stages of an archived multi or a puzzle into a new cache listing. I don't see anything wrong with that - its a different experience. I've also seen people place a new cache at the site of an old, archived cache. That is fine especially when the old cache was a good one. I prefer that to keeping an unmaintained cache alive.

 

If it's a new listing I'll always gladly log a find.

Edited April 9, 2009 by briansnat

[Mr.Yuck]

I can think of three occasions over the years when I have been looking for a relatively new cache and had gotten serious deja vu when approaching ground zero. At least one of these new caches was hidden in the exact same spot as the old cache, but by a cacher who hadn't even started caching yet.

 

On each occasion, I happily logged my find.

 

That happened to me last summer! It was in BrianSnat's neighborhood, as a matter of fact. I didn't really even realize it until I found the old archived listing, clicked on "find nearby caches", and the new one came up as "here". That was pretty funny. But the same owner with a new listing in the same spot, and with verbage on the cache page such as has been posted? I think I'd pass on that one.