Jump to content

What Do You Think About This?


Mini-Geek
Followers 1

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

There is a cache in my area, named Chosen Hill, which seems as if it is not being maintained. It was placed on 08/03/2002, by a very active cacher, who has sadly passed away, the cache was then adopted by a new owner.

 

The cache has been found by over 240 cachers, and was my first ever find, therefore I do not want it to be archived.

 

There have been need maintenance logs for over a year now, mostly due to a filling log book. I visited this cache in January of this year to place a TB, and at that time the log book was totally full, apart from the back page, since then there have been numerous "Needs maintenance" logs, and other comments about the log book, with no response from the cache owner.

 

The CO logs in regularly.

 

What do you guys think about this? I would be happy to adopt the cache to keep it running, if this is the case, how would I go about it? I have placed caches before, but never adopted them.

 

Thanks

Link to comment

Hi,

 

There is a cache in my area, named Chosen Hill, which seems as if it is not being maintained. It was placed on 08/03/2002, by a very active cacher, who has sadly passed away, the cache was then adopted by a new owner.

 

The cache has been found by over 240 cachers, and was my first ever find, therefore I do not want it to be archived.

 

There have been need maintenance logs for over a year now, mostly due to a filling log book. I visited this cache in January of this year to place a TB, and at that time the log book was totally full, apart from the back page, since then there have been numerous "Needs maintenance" logs, and other comments about the log book, with no response from the cache owner.

 

The CO logs in regularly.

 

What do you guys think about this? I would be happy to adopt the cache to keep it running, if this is the case, how would I go about it? I have placed caches before, but never adopted them.

 

Thanks

 

You need to contact the cache owner. They have to give their blessing to the adoption.

Link to comment
You need to contact the cache owner. They have to give their blessing to the adoption.

 

So, if the cache owner were to agree to the adoption after I have emailed them, what is the process after that? Is there anything I will have to do, or would the CO do the necessary things, and then it appears in the "My Geocaches" list, as if I created it.

Link to comment

of course if you get no response from the current CO and would really like to see this cache "live" you could put a new logbook in it

 

yes, yes i know it encourages CO to be lazy but its an option

 

of course they still have to clear those NM logs and there is a chance that someone may contact the reviewer and they will be given a time frame to fix it or it gets archived

Link to comment

Actually, there haven't been "numerous Needs Maintenance logs" - What there has been are many very polite cachers, trying to be helpful, who have mentioned the full logbook within their Found logs. If they'd all added NM logs with their Found logs there would be a long trail of blue crosses all down through the logs and maybe the CO would have paid more attention!

 

Good luck with your bid to keep this old one alive, I hope that you are able to adopt it because you have a personal interest in this cache. I like to see the Golden Oldies kept going when they're in good locations.

 

MrsB :laughing:

Link to comment

I do wish that there was the facility for cachers to offer to adopt an old cache that is due to be archived due to owner negligence. I recently did maintenance on two caches which have been around for many years, because I thought that the owner was probably bogged down with school exams and couldn't cope with responding to the "Needs Maintenance" logs. I also tried to email him but got no reply. These caches are in a glorious location and has been there for many years. They are also "base level" caches each containing half the co-ords for a bonus ammo can cache which hasn't been archived, but no-one will be able to find it now.

 

Sadly the owner didn't respond to the Reviewer who has just archived them. The caches (which were in good order) are now geolitter. I would have offered to keep them going if that was possible :laughing:

 

What I intend to do is go to the location, check the caches are there and are in good order, place new logbooks and then open them as new caches with a similar name and the word "Reborn" in their title.

Link to comment

 

 

 

since then there have been numerous "Needs maintenance" logs, and other comments about the log book,

 

 

Not true. :laughing: The first Needs Maintenance log was in June of 2008, some rubbish about a rotting tree log. :laughing: The second, in October 2009, stated "log book nearly full"; the current Needs maintenance log states " "won't be long until it [log book] is full."

 

So really, much ado about NOTHING.

Most experienced geocachers, who have a number of hides under their belt know the value of helping their fellow hiders out, by repairing caches they encounter that may need a new log, or even a container.

 

We have helped out literally scores of times over the years and have been helped literally hundreds of times.

 

It's the hiders with high numbers of hides that help keep this sport going, and they and everybody else all help each other out, otherwise, it would be tough to keep all these caches going.

 

If you are so concerned about this cache, why not just drop in a new log book??? and be done with it, instead of calling out the CO in the forums? :P

Link to comment

 

... Most experienced geocachers, who have a number of hides under their belt know the value of helping their fellow hiders out, by repairing caches they encounter that may need a new log, or even a container.

 

We have helped out literally scores of times over the years and have been helped literally hundreds of times.

 

This is fine, for a temporary fix, but in the long-term a more permanent solution to lack of maintenance is preferable.

 

It's the hiders with high numbers of hides that help keep this sport going, and they and everybody else all help each other out, otherwise, it would be tough to keep all these caches going.

 

I disagree. It's the hiders who hide caches that they know they can manage effectively and maintain in good order who keep this sport going. If their circumstances change for whatever reason then it's better the owners 'pro-actively' offer their caches out for adoption, or contact another local cacher to ask for regular assistance or, as a final resort, archive some caches thus freeing up some places for newer cachers.

 

If you are so concerned about this cache, why not just drop in a new log book??? and be done with it, instead of calling out the CO in the forums? :laughing:

 

I don't see that the OP has called out the CO. They've put a very reasonable, politely-worded topic up, requesting opinions. If the current CO is no longer able to maintain this cache then ideal outcome would be for the CO to allow Mini-Geek to adopt it.

 

MrsB :laughing:

Link to comment

 

... Most experienced geocachers, who have a number of hides under their belt know the value of helping their fellow hiders out, by repairing caches they encounter that may need a new log, or even a container.

 

We have helped out literally scores of times over the years and have been helped literally hundreds of times.

 

This is fine, for a temporary fix, but in the long-term a more permanent solution to lack of maintenance is preferable.

 

WHAT LACK OF MAINTENANCE??? AN ALMOST FULL LOG? REALLY?

 

It's the hiders with high numbers of hides that help keep this sport going, and they and everybody else all help each other out, otherwise, it would be tough to keep all these caches going.

 

I disagree. It's the hiders who hide caches that they know they can manage effectively and maintain in good order who keep this sport going. If their circumstances change for whatever reason then it's better the owners 'pro-actively' offer their caches out for adoption, or contact another local cacher to ask for regular assistance or, as a final resort, archive some caches thus freeing up some places for newer cachers.

 

THE INFORMAL AGREEMENT AMONG GEOCACHERS TO HELP EACH OTHER OUT HAS WORKED FINE WHEREVER WE'VE ENCOUNTERED IT AND SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED.

If you are so concerned about this cache, why not just drop in a new log book??? and be done with it, instead of calling out the CO in the forums? :laughing:

 

I don't see that the OP has called out the CO. They've put a very reasonable, politely-worded topic up, requesting opinions. If the current CO is no longer able to maintain this cache then ideal outcome would be for the CO to allow Mini-Geek to adopt it.

 

THERE ARE NOT REALLY ANY CACHE MAINTENANCE ISSUES ON THIS CACHE YET, AND CALLING THE CO OUT IN THE FORUMS, NO MATTER HOW POLITELY DONE, IS NOT ONLY NOT NECESSARY, BUT INCONSIDERATE. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ANYWHERE TO SUGGEST THE CO IS NO LONGER ABLE TO MAINTAIN THE CACHE.

 

MrsB :laughing:

Link to comment

 

... Most experienced geocachers, who have a number of hides under their belt know the value of helping their fellow hiders out, by repairing caches they encounter that may need a new log, or even a container.

 

We have helped out literally scores of times over the years and have been helped literally hundreds of times.

 

This is fine, for a temporary fix, but in the long-term a more permanent solution to lack of maintenance is preferable.

 

WHAT LACK OF MAINTENANCE??? AN ALMOST FULL LOG? REALLY?

 

It's the hiders with high numbers of hides that help keep this sport going, and they and everybody else all help each other out, otherwise, it would be tough to keep all these caches going.

 

I disagree. It's the hiders who hide caches that they know they can manage effectively and maintain in good order who keep this sport going. If their circumstances change for whatever reason then it's better the owners 'pro-actively' offer their caches out for adoption, or contact another local cacher to ask for regular assistance or, as a final resort, archive some caches thus freeing up some places for newer cachers.

 

THE INFORMAL AGREEMENT AMONG GEOCACHERS TO HELP EACH OTHER OUT HAS WORKED FINE WHEREVER WE'VE ENCOUNTERED IT AND SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED.

If you are so concerned about this cache, why not just drop in a new log book??? and be done with it, instead of calling out the CO in the forums? :laughing:

 

I don't see that the OP has called out the CO. They've put a very reasonable, politely-worded topic up, requesting opinions. If the current CO is no longer able to maintain this cache then ideal outcome would be for the CO to allow Mini-Geek to adopt it.

 

THERE ARE NOT REALLY ANY CACHE MAINTENANCE ISSUES ON THIS CACHE YET, AND CALLING THE CO OUT IN THE FORUMS, NO MATTER HOW POLITELY DONE, IS NOT ONLY NOT NECESSARY, BUT INCONSIDERATE. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ANYWHERE TO SUGGEST THE CO IS NO LONGER ABLE TO MAINTAIN THE CACHE.

 

MrsB :laughing:

 

Please don't shout on these forums - especially in red - it makes people's ears bleed.

 

Looking at the cache in question, there are at least 9 logs since the beginning of this year where cachers have mentioned that the log book is nearly full, or full. I suggest that an attentive cache owner would have put in a new log book by now.

 

Mini-Geek, you're doing fine. Maybe the cache owner will be happy to let you adopt the cache, maybe they won't, but at least you'll have tried.

 

MrsB :P

Link to comment

/snip

 

am i supposed to assume your replies are in red?

 

i agree with MrsB, there is no need to yell, nobody's deaf, and please use proper quote/reply methods

 

integrating your replies in the quotes makes it look like MrsB wrote that

Link to comment

There's a whole spectrum of maintenance issues, and a full logbook is pretty much on the benign end of the spectrum. For a really old cache, where the only issue is a full logbook, I'd be inclined to put a new logbook in the cache.

 

Wet caches in bad containers are a much bigger issue. I think I'm more inclined than most people to go ahead and post a "NA" log on a wet cache that has already had "NM" logs posted and ignored.

Link to comment
THERE ARE NOT REALLY ANY CACHE MAINTENANCE ISSUES ON THIS CACHE YET.....THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ANYWHERE TO SUGGEST THE CO IS NO LONGER ABLE TO MAINTAIN THE CACHE.

I beg to differ:

August 6 by Razorfishy (102 found)

Hello, the log book is completely full and some nice person left behind an A4 piece of paper but it wont be long before it is full.

 

July 4 by oz uk (13 found)

Tftc nice story behind it. Tnln. Book is now full

 

June 25 by Buckstopseer (231 found)

<snip>it's a bit of a pity that such a significant cache, in memory of Mark Thompson, is in need of some TLC. The log book is full.

 

June 6 by Mr & Mrs Bumpkin (16 found)

TFTC. Left Pfennig Travel Bug. (Log book full, additional sheet of paper nearly full).

 

April 14 by thehumdingers (2100 found)

Found with Mel 539,Slope a bit steep left coin.Log full. tftc

 

April 10 by Esscafe (11239 found)

A quick find on a circular walk of the caches on and close to the hill, thank you. The log is very full.

 

April 3 by coldrum (1602 found)

Found easily thanks. Log is completely full - no space leaft...

 

March 13 by TwoRisky (511 found)

Forgot to mention - the log book is near to full.

 

January 31 by elliott150 (390 found)

Took the wrong path down to here, but the views from teh top were superb. Log nearly full...

 

January 30 by Mini-Geek (53 found)

There are now no more lined pages left in the log book, only the back page. A nice find, TFTC TNLN

 

October 25, 2009 by ArtemisArtio (55 found)

Second visit to this cache. Took elf charm, left heart badge. Log book nearly full. TFTC

 

September 27, 2009 by Evil Edna (303 found)

....Cache will soon need a new notebook.

 

September 5, 2009 by de mondo (175 found)

...Log book is on the last couple of pages and pen is leaking.

 

August 18, 2009 by magz28 (38 found)

...Log book will need replacing soon

 

August 15, 2009 by ArtemisArtio (55 found)

Getting towards the end of the log book. TFTC

 

August 5, 2009 by johnnat (16 found)

very muddy book will need replaceing soon as its on last but one page brill walk loved it

 

June 15, 2009 by DanielHawk (89 found)

The bag housing the log book is very damaged and the Log Book will need replacing shortly (only a few pages left!)

 

I quit looking at that point. It's been over a year since the owner was told the logbook was getting full. It's been over 4 months since it was reported as completely full. From where I sit it sure looks like the cache owner is unwilling or unable to maintain his cache.

Edited by Clan Riffster
Link to comment

sence the owner has passed away atleast the original owner and the one who adopted it now isnt takin care of it ,u should talk to the head person and see if you can adopt it. its been going for a long time and it would suk if it were archived. you sound passionate about it and from that i think you would take care of it. i wish you the best of luck and hope that you get it.where is it located anyway.im in michigan.

Link to comment

Thanks to the people who have been sticking up for me in this thread whilst I was off the forums. :laughing:

 

To the people who... Don't seem to see my point of view... I didn't exactly want to imply that the CO is a bad one, so I hadn't mentioned all of the issues with the cache. However if that is necessary to you, I will.

 

Full log book

The cache has dirt sitting in the bottom

It is full of business cards no one collects (Some are wet/moldy)

The label on the cache is almost ripped to shreds and is hanging off

The baggie which holds the log has numerous holes in it, so is now no use

The items in the cache are now of poor quality (Think broken McToys etc...)

The container has been out for multiple years, and could do with replacing

 

So please don't tell me the cache has no maintenance issues when you have never even visited it. :P

 

Regarding the point others have brought up, I could just go and fix these myself now, however some people find this questionable, as I do not own the cache. Also it would only be a temporary fix, as the NM icon would still be in the attributes section.

 

And also if you think I was just posting here to "Call out the CO," to be perfectly blunt, you are wrong. I posted this here to see what others think about this cache's situation, and how to go about the adoption process.

 

Thanks,

Mini-Geek

Edited by Mini-Geek
Link to comment

Hi,

 

There is a cache in my area, named Chosen Hill, which seems as if it is not being maintained. It was placed on 08/03/2002, by a very active cacher, who has sadly passed away, the cache was then adopted by a new owner.

 

The cache has been found by over 240 cachers, and was my first ever find, therefore I do not want it to be archived.

 

There have been need maintenance logs for over a year now, mostly due to a filling log book. I visited this cache in January of this year to place a TB, and at that time the log book was totally full, apart from the back page, since then there have been numerous "Needs maintenance" logs, and other comments about the log book, with no response from the cache owner.

 

The CO logs in regularly.

 

What do you guys think about this? I would be happy to adopt the cache to keep it running, if this is the case, how would I go about it? I have placed caches before, but never adopted them.

 

Thanks

What I think...If you'd like to see it kept alive, see if the current owner will adopt it to you, or just start helping out with the issues that need attention, and send notes to the reviewer that the maintainence isseus have been addressed. You do not need to be the owner of a Cache to help take care of it.

Link to comment

 

...or just start helping out with the issues that need attention, and send notes to the reviewer that the maintainence isseus have been addressed. You do not need to be the owner of a Cache to help take care of it.

 

DON'T YOU HATE it when the voice of reason raises its ugly head? Shame on you, Robert! A simple solution to a non-issue? We don't like that around here! More dead horse beating, I say! Poke it once more with a stick, it's not done!! At least the cache owner has been properly and publicly chastised, we have that...

 

The real issue here should be why so many cachers saw an almost full log and did NOTHING to help... :laughing:

Link to comment

Some of us believe it's the cache owners responsibility to care for the stuff they throw out out there. An uncared for cache is just garbage laying around. I prefer to not enable lazy cache owners.

 

And some of us actually prefer to HIDE caches. The CO didn't throw anything anywhere. He adopted and, at least once, has maintained the cache. Your characterization of him as "lazy" is without foundation.

Link to comment

I wasn't directing it at the cache owners. The comment was made right before mine about people not helping the cache owners. An unmaintained cache is not hidden. It's garbage.

 

How is"it's the cache owners responsibility to care for the stuff they throw out out there." not directed at cache owners? No one questions their responsibility. It's just our opinion that cachers should help each other out, and they do, for the most part, altho apparently not in this case. Instead of doing a little cache repair to help out , calling the CO out in the forums for an "almost full" log is the way to go. One man's "garbage" is another man's treasure.

 

Why don't you throw out some garbage?? We'll be glad to monitor your progress in caring for it. :laughing:

Link to comment

Hello All,

 

Gosh, it must be Friday!

 

I don't think it's fair to assume that every cache owner reads every email from gc.com that starts "[Log] Owner: cachername found ..." To me they are just unnecessary noise in amongst the daily email deluge and my ego is not such that I need it stroked by reading about my caches. In fact I have a filter specifically to pull such emails out and put them into a specific folder which periodically I clear out, almost all of the emails unread. Similarly I don't habitually go and browse the logs on the website looking at the logs for my own caches.

 

As such apart from the 2 needs maintenance logs of which more below, I have been in blissful ignorance of the plethora of found it logs where people comment on the state of the cache.

 

I've always assumed that if a cache really needs maintenance someone will post a needs maintenance, such emails from gc.com are not trapped by the filter and I do read straight away and as far as I can see there have been 2 relevant ones on this cache.

 

A needs maintenance was posted on the October 25, 2009 saying log book nearly full. OK - nearly full, so no rush, someone will surely post another needs maintenance when it is (and I've done caches before which have said log nearly full and when you get there you find loads of empty reverse pages if you look back through the book so take it with a pinch of salt when someone says it's full). In the meantime I'd forgotten that a nearly full had ever been notified - what with almost a year passing. If I had say in March remembered it then as nobody had posted a needs maintenance to say it actually was full I would in any case have thought some cacher had put in a new log (as I've done to other caches on several occasions - not to mention adding pencils/pens, wiping out, removing rusty/manky/edible/inappropriate swaps, new camo bag etc. etc. - our last caching trip I could have got rid of 3 pencils/pens to replace missing/broken ones but sadly I didn't take any spares) but I didn't remember it so didn't think anything was wrong until August 6th when needs maintenance was posted saying log book full. OK - now it really is time to sort out. (Not that I saw the needs maintenance until several days later as I was on holiday without email).

 

Options are take off-line until then or leave it on-line so that people can still do it. I chose to do the latter on the basis that anyone attempting it would read the logs, see that the log is full, and be aware of it.

In the meantime the email with the subject "[LOG] Owner: Razorfishy reported Chosen Hill (Traditional Cache) needs maintenance" is starred and in bold in googlemail precisely so I see it every time I check my email and don't forget it.

 

Since seeing the needs maintenance email then there have only been 2 weekends and they've all been busy with pre-planned events so I have not been able to get up there. It may still be several weeks before I can but as it seems to be causing some problems I think it's probably best to just take it off-line.

 

Right, I'm now off to read through recent logs on the other caches to see if they have found it logs indicating attention is needed but haven't actually been flagged as needs maintenance...

 

Cheers,

Jon.

Edited by The J J Noodle Fan Club
Link to comment

I would like to weigh in on the side of CO's hiding a few caches that they can maintain. I would rather have fewer caches that people regularly check up on than hundreds of wet logs stuffed into film cans littering the city.

 

carry on in whatever color you see fit

Link to comment

 

A needs maintenance was posted on the October 25, 2009 saying log book nearly full. ...

 

I didn't remember it so didn't think anything was wrong until August 6th when needs maintenance was posted saying log book full. OK - now it really is time to sort out.

 

So you've ignored a needs maintenance log for a year, then you are surprised when another one is posted?

 

I'm kind of new at owning caches, so let me throw out a question to the more experienced CO's here: Do you normally not visit your caches unless/until a NM is posted? I kind of figured that I'd want to check on my caches at least once a year. Do most CO's not do that?

Link to comment

To me they are just unnecessary noise in amongst the daily email deluge and my ego is not such that I need it stroked

 

Denigrating active COs as low self-esteem wimps for reading their email and responding to notices (in whatever form: found log, note log, NM log) with regular cache maintenance, hmmm :laughing: . Your cache was listed in 2002, what did you do before the implementation of the NM log?

Edited by Lone R
Link to comment

 

A needs maintenance was posted on the October 25, 2009 saying log book nearly full. ...

 

I didn't remember it so didn't think anything was wrong until August 6th when needs maintenance was posted saying log book full. OK - now it really is time to sort out.

 

So you've ignored a needs maintenance log for a year, then you are surprised when another one is posted?

 

Can we please not talk to the CO like this, that wasn't the intention of this post. Now that this has been brought to the CO attention, and they intend of fixing it, I am happy, and this thread can be closed. Thank you to the people who gave constructive advice.

Edited by Mini-Geek
Link to comment

I'm kind of new at owning caches, so let me throw out a question to the more experienced CO's here: Do you normally not visit your caches unless/until a NM is posted? I kind of figured that I'd want to check on my caches at least once a year. Do most CO's not do that?

Don't know about most CO's, but as a minimum we do a spring check-up on all our caches. If a NM log is posted we check on the cache an amend the problem as quickly as possible. If a DNF is posted we consider checking the cache (all of our caches should be easy to find once you're at the right location). If 2 DNFs are posted we'll check the cache for sure.

Link to comment

Hi,

 

There is a cache in my area, named Chosen Hill, which seems as if it is not being maintained. It was placed on 08/03/2002, by a very active cacher, who has sadly passed away, the cache was then adopted by a new owner.

 

The cache has been found by over 240 cachers, and was my first ever find, therefore I do not want it to be archived.

 

There have been need maintenance logs for over a year now, mostly due to a filling log book. I visited this cache in January of this year to place a TB, and at that time the log book was totally full, apart from the back page, since then there have been numerous "Needs maintenance" logs, and other comments about the log book, with no response from the cache owner.

 

The CO logs in regularly.

 

What do you guys think about this? I would be happy to adopt the cache to keep it running, if this is the case, how would I go about it? I have placed caches before, but never adopted them.

 

Thanks

 

To be honest, this sounds like a cache you really care about. If I find a cache which is in need I simply give it what it needs. In your case I would consider adopting it but I would without hesitation simply replace the logbook and scan the logbook onto a 'Post note' log.

 

Hope this helps!!

Link to comment

We had one in our area recently be archived that we would have gladly taken responsibility for. It's to bad some of those old ones go to the wayside cause of something that simple.

 

If a reviewer archives them just drop them an email and ask them to unarchive it. Then email the CO asking to adopt it and that should solve your problems. :-)

Link to comment
The real issue here should be why so many cachers saw an almost full log and did NOTHING to help... :)

Perhaps they had no way of rectifying the problem? If I make a three mile hike through a swamp, and find a cache with a full log, I will replace that log if I happen to have a spare with me. If I do not have one handy, I will not repeat the trek just to do the job which the cache owner promised to do when they hid the cache. I think the "real" issue here is a cache owner intentionally setting up their notifications in such a way as to ignore any concerns brought forward by the community. As an experienced cacher, the owner knows that cache logs are the single greatest tool for the general public to advise an owner of potential problems. Yet, knowing this, he deliberately ignores these logs, unless they are NM types.

 

Enabling lackadaisical maintenance does nothing to benefit this game.

Link to comment

Let's say an ordinary cacher finds a full logbook, and replaces it. Fine. But what should he do with the old one (and the several extra pieces of crumpled paper also full of logs)? Assuming they are in poor shape and do not fit in the container anymore anyway. Throw away as trash? Should we say that if the CO lose his full logbook this way, because he did not provide a new one in time, it's his fault?

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 1
×
×
  • Create New...