To Search or Not To Search...

[+BaylorGrad]

There's a cache in my area called "Rabbit Hole." I have searched for it once (without luck), and I'm trying to decide whether I should search for it again. So here's the main question: Would you search for this cache?

 

Here are the facts:

 

- The cache is a 2-star difficulty and terrain.

- Despite the rating, one of the veteran cachers in the area has placed a difficult cache in the park to vent his frustration about not being able to find this one.

- It's located in a moderately-wooded urban park, but the coordinates take me just inside the edge of a wooded area.

- The cache is pretty darn old--just had its 7th birthday.

- The cache has not been found in just over 11 months.

- There have been 9 (10 if you include mine) recorded DNFs in the last 11 months.

- However... None of the DNFs have been from cachers with over 1000 finds.

 

For more information, see the cache page below.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...=y&decrypt=

 

So, would you bother searching for it? (Or the better question--if you were me, would you bother searching for it again?

 

Thanks!

Edited October 30, 2010 by BaylorGrad

[+Krypton]

A cache that was being found every month or 2 and then not for 11 months and 10 DNF's needs to be visited by the cache owner ASAP for maintenance. I don't think this has a chance of happening as the owner has 1 hide and 1 find, was a student when this was hidden in 2003. Also has not logged on since 2004 and has an email that has not been validated.

 

My suggestion is to post a needs archived and let the local reviewer take care of it.

Edited October 30, 2010 by Krypton

[+BaylorGrad]

A cache that was being found every month or 2 and then not for 11 months and 10 DNF's needs to be visited by the cache owner ASAP for maintenance. I don't think this has a chance of happening as the owner has 1 hide and 1 find, was a student when this was hidden in 2003. Also has not logged on since 2004 and has an email that has not been validated.

 

My suggestion is to post a needs archived and let the local reviewer take care of it.

 

I think you're right... But then again, it's SUCH an old cache (I think it might be the oldest in the city), I would be sad to lose it. Instead, I have contacted the individual who said he had adopted this cache about 18 months ago... Hopefully I'll hear back from him about whether he thinks the cache is gone or not.

[jholly]

A cache that was being found every month or 2 and then not for 11 months and 10 DNF's needs to be visited by the cache owner ASAP for maintenance. I don't think this has a chance of happening as the owner has 1 hide and 1 find, was a student when this was hidden in 2003. Also has not logged on since 2004 and has an email that has not been validated.

 

My suggestion is to post a needs archived and let the local reviewer take care of it.

 

I think you're right... But then again, it's SUCH an old cache (I think it might be the oldest in the city), I would be sad to lose it. Instead, I have contacted the individual who said he had adopted this cache about 18 months ago... Hopefully I'll hear back from him about whether he thinks the cache is gone or not.

The causal observer has noted the cache has *not* been adopted, otherwise there would be a valid email address and a different profile than the one offered. What has happened, and this is a prime example why it is a bad idea, is someone performed maintenance on an abandoned cache. This good Samaritan has now also abandoned the cache. Your three choices are a) file a needs archive log, file a needs archive log or c) you perform the needed maintenance and put a watch on the cache so you can take care of problems. When you tire of this do a or b. My vote is a or b.

[+BaylorGrad]

A cache that was being found every month or 2 and then not for 11 months and 10 DNF's needs to be visited by the cache owner ASAP for maintenance. I don't think this has a chance of happening as the owner has 1 hide and 1 find, was a student when this was hidden in 2003. Also has not logged on since 2004 and has an email that has not been validated.

 

My suggestion is to post a needs archived and let the local reviewer take care of it.

 

I think you're right... But then again, it's SUCH an old cache (I think it might be the oldest in the city), I would be sad to lose it. Instead, I have contacted the individual who said he had adopted this cache about 18 months ago... Hopefully I'll hear back from him about whether he thinks the cache is gone or not.

The causal observer has noted the cache has *not* been adopted, otherwise there would be a valid email address and a different profile than the one offered. What has happened, and this is a prime example why it is a bad idea, is someone performed maintenance on an abandoned cache. This good Samaritan has now also abandoned the cache. Your three choices are a) file a needs archive log, file a needs archive log or c) you perform the needed maintenance and put a watch on the cache so you can take care of problems. When you tire of this do a or b. My vote is a or b.

 

You make a good point; however, the person who did some "foster care" on the cache has probably not abandoned it. He is a very active cacher in the area, and I'm willing to bet I'll hear back from him. He even posts on these forums occassionally I've noticed! I think I'll just wait it out.

[jholly]

A cache that was being found every month or 2 and then not for 11 months and 10 DNF's needs to be visited by the cache owner ASAP for maintenance. I don't think this has a chance of happening as the owner has 1 hide and 1 find, was a student when this was hidden in 2003. Also has not logged on since 2004 and has an email that has not been validated.

 

My suggestion is to post a needs archived and let the local reviewer take care of it.

 

I think you're right... But then again, it's SUCH an old cache (I think it might be the oldest in the city), I would be sad to lose it. Instead, I have contacted the individual who said he had adopted this cache about 18 months ago... Hopefully I'll hear back from him about whether he thinks the cache is gone or not.

The causal observer has noted the cache has *not* been adopted, otherwise there would be a valid email address and a different profile than the one offered. What has happened, and this is a prime example why it is a bad idea, is someone performed maintenance on an abandoned cache. This good Samaritan has now also abandoned the cache. Your three choices are a) file a needs archive log, file a needs archive log or c) you perform the needed maintenance and put a watch on the cache so you can take care of problems. When you tire of this do a or b. My vote is a or b.

 

You make a good point; however, the person who did some "foster care" on the cache has probably not abandoned it. He is a very active cacher in the area, and I'm willing to bet I'll hear back from him. He even posts on these forums occassionally I've noticed! I think I'll just wait it out.

There are six watchers on this cache. None of them seemed concerned enough about the string of DNF's to go and check the health of the cache and possibly fix/replace it if needed. There are 10 DNF's, including yours. I would be inclined to bet that a number of the watchers are the ones that wrote the DNF's waiting for someone to fix the cache or find it so they can get a clue.

 

Not only do you have the problem of a person giving foster care moving on with life and not doing it any more, but if something changes and there needs to be changes to the listing, like maybe the location needs to be changed, information about new construction, the tree fell over, etc. no on can make changes to the cache page. Or someone files a Needs Maintenance there is no one to file a owner maintenance log to clear the attribute. I still think choice a or be is the best choice. Old caches just stop existing, it is time to move on. The original cache is a fond memory and an plaque.

[Dj Storm]

You make a good point; however, the person who did some "foster care" on the cache has probably not abandoned it. He is a very active cacher in the area, and I'm willing to bet I'll hear back from him. He even posts on these forums occassionally I've noticed! I think I'll just wait it out.

 

Sorry to disappoint you, but it looks like the "foster parent" abandoned the cache, or had no intention to provide continuous maintenance. If the cache has some historic importance and a cacher assumes the responsibility to maintain it, he should do a job at least as good as the guidelines require.

 

The oldest cache in my country has been "unofficially adopted" by a cacher; here's a timeline of the maintenance visits:

-----

2007 September 26 - maintenance and unofficial adoption

 

2008 July 29 - log mentioning the logbook has only one page left

2008 August 15 - maintenance, adding of a new logbook

 

2009 August 21 - second DNF in a row (one of them a Did Not Search)

2009 September 11 - maintenance check

 

2010 August 18 - pre-event maintenance check

 

2010 August 27 - post-event maintenance check

 

2010 September 20 - DNF log, coming after a log mentioning possible muggle tampering

2010 September 25 - new maintenance visit (third in 5 weeks)

-----

I consider this cache receives adequate maintenance, while the cache described by the OP does not.

[+baloo&bd]

I think you're right... But then again, it's SUCH an old cache (I think it might be the oldest in the city), I would be sad to lose it. Instead, I have contacted the individual who said he had adopted this cache about 18 months ago... Hopefully I'll hear back from him about whether he thinks the cache is gone or not.

 

This isn't nearly the oldest cache in the state and doubtful in the immediate area. GCC6 is the oldest state cache as evidenced here and is not all that far from the cache in question.

 

That being said, even if it WAS the oldest in the area, after being gone 11 months, it isn't anymore. The badge of honor, if you will, of being an old cache should go to those in continuous service or that are maintained quickly per the guidelines of a reasonable time.

 

It is like the old joke about the guy who was selling the ax George Washington used to cut down the cherry tree. The handle's been replaced a couple of times, and the head is new, but it's the same ax.

 

Right now it appears to simply be frustrating local cachers and those who pass through the area. Nobody seems interested enough that had found it to go fix it. I don't think someone that never found the original should replace it as there is always a chance, no matter how slim, that it is still there.

 

At this point, the appropriate thing to do is post a Should Be Archived after you make another effort to look. This allows the reviewer and co a chance to get it taken care of.

[+BaylorGrad]

I think you're right... But then again, it's SUCH an old cache (I think it might be the oldest in the city), I would be sad to lose it. Instead, I have contacted the individual who said he had adopted this cache about 18 months ago... Hopefully I'll hear back from him about whether he thinks the cache is gone or not.

 

This isn't nearly the oldest cache in the state and doubtful in the immediate area. GCC6 is the oldest state cache as evidenced here and is not all that far from the cache in question.

 

That being said, even if it WAS the oldest in the area, after being gone 11 months, it isn't anymore. The badge of honor, if you will, of being an old cache should go to those in continuous service or that are maintained quickly per the guidelines of a reasonable time.

 

It is like the old joke about the guy who was selling the ax George Washington used to cut down the cherry tree. The handle's been replaced a couple of times, and the head is new, but it's the same ax.

 

Right now it appears to simply be frustrating local cachers and those who pass through the area. Nobody seems interested enough that had found it to go fix it. I don't think someone that never found the original should replace it as there is always a chance, no matter how slim, that it is still there.

 

At this point, the appropriate thing to do is post a Should Be Archived after you make another effort to look. This allows the reviewer and co a chance to get it taken care of.

 

You make many good points, but I have two issues with your comments:

 

First, you'll see from my own quotations that I said this is likely the "oldest cache in the city." To my mind, "city" isn't the same as "area," and since Turkey Run is a 45-minute drive from this cache's location, I would strongly disagree that the cache you referred to is in city limits. As for oldest in the state, I made absolutely no reference to that. I'm sure there are dozens, if not hundreds, of older caches in the state. Anyway, that's beside the point. I would be sad to see a 7-year-old cache disappear.

 

My second issue is that you told me to post a "Should be Archived" after another effort to look... My issue with this is that I'm a relatively new cacher, as I'm sure you discovered. I have 142 finds, which to my mind is practically nothing! So with that said, I feel that if any cacher is going to overlook this cache, it's me! What if I post a "Should be Archived" and the cache is still there? What a bummer that would be! Notice that none of the DNFs over the last 11 months have been by veteran cachers--they've all been by relative newbies like myself. Besides, even when the cache was obviously active, many very experienced cachers had great difficulty finding this cache.

 

Lots to consider! Thanks for the input!

[+baloo&bd]

You make many good points, but I have two issues with your comments:

 

First, you'll see from my own quotations that I said this is likely the "oldest cache in the city." To my mind, "city" isn't the same as "area," and since Turkey Run is a 45-minute drive from this cache's location, I would strongly disagree that the cache you referred to is in city limits. As for oldest in the state, I made absolutely no reference to that. I'm sure there are dozens, if not hundreds, of older caches in the state. Anyway, that's beside the point. I would be sad to see a 7-year-old cache disappear.

 

My second issue is that you told me to post a "Should be Archived" after another effort to look... My issue with this is that I'm a relatively new cacher, as I'm sure you discovered. I have 142 finds, which to my mind is practically nothing! So with that said, I feel that if any cacher is going to overlook this cache, it's me! What if I post a "Should be Archived" and the cache is still there? What a bummer that would be! Notice that none of the DNFs over the last 11 months have been by veteran cachers--they've all been by relative newbies like myself. Besides, even when the cache was obviously active, many very experienced cachers had great difficulty finding this cache.

 

Lots to consider! Thanks for the input!

 

Then put on your ignore list and move on.

[7rxc]

Doing the SBA on this cache would also eventually lead to you being able to 'recreate' the cache with the ability to do all the normal maintenance items... Checking the area thoroughly might turn up the container and logs as well... I've managed to do that on a number of missing caches / containers... and I have lots less Finds than you have... but I'm an excellent searcher... at very least it would be a recovery of potential Geo litter.. at best you could record the logs as being in the new cache for posterity even though it was no longer the same cache... it would have it's own log of course... or not. I agree that OLD caches want to be preserved, if they are significant ones... this might or might not be, I haven't been there to tell... I would start by mining the logs for as much information as possible... (bad memory here) I recall there were several logs that recorded apparent changes to the original hide due to storm damage or such... and one that mentioned covering with leaves and dirt... I can't off hand remember where in the timeline that happened... before or after replacement(s) but you should do that so you can tell what you might be up against... I maintain one cache here that is up to it's 6th container, and I was able to tell the owner that the 2nd container lost in 2007 was found again... I've restored it and it's ready to go back as number 7 should the need arise... most of the rest (except #1) could still be at GZ, but not in the search area allowed legally or in accessible spots... they have been micros on a large vehicle display... they wander around from time to time or get taken, dropped etc... but they might be there... I spend a lot of time checking and rechecking and relocating often... replacing sometimes... This is also a local 'classic' that is often DNFed by 'experts', and found by first timers... I took the time to care, and arranged to maintain it with an active owner... but would have 'recreated' it had that not been an option, he offered adoption, but I'd rather he kept it, since it was his placement originally, but I've picked new spots to avoid muggles... great learning experience BTW.

 

Good luck whatever you do...

 

Doug 7rxc

[+John in Valley Forge]

Another option would be to look at the logs and find some local active veteran cachers and contact them for help.

It is surprising how well people seem to remember their finds. Explain the situation to them and ask for help. Perhaps one or more of them might stop by the cache site and look for themselves. They would be a much better judge of whether it is missing or not as they may remember the spot and be able to confirm its existence or loss.

 

Along with that, you will open the door to meeting the locals, which can be a lot of fun.

[+deercreekth]

Well this is an interesting way to find out I haven't been getting emails from one of my accounts for the last week. I thought it was odd that no new caches have been published near me lately, oops.

 

I'm sentimental when it comes to older caches too. For this one to inspire the creation of the $*^#& of a cache that is Rabbit Hole Revenge, I thought that this one had to be pretty special. So I was surprised when I found it without much trouble(for comparison, Bass could eat the way this one was when I found it for breakfast). When I found it, it was a plastic paintball container(not the Altoids box mentioned in the description), and the lid was busted off. The area looked like it was probably much different than when the cache was first placed. I put in a Needs Maintenance log but then I noticed the CO hadn't logged in for 5(now 6) years. I had some new Lock & Locks I hadn't found a use for yet, so I went ahead and replaced it and asked the reviewer to remove the Needs Maintenance flag. I never put it on my watchlist, but I kept an eye on it for awhile. Everything seemed good for 5 months or so. I noticed a string of DNFs, so I took a quick look for it when I was making one of my Rabbit Hole Revenge trips. I didn't have the coordinates in my GPSr at the time, but I was pretty sure it was gone. Then I later saw a couple of new finds logged on it. I lost track of it after that, but no one has found it since. I actually checked the cache page last week, and thought about pulling the trigger on a NA log.

 

I definitely don't think I found it in its original spot, either that or damage had caused the original spot to not be as hidden as it once was. I replaced the container with the thought that since the last container seemed to have lasted 5 years, maybe a new one could last another 5 years. I'll go check the spot out and if I don't find it, I'll log a NA.

[+BaylorGrad]

Well this is an interesting way to find out I haven't been getting emails from one of my accounts for the last week. I thought it was odd that no new caches have been published near me lately, oops.

 

I'm sentimental when it comes to older caches too. For this one to inspire the creation of the $*^#& of a cache that is Rabbit Hole Revenge, I thought that this one had to be pretty special. So I was surprised when I found it without much trouble(for comparison, Bass could eat the way this one was when I found it for breakfast). When I found it, it was a plastic paintball container(not the Altoids box mentioned in the description), and the lid was busted off. The area looked like it was probably much different than when the cache was first placed. I put in a Needs Maintenance log but then I noticed the CO hadn't logged in for 5(now 6) years. I had some new Lock & Locks I hadn't found a use for yet, so I went ahead and replaced it and asked the reviewer to remove the Needs Maintenance flag. I never put it on my watchlist, but I kept an eye on it for awhile. Everything seemed good for 5 months or so. I noticed a string of DNFs, so I took a quick look for it when I was making one of my Rabbit Hole Revenge trips. I didn't have the coordinates in my GPSr at the time, but I was pretty sure it was gone. Then I later saw a couple of new finds logged on it. I lost track of it after that, but no one has found it since. I actually checked the cache page last week, and thought about pulling the trigger on a NA log.

 

I definitely don't think I found it in its original spot, either that or damage had caused the original spot to not be as hidden as it once was. I replaced the container with the thought that since the last container seemed to have lasted 5 years, maybe a new one could last another 5 years. I'll go check the spot out and if I don't find it, I'll log a NA.

 

Wow, what an interesting turn of events, haha! Yes--you are obviously the individual I e-mailed about this cache... I appreciate the explanation, and I appreciate your checking on it even more. I'll check the cache page over the next few weeks... I'll be interested to see if it's still there. Despite all of the DNFs, it has been frequently "DNFed" over the years... We'll see soon!

 

While we're on the topic of Bass and Rabbit Hole Revenge... I saw Dieseldoc on the way to Bass (his second attempt without luck) and I searched for about an hour... Finally found it just as it was getting too dark to search much anymore. Definitely an intense one, although I'm not sure it was meant to be. As far as Rabbit Hole Revenge, I have attempted that cache twice (most recently 3 days ago, on Friday) and have spent about 3-4 hours looking at/into every INCH of that shelter. I think I've climbed just about every inch as well. It's currently my most-desired cache, haha. (I do not want hints... Yet...)

 

So deercreekth, when are you going after my cache?

[+deercreekth]

So deercreekth, when are you going after my cache?

 

I've never been much of a tree climber, although I definitely think it could be fun. I've been meaning to stop by there to at least have a look. It's funny, I was watching an episode of Billy the Exterminator this weekend and they were using a cherry picker at a hotel to dispose of some wasps. When he said something about being 50 feet off the ground, I thought, "hey, I only need to be 25 feet off the ground" and wished I could borrow it. Misco was at my work yesterday, and I thought about asking if they'd be interested in giving me a cherry picker lesson. They're just over the bridge from the park... the place with the huge crane with an American flag hanging from the top. It would be pretty funny to post a picture of me leisurely reaching out and grabbing the cache.

 

Rabbit Hole Revenge haunted me. I lost count of how many times I went looking for that one(three times that I logged, probably at least three other times). I finally got an idea of a spot to check while looking and it still took me one more trip.

[+BaylorGrad]

So deercreekth, when are you going after my cache?

 

I've never been much of a tree climber, although I definitely think it could be fun. I've been meaning to stop by there to at least have a look. It's funny, I was watching an episode of Billy the Exterminator this weekend and they were using a cherry picker at a hotel to dispose of some wasps. When he said something about being 50 feet off the ground, I thought, "hey, I only need to be 25 feet off the ground" and wished I could borrow it. Misco was at my work yesterday, and I thought about asking if they'd be interested in giving me a cherry picker lesson. They're just over the bridge from the park... the place with the huge crane with an American flag hanging from the top. It would be pretty funny to post a picture of me leisurely reaching out and grabbing the cache.

 

Rabbit Hole Revenge haunted me. I lost count of how many times I went looking for that one(three times that I logged, probably at least three other times). I finally got an idea of a spot to check while looking and it still took me one more trip.

 

As I told another cacher who stared hopelessly upward at the cache--there's more than one way to grab this one. A cherry picker is absolutely an option!

 

I'm heading back to Rabbit Hole Revenge probably this Friday... I just read the entire cache page and all the logs (AGAIN)... And this time, I feel like I can narrow my search at least...

[+BaylorGrad]

Thanks to Deercreekth for checking on this cache. Turns out the cache was almost certainly gone. He posted a "Needs Archiving."

 

And the second this cache is archived, you'd better believe I have a new cache in mind for the park. (Don't steal my idea now, Deercreekth!)

 

I already have its name ready (but the cache still needs to be created!) once the reviewer archives "Rabbit Hole."

 

Get ready for "Rabbit Hole Returns."