Massive Archiving of TEAM KFWB GPS caches in B.C.

[+blackjack65]

Hi,

 

It seems TEAM KFWB GPS, after finding all of 1 cache in 2003,

has just retired all of their 359 caches.

 

Are the containers still out there?

 

If so, what are the plans to retrieve them?

 

And if they have been brought in,

what will happen to the Travel Bugs and geoCoins they contained?

 

I happened to have my TBV6Z8 Mini Generic Geocoin

in their GCJN90 KID COMMANDO CACHE

 

Can anyone help move it along?

 

Thanks,

 

Black

[+mpilchfamily]

Have you contacted the CO with these questions? The team may have disbanded but individuals of the team may still be active but not willing to maintain the caches. If you can contact them they may be able to help.

[+moop]

It's a shame when someone archives a geocache without retrieving the container and other remnants. It's a catastrophe when someone does it on this scale. I just checked a few of their previously archived caches and others have had to CITO the remains. It does not reflect well on the hobby.

[+Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat]

Yes, the containers are still out there, all 350 of them(some probably missing already.)

It's a real shame that the Team has finished with their geocaching career. Nobody really knew who they were, from my knowledge.

The Team used to have large contests that would take lots of time and teamwork to complete, but the winners were usually paid off with big $$$. Here's some of the old contests: http://www.vigps.com/category/contests-stories/ .

 

Back to the containers in the wild part...

Wizard of Ooze, a local reviewer is working on creating bookmark lists and other resources to aide in the retrieval of the containers. Hopefully BC cachers will be able to retrieve every last one of them.

[+ZoomZoom]

Low live scum bags

 

After seeing all this it really doesn't matter if you ban me cause I quit anyway...numbers never =mattered to me in the first place. ur not getting My support ever again

Edited April 2, 2011 by ZoomZoom

[+Cache-tech]

Please keep post civil and within the posting guidelines, Forum Guidelines

 

Thank you

[+ArnieBarney]

these caches need to be resurrected! not removed.

[+Eartha]

whoops, I am posting in the wrong thread, not sure how I managed that.

But while I'm here, it was the cache owner that archived these caches and that is their choice, isn't it?

Edited April 2, 2011 by Eartha

[+ArnieBarney]

there are threads in multiple forums and while true that the CO did archive, maybe that was the unintended course of action.

[+mtn-man]

I am not sure what the deal is exactly, but THE TEAM has not maintained their caches for years. I've written them several times over the years and I don't think I ever got a single response. I do understand the emotional attachment to these old caches and like to seek them myself, but if the community is not fixing the caches and if the cache owner wants to archive their caches instead of fixing them, then they can. That choice does not involve Groundspeak or the local reviewer.

 

I've archived some of their caches over time too after they did not respond to emails and cache notes. I guess I am scum too?

 

Edited to add that I've read the other topics elsewhere and it sounds like Wiz-of-Ooze was working with them to get them adopted out and they just up and archived them all but two. I think your anger at Wiz is misdirected since they were actually trying to work to keep them going it sounds like.

Edited April 2, 2011 by mtn-man

[+ArnieBarney]

We appreciate the effort of Wiz in getting this worked out. yeah, the emotions are running high over this one. I can even see the concept of cache maintenance by community. But in the end, I thing we all want to see a positive solution.

[+ZoomZoom]

Thank you Wiz for attempting to do something good about these caches. I am willing to adopt everyone of them though it will take me time to maintain them. Also hope you will accept my apology for earlier on but it really, really did upset me to see the Teams caches archived just all of a sudden. Sorry.

[+ZoomZoom]

I am asking you all at geocaching.com if you have a heart...please let me adopt them all. Working on getting volunteers to join me at saving these historical caches

[+ZoomZoom]

WiZ...stop it...you not listening to me...I will adopt all...that is not against the quidelines of yours.

Edited April 3, 2011 by ZoomZoom

[+Cache-tech]

WiZ...stop it...you not listening to me...I will adopt all...that is not against the quidelines of yours.

I think it might be best to do this by email instead of a one sided forum thread. Also, it is not up to geocaching.com or the volunteer reviewer concerning the adoption of caches, that would be up to the cache owner. Since the caches here have been archived, it might be best to submit new listings after the cache has been checked up on and refreshed.

[+ZoomZoom]

WiZ...stop it...you not listening to me...I will adopt all...that is not against the quidelines of yours.

I think it might be best to do this by email instead of a one sided forum thread. Also, it is not up to geocaching.com or the volunteer reviewer concerning the adoption of caches, that would be up to the cache owner. Since the caches here have been archived, it might be best to submit new listings after the cache has been checked up on and refreshed.

K whatever must be done but I want to make sure |I can adopt...is that still possible?

Wait a minute...just reread what you said and ur saying not possible?

Speak english and i am sure the Team will let me be

Edited April 3, 2011 by ZoomZoom

[+ZoomZoom]

Maybe...just maybe I want the world see how this goes...Email is for secrets

Edited April 3, 2011 by ZoomZoom

[+Cache-tech]

WiZ...stop it...you not listening to me...I will adopt all...that is not against the quidelines of yours.

I think it might be best to do this by email instead of a one sided forum thread. Also, it is not up to geocaching.com or the volunteer reviewer concerning the adoption of caches, that would be up to the cache owner. Since the caches here have been archived, it might be best to submit new listings after the cache has been checked up on and refreshed.

K whatever must be done but I want to make sure |I can adopt...is that still possible?

Wait a minute...just reread what you said and ur saying not possible?

Speak english and i am sure the Team will let me be

Generally, caches are not unarchived to be adopted, the Team chose to archive their caches for a historical archive of the caches they placed. Geocaching.com does not adopt over caches without cache owner (the Team) permission. The Team would have to go to www.geocaching.com/adopt but this would have been before they archived their caches.

[+ZoomZoom]

and of course you don't bend the rules to your quidelines...I am awaiting an answer from the Team. This has been so suddenly.

[+ZoomZoom]

You mods better think twice about this. I have given an option to accept all but yet you make it difficult. please let's not draG THIS FURTHER THEN NEED BE. I asked politely to have these given to me...if anybody deserves these...I am the one.

[+Red90]

I'm really not sure how you are having trouble understanding this.

 

1) Adoption of caches can only happen between the old owner and new owner. Groundspeak cannot transfer ownership of caches without the owner consent.

 

2) Caches are not supposed to be un-archived for the purposes of adoption.

 

3) The standing policy is that you should publish a new cache if you wish to keep them alive. This is simple to do.

 

If you don't like the rules, that is your prerogative, but those are the rules. There is no point getting mad at the reviewers. They do not make the rules.

 

In this case, they have made special arrangements to allow the adoptions. As it clearly states on teh cache pages, each new owner is limited in the number. It also states that if you are going to make a big fuss, then they will all be lost, so I would suggest following the the advice given.

Edited April 4, 2011 by Red90

[Pup Patrol]

You mods better think twice about this. I have given an option to accept all but yet you make it difficult. please let's not draG THIS FURTHER THEN NEED BE. I asked politely to have these given to me...if anybody deserves these...I am the one.

 

 

Groundspeak has done a major bending of the rules to accommodate this incident. I obviously don't know the behind-the-scenes action, so to an outside observer it looks like they may have set an unwieldy precedent.

 

What will stop the rest of us from wanting the same special consideration for just one or two caches, knowing that they were willing to go to these lengths for 350?

[+CanadianRockies]

Groundspeak has done a major bending of the rules to accommodate this incident. I obviously don't know the behind-the-scenes action, so to an outside observer it looks like they may have set an unwieldy precedent.

 

What will stop the rest of us from wanting the same special consideration for just one or two caches, knowing that they were willing to go to these lengths for 350?

I don't know the behind-the-scenes action either, but as far as I can tell there's been no indication that TEAM KFWB has consented to this mass adoption. They own the containers; Groundspeak doesn't.

 

More likely than not, TEAM KFWB are happy to be relieved of the burden of collecting all their archived caches. But it's also possible that they would prefer to do this themselves. Perhaps they want to give the containers to friends or family.

 

If these adoptions haven't been approved by TEAM KFWB, then I agree it sets a bad precedent.

[+MontyFam]

We can speculate all day long. I'd like to see some facts on this matter...

[Pup Patrol]

I find it hard to believe that the cache owner is not in agreement with the adoption offer. I find it hard to believe that Groundspeak would do something like this "out of the blue", without the cache owner's consent:

 

April 3 by Wizard of Ooze

 

Through special arrangement by Groundspeak, many of the caches recently archived by TEAM KFWB GPS will be made available for adoption.

 

Please do not remove or recycle any of these caches or cache containers until all caches which may be chosen for adoption have been processed.

 

A list of caches which may potentially be adopted is currently being prepared and will be posted at www.wizardofooze.com/team hopefully by 9:00 p.m. Sunday, April 3.

 

Please note that not all caches listed may be adoptable, as I have not had time to review each one to ensure that it meets today's geocaching guidelines. I am doing this as a favour to the BC caching community, and ask that you please be respectful of me and your other fellow cachers while this process is underway. While the caches will be adopted on a "first come, first serve", please do not request a large quantity for yourself, as there are many who are interested in owning a part of this BC caching history. Out of respect for others, please select up to three caches and email wiz@wizardofooze with the GC waypoint number and name of your desired caches, along with your cacher name and email address. I will do my best to ensure that you receive at least some of the caches that you have requested.

 

I appreciate your cooperation while we sort through this. If in the unlikely event that things get out of hand, Groundspeak's special arrangments will be terminated and the caches will remain archived, so please be thoughtful and courteous of your fellow cachers and me, your local volunteer reviewer.

 

Thanks,

Wizard of Ooze

www.wizardofooze.com

 

This is why some stuff is best dealt with privately through email...the rest of us wouldn't have had a clue about this if it hadn't been posted in the forum.

 

As I said, this is an interesting precedent to set.

[+Landsharkz]

Groundspeak has done a major bending of the rules to accommodate this incident. I obviously don't know the behind-the-scenes action, so to an outside observer it looks like they may have set an unwieldy precedent.

 

What will stop the rest of us from wanting the same special consideration for just one or two caches, knowing that they were willing to go to these lengths for 350?

I don't know the behind-the-scenes action either, but as far as I can tell there's been no indication that TEAM KFWB has consented to this mass adoption. They own the containers; Groundspeak doesn't.

 

More likely than not, TEAM KFWB are happy to be relieved of the burden of collecting all their archived caches. But it's also possible that they would prefer to do this themselves. Perhaps they want to give the containers to friends or family.

 

If these adoptions haven't been approved by TEAM KFWB, then I agree it sets a bad precedent.

 

I can say that there have been some emails with TEAM KFWB and they're welcoming their geocaching community's involvement.

 

Thankfully Groundspeak is made up of real people who care about what is happening in communities such as ours. Rules are there to guide most cases, but level-headed decision making is there for the grey areas. Groundspeak has said in the past that their decisions are never precedent setting and I suspect that this one for BC will fall in there somewhere.

 

Thank you to our reviewers and the Lackeys involved for coming to this very workable solution. As always, we appreciate you.

 

Helen and Chris

[+CanadianRockies]

Groundspeak has done a major bending of the rules to accommodate this incident. I obviously don't know the behind-the-scenes action, so to an outside observer it looks like they may have set an unwieldy precedent.

 

What will stop the rest of us from wanting the same special consideration for just one or two caches, knowing that they were willing to go to these lengths for 350?

I don't know the behind-the-scenes action either, but as far as I can tell there's been no indication that TEAM KFWB has consented to this mass adoption. They own the containers; Groundspeak doesn't.

 

More likely than not, TEAM KFWB are happy to be relieved of the burden of collecting all their archived caches. But it's also possible that they would prefer to do this themselves. Perhaps they want to give the containers to friends or family.

 

If these adoptions haven't been approved by TEAM KFWB, then I agree it sets a bad precedent.

I can say that there have been some emails with TEAM KFWB and they're welcoming their geocaching community's involvement.

If I'm reading between the lines correctly, then you seem to suggest that TEAM KFWB have indeed consented to their caches being adopted out. That would be good news.

Edited April 4, 2011 by CanadianRockies

[+Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat]

Groundspeak has done a major bending of the rules to accommodate this incident. I obviously don't know the behind-the-scenes action, so to an outside observer it looks like they may have set an unwieldy precedent.

 

What will stop the rest of us from wanting the same special consideration for just one or two caches, knowing that they were willing to go to these lengths for 350?

I don't know the behind-the-scenes action either, but as far as I can tell there's been no indication that TEAM KFWB has consented to this mass adoption. They own the containers; Groundspeak doesn't.

 

More likely than not, TEAM KFWB are happy to be relieved of the burden of collecting all their archived caches. But it's also possible that they would prefer to do this themselves. Perhaps they want to give the containers to friends or family.

 

If these adoptions haven't been approved by TEAM KFWB, then I agree it sets a bad precedent.

I can say that there have been some emails with TEAM KFWB and they're welcoming their geocaching community's involvement.

If I'm reading between the lines correctly, then you seem to suggest that TEAM KFWB have indeed consented to their caches being adopted out. That would be good news.

From what I know, Yes, Team KFWB has given consent to allow adoption of these caches.

[+ZoomZoom]

Well so be it, nice to see most will survive. Sorry for flipping out.

[7rxc]

Well so be it, nice to see most will survive. Sorry for flipping out.

Well... there will always be the UNadopted locations that might be available for rework... just thinking.

 

Many might be wanting re inventing.

 

Doug 7rxc

[+Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat]

Caches have started being adopted out. I am now the proud adoptive owner of GCK71A.

Edited April 9, 2011 by Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat

[+ZoomZoom]

Some of these caches are no longer accessible, ask me, I know. Some are now in places you are no longer welcome to be unless you want a fine of some sort. You all go ahead and adopt, and adopt, and adopt...but don't dare ask me about one cache. I haven't done them all but I hardly have any more to tackle but I know problems with many...such as missing steps. Sorry I don't carry that info any longer but I know.