Archive to refresh or not/\/\/\/\/\/

[+infiniteMPG]

Our local area is pretty saturated and I can see this happening in other areas where there is a good foundation of active geocachers. After a while you (and the other locals) have pretty much wiped up all the unfound caches so in order to spend a little time caching you need to travel out of your local community area.

 

Question is what everyone thinks about (or does anyone do this) taking some of your local hides, tweaking them via technique, camo or exact location, then archiving the old cache and list a similar but new cache to keep some local challenges for the local cachers?

 

Just tiring of looking at my PQ of caches within my local mountain biking vicinity and seeing hundreds of found caches and occasionally one or two unfound popping up. Almost look forward to needing to maintenance so I have a reason to bike.

 

Thanks!

[knowschad]

Our local area is pretty saturated and I can see this happening in other areas where there is a good foundation of active geocachers. After a while you (and the other locals) have pretty much wiped up all the unfound caches so in order to spend a little time caching you need to travel out of your local community area.

 

Question is what everyone thinks about (or does anyone do this) taking some of your local hides, tweaking them via technique, camo or exact location, then archiving the old cache and list a similar but new cache to keep some local challenges for the local cachers?

 

Just tiring of looking at my PQ of caches within my local mountain biking vicinity and seeing hundreds of found caches and occasionally one or two unfound popping up. Almost look forward to needing to maintenance so I have a reason to bike.

 

Thanks!

 

That is pretty much how King Boreas keeps going. He will put out a bunch of new ones, then archive the old ones. I don't know, but I would assume that he will create the cache pages for the new ones and uncheck the "Cache is ready" box before submitting them, then archive the old ones. Typicall, as long as the cache has been there for enough time to satisfy the reviewer of the cache permanance guidelines, there shouldn't be an issue.

 

 

PS: Just curious, but what's with the "\/\/\/\/\/\/" stuff?

Edited July 21, 2011 by knowschad

[+lamoracke]

personally, and this is just me, if its a trail system and someone archives them and just places them say within 30 feet of the last cache...I find going back there for the caches incredibly monotonous. Obviously folks archive caches and new ones get placed but just recycling caches in roughly the same spot does not do much for me.

 

Then again, I am not in your situation perhaps.

[+infiniteMPG]

These aren't rural caches, mostly urban caches, maybe at a small park or something like that but nothing that would take a long hike or bike to get to. I wouldn't make someone hike miles to snag a find on something near one they found a few years ago. I know I probably wouldn't do that unless there was some other reason to be there.

 

The /\/\/\/\/\/ I do out of laziness. When I get on a main listing page it's incredibly easy to scroll down and find my post laziness is the mother on invention.

[+Ike 13]

If you as the owner wants to archive a cache and find a spot nearby and hide a completely new cache in the vicinity I saw go ahead. If it's a case of archiving an LPC and publishing a new LPC 50 feet away then I feel that's just inflating numbers.

 

For caches you do not own if they need maintenance and the owner is absent and they add no value to the community then post a NA log and then in a few months that spot will be open.

 

To help your boredom you could add notifications for DNFs and/or NM logs since you have found almost all the caches near you you will know where they should be and can check on them and even do minor maintenance (new log/baggy).

[+infiniteMPG]

If you as the owner wants to archive a cache and find a spot nearby and hide a completely new cache in the vicinity I saw go ahead. If it's a case of archiving an LPC and publishing a new LPC 50 feet away then I feel that's just inflating numbers.

I am the owner of the ones in question and I can proudly say I do not now, nor do I plan on ever, owning a LPC

 

I wouldn't do the archive and re-hide unless I could make it a totally new challenge for people who had previously found it. I have done this when some of my camo went missing and the replacement was a step up from the original so I archived and re-hid to let people who found it get challenged with the new (better) camo.

 

One thing I can think of possibly being a quirk is if a cache was hidden and grandfathered, when it gets archived and the new one submitted, if there are different restrictions in place the new one might get declined but the grandfathered one is gone. Guess it could be un-archived by request but still a pain. Guess that's the risk in it.

[+addisonbr]

One thing I can think of possibly being a quirk is if a cache was hidden and grandfathered, when it gets archived and the new one submitted, if there are different restrictions in place the new one might get declined but the grandfathered one is gone. Guess it could be un-archived by request but still a pain.

If it no longer meets the guidelines, the un-archive request would be denied - just something to keep in mind.

[+DanOCan]

Personally I am againsted this sort of cache churn. I prefer to see caches archived because the area can't support the cache any longer or because the owner can no longer support the cache, but just archiving for the sake of giving the locals a chance to pump up numbers is kinda lame IMO.

[+Crow-T-Robot]

If there is a vote, I vote no. As a cache owner, I'd find that sort of thing stultifyingly boring. As a cache finder, I'd find that sort of thing stultifyingly boring.

[+d+n.s]

I did something similar recently.

I had a cache get muggled. I thought a FAR superior hide to do in the same location. Instead of redoing the old semi-boring hide, I did the the new memorable one.

I made a thread and got some interesting responses. Might be worth a glance since it's short and your question is related:

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=277522&st=0&p=4768455&hl=new%20cache%20new%20coordinates&fromsearch=1entry4768455

[Clan Riffster]

Not my cup of tea. My caching bias is largely location based, so retutning to the same spot would not do a whole lot for me. I have friends who are into numbers, and friends who are into challenges who would probably love the idea.

[+power69]

Our local area is pretty saturated and I can see this happening in other areas where there is a good foundation of active geocachers. After a while you (and the other locals) have pretty much wiped up all the unfound caches so in order to spend a little time caching you need to travel out of your local community area.

 

Question is what everyone thinks about (or does anyone do this) taking some of your local hides, tweaking them via technique, camo or exact location, then archiving the old cache and list a similar but new cache to keep some local challenges for the local cachers?

 

Just tiring of looking at my PQ of caches within my local mountain biking vicinity and seeing hundreds of found caches and occasionally one or two unfound popping up. Almost look forward to needing to maintenance so I have a reason to bike.

 

Thanks!

my opinion is its just a dirty way to hike ones hide counts.

[ertyu]

I don't like to see rehashes of the same cache. Even rehashing the same area isn't all that fun. For people in search of numbers it is perhaps the thing to do, but for people in search of experiences this doesn't work.

[+d+n.s]

Not my cup of tea. My caching bias is largely location based, so retutning to the same spot would not do a whole lot for me. I have friends who are into numbers, and friends who are into challenges who would probably love the idea.

I always thought you were into containers? If someone redid a film can hide with a decon in the same general location, would you call it the same cache? Like, different hide, different container same location? Just genuinely curious.

As a person who spends time hiking on certain trails all the time because I love them, I wouldn't mind new caches there fi they were rejiggered or improved. Less about numbers and more about location, but not int the traditional sense.

Edited July 23, 2011 by d+n.s

[+The_Incredibles_]

I don't like the idea, personally. I think if you've run out of caches to find, maybe focus your energy on hiding new ones. Or perhaps some travel time is in order?

[Clan Riffster]

I always thought you were into containers? If someone redid a film can hide with a decon in the same general location, would you call it the same cache? Like, different hide, different container same location? Just genuinely curious.

I am, sort of. I think container selection is an important part of the process when creating a cache. But location is still the main element for me. In your example, it actually would be a new cache, for me, as the film can would never survive my PQ filters. But change the scenario a bit, say, changing a decon to an ammo can, and if it were in a nice location, (someplace I would enjoy even if there were no cache), and I would likely go back out to make the new find, and have fun doing it. I would have more fun, however, if the ammo can was at least a few hundred feet away, (preferably a few thousand), bringing me to a new spot.

[+6NoisyHikers]

I think Infinite's idea is not so bad. For those of us in the suburbs who don't get to travel too often, it might be nice to do a change up every few years. Of course, we're a long way from finding everything in our immediate area so we'll see how we feel when seeking opportunities run thin. Our family stays pretty close to home and though we like to discover new places, our thrill is the WhooHoo! of the find. It's not about numbers at all because we are the "caching-while-we-happen-to-be-in-the-area" types. There is just something exciting about discovering hidden treasure in places you thought you knew.

 

So the short answer is that I would vote yes to a cache shake-up every once in a while.

Edited July 23, 2011 by 6NoisyHikers

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

Every situation is different. I wouldn't mind going back to a previous spot that held a T2.5 in a hollow log to find that a T4 tree or rock climb had been published. I understand the the OP's question. There are so many cool places around here, but farmland is private and State and Metro parks continue to place restrictions.