newbie getting annoyed

[Maripossa24]

Hi everyone!

 

I started caching about 2 months ago. I really do love it, and I go out whenever I can. With 36 finds and counting, I'm already having some issues I need to vent/ask about.

 

I've come across quite a number of caches that are in need of maintenance. We carry a supply bag with us whenever we go out, that includes paper towels and ziplock baggies among other things. I'll say 8 times out of 10, we need to dry out a cache, replace a baggie, and replace a disintegrated log with a dry one. The questions I have for this are: why doesn't everyone who caches carry these supplies, instead of just logging "log was wet" or "baggie has a hole in it". I feel like we do more maintenance than the COs do. We've also found a number of logs that were so full and overwritten, we've needed to add a new one. This is very hard with nanos. Then I'll go online and check the log, and it will have "needs new log" in the last 10 logs.

 

Also, why are so many COs not maintaining their caches? It's starting to drive me up a wall. Whenever I find one that is messed up beyond what I can fix, I post a needs maintenance, and it goes unfixed. I've also noticed often that if there are a number of DNFs in a row, no one seems to check if they are still there. I've even emailed the COs directly on a few of them, and get no response.

 

I don't mean to sound so negative, but I'm starting to feel more like a GeoMaintainer than a Geocacher. Is it just me?

[jholly]

Some questions just don't have answers. If a cache has a string of DNF's and a non-responsive CO then maybe the correct log type is Needs Archive.

[+The Frosties!]

I posted a DNF yesterday, and emailed the owner as it was confirmed missing, I got a reply within the hour, and the cache is currently shown as offline until he can check or replace, ~I guess some people are more pro-active than others, and you've just been unlucky with the ones you've contacted (or I was lucky to get a star?)

[+kunarion]

I'm starting to feel more like a GeoMaintainer than a Geocacher. Is it just me?

Cachers do bring ziplocks and log sheets, just in case. But there's only so much you can do. If a log's soaking wet, you have to completely dry it out, before placing it in a watertight bag. The Cache Owner is the one for that.

 

You may do "NA" on a couple of the worst caches that have lots of "NMs" with no action. Maybe spread the wealth and allow other cachers to NM/NA other caches. Take it all with a grain of salt, research the caches you hunt (try the ones that don't have maintenance issues), and simply enjoy the journey. Good luck!

Edited October 25, 2011 by kunarion

[+GeoBain]

I don't mean to sound so negative, but I'm starting to feel more like a GeoMaintainer than a Geocacher. Is it just me?

 

Then stop.

 

Cache owners are charged with maintaining their caches. If you enjoy doing it for them, then do it. If not, don't.

[+Manville Possum]

I'm OK with finders dropping in a new log sheet if they find one of mine full or wet. But all it takes is a note on the cache page and I will address the issue myself. Some users go as far as to throw down a container and log because the can't find the real cache. My advise would be to learn how to use the DNF, NM, NA buttons and proper logging.

[+The_Incredibles_]

Maybe you're just in a bad area? When I was a newbie, I did what you were doing and that is to fix up caches as I found them, sometimes fixing up the whole cache, replacing swag etc.

 

Then I stopped doing that. Quite frankly, the amount of money and time it was costing me, I realized that I would rather put that time and money into my own caches. I still do it once in a blue moon when I see a cache I really think could use some help and is in a good location. But if I do fix up someone's whole cache, for an owner that is inactive, I also email and post a note on the cache page requesting an adoption. But as a rule, I don't do maintenance on other people's caches anymore. It is the CO's responsibility to maintain their cache. Fixing up other people's caches, I believe, just encourages future CO's to neglect their caches. In my area, also, people are frustrated with trying to find a spot to put their cache. There's a day of rejoicing when one of these neglected caches is muggled.

 

If a cache is in such a bad state, take a photo, post it to the cache page. Then if the reviewer does get involved, they will be able to see what's going on.

Edited October 25, 2011 by The_Incredibles_

[Clan Riffster]

I'll say 8 times out of 10, we need to dry out a cache, replace a baggie, and replace a disintegrated log with a dry one.

Hi Maripossa! From what you've posted, it sounds like there are some folks up there using crappy containers. (Crappy, being defined as being inadequate at protecting its contents at its particular location) At this point, the ball is in your court. Do you want to be a crappy cache enabler? Cache owners select crappy containers for one of two reasons: Ignorance or apathy. They either don't know their chosen container sucks for that location, or they don't care. If you are doing the maintenance duties that the owner agreed to when they submitted the cache for publication, then neither reason, (ignorance or apathy), gets addressed.

 

Add to that the fact that you are getting stressed out over it, and the solution seems pretty simple. If you find a cache in need of some TLC, and it is a crappy cache, don't fix it. If the owner is simply ignorant regarding quality containers, perhaps enough maintenance visits will educate them. Then you both win. The owner will start using quality containers, and you will find less soggy logs.

 

Unfortunately, if the owner is apathetic, your refusal to do their job will have very little effect, until the cache collects enough NMs and NAs to get archived. The apathetic hider is going to continue using crappy containers because they don't care that they suck, and they don't care that finders have to deal with icky logs.

 

Fixing a crappy cache is a lose-lose scenario.

[+GeoReapers]

We are almost 1100 caches in, and this is a persistant issue, to be sure. One night, we replaced 4 different containers for caches that had a string of DNF's (and these caches were obviously missing). Then again, we have a couple of CO's out here with over 300 hides that the moment someone posts a "log is wet" log, they disable the cache until they can tend to it. For our part, we don't mind doing it-mostly because we don't want to have that cache sitting on our map waiting for the CO to come out and fix it so we can actually go back out and log it.

 

Honestly, we look at it as a pay it forward sort of situation. We are good about getting out to our caches, but there could be a time when we are under the weather and our cache needs maintenance and maybe there is a helpful cacher our there to help us out. Kunarion has a good point, if it is something you don't want to have to deal with, then just read the logs and move onto another cache, less stress for you. The truth is, there are many CO's that get into the game, get really stoked about their first few hides and then get busy with life and don't get around to maintaining them. They eventually get filtered out later (at least that is my present experience), but not as quick as some might like.

[+L0ne.R]

Is it just me?

 

Nope.

 

It's not really bad in my area but there are plenty. I will do minor repairs - a new baggie (although if a good container is used a baggie isn't really necessary), wipe out a box of moisture and dirt buildup, remove junk, add a small piece of paper to tide the cache over, seal up a minor crack with duct tape but generally only if it appears that the CO cares about the cache and hasn't abandoned it. Anything that's been abandoned, in my opinion, needs to be archived so the area can open up for an active CO. I have no problem posting NMs. Fortunately in my area the reviewers check for NMs and will often step in when there are multiple NMs. Many COs ignore NMs but step up to the plate when a Reviewer posts a note. I will post a NA when needed. So far my NM NA stats are: 35 NMs, 6 NAs (since 2008).

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Clan Riffster supplied THE answer.

 

If you are in the business of maintaining all of these other caches, you are an "enabler". One who allows another to sit on their duff and not worry about or contend with their responsibilities.

 

Temporary fixes are another issue. Helping with adding a temp log is (relatively) common, but it doesn't directly address the issue that the container just flat leaks. Replacing a torn baggie is also common. Doing these deeds are simple courtesy. Replacing a container that you may have broken is only right (been there, done that!). Replacing a crappy container because the CO is lazy or simply doesn't care is not all right.

SIDE NOTE: A baggie is not a solution to a leaky cache, it only perpetuates the problem. The problem is the inadequate cache -- eh, maybe an inadequate incompetent CO.

I know, those are strong words to use, but for the geocaching community to continually maintain these type of caches only means that there will be more of them for you, us and everybody else to log "finds" on.

 

If it is junk and remains junk over a period of time, post a NA log. If the CO springs to life and does what they should, problem solved (more or less). If not, well... perhaps the next cache in that spot will be a better one with a better CO.

 

If you are really interested in getting it done, use a watch list, pay attention to the time span after a NM log. If no response by the CO (not other cachers) over a span of say.... three/four weeks, then file a NA log. Just maybe something good will come of it.

[jholly]

If you are really interested in getting it done, use a watch list, pay attention to the time span after a NM log. If no response by the CO (not other cachers) over a span of say.... three/four weeks, then file a NA log. Just maybe something good will come of it.

Few The reviewers will not archive a cache because the log is wet/soaked/mush. Just something to keep in mind. No sense in getting wrapped around the axle over that one. A scrap of paper in a baggie is probably the best answer.

[+Michaelcycle]

There are exceptions, though...

 

This Sunday we did a kayak run to pick up a few hydrocaches on a stretch of a "wild and scenic" river in south Jersey. We read the cache pages ahead of time and noted log issues with a few posted recently. So we brought a towel and some fresh log sheets with us. As it happens, this part of the world has seen record rainfall over the last few months and these caches were submerged in the high waters that resulted. No one would have anticipated that the caches would be under torrents of water and leak. (it is a tribute to the COs that the caches did not get washed all the way to the Atlantic) We know the COs, they are good people and just had not had the chance to get out and do maintenance. This river requires a vehicle at both put-in and take-out as you really are not able to go very far upstream against the current so it requires time and co-ordination. We got a nice note thanking for our efforts.

 

Now, bad containers in bad places...we tend to figure those out from the logs before we leave home. We just don't hunt them

Edited October 25, 2011 by Michaelcycle

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

If you are really interested in getting it done, use a watch list, pay attention to the time span after a NM log. If no response by the CO (not other cachers) over a span of say.... three/four weeks, then file a NA log. Just maybe something good will come of it.

Few The reviewers will not archive a cache because the log is wet/soaked/mush. Just something to keep in mind. No sense in getting wrapped around the axle over that one. A scrap of paper in a baggie is probably the best answer.

This is true. Wet logs are a fact of life geocaching.

[+medicman911]

I think that minor touch ups are what playing the game is about. Who knows how the last person left the hide. Wipe it out stick some dry paper in it with your log and move on to the next one and let the CO know you did it. I know I maintain my hides but a little help if it is as simple as a new baggie are a new log sheet is always welcome help. But if it bugs you then don't do it. Remember its just a game and have fun.

[+terrkan78]

I feel your pain. Unmaintained caches used to bug me, too. I couldn't (and still can't) imagine why a CO wouldn't be too embarrassed to leave mutiple NM logs unaddressed for months on end. But I realize not everyone feels the way I do, on lots of fronts. (Of course, they're wrong not to feel the way I do, but that's a separate issue...)

 

After you've replaced wet log after wet log, you kind of get burned out on doing that. I still fix wet logs on occasion, if I really liked the cache, or it involved a hike, or I know the CO or I just feel like it. But if I just don't feel like it, I don't. That helps keep my annoyance levels down, too.

[+ollave]

I used to do more maintenance than I do now. I don't bother adding pens to caches anymore; who doesn't carry a pen?

 

I'll return to replacing worn out ziplock log bags when I find a supply of suitable quality and suitably sized ziplock bags; I had some nice small ones but misplaced them (not completely a bad thing as they weren't great quality).

 

Replacement logs ... nah. I know people who do, but if the container is leaking it's leaking, and most replacement logs I've found have been soaked as well. (We've had lots of rain and flooding locally: many caches which were fine for years of drought are not so fine any more.) Adding a sheet of notebook paper when a cache log is full does make sense, and I'd probably do that when I have paper with me.

 

Replacing a container? OK, I did once, but it was a special case: I was muggled, the last finder before a DNF, I lived nearby and so wanted to check the cache, and had an identical cache ready to go anyway. (I hate being the last finder before one or more DNFs, especially when I know that I've been observed by a muggle.)

 

The cache I replaced had disappeared so I dropped the new one in. Happily the cache owner thanked me (and said there had been no need, and that the cache had been muggled before) but didn't think I was interfering. Other cache owners might have.

 

Re "needs maintenance" and "needs archiving" ... go carefully. I log a DNF when I don't find a cache rather than "needs maintenance". A string of DNFs is a better clue than one "needs maintenance" that a cache has gone missing.

 

"Needs archiving" kicks off a review process I believe and so can be a pain for the cache owner. Obviously if a cache has a string of unaddressed "needs maintenance" it's a fair thing, ditto if a cache is in a problematic illegal location.

 

Otherwise -- tread gently. I've had a "needs archiving" log deleted very quickly when the cache owner disagreed with me about the location of the cache being unsafe. We agreed to disagree.

 

Another owner went so far as to delete a DNF on one cache and a note on another without so much as a courtesy message to me to say why ... so I add that hider's caches to my ignore list as they're published. He wins (no more annoyance from me) and I win (no more aggravation from his caches). I also follow the "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything" idea in my logs as much as possible now. There's enough real world aggravation going around; no need to add stress from a game.

[+Chokecherry]

I'll help out a cache owner maintaining the cache if I know the cache owner and know that they otherwise do a good job with their caches. I'll a sheet of paper as a temp log until a owner can get out to the cache in most cases too unless the container is obviously a hot mess. Then I just sign the existing log and don't bother.

[+SwineFlew]

I dont maintaining anyone caches. Period. Around here, a long history of wet log will get your cache archived.

[Maripossa24]

Ok, thanks for the advice everyone! I'm going to stop "fixing" messed up caches. I was just doing it because I felt this was a community activity, where we all kind of helped each other here and there, and I felt bad about leaving a messed up cache for the next person. However, I can see your point about enabling.

[+Gan Dalf]

Ok, thanks for the advice everyone! I'm going to stop "fixing" messed up caches. I was just doing it because I felt this was a community activity, where we all kind of helped each other here and there, and I felt bad about leaving a messed up cache for the next person. However, I can see your point about enabling.

 

It really is a fine line. You are right, and thank you for recognizing that this is a community based activity where we all need to help with all aspects of the game. As you cache longer you will learn that certain types of "helping" will get you labelled as a geocop and you will also find that some cache owners don't want you maintianing their caches for them. Others will be eternally grateful and often ask for advice or help. The trick is recognizing which is which and like most similar types of things, is a learning process that comes with participating int he activity longer.

 

I guess my advice would be to use your judgement. If you see a pattern where a certain cache owners caches are continually falling into disrepair, then this would be a case of where you are being an enabler if you fix his caches, leave them be and post a Needs Maintanence Log. On the otherhand, if you learn that a different cacher really likes their caches to be quality and you find that one of their caches has fallen into disrepair through no fault of their own, then go ahead and fix it and explain what you did in your log. Remember though that if you remove a log book, don't just throw it away, no matter how wet it is. Many cache owners like to go through their logs to check for armchair logging. If the log is salvagable then they migh twant it back.

[+WarNinjas]

It sounds to me like you are a great geocacher and will be a great asset to the game. I would not take the side of I am not going to help out any cache now. We also carry extra supplies if needed. Don't let it stress you out at all but you will get to know some of the local geocachers. If you think something is needed and you have the stuff and want to help out a cache then do it and I am sure many will thank you. If you get to one that you think is a problem then just log it and move on. It never hurts to have the stuff with you and it can be helpful. I know my first hide was a container I thought was waterproof. Turned out is was not and someone fixed up the inside for me. I was very thankful and changed out the container soon after. I would not expect anyone to change the container or do anything great but a little help can be nice until I can get to it. The most helpful would be to post a log so I know I need to go check on it. I try to go check on mine when I can but would definitely do so if someone noted it needed it. One my daughter and I hid on the spare of the moment we were trying to find a good log to fit. I guess with all the thinking of what one would be best we placed it without any log. the FTF added one and that was great until we could get out there. Just do what you think is best and I agree not to fix up one the CO is not taking care of at all.

-WarNinjas

[+A & J Tooling]

I started out by maintaining other peoples caches but now all I'll do is replace an o-ring if it is gone.

I enjoy refilling containers with swag now.

[+bflentje]

Yep, sign the mushy log and move on. If I maintained every cache I ran into that needed help, it'd be a fulltime job and cost me a fortune.

[+NanCycle]

Hi everyone!

 

why doesn't everyone who caches carry these supplies, instead of just logging "log was wet" or "baggie has a hole in it".

 

Many of us used to do that, and just got tired of owners not doing their own maintenance. I'll still help out a cache if I feel like it, and have the time and materials needed, but a film can with a soggy log, just gets a "Soggy Log"

 

Is it just me? No, it's not just you.

[+wimseyguy]

A quick scan of your finds list shows a few from one hider who hasn't logged a cache find since '08. Perhaps just ignoring their hides will make it easier for you? Someone won't maintain their caches if they have dropped out of the game.

[+NanCycle]

A quick scan of your finds list shows a few from one hider who hasn't logged a cache find since '08. Perhaps just ignoring their hides will make it easier for you? Someone won't maintain their caches if they have dropped out of the game.

 

If the owner has dropped out of the game, their caches should be either adopted or archived.

[+Gan Dalf]

A quick scan of your finds list shows a few from one hider who hasn't logged a cache find since '08. Perhaps just ignoring their hides will make it easier for you? Someone won't maintain their caches if they have dropped out of the game.

 

If the owner has dropped out of the game, their caches should be either adopted or archived.

 

Getting the owner to adopt out a cache can often be problematic if they are no longer playing the game and their cooperation is a required neccesity in order to do so. I have yet to see a reviewer that will archive a cache simply because the owner is an absentee. On the contrary, in many cases, the community has taken up reponsibilty of maintaining an abandoned cache that is not adoptable, especially if it is a much loved or historic cache, which is as it should be.

[+StarBrand]

Sorry that has been your experience but around here it is much closer to sub 10% needing some serious TLC. You have likely just hit on a bad area.

[Clan Riffster]

I'm going to stop "fixing" messed up caches.

Personally, I think it's pretty dern kewl of you to fix 'em up. It shows what kind of character you have. With a positive outlook like that, you'll likely be around here a long time. Rather than quit fixing caches all together, might I suggest a bit of moderation instead? I will go way out of my way to repair what I consider to be a quality cache. But I won't waste my time fixing anything on what I consider to be a poorly chosen cache container. The end result is, I still get the occasional warm fuzzy, without having to feel annoyed.