Replacing abandoned caches

[+jellis]

There has been a some caches in my area that have been abandoned that the caches have either gone missing and/or the owner no longer is active. I am not talking about really old historical caches or ones place by cachers who passed away and their friends are keeping them alive. I am mostly talking about ones who just drop out and leave the caches behind for us to deal with.

 

One was placed by a kid that had a habit of placing caches then not maintain them and then he dropped out and his caches are dying a slow death. One of them is a puzzle challenge. I like the idea of the cache. But without the owner to update changes or replace the cache when it goes missing then what's the point? So a local cacher has been replacing the container and answering questions in the logs. But has no access to the cache page.

 

I just got a notification about a cache I have mentioned many times on the forum. The one where a CO buried a regular sized container in the ground with only the lid showing, not hidden but in plain view of walking paths in a City park. The CO claimed to have permission from the City Park. Now the CO has not been active since January and the cache has been dying with DNF's, report of a hole in the ground, and then nothing. Then I see a log a cacher out of the blue who has never found the cache replaced the cache, but of course didn't know where it was originally located, put it in a different spot and posted coords in their log.

 

Seen others like this too.

We've talked about this even in Mingo about other cachers replacing caches for owners without contacting them.

 

Why don't these cachers put archive requests on them, wait til it is gone and just put their own out instead of trying to revive the cache?

[+StarBrand]

I fully understand that most of the cachers that do this are very well meaning and are not acting out of any kind of malice. We have a local cacher that has replaced several local caches that were fading away and even one of mine that I had not been able to check for a few weeks. I know he really means well. However.....

 

Said with the utmost respect....

 

STOP!!!!

 

Logging a find on a cache that you just dropped at a guessed location is just cheesy. Let the owner deal with it or post an NA log and let the reviewer deal with it. Return later and place your own. Caches need real owners not just a new container.

[+nikcap]

This seems to be common just about everywhere.

 

To paraphrase StarBrand, these cache these cachers mean well, but the over all impact of these replacement caches just kicks can down the road.

 

There are several caches in my area that have been replaced by a well-meaning geocacher. Now that those caches have gone MIA again, this person that replaced the cache feels they did their good deed and is no longer responsible.

 

I've spoken with several local cachers in my area regarding NM and NA logs. Basically, they don't use them because they don't want to be come known as the Cache Police. Perhaps if there was a method to anonymous notify the local reviewer, things would be different, however, I'm afraid that this would bring on a whole other set

 

I've tried to discuss with other cachers that there is no harm in a NM log, since it's so easy to fix by the CO acknowledging the log and the issue with a Owner Maintenance log, at least for those COs that are still active.

 

Edited April 9, 2012 by ekitt10

[+jellis]

Sometimes I send a note directly to the reviewer since we know them so well. Or create a sock puppet and just log a NA or NM that way.

[+wimseyguy]

If only these well meaning cachers would visit the forums.

 

It's a lousy practice, but isn't likely to go away.

[+nikcap]

Sometimes I send a note directly to the reviewer since we know them so well. Or create a sock puppet and just log a NA or NM that way.

 

Seriously?

 

That's crazy. Just curious, do you (or someone you know) create sock pupper accounts repeatedly. Why not use the same account?

 

I think there is something to be said for this. It might be kind of nice to have a "generic account" for a local group that can play cache police.

 

Mods, can you all look away so we can discuss this aspect?

[+briansnat]

I fully understand that most of the cachers that do this are very well meaning and are not acting out of any kind of malice. We have a local cacher that has replaced several local caches that were fading away and even one of mine that I had not been able to check for a few weeks. I know he really means well. However.....

 

Said with the utmost respect....

 

STOP!!!!

 

Logging a find on a cache that you just dropped at a guessed location is just cheesy. Let the owner deal with it or post an NA log and let the reviewer deal with it. Return later and place your own. Caches need real owners not just a new container.

 

I ran into this just a few weeks ago when caching out of state. Container went missing and someone replaced it with a throw down pill bottle. Pill bottle went missing and a searcher found a baggie on the ground in the general area, put a receipt inside and hid it in a hollow log. Who knows if it's even close to the original hiding place? My GPS was pointing to a hollow standing tree about 25 feet away. People have been logging finds by signing the back of the receipt for months now. I logged a NA and the local reviewer has disabled it. CO hasn't logged onto the site for 3+ years.

 

I'm sure some of this is done by well meaning people, but I think a lot of it comes from people who refuse to walk away without a smiley.

[+captnemo]

I fully understand that most of the cachers that do this are very well meaning and are not acting out of any kind of malice. We have a local cacher that has replaced several local caches that were fading away and even one of mine that I had not been able to check for a few weeks. I know he really means well. However.....

 

Said with the utmost respect....

 

STOP!!!!

 

Logging a find on a cache that you just dropped at a guessed location is just cheesy. Let the owner deal with it or post an NA log and let the reviewer deal with it. Return later and place your own. Caches need real owners not just a new container.

+1 I have a cache near a power trail and have had cachers throw down a replacement cache when the cache is still there and in good shape. I have to visit this cache at least once a month, check for throw downs, swap logs and delete those who drove by and didn't sign.

 

The only reason I don't archive this cache is that I adopted it from a friend who moved out of the area and I love the site.

[+briansnat]

I've spoken with several local cachers in my area regarding NM and NA logs. Basically, they don't use them because they don't want to be come known as the Cache Police.

 

Personally I wish people would use these logs as designed. I've taken to logging NMs on my own caches when I get a log that indicates there could be a problem.

[+hzoi]

I did this a few times. I was living in an area that didn't have many caches, and I wasn't going to be staying long. So I thought it was a good thing for the caching community at the time to keep some caches with absentee owners going. (And it was good for me, since we got a few more finds than we'd've had otherwise.)

 

I've changed my stance since then. I'm fine with helping maintain a cache now and then -- log's full and I have an extra slip of paper, that sort of thing. But if a cache is missing, I didn't find it. And if I'm not the owner, I've got no business replacing it. If it needs to be adopted out or archived, so be it.

[+DaysJourney]

I wouldn't worry too much about being a cache cop for a container that has been MIA for a month and the owner hasn't logged on in six. Add a 'needs maintenance' log to the cache. Think of it this way, wouldn't it be better to clear out the old, abandoned stuff and open up that area for someone else? Helping a cache out (replacing log sheets, drying the container out, etc) is cool in small doses but I think its better to archive a barely cared for cache and get some new stuff into the area before too long.

[+SwineFlew]

Post a NM log and wait 5 weeks or so, and post a NA log. Those caches need to go. Bye-bye.

[+jellis]

Sometimes I send a note directly to the reviewer since we know them so well. Or create a sock puppet and just log a NA or NM that way.

 

Seriously?

 

That's crazy. Just curious, do you (or someone you know) create sock pupper accounts repeatedly. Why not use the same account?

 

I think there is something to be said for this. It might be kind of nice to have a "generic account" for a local group that can play cache police.

 

Mods, can you all look away so we can discuss this aspect?

Seriously! Yes! what's wrong with it? I don't abuse sock puppets like some. I don't create them just to have more finds. I know some well known cachers who are well respected who use sock puppets and some of them are on this forum.

I started to use one for this reason when I had a cacher when I asked him nicely to maintain his caches so myself and others can find them. He got so irate he archived all his caches and I got the blame for it and an unnecessary reputation.

So yes I have a sock puppet to take the blame for me.

Edited April 9, 2012 by jellis

[+Mr.Benchmark]

I started to use one for this reason when I had a cacher when I asked him nicely to maintain his caches so myself and others can find them. He got so irate he archived all his caches and I got the blame for it and an unnecessary reputation.

 

It is really unfortunate that some are so nacissistic that you have to go to these lengths to deliver polite feedback. I've said it before - apparently some people have never really encountered honest, constructive criticism before. Just because someone made something, doesn't mean it's awesome, or in this case, that it will exist in perpetuity, without some TLC being required every now and again. Amazing.

[Keystone]

Sometimes I send a note directly to the reviewer since we know them so well. Or create a sock puppet and just log a NA or NM that way.

 

Seriously?

 

That's crazy. Just curious, do you (or someone you know) create sock pupper accounts repeatedly. Why not use the same account?

 

I think there is something to be said for this. It might be kind of nice to have a "generic account" for a local group that can play cache police.

 

Mods, can you all look away so we can discuss this aspect?

This is nothing new. One such sock puppet logged a "Needs Archived" on a cache owned by my player account, presumably out of fear that I'd somehow retaliate against the true account owner using my reviewer powers.

 

Instead, my player account simply answered the sock puppet by saying the cache maintenance would be addressed sometime after I got home from my mom's funeral (a true statement, and one I followed through on). Haven't heard from that particular account since then.

 

Personally I prefer an "whispered tip" in an email from someone I know and trust, if they're worried about the repercussions of logging "Needs Archived," rather than hearing from a sock puppet and not knowing who's behind it.

[+Markwell]

How are the reviewers supposed to know if the sock puppet belongs to n account tat tried to find the cache? Just stand up and post a NM, and if there's no response a NA.

[Mr.Yuck]

I did this a few times. I was living in an area that didn't have many caches, and I wasn't going to be staying long. So I thought it was a good thing for the caching community at the time to keep some caches with absentee owners going. (And it was good for me, since we got a few more finds than we'd've had otherwise.)

 

I've changed my stance since then. I'm fine with helping maintain a cache now and then -- log's full and I have an extra slip of paper, that sort of thing. But if a cache is missing, I didn't find it. And if I'm not the owner, I've got no business replacing it. If it needs to be adopted out or archived, so be it.

 

I'll come out of the closet with hzoi. Back in like '05 or '06, I replaced a cracked container for an absent owner, who probably hadn't logged in for a year, and did nothing (obviously) with just about every log saying it was cracked. Read the logs before going out, and brought a brand spanking new Lock-n-Lock with me. It was not a historic cache by any means, but one in a great location.

 

I've done a complete 180 though, and probably had within a year of doing that. Never do what I did!! Post a needs archived, and place a cache there yourself if you want to. Not applicable to me in that case, the cache was in Canada, although only about 15 miles from my home coordinates.

[+Totem Clan]

Log the NM. If that doesn't work log the NA and don't worry about it. You're in the right to do so.

 

Since I moved here 5 months ago I've been hunting a lot or older caches. I've had to log 25 NAs. All of them were archived after a while. If the CO is absent let it go and another cacher will put one in it's place if the stop is good enough.

[+firestronaut]

I think light maintenance is fine - cleaning a dirty cache, replacing a full/wet log, but anything beyond that is CO's job.

[+TeamTwoStar]

If you place a cache it is your responciblity to maintain that cache. If the owner disappears and does not check their caches and the cahces are muggled, it no ones job but the owner to replace that cache. Log a NA if the owner does not responde to a NM. Then when the cache is archieved, place your own cache there. I think it makes more sense to make your own cache than to do all the work for someone else.

[+L0ne.R]

Post a NM log and wait 5 weeks or so, and post a NA log. Those caches need to go. Bye-bye.

 

This might be the solution. And retrieve the throw-down so it doesn't end up becoming geolitter.

[+hukilaulau]

I think a lot of it comes from people who refuse to walk away without a smiley.

Bingo!

I've been watching this one in NYC that I've looked for unsuccessfully several times.

It was replaced (and found!) by someone from MN, and then the replacement went missing and was replaced by someone else. At last count there were a dozen people claiming smilies who either found nothing or something left by someone other than the CO, some of them thanking the CO for "keeping this one going."

There are also about a half dozen dnf's since the last legitimate find.

Edited April 10, 2012 by hukilaulau

[+Moose Mob]

There are time where a "Needs Archived" log is the best thing you can do for a cache listing.

[Pup Patrol]

Interesting.

 

Groundspeak seems to be encouraging "community maintenance", including replacing cache containers in the newsletter sent out the last week of March 2012:

 

Sometimes nature takes a bite out of geocaches. Cache containers end up battered by weather or broken from regular use. Does one of your geocaches need a new logbook, is the container cracked, or did the pen or pencil in the cache disappear? The changing of the seasons is a perfectly timed reminder to check your caches.

 

And geocache maintenance is not just for geocache owners. Courteous geocachers often help with cache maintenance, which helps increase the quality of the game for all. It's easy. You simply bring additional supplies such as an extra geocache container, swag, logbooks, and pens on your geocaching adventures. That way you're prepared to help out another geocacher by fixing a cache that needs maintenance on the spot.

 

If you go geocaching on the spur of the moment and don't have supplies to fix up a cache that needs maintenance, visit Geocaching.com and report a 'Needs Maintenance' log on the cache page.

 

 

 

B.

Edited April 10, 2012 by Pup Patrol

[+jellis]

Interesting.

 

Groundspeak seems to be encouraging "community maintenance", including replacing cache containers in the newsletter sent out the last week of March 2012:

 

Sometimes nature takes a bite out of geocaches. Cache containers end up battered by weather or broken from regular use. Does one of your geocaches need a new logbook, is the container cracked, or did the pen or pencil in the cache disappear? The changing of the seasons is a perfectly timed reminder to check your caches.

 

And geocache maintenance is not just for geocache owners. Courteous geocachers often help with cache maintenance, which helps increase the quality of the game for all. It's easy. You simply bring additional supplies such as an extra geocache container, swag, logbooks, and pens on your geocaching adventures. That way you're prepared to help out another geocacher by fixing a cache that needs maintenance on the spot.

 

If you go geocaching on the spur of the moment and don't have supplies to fix up a cache that needs maintenance, visit Geocaching.com and report a 'Needs Maintenance' log on the cache page.

 

 

 

B.

 

I think that's when there is a CO that may not be able to get to the cache right away. As I mentioned in the first post not for ones who drop out of the game and don't bother to archive their own caches so other cachers try to maintain caches in vain.

[Pup Patrol]

Interesting.

 

Groundspeak seems to be encouraging "community maintenance", including replacing cache containers in the newsletter sent out the last week of March 2012:

 

Sometimes nature takes a bite out of geocaches. Cache containers end up battered by weather or broken from regular use. Does one of your geocaches need a new logbook, is the container cracked, or did the pen or pencil in the cache disappear? The changing of the seasons is a perfectly timed reminder to check your caches.

 

And geocache maintenance is not just for geocache owners. Courteous geocachers often help with cache maintenance, which helps increase the quality of the game for all. It's easy. You simply bring additional supplies such as an extra geocache container, swag, logbooks, and pens on your geocaching adventures. That way you're prepared to help out another geocacher by fixing a cache that needs maintenance on the spot.

 

If you go geocaching on the spur of the moment and don't have supplies to fix up a cache that needs maintenance, visit Geocaching.com and report a 'Needs Maintenance' log on the cache page.

 

 

 

B.

 

I think that's when there is a CO that may not be able to get to the cache right away. As I mentioned in the first post not for ones who drop out of the game and don't bother to archive their own caches so other cachers try to maintain caches in vain.

 

The newsletter made no distinction between active co's and non-active co's.

 

It just says to take supplies with you to replace caches as part of your regular caching experience.

 

http://blog.geocaching.com/2012/03/Groundspeak-weekly-newsletter-2/

 

 

 

B.

[+TeamTwoStar]

.

Edited April 11, 2012 by TeamTwoStar

[+TeamTwoStar]

I say use your judgement.

 

If it is a generic nano, bison tube or magnetic holder on a gaurdrail on the side of a road with a simple logbook, why not replace it, if it is obvious it was muggled.

 

But not the special ones. I dont worry about the fading ones so much. Thats geocaching. They come and go all the time.

 

It would be cool if Groundspeak would create a system that after 30 days, if noone has stepped forward to fix the cache (CO) then they would take volunteers on a first come first serve basis to adopt them.

 

Their are a few easy ones in my area that i would gladly adopt that the co is mia.

[+ras_oscar]

There's a difference between replacing a damaged container and throwing down a new container. Twice I have replaced containers that were damaged. One of them inadvertently by me, the other was a blinkey that had it's cap and log missing. Each time I PM'd the CO with a description of what I did and why. If I find nothing, I have no right to assume the container is missing and replace it with a throw down. That's kinda like saying " I'm the most talented cacher in the world. If I can't find your silly little cache it's because it's not there, therefore I will replace it for you, thus preserving my statistic of finding 100% of the caches I searched for.

[+Totem Clan]

I say use your judgement.

 

If it is a generic nano, bison tube or magnetic holder on a gaurdrail on the side of a road with a simple logbook, why not replace it, if it is obvious it was muggled.

Because it's not your's and you don't know that has been muggled. Plain and simple

 

But not the special ones. I dont worry about the fading ones so much. Thats geocaching. They come and go all the time.

 

It would be cool if Groundspeak would create a system that after 30 days, if noone has stepped forward to fix the cache (CO) then they would take volunteers on a first come first serve basis to adopt them.

 

Their are a few easy ones in my area that i would gladly adopt that the co is mia.

Why not archive them and replace them? All the history is still there. Why add more complexity to a system that seems too hard for some cachers to figure already?

[+StarBrand]

I say use your judgement.

 

If it is a generic nano, bison tube or magnetic holder on a gaurdrail on the side of a road with a simple logbook, why not replace it, if it is obvious it was muggled.

 

But not the special ones. I dont worry about the fading ones so much. Thats geocaching. They come and go all the time.

 

It would be cool if Groundspeak would create a system that after 30 days, if noone has stepped forward to fix the cache (CO) then they would take volunteers on a first come first serve basis to adopt them.

 

Their are a few easy ones in my area that i would gladly adopt that the co is mia.

Thats just the issue - how do you KNOW - 100% for certain that a cache you never found before is missing??? Log a DNF - if there are a bunch of DNFs over a long time - then feelk free to issue a NA log. If anybody decides instead to replace it - how can you claim to have "found" the cache when you are the one that placed it??

 

I think 30 days to "fix" a cache is waaaay to short of a time frame. 90 days may be too short in some instances considering sickness/season/weather/location/construction/military deployment and other issues. At any rate - Groundspeak has no authority to give away something that it never owned. Groundspeak is a listing service.

[+Mr.Benchmark]

The newsletter made no distinction between active co's and non-active co's.

 

It just says to take supplies with you to replace caches as part of your regular caching experience.

 

http://blog.geocachi...y-newsletter-2/

 

 

Does one of your geocaches need a new logbook, is the container cracked, or did the pen or pencil in the cache disappear? ... You simply bring additional supplies such as an extra geocache container, swag, logbooks, and pens on your geocaching adventures. That way you're prepared to help out another geocacher by fixing a cache that needs maintenance on the spot.

 

I think the implication here is that it is courteous to repair a cache in need of maintenance, not replace it outright. I wish they'd worded this differently, because it's very easy to read this as "it's OK to replace a cache if you don't find it." Especially if that's what a person wants to read into it. It isn't very well worded though, so maybe I'm not reading what they intended, and they really meant "throw 'em down!"

 

BTW, a missing container is problematical for the CO even - if the CO can't find the container, it really only proves that it isn't where they hid it. Perhaps some thoughtful finder "hid it better" - and moved it some distance away. Even if the rightful CO replaces the container in the correct hiding place, it's possible that there will, in fact, be two caches in close proximity, and that people will find both. That said, I think only the CO, or someone with permission and DIRECT knowledge of the location (i.e. they found it previously) should replace a cache that is presumed missing.

[+Mr.Benchmark]

Thats just the issue - how do you KNOW - 100% for certain that a cache you never found before is missing??? Log a DNF - if there are a bunch of DNFs over a long time - then feelk free to issue a NA log. If anybody decides instead to replace it - how can you claim to have "found" the cache when you are the one that placed it??

 

Yeah, that is the problem - you never know that something you never found is missing, not with certainty. There are situations where you can be 99% sure - the coordinates point you to the only lamp post within 75', and the hint for the micro cache says "skirt lifter", and there really is nothing at the lamp post.

 

As for logging "found" for something you throw down, while I agree that this doesn't feel right, it does serve a purpose. If there was a non-owner maintenance log type, THAT would actually be the correct thing to file, rather than "found it". A "found it", though, serves to notify people that the cache is findable again in a way that a simple note would not. (GSAK and other tools can't really read and interpret notes, but a "Found it" will cause the cache to show up on many search filters again.) I'm not trying to rationalize this rather dubious proposition, just saying that if a person is inclined to throw down a cache, "found it" actually makes sense as the log type. (BTW, I feel pretty sure that if a "non-owner maintenance" type log were available, that most of the folks who throw down either wouldn't use it, or would log a find on their throwdown anyway, in addition to noting "non-owner maintenance"...)

[+redsox_mark]

I've only "thrown down" once - and it was recently.

 

It was a cache in the secure/transit area of an airport. I.e. you could only get to it if you were flying, it is past security. (Or if you worked at the airport). The owner claimed to have airport permission. (It is not in the USA).

 

The owner said on the page that as he/she doesn't work at the airport, they ask travelers to maintain the cache - including replacing it if it goes missing. So in this case the owner was active, and encouraging replacement.

 

When I went to look for it, it was missing. The cache was an easy one, there was a clear hint and a spoiler photo. It could have migrated away somewhere, but it clearly was not where it was supposed to be. I purchased a container and replaced it. The owner thanked me.

 

I also logged it as a find. Now I know; how could I "find" that particular pot, when I was the one who put it there? But I did find the location. I know some (maybe most on this forum) would object to that, but I honestly don't feel guilty. Anyone who looks for that cache would find it if it was there. The owner had no issue with my claiming a find. I could have done nothing and wait for someone else to replace it (I was coming back through this airport later).

 

And I did sign the log...so it's legal...

[+hukilaulau]

I've only "thrown down" once - and it was recently.

 

It was a cache in the secure/transit area of an airport. I.e. you could only get to it if you were flying, it is past security. (Or if you worked at the airport). The owner claimed to have airport permission. (It is not in the USA).

 

The owner said on the page that as he/she doesn't work at the airport, they ask travelers to maintain the cache - including replacing it if it goes missing. So in this case the owner was active, and encouraging replacement.

 

When I went to look for it, it was missing. The cache was an easy one, there was a clear hint and a spoiler photo. It could have migrated away somewhere, but it clearly was not where it was supposed to be. I purchased a container and replaced it. The owner thanked me.

 

I also logged it as a find. Now I know; how could I "find" that particular pot, when I was the one who put it there? But I did find the location. I know some (maybe most on this forum) would object to that, but I honestly don't feel guilty. Anyone who looks for that cache would find it if it was there. The owner had no issue with my claiming a find. I could have done nothing and wait for someone else to replace it (I was coming back through this airport later).

 

And I did sign the log...so it's legal...

So you helped perpetuate a cache that is not available to everyone, that the owner is unable to maintain, and that does not have permission (Don't even PRETEND that you believe it had permission)

Ah, but the owner thanked you... guess that proves it's okay

[+wimseyguy]

I say use your judgement.

 

If it is a generic nano, bison tube or magnetic holder on a gaurdrail on the side of a road with a simple logbook, why not replace it, if it is obvious it was muggled.

 

But not the special ones. I dont worry about the fading ones so much. Thats geocaching. They come and go all the time.

 

Their are a few easy ones in my area that i would gladly adopt that the co is mia.

 

So who gets to decide which are special and which are not?

If it's not your cache, don't replace the container unless you know the owner and they have told you exactly what it is, where to find it, and to replace it on their behalf.

 

I have found multiple containers too often recently. Including at a park bench with the original 2+ year old Listerine breath strip on one end and a new nano at the other. Really?

 

And if the CO is MIA he cannot initiate the adoption process and it won't happen any other way.

Edited April 11, 2012 by wimseyguy

[+briansnat]

I say use your judgement.

 

If it is a generic nano, bison tube or magnetic holder on a gaurdrail on the side of a road with a simple logbook, why not replace it, if it is obvious it was muggled.

 

But not the special ones. I dont worry about the fading ones so much. Thats geocaching. They come and go all the time.

 

Their are a few easy ones in my area that i would gladly adopt that the co is mia.

 

So who gets to decide which are special and which are not?

If it's not your cache, don't replace the container unless you know the owner and they have told you exactly what it is, where to find it, and to replace it on their behalf.

 

I have found multiple containers too often recently. Including at a park bench with the original 2+ year old Listerine breath strip on one end and a new nano at the other. Really?

 

And if the CO is MIA he cannot initiate the adoption process and it won't happen any other way.

 

I add one to this sentiment

[+redsox_mark]

I've only "thrown down" once - and it was recently.

 

It was a cache in the secure/transit area of an airport. I.e. you could only get to it if you were flying, it is past security. (Or if you worked at the airport). The owner claimed to have airport permission. (It is not in the USA).

 

The owner said on the page that as he/she doesn't work at the airport, they ask travelers to maintain the cache - including replacing it if it goes missing. So in this case the owner was active, and encouraging replacement.

 

When I went to look for it, it was missing. The cache was an easy one, there was a clear hint and a spoiler photo. It could have migrated away somewhere, but it clearly was not where it was supposed to be. I purchased a container and replaced it. The owner thanked me.

 

I also logged it as a find. Now I know; how could I "find" that particular pot, when I was the one who put it there? But I did find the location. I know some (maybe most on this forum) would object to that, but I honestly don't feel guilty. Anyone who looks for that cache would find it if it was there. The owner had no issue with my claiming a find. I could have done nothing and wait for someone else to replace it (I was coming back through this airport later).

 

And I did sign the log...so it's legal...

So you helped perpetuate a cache that is not available to everyone, that the owner is unable to maintain, and that does not have permission (Don't even PRETEND that you believe it had permission)

Ah, but the owner thanked you... guess that proves it's okay

 

I see your point of view, but I still feel what I did was OK.

 

Maybe I am naive, but I do believe the owner had permission. Yes, the cache was only available to those traveling (or working in the airport). But that had always been the case; the cache had been reviewed and published. The cache owner was active (but did admittedly need help to maintain).

 

The cache is in a lovely butterfly garden in Singapore Airport. Many people change flights there on long haul flights (as I did). For a traveling geocacher who is in the middle of a 24 hour journey to Australia, being able to find a geocache (and in a nice garden) is a welcome break, which most seemed to enjoy. I think this is a cache worth perpetuating.

 

But I just checked the cache page. My replacement only lasted about a week. Later there was another replacement; it lasted a month or more. Now that one is missing. So it seems this one does have some issues. Still a nice place for a cache.

[+jellis]

sorry did this from iphone.

Edited May 3, 2012 by jellis

[+jellis]

I've only "thrown down" once - and it was recently.

 

It was a cache in the secure/transit area of an airport. I.e. you could only get to it if you were flying, it is past security. (Or if you worked at the airport). The owner claimed to have airport permission. (It is not in the USA).

 

The owner said on the page that as he/she doesn't work at the airport, they ask travelers to maintain the cache - including replacing it if it goes missing. So in this case the owner was active, and encouraging replacement.

 

When I went to look for it, it was missing. The cache was an easy one, there was a clear hint and a spoiler photo. It could have migrated away somewhere, but it clearly was not where it was supposed to be. I purchased a container and replaced it. The owner thanked me.

 

I also logged it as a find. Now I know; how could I "find" that particular pot, when I was the one who put it there? But I did find the location. I know some (maybe most on this forum) would object to that, but I honestly don't feel guilty. Anyone who looks for that cache would find it if it was there. The owner had no issue with my claiming a find. I could have done nothing and wait for someone else to replace it (I was coming back through this airport later).

 

And I did sign the log...so it's legal...

So you helped perpetuate a cache that is not available to everyone, that the owner is unable to maintain, and that does not have permission (Don't even PRETEND that you believe it had permission)

Ah, but the owner thanked you... guess that proves it's okay

 

I see your point of view, but I still feel what I did was OK.

 

Maybe I am naive, but I do believe the owner had permission. Yes, the cache was only available to those traveling (or working in the airport). But that had always been the case; the cache had been reviewed and published. The cache owner was active (but did admittedly need help to maintain).

 

The cache is in a lovely butterfly garden in Singapore Airport. Many people change flights there on long haul flights (as I did). For a traveling geocacher who is in the middle of a 24 hour journey to Australia, being able to find a geocache (and in a nice garden) is a welcome break, which most seemed to enjoy. I think this is a cache worth perpetuating.

 

But I just checked the cache page. My replacement only lasted about a week. Later there was another replacement; it lasted a month or more. Now that one is missing. So it seems this one does have some issues. Still a nice place for a cache.

Like the one I mentioned at the start of this thread, the CO claimed to have permission to bury the cache in a city park, GS said it is still against their guidelines. Because this owner abandoned the cache shows why just having permission doesn't make it okay. The airport one though the CO claims to have permission, someday security will say no and it maybe the finder who will pay the price because the CO may not want to take responsibility. It's still against GS guidelines to place a cache in an airport.

Edited May 3, 2012 by jellis

[+redsox_mark]

It's still against GS guidelines to place a cache in an airport.

 

I'm not sure.

 

There is a statement in Guildelines: Inappropriate or Non-publishable Placements

 

"The cache is problematic due to its proximity to a public structure, including and not limited to, highway bridges, dams, government buildings, schools and military installations, hospitals, airports and other such locations."

 

I believe the definition of "problematic" (and proximity) varies depending on local laws and reviewers. This is the only cache I've found which was after security (airside) in an airport. But I have found others (which were well maintained) inside airport terminal buildings "landside" in other countries. And in still other countries, in other airport buildings (such as parking garages).

 

On the other hand, I know at some airports here in the UK there is an exclusion area for caches along the flight path for several miles.

 

So I agree airports need special consideration, but I can't conclude that this cache is against the guidelines.

[+riftan]

I decided to search the forums for the first time to try to find an answer to my dilemma. Recently I came across a cache that was muggled. The cache contents were spread all over the site. The container was nowhere to be seen. The cache was last found about a month ago. The log book was present in the mess and was the original from 2007 in really good condition. The muggling had happened fairly recently since there had been rain in the past week and the book was dry.

 

I am fairly new to geocaching and have only logged just over 50 finds. So I had to make a spot field decision. Do I leave all the swag, log, and TB on site and try to rehide without a container or take it out? I decided to clean out the site in the end. I logged a NM on the cache and in it let the others cachers know that it is not in the location anymore. The CO hasn't logged on in about a month. That was a few days ago and no word back.

 

I have taken the past few days to wonder if I should get a new container and replace. Im glad I found this thread it has lead me to think that it would be best to not replace this cache. So what now? I have the remains of this cache ready to go. Any advice? Oh and I did log and move the TB along.

[+BaseOverApex]

Log an archive request. The local reviewer will see this. Our local reviewers tend to temporarily disable the cache, then come back in a few weeks and if the CO hasn't rectified it, it gets archived. Don't guess the location of the cache.

 

I recently replaced a cache container whose location I know well. I've used the site to introduce several newbies and it has a good number of finds. The CO has fallen off the face of the planet and I didn't want it archived because that would cause the loss of the logs.

 

Lackeys: Is there any possibility of / merit in an option to "assume ownership" of a cache after a reasonable amount of unresponsiveness from the CO, without the need for archiving and therefore losing public visibility of the logs? I do appreciate that the logs remain visible to the owners and no-one loses a "find" due to an archive, but it is really nice to see a big long list of finds!

[Mr.Yuck]

I decided to search the forums for the first time to try to find an answer to my dilemma. Recently I came across a cache that was muggled. The cache contents were spread all over the site. The container was nowhere to be seen. The cache was last found about a month ago. The log book was present in the mess and was the original from 2007 in really good condition. The muggling had happened fairly recently since there had been rain in the past week and the book was dry.

 

I am fairly new to geocaching and have only logged just over 50 finds. So I had to make a spot field decision. Do I leave all the swag, log, and TB on site and try to rehide without a container or take it out? I decided to clean out the site in the end. I logged a NM on the cache and in it let the others cachers know that it is not in the location anymore. The CO hasn't logged on in about a month. That was a few days ago and no word back.

 

I have taken the past few days to wonder if I should get a new container and replace. Im glad I found this thread it has lead me to think that it would be best to not replace this cache. So what now? I have the remains of this cache ready to go. Any advice? Oh and I did log and move the TB along.

 

So you currently have the logbook and scattered swag in your posession? If that is the case, I tend to think you should have left it at the site, but a lot of that would depend on whether there was a baggie or not. This guy/gal hasn't logged in in a month? That's nothing, in the world of inactive players. I'd keep waiting and send a few more emails.

 

Eh, I'd never do it, but if you were to replace this container, it wouldn't be the most terrible thing in the world, and the Geocaching Police are not going to come and take you away. Is this a totally obvious you know exactly where it's supposed to be situation?

[+L0ne.R]

The CO has fallen off the face of the planet and I didn't want it archived because that would cause the loss of the logs.

 

The logs aren't lost, the cache description and logs are always available when you look at the cache owner's list of owned caches on their profile, and to anyone who's logged a find or left a note, and to anyone who knows the GC#. The cache is just stored away, not deleted from the database.

[+L0ne.R]

I decided to search the forums for the first time to try to find an answer to my dilemma. Recently I came across a cache that was muggled. The cache contents were spread all over the site. The container was nowhere to be seen. The cache was last found about a month ago. The log book was present in the mess and was the original from 2007 in really good condition. The muggling had happened fairly recently since there had been rain in the past week and the book was dry.

 

I am fairly new to geocaching and have only logged just over 50 finds. So I had to make a spot field decision. Do I leave all the swag, log, and TB on site and try to rehide without a container or take it out? I decided to clean out the site in the end. I logged a NM on the cache and in it let the others cachers know that it is not in the location anymore. The CO hasn't logged on in about a month. That was a few days ago and no word back.

 

I have taken the past few days to wonder if I should get a new container and replace. Im glad I found this thread it has lead me to think that it would be best to not replace this cache. So what now? I have the remains of this cache ready to go. Any advice? Oh and I did log and move the TB along.

 

So you currently have the logbook and scattered swag in your posession? If that is the case, I tend to think you should have left it at the site

 

I agree.

 

What I've done (when it was convenient for me i.e. a local cache) is:

1. Posted the NM (if NMs haven't already been posted)
2. Then the NA
3. Waited until the cache is archived
4. Cleaned up the cache site
5. Post a note to say the cache remains have been cleared away

[+badger10]

I have a different scenario. My son and I found a local cache but while we were retrieving the cache it fell down a pipe never to be seen again. We emailed the CO and offered to replace the container. He said he would make the walk and replace it. That was last October and has had several DNF and a couple of NM. The cacher is still active. Should I replace the cache or let the chips fall as they may?

[+riftan]

I decided to search the forums for the first time to try to find an answer to my dilemma. Recently I came across a cache that was muggled. The cache contents were spread all over the site. The container was nowhere to be seen. The cache was last found about a month ago. The log book was present in the mess and was the original from 2007 in really good condition. The muggling had happened fairly recently since there had been rain in the past week and the book was dry.

 

I am fairly new to geocaching and have only logged just over 50 finds. So I had to make a spot field decision. Do I leave all the swag, log, and TB on site and try to rehide without a container or take it out? I decided to clean out the site in the end. I logged a NM on the cache and in it let the others cachers know that it is not in the location anymore. The CO hasn't logged on in about a month. That was a few days ago and no word back.

 

I have taken the past few days to wonder if I should get a new container and replace. Im glad I found this thread it has lead me to think that it would be best to not replace this cache. So what now? I have the remains of this cache ready to go. Any advice? Oh and I did log and move the TB along.

 

So you currently have the logbook and scattered swag in your posession? If that is the case, I tend to think you should have left it at the site

 

I agree.

 

What I've done (when it was convenient for me i.e. a local cache) is:

1. Posted the NM (if NMs haven't already been posted)
2. Then the NA
3. Waited until the cache is archived
4. Cleaned up the cache site
5. Post a note to say the cache remains have been cleared away

 

The only reason I did take this stuff was mainly to save the log. There was no way to keep it waterproofed and I didnt want to have it destroyed. Maybe I will throw it all in a ziplock back and get it back to the location. Seems a waste of an old logbook then.

[+BaseOverApex]

The CO has fallen off the face of the planet and I didn't want it archived because that would cause the loss of the logs.

The logs aren't lost, the cache description and logs are always available when you look at the cache owner's list of owned caches on their profile, and to anyone who's logged a find or left a note, and to anyone who knows the GC#. The cache is just stored away, not deleted from the database.

Yes, thanks for that, but the spirit of the message was that if one archives a cache and creates a new one, that new one does not posses the logs of the old one.

 

I do appreciate that the logs remain visible to the owners and no-one loses a "find" due to an archive, but it is really nice to see a big long list of finds!

...and apart from anything else, why would the potential finder look at the profile of the person who used to own the old cache at the current GZ?

[+Don_J]

The CO has fallen off the face of the planet and I didn't want it archived because that would cause the loss of the logs.

The logs aren't lost, the cache description and logs are always available when you look at the cache owner's list of owned caches on their profile, and to anyone who's logged a find or left a note, and to anyone who knows the GC#. The cache is just stored away, not deleted from the database.

Yes, thanks for that, but the spirit of the message was that if one archives a cache and creates a new one, that new one does not posses the logs of the old one.

 

I do appreciate that the logs remain visible to the owners and no-one loses a "find" due to an archive, but it is really nice to see a big long list of finds!

...and apart from anything else, why would the potential finder look at the profile of the person who used to own the old cache at the current GZ?

 

If you are that concerned, place a new cache and put a link to the old one in the description.