Archived Cache Removal

[+6NoisyHikers]

Was just looking at the caches in an area the NoisyHikers will be visiting next month and noticed two archived caches that are still in place and being found. I'm wondering if, when we find them, we should pack them out as geo-trash?

 

The reason these two caches are still being found is because they are part of a series of three and their GC codes are linked on the page of the cache that is still active. They were archived nearly a year ago but were found as recently as a month ago. Both containers are reported to be in decent shape but the CO didn't respond to the Reviewer note after they had been disabled for over a year (which is to say that the CO had not done anything about the caches for two years) so they were archived.

 

So, leave them be or cache trash out? What say ye?

[+Roman!]

Was just looking at the caches in an area the NoisyHikers will be visiting next month and noticed two archived caches that are still in place and being found. I'm wondering if, when we find them, we should pack them out as geo-trash?

 

The reason these two caches are still being found is because they are part of a series of three and their GC codes are linked on the page of the cache that is still active. They were archived nearly a year ago but were found as recently as a month ago. Both containers are reported to be in decent shape but the CO didn't respond to the Reviewer note after they had been disabled for over a year (which is to say that the CO had not done anything about the caches for two years) so they were archived.

 

So, leave them be or cache trash out? What say ye?

 

Probably the right thing to do is find and log them then pst a note you geotrashed them but I'd just find and log them.

[+L0ne.R]

Was just looking at the caches in an area the NoisyHikers will be visiting next month and noticed two archived caches that are still in place and being found. I'm wondering if, when we find them, we should pack them out as geo-trash?

 

The reason these two caches are still being found is because they are part of a series of three and their GC codes are linked on the page of the cache that is still active. They were archived nearly a year ago but were found as recently as a month ago. Both containers are reported to be in decent shape but the CO didn't respond to the Reviewer note after they had been disabled for over a year (which is to say that the CO had not done anything about the caches for two years) so they were archived.

 

So, leave them be or cache trash out? What say ye?

 

Probably the right thing to do is find and log them then pst a note you geotrashed them but I'd just find and log them.

Sounds reasonable and perhaps add a note that you'll hold on to the cache for one month in case the CO would like the cache back. After a month trash the cash or recycle.

[+K13]

Trash out & watch for the throwdowns to follow.

[+CanadianRockies]

If you plan to remove the caches, then be sure to send an email to the owner ahead of time informing them of your intentions. Remember, even if the cache is no longer listed on Groundspeak, it might be listed on another site.

[+cerberus1]

Remember, even if the cache is no longer listed on Groundspeak, it might be listed on another site.

- Saved me an edit.

I was thinking the same when it was stated all three were still in play.

[+Viajero Perdido]

Leave them be.

 

1. You don't own them.

2. They're still in play.

[+fizzymagic]

Leave them be.

 

1. You don't own them.

2. They're still in play.

 

+1 They are not doing any harm.

[+WarNinjas]

I would leave one still being logged. We did however find one the other day near one that had been archived and we kind of know the CO. The new one is in place so we removed the old one so not muggles would find it. Not sure if that was the right decision now after reading this but know it is not being used under another account. We just thought of it as geo trash that would someday be found by workers.

[+The_Incredibles_]

If people are actively looking for them, I'd just leave them however would definately keep them on my watchlist. I've noticed in our area when a cache gets archived, people will pitch in to help clean the abandoned caches up. Perhaps it's different in other areas, but in ours, I've checked and there are very few listed on other sites.

 

I have CITOd cache containers from archived caches a number of times, but only because I didn't expect anybody would be looking for them and the owner was unresponsive. I do make sure to post a note on the cache page saying I've got the old container if they wanted. Haven't yet had anybody asking for their cache back.

Edited January 26, 2013 by The_Incredibles_

[+Afterburned]

Why not just list it yourself? I am assuming there are no proximity issues!

You could even ask the reviewer to lock the archived listing!

 

I would just find it and log it.

[+6NoisyHikers]

Thanks for your ideas everyone The location of these caches is a little out of my maintenance range so I won't be taking them over or placing my own in the area.

 

If you plan to remove the caches, then be sure to send an email to the owner ahead of time informing them of your intentions. Remember, even if the cache is no longer listed on Groundspeak, it might be listed on another site.

 

This makes sense - and I'll drop a note to our local reviewer too (she archived the caches and has just disabled another cache of his that has several needs maintenance flags) and see what she recommends we should do.

[Keystone]

Your local reviewer will not give advice about removing someone else's cache container. Rather, you'll be reminded that the cache belongs to the owner, and what you do is between you and the owner.

 

Your reviewer will likely also remind you that the area is open to a fresh placement of a new container hidden by someone who will maintain it.

[+stijnhommes]

Was just looking at the caches in an area the NoisyHikers will be visiting next month and noticed two archived caches that are still in place and being found. I'm wondering if, when we find them, we should pack them out as geo-trash?

 

The reason these two caches are still being found is because they are part of a series of three and their GC codes are linked on the page of the cache that is still active. They were archived nearly a year ago but were found as recently as a month ago. Both containers are reported to be in decent shape but the CO didn't respond to the Reviewer note after they had been disabled for over a year (which is to say that the CO had not done anything about the caches for two years) so they were archived.

 

So, leave them be or cache trash out? What say ye?

So they were archived because they were disabled by a reviewer when the CO didn't respond to a reviewer note. The real question is what the note was about. If that issue is no longer relevant, it would be a shame to mess up a series since the cache is in good shape.

[+Manville Possum]

Remember, even if the cache is no longer listed on Groundspeak, it might be listed on another site.

- Saved me an edit.

I was thinking the same when it was stated all three were still in play.

 

Yes, leave them be. They likely are listed on another site.

Edited January 26, 2013 by Keystone
promotional reference removed by moderator

[4wheelin_fool]

I would definitely NOT remove them if they are in good condition. If the containers were wet and broken, that's different.

[+tomfuller & Quill]

Several year ago I was asked by a reviewer to remove a archived "moving" cache that had not been found for several months.

The cache was a good ammocan which had a great spiral-bound notebook log. All of the SWAG was trash. I gave the ammocan to the host of an event. The host was one of the names in the logbook. I took the logbook and attached a TB to it and released it as "Lost & Found Lives On"

The reviewer opened the online log ability for an hour to allow me to be the last logger of the cache. In my log, I let people know that the cache was no longer in the wild.

[+wimseyguy]

Leave them be.

 

1. You don't own them.

2. They're still in play.

 

+1 They are not doing any harm.

 

+2 not yours, not yours to maintain.

[+OZ2CPU]

We often find arhcived caches, actually one today, offcourse we let it be, it is still in the game and people still have fun finding them.

Some of them got special place dates, or old hidden monts.. So if removed,

You could create an unwanted hole..

[+dprovan]

Definitely find them, sign the log, claim the find, and leave them there. It sounds like what used to be an ordinary series capper has turned into an interesting puzzle cache involving finding some unlisted caches. As long as the caches are still in place and still serving a function, why worry about them?

 

Although I am curious what led to the archival if they're in good shape and still have the coordinate pieces they're supposed to have.

[GOF and Bacall]

Your local reviewer will not give advice about removing someone else's cache container. Rather, you'll be reminded that the cache belongs to the owner, and what you do is between you and the owner.

 

Your reviewer will likely also remind you that the area is open to a fresh placement of a new container hidden by someone who will maintain it.

 

They aren't yours and are still being found via links on the GC.com site. And while I doubt your reviewer will mention it it has already been pointed out that they may be listed on another site.

[+6NoisyHikers]

The caches were disabled by the CO two years ago due to "muggling" of one of the series (which seems to be inaccurate because people found them afterward without any trouble). After a year, our reviewer posted a "Hey, your cache has been disabled for a long time, what are your plans?" After nothing was done for a month, she archived them. That was a year ago. Since then, about four people have logged finding these caches.

 

From my research, it looks as though the CO stopped caching in 2010. One of the containers was a lock n lock inside a decorative box. The box has since deteriorated so it doesn't look like the CO is keeping these caches up for another listing site.

 

I'm not out to remove perfectly good containers When we get out there and find them (and we will, by golly!) then we'll have a better idea of the right course of action.

[+briansnat]

Leave them be.

 

1. You don't own them.

2. They're still in play.

 

+1 They are not doing any harm.

 

They may not be doing harm but sometimes CO's plant another cache nearby and advertise that the archived cache is in place and loggable. It's done to get around the guidelines. Harm? It depends on how you view adherence to rules and sleazy workarounds.

[+L0ne.R]

We often find archived caches, actually one today, offcourse we let it be, it is still in the game and people still have fun finding them.

Some of them got special place dates, or old hidden monts.. So if removed,

You could create an unwanted hole..

 

This brings to mind a CO who would archive some of his caches so that he could plant another cache nearby, within the .1 mile radius and then invite people to go find and log both the active new cache and the nearby archived cache. But that doesn't appear to be the issue in this case. These caches do however appear to be abandoned archived caches. Geolitter that can still be logged. I've heard of some archived caches, that continue to be logged as found, get locked down. Which I assume is to prevent geolitter caches and caches that circumvent the .1 mile rule.

[+The_Incredibles_]

Leave them be.

 

1. You don't own them.

2. They're still in play.

 

+1 They are not doing any harm.

 

+2 not yours, not yours to maintain.

 

You know what, I don't like this attitude, actually. Look the other way, not my problem. Too easy. Yes, technically they belong to someone else. However, if the owner has abandoned their cache and it is not listed on another site (easy to check) are we as a community supposed to leave geo-trash lying around in the woods? For how long? For the next 200 years? How many caches are destined to end up as geo-trash? How will this reflect on our community as the number of abandoned containers lying out in the woods grows?

 

There are so many people that join geocaching, place a cache, then disappear. The cache may disappear all-together, in which case, there is no problem. However, what about when a cache is muggled and some of the cache contents remain? Or if the container is damaged and then archived and the owner has not retrieved it. Or the cache got archived for some other reason and the container is still good. Should we just look the other way and say "not my problem"?

 

I disagree strongly with this attitude. I find it simplistic and child-like to say "not my problem" and "look the other way" while geotrash accumulates in the woods. The situation can be handled in a way that respects the rights of the owner while also respecting the environment we are so priveleged to cache in.

 

As a community we can and should be dealing with the problem of geo-trash. (The cache mentioned in this thread is still being found so I don't consider it geo-trash).

 

I have the perfect example recently from my area:

 

There was a series of 4 caches that were recently archived by the reviewer. Nobody has heard from the cache owner in a long time. Who knows, they may be dead. The series consisted of 3 caches and 1 final bonus cache. 1 in the series had gone missing and a 2nd had been chewed by a mouse, thus making it impossible to find the bonus cache without emailing another cacher for the numbers. All cache pages referred to the series. Even though 1 of the caches was fine and the final was still there, our reviewer archived the series.

 

I went and picked up the mouse-chewed container, the magnetic keyholder that was still good and the series final. And no, they are not listed on another site. I posted notes on the cache page detailing what I did and have the containers in my possession, but have not heard from the cache owner. I doubt I ever will. I feel like I've done a community service and I think it would be great it everybody would feel this way:

 

If the cache is archived, seems abandoned and nobody is looking for it anymore, you can:

 

1) Attempt to contact the cache owner by email and by posting notes on the cache page

2) Take a look at the cache owner's profile to see when they last logged on and when they last found a cache

3) Check other sites to make sure the cache in question is not listed there

4) Post a note on the cache page indicated you plan to remove the old container

5) Wait a bit

6) Remove the container and post another note indicated you have it and the owner can contact you if they want it back.

Edited January 26, 2013 by The_Incredibles_

[+NeverSummer]

Leave them be.

 

1. You don't own them.

2. They're still in play.

 

+1 They are not doing any harm.

 

They may not be doing harm but sometimes CO's plant another cache nearby and advertise that the archived cache is in place and loggable. It's done to get around the guidelines. Harm? It depends on how you view adherence to rules and sleazy workarounds.

If the cache is archived on this site, what is stopping someone from creating a new listing with the former cache's coordinates and related D/T. If they want to keep this viable container going, why not get it back on the record?

[+briansnat]

Leave them be.

 

1. You don't own them.

2. They're still in play.

 

+1 They are not doing any harm.

 

They may not be doing harm but sometimes CO's plant another cache nearby and advertise that the archived cache is in place and loggable. It's done to get around the guidelines. Harm? It depends on how you view adherence to rules and sleazy workarounds.

If the cache is archived on this site, what is stopping someone from creating a new listing with the former cache's coordinates and related D/T. If they want to keep this viable container going, why not get it back on the record?

 

Nothing at all. That's what many people do and it may be fine depending on the circumstances. But sometimes, there is an archived cache that is still maintained by the CO and it is done so to purposefully get around the guidelines. When I hear of an archived cache that gets logged regularly, that is my suspicion. If it is getting logged regularly there must be a reason, because most people don't hunt archived caches because they don't know they are there.

[4wheelin_fool]

Leave them be.

 

1. You don't own them.

2. They're still in play.

 

+1 They are not doing any harm.

 

They may not be doing harm but sometimes CO's plant another cache nearby and advertise that the archived cache is in place and loggable. It's done to get around the guidelines. Harm? It depends on how you view adherence to rules and sleazy workarounds.

If the cache is archived on this site, what is stopping someone from creating a new listing with the former cache's coordinates and related D/T. If they want to keep this viable container going, why not get it back on the record?

 

Nothing at all. That's what many people do and it may be fine depending on the circumstances. But sometimes, there is an archived cache that is still maintained by the CO and it is done so to purposefully get around the guidelines. When I hear of an archived cache that gets logged regularly, that is my suspicion. If it is getting logged regularly there must be a reason, because most people don't hunt archived caches because they don't know they are there.

 

The cache owner is not trying to cheat the guidelines, they are just not active on this site. If the container is damaged it should be cleaned up. Otherwise it is someone else's property who may want it there.

 

I have a few archived caches hidden that I plan on reusing. If someone went and removed them, I would ask them to return them to where they were. Just because someone is not logging in, doesn't mean that their property suddenly belongs to someone else.

Edited January 27, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+hzoi]

I think the only time I'd remove someone else's cache, active or otherwise, would be at the request of a landowner. I removed one archived cache that was still being logged. The listing was auto archived at the request of the National Park Service (it was in the middle of Shenandoah National Park), but the container itself hadn't been removed. Since the owner was AWOL and hadn't removed it, we picked it up while logging the nearby earthcache.

 

edit: on a side note, unfortunately the NPS still hasn't gotten the memo that geocaches are not buried...I was talking to park personnel today to try and get permission for an earthcache, and when I asked if they knew what a geocache was, one of them said, "Sure, you use a GPS to find them, some are virtual, some are buried..." I politely clarified that, no, they are most definitely not buried.

Edited January 28, 2013 by hzoi

[+OZ2CPU]

many CO simply archive caches they dont have time to handle anymore,

health state of cache dont matter much,

some are offcourse VERY bad = liter

some are still in super good health, and should be found, signed and hidden again,

we do have archive lists, it is another fun side game to find them,

it is not always easy, but we are a few who like it.

if what we find is very good, we contact the CO and ask him to enable it again,

they do some times :-)

now a few old 2001 and 2002 caches are back online for all to enjoy, fine with me and many others too.

 

once I found by pure luck ! a cache it was NEWER puplished !!

it had been in the same tree for 4 years, all was still perfect,

it even had cache name and CO email address,

position was still legal, so I asked him to puplish it, he did..

Edited January 29, 2013 by OZ2CPU

[+bflentje]

I disagree strongly with this attitude. I find it simplistic and child-like to say "not my problem" and "look the other way" while geotrash accumulates in the woods. The situation can be handled in a way that respects the rights of the owner while also respecting the environment we are so priveleged to cache in.

 

As a community we can and should be dealing with the problem of geo-trash. (The cache mentioned in this thread is still being found so I don't consider it geo-trash).

 

Collectivism has been tried and it failed.

[+releasethedogs]

Remove. Notify and hold for 10 days then dispose (or reuse).

If the owner is not maintaining them eventually they WILL turn to trash and pollute the earth. If a land manager finds a poorly maintained cache it hurts the reputation of all caches.

[+CanadianRockies]

Before visiting any archived cache, you should check to see if a reason was given for its archival. For example, the landowner or land manager might no longer want (or never wanted) visitors in that area. If that's the case, then you should respect their wishes.

[+Yazz]

Leave them.

 

I have found pretty much everything in 30 miles of my location. I did some research on a cache the other day that had been archived in 2004, while getting a couple close by I searched for it too. Amazingly it was still there. A bonus cache to log and it was dry too. Sometimes it's more of an adventure trying to find them. Better than the lousy stop sign caches.

 

Just my opinion....

[+6NoisyHikers]

The more I research the CO and the history of his caches, the more I can see that one by one his hides will break down and eventually be geotrash in the woods.

 

HOWEVER - I'm actually very excited about the prospect of finding these caches and it does feel like more of an adventure, an extra secret that most people would never discover because two out of the three aren't marked on the map. So, if they are in good shape, I'm inclined to leave them in place and hope for the best. I'm not thrilled that no one seems to be caring for them, but at the same time...

 

We're going on Monday so I will definitely post an update with pics when we get home.

[+OZ2CPU]

exactly Yazz and Noisy, we like this extra adventure

if people remove them, we be sad,

but ok if they are more trash than cache, remove it from the nature if you feel this is the right thing to do.

but if you do so, besure to write this loud and clear in your own found it log,

now no one else after you can find it, and game is over for this one..

but if you are such a concerned and nice person,

why dont you also take all the other trash with you ?

have a look arround, just start with all parking lots you pass, thanks alot..

[GOF and Bacall]

Leave them be.

 

1. You don't own them.

2. They're still in play.

 

+1 They are not doing any harm.

 

+2 not yours, not yours to maintain.

 

You know what, I don't like this attitude, actually. Look the other way, not my problem. Too easy. Yes, technically they belong to someone else. However, if the owner has abandoned their cache and it is not listed on another site (easy to check) are we as a community supposed to leave geo-trash lying around in the woods? For how long? For the next 200 years? How many caches are destined to end up as geo-trash? How will this reflect on our community as the number of abandoned containers lying out in the woods grows?

 

There are so many people that join geocaching, place a cache, then disappear. The cache may disappear all-together, in which case, there is no problem. However, what about when a cache is muggled and some of the cache contents remain? Or if the container is damaged and then archived and the owner has not retrieved it. Or the cache got archived for some other reason and the container is still good. Should we just look the other way and say "not my problem"?

 

I disagree strongly with this attitude. I find it simplistic and child-like to say "not my problem" and "look the other way" while geotrash accumulates in the woods. The situation can be handled in a way that respects the rights of the owner while also respecting the environment we are so priveleged to cache in.

 

As a community we can and should be dealing with the problem of geo-trash. (The cache mentioned in this thread is still being found so I don't consider it geo-trash).

 

I have the perfect example recently from my area:

 

There was a series of 4 caches that were recently archived by the reviewer. Nobody has heard from the cache owner in a long time. Who knows, they may be dead. The series consisted of 3 caches and 1 final bonus cache. 1 in the series had gone missing and a 2nd had been chewed by a mouse, thus making it impossible to find the bonus cache without emailing another cacher for the numbers. All cache pages referred to the series. Even though 1 of the caches was fine and the final was still there, our reviewer archived the series.

 

I went and picked up the mouse-chewed container, the magnetic keyholder that was still good and the series final. And no, they are not listed on another site. I posted notes on the cache page detailing what I did and have the containers in my possession, but have not heard from the cache owner. I doubt I ever will. I feel like I've done a community service and I think it would be great it everybody would feel this way:

 

If the cache is archived, seems abandoned and nobody is looking for it anymore, you can:

 

1) Attempt to contact the cache owner by email and by posting notes on the cache page

2) Take a look at the cache owner's profile to see when they last logged on and when they last found a cache

3) Check other sites to make sure the cache in question is not listed there

4) Post a note on the cache page indicated you plan to remove the old container

5) Wait a bit

6) Remove the container and post another note indicated you have it and the owner can contact you if they want it back.

 

Nice rant. But keep in mind that those people you quoted and called "simplistic and child-like" were talking about this particular situation.

[+L0ne.R]

exactly Yazz and Noisy, we like this extra adventure

if people remove them, we be sad,

but ok if they are more trash than cache, remove it from the nature if you feel this is the right thing to do.

but if you do so, besure to write this loud and clear in your own found it log,

now no one else after you can find it, and game is over for this one..

but if you are such a concerned and nice person,

why dont you also take all the other trash with you ?

have a look arround, just start with all parking lots you pass, thanks alot..

 

Can't speak for the CO but... I'm guessing it's because geolitter gives the game a bad name.