Favorite points on an illegal cache

[+jellis]

I went to a cache in a regional park that had 13 favorite points. Thought cool a cache that maybe worth finding. And the cache was creative. But also very illegal. From what I read in the logs it may have been different at the beginning but it was muggled and then changed. Now it is a buried cache. Hole dug over a foot deep and about 8" wide, with a wide mouth pipe to hold back the dirt. Then a cover and a fake stump for camo. I would never feel comfortable putting a favorite point on an illegal cache that would encourage other cachers to break the rules.

Oh and the cacher has not been active for 3 months and yes I did report it.

[+BlueDeuce]

ok, the best thing is to discuss it with the local reviewer.

[+jellis]

Sent him a message. I may want to contact the park to report it to them too since the hole will have to be refilled.

[+BlueDeuce]

Understood. Just know that the process takes a while.

[4wheelin_fool]

All of the illegal caches get favorite points. Since they are creative, that's what happens.

[+The A-Team]

I would never feel comfortable putting a favorite point on an illegal cache that would encourage other cachers to break the rules.

I completely agree, and have held back favourite points for this reason several times in the past. There seem to be quite a number of people that see a guideline-violating cache as fine if it's creative. I don't see it that way.

[+J the Goat]

It sounds to me like you clearly didn't enjoy the cache because it was illegal. That doesn't sound like a favorite geocaching moment to me. Glad you reported a blatant violation like that.

[+TheWeatherWarrior]

I'm confused....it is "illegal" to dig a whole. That is news to me. Now, against geo-policy, sure...but I highly doubt it is illegal to simply dig a small hole.

[+BlueDeuce]

I'm confused....it is "illegal" to dig a whole. That is news to me. Now, against geo-policy, sure...but I highly doubt it is illegal to simply dig a small hole.

 

That's the thing about conjecture, it's best to talk about it with the people in charge.

[+jellis]

I'm confused....it is "illegal" to dig a whole. That is news to me. Now, against geo-policy, sure...but I highly doubt it is illegal to simply dig a small hole.

It's against the guidelines to dig a hole to hide a cache. It is illegal to dig a hole in regional parks. That I believe is a form of vandalizing

Edited March 1, 2013 by jellis

[+SwineFlew]

Post the GC# or it didnt happen.

[+Manville Possum]

I may want to contact the park to report it to them too since the hole will have to be refilled.

It was a buried cache without permission that got any new geocaches in Tennessee State parks banned.

[+jellis]

Post the GC# or it didnt happen.

GC3F7JE

You know me. I wouldn't lie or exaggerate

[+SwineFlew]

Post the GC# or it didnt happen.

GC3F7JE

You know me. I wouldn't lie or exaggerate

Thank you...

 

Thats a nice area to go caching.

 

Funny that the CO been around for years.

 

However, here is a question that someone might bring up, what if the hole was there and the CO just dropped it in?

 

I think the favorite points are for the location and not for the cache itself.

[+Don_J]

Post the GC# or it didnt happen.

GC3F7JE

You know me. I wouldn't lie or exaggerate

 

Nope, just broadcast everything to the world, including the park manager, so all caches can be properly banned system wide. Ever hear of the word discretion? I'd have simply notified one of my reviewers in private and then gone and remedied the situation after it was archived. But, what fun is that?

[+Lieblweb]

What is 'illegal'?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal

Illegal, or unlawful, is used to describe something that is prohibited or not authorized by law.

 

What is a 'guideline'?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guideline

A guideline is a statement by which to determine a course of action. A guideline aims to streamline particular processes according to a set routine or sound practice. By definition, following a guideline is never mandatory.

[+jellis]

What is 'illegal'?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal

Illegal, or unlawful, is used to describe something that is prohibited or not authorized by law.

 

What is a 'guideline'?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guideline

A guideline is a statement by which to determine a course of action. A guideline aims to streamline particular processes according to a set routine or sound practice. By definition, following a guideline is never mandatory.

I agree. I am pretty sure it is prohibited to dig a hole in a park. Especially to hide a cache.

[+jellis]

Post the GC# or it didnt happen.

GC3F7JE

You know me. I wouldn't lie or exaggerate

 

Nope, just broadcast everything to the world, including the park manager, so all caches can be properly banned system wide. Ever hear of the word discretion? I'd have simply notified one of my reviewers in private and then gone and remedied the situation after it was archived. But, what fun is that?

HUH? did I already say I did? Twice?

[+jellis]

Post the GC# or it didnt happen.

GC3F7JE

You know me. I wouldn't lie or exaggerate

Thank you...

 

Thats a nice area to go caching.

 

Funny that the CO been around for years.

 

However, here is a question that someone might bring up, what if the hole was there and the CO just dropped it in?

 

I think the favorite points are for the location and not for the cache itself.

Not a chance. It's on a trail leading down a hill to a fishing spot. No reason for a hole that large to be there.

[Mr.Yuck]

All of the illegal caches get favorite points. Since they are creative, that's what happens.

 

If I'm not mistaken, the rappel of off an observation tower cache in Germany, and the climb the cables of a suspension bridge cache in Finland had about 50 favorite points apiece. No surprise with this one.

 

In the Geocaching mainstream, a buried pipe will rack up favorite points like crazy. Those of us who regularly read or post to these forums are not the Geocaching mainstream.

[+lamoracke]

Have not looked at the cache in question, but have seen so many "against the guidelines" caches get favorite points, but I just won't do it myself.

 

If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

If a cache has a pipe or green sprinkler top thing with a hole dug out below it in the ground, I will not give it a favorite point

 

Sometimes its just tough to know what to do on these, depends on my mood or other factors if I pursue it that particular time. Wish there was an actual way to report these kind of scenarios without notifying the whole community or emailing a reviewer directly. The reality is, they do not always get archived, so then you just look a fool and get animosity, so at the minimum, I won't give a favorite or write a great log.

[4wheelin_fool]

Post the GC# or it didnt happen.

GC3F7JE

You know me. I wouldn't lie or exaggerate

 

Nope, just broadcast everything to the world, including the park manager, so all caches can be properly banned system wide. Ever hear of the word discretion? I'd have simply notified one of my reviewers in private and then gone and remedied the situation after it was archived. But, what fun is that?

 

+1

 

Yes, why go tell the park manager and risk having all of the caches banned? A hole can be repaired.

Edited March 1, 2013 by 4wheelin_fool

[+Off Grid]

Half of the caches I've been to that were difficult were buried even some of the well known caches are buried and they are promoted so you have to wonder if people even care there's been a few caches that have been very questionable

[+uxorious]

While it isn't likely on this cache, I do know of a cache on public property that is buried, and is OK. The people who run the place, dug a hole and put a water meter box in, just so a Geocacher could hide a cache. They wanted to bring people there. (It has lots of favorites also)

 

The thing is though, it is clearly stated on the cache page the cache has permission, and the property manager is aware of the cache.

 

If you sent a note to the reviewer, and he/she decides it was done with the property managers approval, someone should state that on the cache page.

 

Any cache that is placed in a way that appears to go against the guidelines, but has permission, should have something on the cache page.

[+tozainamboku]

I've withheld favorite points as well from caches that I suspected of being in violation of guidelines. I don't want my favorite vote to encourage people to violate guidelines. On the other hand, for many guideline violations, I just can't get in to the role of playing "cache cop". Even a hole in a park is likely to go unnoticed by the land manager, or if it is discovered it either be filled in or the mananger will have no problem with it. While there have been cases of individual park managers getting worked up over a single instance of minor damage, most will see this as a minor problem with geocaching that can be controlled. But I am concerned that cachers think they can ignore guidelines in order to create a cache that is a favorite, if that encourages a lot more of these caches.

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

On the other hand, for many guideline violations, I just can't get in to the role of playing "cache cop".

 

I don't believe I have ever favorited a "flat cache", but I have see a couple of good ones. I don't think I would refrain from awarding a FAV if a particular "flat cache" was deserving. That's the only guideline that I am aware of that has never been explained to my satisfaction. I vowed, back when this was being discussed, to not place one. But I also stated that I would not send a note to COs to inform them of the perceived violation either as I would be inclined to do for other violations.

[+Ambrosia]

Have not looked at the cache in question, but have seen so many "against the guidelines" caches get favorite points, but I just won't do it myself.

 

If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

If a cache has a pipe or green sprinkler top thing with a hole dug out below it in the ground, I will not give it a favorite point

 

Sometimes its just tough to know what to do on these, depends on my mood or other factors if I pursue it that particular time. Wish there was an actual way to report these kind of scenarios without notifying the whole community or emailing a reviewer directly. The reality is, they do not always get archived, so then you just look a fool and get animosity, so at the minimum, I won't give a favorite or write a great log.

If you email a reviewer, it's true that it may not get archived. But you won't look like a fool to the reviewer, or get any animosity from them. Politeness and a helpful attitude go a long way with reviewers.

[+aka Momster]

If you feel the need to let forum readers know when you report a cache with favorite points, wouldn't it be more useful for them to be added to your previous discussion on the subject, Does this just eat at you?

[+mobywv]

If you feel the need to let forum readers know when you report a cache with favorite points, wouldn't it be more useful for them to be added to your previous discussion on the subject, Does this just eat at you?

 

I actually assumed this was the bumping of that old thread. Not sure why the poster feels the need to thump her chest for reporting a cache. Who knows how the hole got there? Can you actually prove the cache owner dug it? Oh, so you read through all the old logs to try to figure it out. That's what we call being a cache cop.

[+jellis]

If you feel the need to let forum readers know when you report a cache with favorite points, wouldn't it be more useful for them to be added to your previous discussion on the subject, Does this just eat at you?

 

I actually assumed this was the bumping of that old thread. Not sure why the poster feels the need to thump her chest for reporting a cache. Who knows how the hole got there? Can you actually prove the cache owner dug it? Oh, so you read through all the old logs to try to figure it out. That's what we call being a cache cop.

Huh? There should be a poll on how many would report a violation and how many will ignore it and then wonder why there are so many more caches in violation.

NO, not only the logs. I was there and no way was this hole already there. Not unless the park managers want muggles stepping into a hole by accident.

[+Lieblweb]

I agree. I am pretty sure it is prohibited to dig a hole in a park. Especially to hide a cache.

 

At what point is it illegal to dig a hole?

 

Your child is in the park digging a hole 8" deep to find earthworms for a school project.

 

But that's illegal.....

 

Sooooooooooo.....that child needs to go to the local township, pay a fee, and apply for a DIG permit???

 

 

Really?? Is that what the 'guidelines' have come down to?

[+aka Momster]

If you feel the need to let forum readers know when you report a cache with favorite points, wouldn't it be more useful for them to be added to your previous discussion on the subject, Does this just eat at you?

 

I actually assumed this was the bumping of that old thread. Not sure why the poster feels the need to thump her chest for reporting a cache. Who knows how the hole got there? Can you actually prove the cache owner dug it? Oh, so you read through all the old logs to try to figure it out. That's what we call being a cache cop.

Huh? There should be a poll on how many would report a violation and how many will ignore it and then wonder why there are so many more caches in violation.

NO, not only the logs. I was there and no way was this hole already there. Not unless the park managers want muggles stepping into a hole by accident.

 

Jellis, are you Huh?ing my post? I don't understand how what I wrote would be confusing. And a second question: Maybe I missed a change, but aren't polls not allowed in the forums?

[+NYPaddleCacher]

If you feel the need to let forum readers know when you report a cache with favorite points, wouldn't it be more useful for them to be added to your previous discussion on the subject, Does this just eat at you?

 

I actually assumed this was the bumping of that old thread. Not sure why the poster feels the need to thump her chest for reporting a cache. Who knows how the hole got there? Can you actually prove the cache owner dug it? Oh, so you read through all the old logs to try to figure it out. That's what we call being a cache cop.

Huh? There should be a poll on how many would report a violation and how many will ignore it and then wonder why there are so many more caches in violation.

NO, not only the logs. I was there and no way was this hole already there. Not unless the park managers want muggles stepping into a hole by accident.

 

Jellis, are you Huh?ing my post? I don't understand how what I wrote would be confusing. And a second question: Maybe I missed a change, but aren't polls not allowed in the forums?

 

To be fair, she didn't actually say that a poll should be conducted using the forums.

 

As I see it, Jellis did the right thing and also initiated an interesting discussion and I'll even speculate on *why* some illegal caches get favorite points. Some might see a cache with a fake tree stump on top of a hole that the CO dug in the ground as creative, and once they have found it (and of course, can post a found it log, and increment their find count), they care less that it violates the guidelines, than the fact that it could put the other 12 caches in that park (which they probably also found) in jeopardy. By reporting the cache which violates the guidelines, Jellis essentially put the "good of the game" ahead of just logging a find and ignoring the fact that the cache never should have been hidden in that manner in the first place.

[+aka Momster]

If you feel the need to let forum readers know when you report a cache with favorite points, wouldn't it be more useful for them to be added to your previous discussion on the subject, Does this just eat at you?

 

I actually assumed this was the bumping of that old thread. Not sure why the poster feels the need to thump her chest for reporting a cache. Who knows how the hole got there? Can you actually prove the cache owner dug it? Oh, so you read through all the old logs to try to figure it out. That's what we call being a cache cop.

Huh? There should be a poll on how many would report a violation and how many will ignore it and then wonder why there are so many more caches in violation.

NO, not only the logs. I was there and no way was this hole already there. Not unless the park managers want muggles stepping into a hole by accident.

 

Jellis, are you Huh?ing my post? I don't understand how what I wrote would be confusing. And a second question: Maybe I missed a change, but aren't polls not allowed in the forums?

 

To be fair, she didn't actually say that a poll should be conducted using the forums.

 

 

Fair? Good grief. I was only asking for clarification about what jellis was saying, not arguing.

[+lamoracke]

Have not looked at the cache in question, but have seen so many "against the guidelines" caches get favorite points, but I just won't do it myself.

 

If a cache has a nail or screw put in a tree, I will not give it a favorite point

 

If a cache has a pipe or green sprinkler top thing with a hole dug out below it in the ground, I will not give it a favorite point

 

Sometimes its just tough to know what to do on these, depends on my mood or other factors if I pursue it that particular time. Wish there was an actual way to report these kind of scenarios without notifying the whole community or emailing a reviewer directly. The reality is, they do not always get archived, so then you just look a fool and get animosity, so at the minimum, I won't give a favorite or write a great log.

If you email a reviewer, it's true that it may not get archived. But you won't look like a fool to the reviewer, or get any animosity from them. Politeness and a helpful attitude go a long way with reviewers.

 

Yes, you are of course correct in the detailing of the reviewers in our area, they have always been kind and courteous.

Edited March 2, 2013 by lamoracke

[+BlueDeuce]

There's no - post the cache or it didn't happen, there's no being a bad guy for having questions. You can ask a question or report a concern to your reviewer, or any reviewer for that matter, contact@gc.com or heck, even a forum mod. The worst that can happen is that you came away with a better understanding of the process of listing a cache.

 

There's nothing cache cop about it. Hear me Toz?

[+Don_J]

If you feel the need to let forum readers know when you report a cache with favorite points, wouldn't it be more useful for them to be added to your previous discussion on the subject, Does this just eat at you?

 

I actually assumed this was the bumping of that old thread. Not sure why the poster feels the need to thump her chest for reporting a cache. Who knows how the hole got there? Can you actually prove the cache owner dug it? Oh, so you read through all the old logs to try to figure it out. That's what we call being a cache cop.

Huh? There should be a poll on how many would report a violation and how many will ignore it and then wonder why there are so many more caches in violation.

NO, not only the logs. I was there and no way was this hole already there. Not unless the park managers want muggles stepping into a hole by accident.

 

Jellis, are you Huh?ing my post? I don't understand how what I wrote would be confusing. And a second question: Maybe I missed a change, but aren't polls not allowed in the forums?

 

To be fair, she didn't actually say that a poll should be conducted using the forums.

 

As I see it, Jellis did the right thing and also initiated an interesting discussion and I'll even speculate on *why* some illegal caches get favorite points. Some might see a cache with a fake tree stump on top of a hole that the CO dug in the ground as creative, and once they have found it (and of course, can post a found it log, and increment their find count), they care less that it violates the guidelines, than the fact that it could put the other 12 caches in that park (which they probably also found) in jeopardy. By reporting the cache which violates the guidelines, Jellis essentially put the "good of the game" ahead of just logging a find and ignoring the fact that the cache never should have been hidden in that manner in the first place.

 

I feel that the situation is worthy of discussion. I just don't understand why the specific cache has to be named, or why anything has to be reported to the park manager. There is no reason to share the specific cache info with anyone but the local reviewer. I feel very strongly about this.

 

According to the cache page, the current incarnation of the cache was placed in May of last year. The OP posted a found log in August stating "Great camo, and interesting hide", so it baffles me why this is suddenly an issue, seven months later.

[+UMainah]

Does this log look a bit ironic to anyone else? http://coord.info/GLA8CBYR

[Trinity's Crew]

I feel that the situation is worthy of discussion. I just don't understand why the specific cache has to be named, or why anything has to be reported to the park manager. There is no reason to share the specific cache info with anyone but the local reviewer. I feel very strongly about this.

 

According to the cache page, the current incarnation of the cache was placed in May of last year. The OP posted a found log in August stating "Great camo, and interesting hide", so it baffles me why this is suddenly an issue, seven months later.

Seriously? August? Jellis did you report it in August and bring it here to get some action on it? If not, what prompted you to report it now?

Edited March 2, 2013 by Trinity's Crew

[4wheelin_fool]

I feel that the situation is worthy of discussion. I just don't understand why the specific cache has to be named, or why anything has to be reported to the park manager. There is no reason to share the specific cache info with anyone but the local reviewer. I feel very strongly about this.

 

According to the cache page, the current incarnation of the cache was placed in May of last year. The OP posted a found log in August stating "Great camo, and interesting hide", so it baffles me why this is suddenly an issue, seven months later.

Seriously? August? Jellis did you report it in August and bring it here to get some action on it? If not, what prompted you to report it now?

 

Apparently she didn't want to make a big deal out of it, or be known as the bad guy and figured an e-mail to the reviewer would be sufficient. Since he basically ignored her e-mails, and with the guideline violation being glaringly obvious, she is left wondering why. Sometimes we are told in these situations that this is a "private" matter between the CO and the reviewer which is rather silly, as the hide is publically listed for all geocachers to find and imitate, and does not have any permission information listed on the page whatsoever. If it is so "private", it should be archived and available for invitation only. With the amount of hides which violate the guidelines that are being listed, it is only fair to conclude that a few reviewers knowingly are quietly allowing it.

[+briansnat]

With the amount of hides which violate the guidelines that are being listed, it is only fair to conclude that a few reviewers knowingly are quietly allowing it.

 

Because we don't physically inspect each cache we can only go by what we see on maps, sat photos and what information the CO volunteers. Some are so proud of their handiwork and so clueless about the guidelines they will sometimes proudly include a photo or two of their guideline violation. Those are the easy ones. For the rest we have to trust the cache owner and the community.

 

Sometimes there are circumstances where what on the surface appears to be a guideline violation may have factors that allow for its publishing. I'm in favor of mentioning those factors on the cache page so there is no doubt, but not all reviewers require that.

 

I'm sure that any reviewer who made a habit of quietly ignoring guideline violations would not be a reviewer for long.

[niverson92]

If you feel the need to let forum readers know when you report a cache with favorite points, wouldn't it be more useful for them to be added to your previous discussion on the subject, Does this just eat at you?

 

I actually assumed this was the bumping of that old thread. Not sure why the poster feels the need to thump her chest for reporting a cache. Who knows how the hole got there? Can you actually prove the cache owner dug it? Oh, so you read through all the old logs to try to figure it out. That's what we call being a cache cop.

 

+1

Also, did you log the cache as a find? If so, you couldn't of been that offended about it being buried.

[+NeverSummer]

If you feel the need to let forum readers know when you report a cache with favorite points, wouldn't it be more useful for them to be added to your previous discussion on the subject, Does this just eat at you?

 

I actually assumed this was the bumping of that old thread. Not sure why the poster feels the need to thump her chest for reporting a cache. Who knows how the hole got there? Can you actually prove the cache owner dug it? Oh, so you read through all the old logs to try to figure it out. That's what we call being a cache cop.

 

+1

Also, did you log the cache as a find? If so, you couldn't of been that offended about it being buried.

Two things:

1. We are all "cache cops". That is why geocaching.com was started as a community listing space for the cataloging of geocaches around the world. That is also why the log types were established. Why else would we have DNF, NM or NA logs at our disposal as users? Thin skin about abiding by the guidelines (which, by the way, are in place to keep us able to hide caches in places that might otherwise ban them outright...) is what makes people paint others as a negative "cache cop". Again, we are all cops, and, just like in the movies, there are "good cops" and "bad cops". We have the ability to choose what kind of cache cop we want to be based on how we approach situations where a cache is against the guidelines or the law.

 

2. Finding a cache is finding the cache. So long as your name is on the logbook, it is a find. If the cache is illegal, it is still a find. But, it is our responsibility to report caches that break the guidelines. That doesn't cancel out a "Found It" log. The choice to log or not isn't a form of protest; rather, it is a statement of fact.

[+OZ2CPU]

some people focus on what kind of fun they had

some people look at errors even if they did not perform research,

who got time to do the research before complain ?? better just to complain and be happy,

what a good life to have.

 

as a side note :

it CAN be perfectly legal to dig down a cache, if you got a permission to do so !

and you can also drill holes in wood you own,

or hammer dons of nails in your own trees, even if they are not dead,

you can also use holes some one else made or maybe there are allready in the ground,

then it is fine to use it, impossible to prove WHO made the hole ??

[+The A-Team]

as a side note :

it CAN be perfectly legal to dig down a cache, if you got a permission to do so !

and you can also drill holes in wood you own,

or hammer dons of nails in your own trees, even if they are not dead...

If by "legal" you mean "conforming to the guidelines", then I haven't seen anything in the guidelines that says these are allowed with permission. For example:

3. Geocaches are never buried, neither partially nor completely.

If one has to dig or create a hole in the ground when placing or finding a geocache, it is not allowed.

I don't see anywhere in there that says "...unless you have permission". When I read the word "never", it means never.

 

If you just meant legal outside of geocaching, then sure, all of those are legal.

[+tozainamboku]

as a side note :

it CAN be perfectly legal to dig down a cache, if you got a permission to do so !

and you can also drill holes in wood you own,

or hammer dons of nails in your own trees, even if they are not dead...

If by "legal" you mean "conforming to the guidelines", then I haven't seen anything in the guidelines that says these are allowed with permission. For example:

3. Geocaches are never buried, neither partially nor completely.

If one has to dig or create a hole in the ground when placing or finding a geocache, it is not allowed.

I don't see anywhere in there that says "...unless you have permission". When I read the word "never", it means never.

 

If you just meant legal outside of geocaching, then sure, all of those are legal.

Once upon a time the guidelines did have wording about exceptions being given. They still contain wording that "if you need to make special arrangements for a novel idea, contact Groundspeak before placing and reporting the geocache on Geocaching.com."

 

I believe that exceptions are still granted but less often than in the past.

 

If Groundspeak would actually provide rationale for each of the guidelines it would be a a little clearer. Is the digging guideline about causing damage to public or private property, or is it about correcting a perception that geocaching involves buried treasure? Either way it's likely that exceptions can be made. It may be that permission alone isn't enough.

 

I don't think anyone is saying that LordBritish can't construct an elaborate cache on his own property that almost certainly involved a few holes being dug.

Edited March 2, 2013 by tozainamboku

[+The_Incredibles_]

We've got one like this here. Totally underground and yet people are raving about it and giving it favorite points.

[+The_Incredibles_]

it CAN be perfectly legal to dig down a cache, if you got a permission to do so !

 

 

Not true at all. Caches must NEVER be buried. Doesn't matter if you have permission to do it. Check the guidelines again.

[+Sagefox]

...Is the digging guideline about causing damage to public or private property, or is it about correcting a perception that geocaching involves buried treasure?

 

This would be the heart of the matter.

 

Either way it's likely that exceptions can be made. It may be that permission alone isn't enough.

 

I vote for this option.

[+Sagefox]

I may want to contact the park to report it to them too since the hole will have to be refilled.

 

I would not do this. Better to sort it out quietly with the C/O and reviewer.

 

Perhaps the park folks did allow the cache to be placed in its current configuration, perhaps not. Perhaps the person you would talk to is not the same one who might have approved it.

 

It would seem to me that we should not present a Problem to the park folks, we should, instead, provide a Solution that doesn't involve them unless absolutely necessary. It would not be beneficial to attach a negative impression to geocaching.

 

If the cache has to be archived and if the owner is out of the game then a local cacher can remove the setup and fill the hole. A three month period of inactivity does not mean the C/O is inactive, especially with a cleverly constructed cache.