Maintenance of geocaches in region

[+-CJ-]

My question is addressed to those geocachers who are members of local geocaching communities. I know guidelines so I'm not asking about who's responsible for maintenance. The question is if there are any informal agreements (traditions, common practice) within your local community to help each other with maintenance issues?

 

The background for this question is my personal attempt to build such agreements in my city. We here have no geocaching community yet though there is some number of active cachers. I tried to organise them in a way that all we are not obliged but are very welcomed to assist each other with maintenance, especially in cases of emergency. E.g. when you walk by some location and see there are workers around that started repairings you don't just pass by ("I found this cache already so I don't care" or "I'll post a NM message since this cache is probably gone") but check if the container is still in place and probably call its owner to find out if he/she needs assistance with moving the cache to a safer location. By this time my attempts were not much fruitful. In last year I helped to maintain 12 caches that I don't own in my city (when I was on a hunt or went to check my own caches) and checked numerous hides (that appeared to be OK). None of my geocaches (they were stolen 30 times last year "thanks" to a local cache thief - I restored all these caches by my own) was maintained by any other cacher whom I know (including those who had already gained from my assistance). I didn't start any discussion on this matter within our local circle of geocachers. Perhaps my intentions were not within traditions of other geocaching communities at all. Or maybe I'm on the right way but don't take into account some important things. (Any good advice would be welcomed).

[+sparklefingers]

Our local Geocachers have an agreement to an extent.

 

We had a discussion at an event and we all were on the same page. If we know the cache owner would go out and replace or repair if we said there was a problem then we will do the repair or replace the log etc but if the cache is owned by an owner that places a cache and then never visited it again then we ignore and once theres too many NM's on it we post NA.

[+Isonzo Karst]

In 2003 in my area, it was quite common for cachers to carry extensive cache repair kits. Logs, baggies, entire containers - container size back then were mostly regulars and smalls, and cachers would carry a variety of cache containers, to have the correct one for replacing a missing hide.

 

Caches were rare, and each one was precious.

 

Now, I'd call it uncommon for cachers to do more than minimum maintenance (log replacement) - except for the unfortunate tendency of some to throwdown free containers, or even just logs, to claim fake finds on caches that they should DNF. (Example log: the tree has swallowed the cache. Took some pictures for the CO to confirm the right spot. Placed a new log in a baggie there but I didn't have an extra container to place it in. Logging as a find)

 

You're in an area where caches are rare, I'd expect that human nature would be the same. Repair and replace missing hides, though whether any individual does this is up to them. Some will, some won't.

 

Hopefully, caching activity will pick up, and you'll be around for the era when the right thing to do is log a DNF and let it go.

[+-CJ-]

If we know the cache owner would go out and replace or repair if we said there was a problem then we will do the repair or replace the log etc

 

Yes, I was talking about active COs. Great.

 

Now, I'd call it uncommon for cachers to do more than minimum maintenance

 

Could you explain why has the situation changed?

[+Semper Questio]

We don't have an agreement, but things have evolved here to the point that cachers will maintain and even replace any cache at will to keep caches going at all cost.

 

It is one of my pet peeves and I just don't understand the practice. After all, every cache has a lifespan and, especially if the CO is no longer active and there is nothing particularly special about the cache, most (if not all) caches should be allowed to die. It seems to never fail that, regardless of what the original cache was, the replacement will nearly always be a bsion tube, film can, or pill bottle. Don't folks realize if these are allowed to go away that new caches can then be placed somewhere else in the area that the old, unmaintained, cache is blocking out? I just don't get it.

[+-CJ-]

the old, unmaintained, cache

 

I would agree with you but I wasn't actually talking about abandoned, unmaintained caches. The question is about those COs who play actively and are members of local geocaching communities.

[+Semper Questio]

the old, unmaintained, cache

 

I would agree with you but I wasn't actually talking about abandoned, unmaintained caches. The question is about those COs who play actively and are members of local geocaching communities.

 

Yeah, I know. It started off OK, but then it turned into an OT mini-rant.

[+niraD]

I am not aware of any formal standing arrangement for geocachers around here to help with maintenance. A number of us carry spare logs and cache repair kits, which I suppose is an informal standing arrangement of sorts. And occasionally someone will organize a group hike for a specific cache, and either the CO will come along just in case, or the CO will ask a friend who is going on the group hike to take care of anything that needs to be taken care of.

 

And sometimes a friend volunteers to maintain/adopt someone's caches when the original CO is unable to maintain them for some reason. But that's a matter between friends, not a general regional thing.