Archived caches a threat to the environment

[+SE81293]

Often caches get archived due to lack of maintenance from the CO. As a geocacher (speaking for my self) i don't like trash around in the nature. And trash is exactly what an arcived cache is, if the remainings are left in the nature. The CO has proven not to care so we can't count on him/her to retreive what's left. My idea is that if, instead of just beeing archived by a reviewer, the reviewer should be able to set a "new" attribute for a cache. This attribute should state that the cache is about to be archived but is allowed for one more find/log. This log should be called LTF (Like an FTF) but Last To Found. Somehow Groundspeak should make it as attractive as an FTF find. The LFT cacher should also be the one cleaning up the remaings and throw them away. This will not completely remove old caches from the environment but it will surely not make it worse. What dou you think of this idea? An archived cache is very hard to find as it don't show up in searches. And even if there is a way to search archived caches, i can't se why bother. I (speaking for my self again), would gladly clean up a hide if there was such things as LTF's. But then there is the problem with multiple logs, so LTF finds should not count as a log but should be awarded some how. Badge?, Souvenir? i don't know.

 

SE-81293

Sweden

[+Isonzo Karst]

The cache is not the property of Geocaching.com. They're unlikely to do anything that creates the impression that the physical container is

something that they control.

 

I suppose there could be a setting created in the original cache report form that allowed the cache owner to designate that the physical container

could be harvested on archive. I think this would get little use, as, at the time a cache is reported, the cache owner is enthusiastic about it. Later, they lose interest.

 

Right now, if you're interested in archived cache clean up, you can set notifications for Archive logs on each physical cache type. This would allow you to keep track of those caches likely archived with the containers still in the field.

[+T.D.M.22]

Just because a cache is not listed here, doesn't mean it's not in play on another site, or privately. And just because a cache is active here, doesn't make it any less harmful or have any less impact on the environment. I would believe that an active cache has traffic, which means cachers littering and -unintentionally- creating damaging foot traffic. So when you get down to it, an inactive cache has less negative effect than an active one.

[Clan Riffster]

Just because a cache is not listed here, doesn't mean it's not in play on another site

That's true. Technically, there is a 0.00000000079% chance that a cache, listed here, will stay active on another site. Personally, I think most geocachers are bright enough to determine if this is the case. I know if I were to archive a cache on this site, and leave it active on some other site, my cache page maintenance obligation would require that I post such to the cache page, so players on this site won't get the wrong impression. If I decide not to do even that tiny bit, to let others know my cache is not litter, and some environmentally conscious cacher cleaned up my mess, I would feel that there is no one to blame but me.

 

The only thing that keeps our caches from fitting the textbook definition of litter is that they are placed, at a specific location, for a specific purpose, and receive continuing visits by players and by owners. Once that purpose is no more, our caches are naught more than rubbish, regardless of who owns them. If we wish to maintain the principle that we are an environmentally conscious group, we have at least some obligation to clean up after those players who refuse to clean up after themselves.

 

I would love to see some sort of process by where players could view a map with archived caches on it. I know I would enjoy seeking those. Maybe Groundspeak could add a log type, "Removed", which owners could use to indicate that their cache is no longer in the wild? Maybe set up the map separate from the active cache map, and once a "Removed" log is posted, it disappears from the map? Make this log type available to others, as well, so we could post about any geo-litter we remove? Something to the effect of, "Hey BillyBobNosePicker, I saw your cache on the archived map. Saw that it was still out in the wild after a month. I went out and picked up your Gladware. I'll hang onto it for a week, in the event you want it back".

[+L0ne.R]

Just because a cache is not listed here, doesn't mean it's not in play on another site

That's true. Technically, there is a 0.00000000079% chance that a cache, listed here, will stay active on another site. Personally, I think most geocachers are bright enough to determine if this is the case. I know if I were to archive a cache on this site, and leave it active on some other site, my cache page maintenance obligation would require that I post such to the cache page, so players on this site won't get the wrong impression. If I decide not to do even that tiny bit, to let others know my cache is not litter, and some environmentally conscious cacher cleaned up my mess, I would feel that there is no one to blame but me.

 

Exactly. And that's coming from someone who has a few archived letterbox hybrids that are still maintained, active and listed on AQ. I put a note that it's still active on my archived cache pages. I also put the AQ web address on/in the box.

 

Another thing I do when I place an NA on a local abandoned falling-apart messy cache, is offer to retrieve it if the owner does not respond and the reviewer ends up archiving it. Then, I put a watch on the cache. After a couple of months, when the reviewer archives it I pick up the cache. Then log a Note that it's picked up and the CO can contact me to have it returned within the month, but I will be throwing it away on [day-month-year] if not contacted.

[+L0ne.R]

 

I would love to see some sort of process by where players could view a map with archived caches on it. I know I would enjoy seeking those. Maybe Groundspeak could add a log type, "Removed", which owners could use to indicate that their cache is no longer in the wild? Maybe set up the map separate from the active cache map, and once a "Removed" log is posted, it disappears from the map? Make this log type available to others, as well, so we could post about any geo-litter we remove? Something to the effect of, "Hey BillyBobNosePicker, I saw your cache on the archived map. Saw that it was still out in the wild after a month. I went out and picked up your Gladware. I'll hang onto it for a week, in the event you want it back".

 

 

I like this idea, but only if the archived cache page is locked. Some COs would archive their cache, place another one 20 feet away and invite folks to log both the archived cache and the new cache. But then again, the next finder might go ahead and pick up the archived cache and chuck it in the trash.

[+Chief301]

Since the "FTF" game is not an official part of Geocaching, I wouldn't think that the LTF game would be either.

 

I think that one control that Groundspeak could implement is to require that a cache owner, following notification of a cache archival, would be required to post a final log that the container has been retrieved (or confirmed missing, if that should be the case). Failure to do so would result in locking down the user's account.

 

Granted, if the CO has completely dropped out of the game, they wouldn't care if their account was locked. And of course they could always lie and say they had done it, but at least it would force them to do SOMETHING instead of continuing to ignore the problem...at least let them know that someone is watching and their actions are not without some consequence.

 

Then, maybe some incentive could be provided to other cachers to go out and collect these orphans.....maybe earn an extra Favorite point or get some special souvenir for so many caches retrieved, something like that.

[Clan Riffster]

I like this idea, but only if the archived cache page is locked.

Maybe have the "Removed" log lock the page?

[+tozainamboku]

IMO, the OP is greatly exaggerating the environmental impact caused by abandoned caches. Many archived cache are in fact already removed, either by the cache owners or by a land manager who may have asked for he cache to be archived. Probably the most common reason for a cache to be archived is that it is missing. It has already been removed. Maybe a muggle took it. Perhaps an animal has re-purposed the cache material for its nest. Or the cache was destroyed by a fire or flood.

 

Sure as there are more and more caches hidden there are more and more locations where the container or the remains of the container are left after the cache has been abandoned and archived. However in most of these locations the cache is well hidden. Seldom will this "trash" be seen by humans. In some areas, geocachers play a game of looking for archived caches. Since most archived caches are not locked, some people will actually log a find on a archived cache. In some cases these are caches from well know hiders who have geocided. The community tries to keep these caches around so people will see the creativity of the former owner.

 

While it's nice to see such concern over the "trash" that gets left behind at some former geocache sites, I think it is far more effective for geocachers to practice CITO. If cachers were to remove just some of the trash that they find while looking for geocaches they would have removed far more trash from the environment than is left by all the caches that have been archived. Instead of worrying about the negligible problem caused by abandoned caches, lets let the land managers and everyone else know that geocachers are collecting far more trash than they could ever be accused of leaving.

[7rxc]

I like this idea, but only if the archived cache page is locked.

Maybe have the "Removed" log lock the page?

How about locking the page when a Reviewer has to archive it. Those done by COs could be left as is perhaps.

That is an active CO could remove it and make the statement of that action. Locking would be after a period to allow for late logging IF the cache was muggled.

 

Any cache still active elswhere should be marked as such by the active CO and it's Geocaching labels removed as well ASAP. I'm sure if the OP feels the need to volunteer to remove items when needed, that the reviewers could keep a list of willing people to do that if needed / warranted. More likely to check on the status... But that is a complex situation as has been stated here already.

 

Doug 7rxc

[+L0ne.R]

Sure as there are more and more caches hidden there are more and more locations where the container or the remains of the container are left after the cache has been abandoned and archived.

 

On the flip side, there are a lot of containers out there planted by newbies who didn't check for saturation or puzzles or multis, etc. who never go back to retrieve the container. And newbies who plant on vacation but didn't read the guidelines about maintenance plans. I have found 4 abandoned never published caches over the years, near cache hides. Not much that can be done about those except remove them if we stumble upon them....of course, being sure that they are not listed somewhere else....i.e. a container with the other gcs' web address marked on it; a box with a hand carved stamp inside is likely a letterbox and not a geocache; a logbook in a box may be a trailhead log and not a geocache.

[Luckless]

I've removed abandoned letterboxes. There was no doubt they needed to go. They were no longer listed. The one was filled with water and sat two years before I tossed it out- algae filled green slimy mess. The other letterbox showed up in my cache. I had talked to the owner when I placed caches near her letterboxes, but got no response from her when I last emailed her about the letterbox turning up in my cache (and no longer listed on letterboxing.com). If it looks abandoned and a mess I've no qualms about getting rid of it- but I do try to always find the CO. If I know there is a cache in an area near where I'm caching I'll check on it and do what I can to fix it up. Sometimes they need a NA, but not before trying to let the CO know. I'll also look for caches I know to be archived to be sure they are gone. Usually they are gone, that's because they were archived because they were missing.

[+wmpastor]

Just because a cache is not listed here, doesn't mean it's not in play on another site, or privately. And just because a cache is active here, doesn't make it any less harmful or have any less impact on the environment. I would believe that an active cache has traffic, which means cachers littering and -unintentionally- creating damaging foot traffic. So when you get down to it, an inactive cache has less negative effect than an active one.

What are you saying? Save the environment by archiving all 2.2 million?!

[nonaeroterraqueous]

The cache is not the property of Geocaching.com. They're unlikely to do anything that creates the impression that the physical container is

something that they control.

 

I think this statement sums it up nicely. I would add that they don't want to be liable for the bomb scares, the trespassing, the litter, the accidental deaths, etc. They just want to be a listing service. If you put that box on the ground, then it's your box and you're responsible for it. They might decide not to list it, but they won't do anything that suggests a shared responsibility for that physical thing or any damage that results from it (They don't know you, and they just don't trust you that far. No offense ).

[+wmpastor]

I like this idea, but only if the archived cache page is locked.

Maybe have the "Removed" log lock the page?

There are legitimate reasons to log an archived cache. A couple examples: (1) forgot to log it earlier (happened to me when I first started); & (2) "team" cachers decide to create separate accounts & retroactively log hundreds of caches on a single day. "Locking" seems best for things like wannabes claiming to have gone to the space station.

[Mr.Yuck]

Just because a cache is not listed here, doesn't mean it's not in play on another site

That's true. Technically, there is a 0.00000000079% chance that a cache, listed here, will stay active on another site. Personally, I think most geocachers are bright enough to determine if this is the case. I know if I were to archive a cache on this site, and leave it active on some other site, my cache page maintenance obligation would require that I post such to the cache page, so players on this site won't get the wrong impression. If I decide not to do even that tiny bit, to let others know my cache is not litter, and some environmentally conscious cacher cleaned up my mess, I would feel that there is no one to blame but me.

 

 

Eh, I'd say the chances are about 1% since a major GPS manufacturer started a Geocaching website about 3 years ago. But I do agree the "they could be listed on other websites" theory is a bit overblown, in most cases. If I were the OP though, I would most definitely check that major GPS manufacturer's website, as well as a very similar named one, but ending in the .se top level domain, before taking it upon themselves and going out and removing any Geotrash.

[ZeMartelo]

What is the difference between an "active" cache and an "archived" cache as far its environment impact is concerned?

[Clan Riffster]

What is the difference between an "active" cache and an "archived" cache as far its environment impact is concerned?

If the archived cache is removed by the owner, the cache itself, as well as future visitors, cease to impact the environment. If the archived cache is left behind, and it's a film can, in about 80 gazillion years, it will degrade, leaching toxins into the environment.

[+ShaunEM]

Go walk into any ditch next to any highway. You are going to find way more junk than exits with all the abandoned caches in the whole world.

 

If you find one that is obviously just garbage now.. read the comments above. Take it, log a note against the cache page.. and throw it out when you get no response back.

 

If it's really bugging you.. create a local CITO. Those are always good PR.

 

Shaun

[Mr.Yuck]

What is the difference between an "active" cache and an "archived" cache as far its environment impact is concerned?

If the archived cache is removed by the owner, the cache itself, as well as future visitors, cease to impact the environment. If the archived cache is left behind, and it's a film can, in about 80 gazillion years, it will degrade, leaching toxins into the environment.

 

That is a chance we must not take. Remove those archived film cans, please.

[+T.D.M.22]

Just because a cache is not listed here, doesn't mean it's not in play on another site, or privately. And just because a cache is active here, doesn't make it any less harmful or have any less impact on the environment. I would believe that an active cache has traffic, which means cachers littering and -unintentionally- creating damaging foot traffic. So when you get down to it, an inactive cache has less negative effect than an active one.

What are you saying? Save the environment by archiving all 2.2 million?!

 

Nope. Then we'd get a out 4.5 million throwdowns.

 

Maybe this is why we have so many LPC' and such. It's green the cache will be long gone before the light standard or guardrail is half gone.

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

I think some here are over thinking again and throwing bureaucracy at a process that needs none. In this day and age of high cache concentrations and cito, the areas that could be affected by a bazillion years of geotrash are cleansed by cachers regularly.

[+The_Incredibles_]

I don't think archived caches are a huge danger to the environment. Having said that, I still think it's important to remove them, not just in case they include batteries, but because it's litter. I have removed quite a few archived caches. In fact, it's a side-game that I quite enjoy, going looking for caches that may or may not still be there. I've found some still in place more than 5 years later....I always post a note on the cache page, but have never once had a cache owner reply to ask for it back...

 

I agree, it may be helpful to have a new 'Removed' log for cache owners. It would remind people, anyway, of the importance of cleaning up after themselves...

Edited December 1, 2013 by The_Incredibles_

[+Ambrosia]

I don't really agree with locking cache pages willy nilly. I'm a very late logger sometimes. I still have a fair amount of cache logs that I'm still trying to catch up on from over a year ago.

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

I don't really agree with locking cache pages willy nilly. I'm a very late logger sometimes. I still have a fair amount of cache logs that I'm still trying to catch up on from over a year ago.

I'm not OCD, but that would keep me up at night.

[+lamoracke]

I think cachers clean up far more trash than they leave in the occasional container left in the caching spot. As a cacher, I have personally cleaned up 1000s of items, many of those at my cache site or forests at CITO. I think we are making mountains out of molehills. I would not want cache listings locked unless there is abuse. People back log caches occasionally for whatever reasons, splitting accounts, late logging. Seems to be a lot more work to do that.

[+Ambrosia]

I don't really agree with locking cache pages willy nilly. I'm a very late logger sometimes. I still have a fair amount of cache logs that I'm still trying to catch up on from over a year ago.

I'm not OCD, but that would keep me up at night.

Oh, believe me, I'm not a happy camper. Even though I've been doing huge chunks of logs over the past few weeks, I still have about 40 more virts and ECs to log. It takes longer to do those types! <sigh> Too much traveling through national parks this past year.

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

I don't really agree with locking cache pages willy nilly. I'm a very late logger sometimes. I still have a fair amount of cache logs that I'm still trying to catch up on from over a year ago.

I'm not OCD, but that would keep me up at night.

Oh, believe me, I'm not a happy camper. Even though I've been doing huge chunks of logs over the past few weeks, I still have about 40 more virts and ECs to log. It takes longer to do those types! <sigh> Too much traveling through national parks this past year.

Never too much. Sounds like a great year.

[+SwineFlew]

No! Just No. There are reason why caches are archived. Let the cache die peaceful.

[+WarNinjas]

What is the difference between an "active" cache and an "archived" cache as far its environment impact is concerned?

If the archived cache is removed by the owner, the cache itself, as well as future visitors, cease to impact the environment. If the archived cache is left behind, and it's a film can, in about 80 gazillion years, it will degrade, leaching toxins into the environment.

WOW! I was going to say the OP was over thinking it until I read this!

[4wheelin_fool]

What is the difference between an "active" cache and an "archived" cache as far its environment impact is concerned?

If the archived cache is removed by the owner, the cache itself, as well as future visitors, cease to impact the environment. If the archived cache is left behind, and it's a film can, in about 80 gazillion years, it will degrade, leaching toxins into the environment.

WOW! I was going to say the OP was over thinking it until I read this!

 

That's a bit of an exaggeration. It takes only 450 to 1000 years for a plastic bottle to break down, so a film can would likely take much less and certainly not 80 gazillion, although a lock n lock would take longer. If they had plastic bottles during the forming of England in 1066 and through the Middle Ages, they would mostly all be gone by now, although large lock n locks from the time of Jesus in theory could still exist. The BPA chemicals do leach into the ground and get into the groundwater as well as the entire ecosystem, and cause hormonal changes and neurological conditions, but they do the same whether they are in the woods or in a landfill. After a major disaster, such as an earthquake, there would likely be a nuclear fallout in many areas with large zones filled with radiation from buried waste escaping into the atmosphere and from destroyed nuclear plants, so that will be the least of worries in a few hundred years. The manufacturing industry would stop completely, so people just may have to dig up those plastic containers to use again.

[+wmpastor]

I don't really agree with locking cache pages willy nilly. I'm a very late logger sometimes. I still have a fair amount of cache logs that I'm still trying to catch up on from over a year ago.

I'm not OCD, but that would keep me up at night.

Could you work with an assistant for a Saturday afternoon?

[+wmpastor]

I think cachers clean up far more trash than they leave in the occasional container left in the caching spot. As a cacher, I have personally cleaned up 1000s of items, many of those at my cache site or forests at CITO. I think we are making mountains out of molehills. I would not want cache listings locked unless there is abuse. People back log caches occasionally for whatever reasons, splitting accounts, late logging. Seems to be a lot more work to do that.

I sleep well - that's certainly true of me!

[+JL_HSTRE]

I like the idea of a Removed log.

 

I think the removal of archived cache containers is less about the quantity of trash involved and more about responsibility and perception.

[Clan Riffster]

I like the idea of a Removed log.

 

I think the removal of archived cache containers is less about the quantity of trash involved and more about responsibility and perception.

Exactly. When I make my sell on geocaching to land managers, after dealing with their concerns for buried caches, and folks trespassing after hours, it is not uncommon for them to express concern over what happens to the container once it is taken out of play. Regardless of how we view them, a land manager will see an archived cache, which is not picked up, as litter. Something which no longer belongs. Naturally, I explain that most cachers remove their containers once they get archived. But this would be a much easier sell if I could show them a bunch of "Removed" logs to support my claim.