Jump to content

When is a good time to suggest an archive?


mimaef

Recommended Posts

I ran into a couple caches today that people weren't really logging very well to show the maintenance issues. I found caches with gigantic holes in them, TBs just laying on the ground, TBs missing but not logged as missing on the page, wet and full logs, caches filled with trash, and owners not properly updating the cache page when there were past maintenance issues. Despite multiple people over the last month finding one in particular, no ones mentioned the issues at all (which I find odd, though I guess someone was stuffing trash into containers they weren't meant to go in). These problems definitely didn't happen between then and when I got there (sometimes within a few days)

When is a good time to suggest an archive? I put up maintenance alerts, but one CO hasn't logged in for several years.

Edited by mimaef
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
46 minutes ago, LizzyRN said:

How long has it been since the first NM was logged? 

A few of them a couple/few years that were fixed either by someone else or not updated by the owner when they were, but then people continued to log in between without mentioning any issues that have clearly been there a while (like the gigantic holes in the bottom of the cache and soaked/full logs), which is what I find odd (armchair loggers maybe? some I noted weren't in the physical wet logs).

I sent a message with request to adopt three of them that are near my home I'd happily take care of in hopes of hearing something from the ones who have logged in more recently.

EDIT: This is more something preemptive in case I don't hear anything and when I check on them in a week or two nothing has been fixed.

Edited by mimaef
clarification
Link to comment
12 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

Curious, why would you go back to "check on" caches that don't belong to you? 

Comparing cache logs to online logs for maintenance issues and/or fake logging is a CO's responsibility.. 

Place your NM or NA and move on, if they truly need it.   :)

Because I like the areas a few of them are placed in that are near my home, would visit them on my own without a cache present, and want other people to enjoy them as well. I'd rather not have trash left in the area if no one is going to check on them since they're in forested areas. Some of them are reaching the 10 year mark, which from what I've read is a feat for some. I wasn't cross checking purposefully, I just log on my phone while I do the book. It's easy to notice who logged before you.

Edited by mimaef
Link to comment
9 hours ago, mimaef said:

Because I like the areas a few of them are placed in that are near my home, would visit them on my own without a cache present, and want other people to enjoy them as well.

I you have possibility to fix some of these problems like emptying trash inside the container to make people to enjoy them, you are welcome to do it yourself. You are allowed to:

  • Remove any trash from from the container and environment
  • Dry the logbook
  • Replace the punctured logbook cover bag
  • Sharpen the pencil
  • Drain the container
  • Repair holes in the container
  • Report missing traveller directly to the owner

If you do not have opportunity or willingness to do so or the damage is otherwise out of your control then a "needs maintenance" log is the right way to report the situation to the cache owner. "Needs archive" is the way to report major permanent problems to the reviewer when there is no way to sign the logbook.

Edited by arisoft
Link to comment

I looked at some of the caches you found and logged NM's on.  A couple of them included pictures from the finders that preceded you. One of them, you noted the logbook was wet, while the logbook photo from the previous finder (less than a month ago) didn't show that there was a lot of wet happening. Another, you noted that the cache was wet and full of trash. The photo from a week prior showed a cache that didn't have any noticeable issues.

It's entirely possible that the issues you noted occurred after the previous finder, so it seems a bit excessive to accuse the CO of poor maintenance and to chastise other cachers for not reporting issues.

It's unfortunate that you've run into so many issues in your first week of geocaching.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, arisoft said:

I you have possibility to fix some of these problems like emptying trash inside the container to make people to enjoy them, you are welcome to do it yourself. You are allowed to:

  • Remove any trash from from the container and environment
  • Dry the logbook
  • Replace the puctured logbook cover bag
  • Sharpen the pencil
  • Drain the container
  • Repair holes in the container
  • Report missing traveller directly to the owner

If you do not have opportunity or willingness to do so or the damage is otherwise out of your control then a "needs maintenance" log is the right way to report the situation to the cache owner. "Needs archive" is the way to report major permanent problems to the reviewer when there is no way to sign the logbook.

I did grab some of the trash out, but I didn't have any bags on me for the logs (guess I'll have to remember to bring them from now on, along with lots of ducktape.) Thanks for the info on the NA. It isn't really explained well.

2 hours ago, noncentric said:

I looked at some of the caches you found and logged NM's on.  A couple of them included pictures from the finders that preceded you. One of them, you noted the logbook was wet, while the logbook photo from the previous finder (less than a month ago) didn't show that there was a lot of wet happening. Another, you noted that the cache was wet and full of trash. The photo from a week prior showed a cache that didn't have any noticeable issues.

It's entirely possible that the issues you noted occurred after the previous finder, so it seems a bit excessive to accuse the CO of poor maintenance and to chastise other cachers for not reporting issues.

It's unfortunate that you've run into so many issues in your first week of geocaching.

Ah yeah, the trash was actually stuffed into the small containers. (I'm pretty impressed everything fit into one of them honestly.)

And i don't mind the issues. I knew that since the area I live in is rural that I was pretty likely to run into caches that may not see many people or could have issues. The hides areas were lovely, so I don't regret visiting even if they're places I already actually visit on my own (I like to go and pick up a little at some of the older cemeteries near me now and then the teenagers hang out at because its spooky and they get poor maintenance to begin with :lol: haha)

Link to comment
1 hour ago, mimaef said:

 I'll have to remember to bring them from now on, along with lots of ducktape.

 

Be sure you have the approval of the owner, before doing container repairs or replacements.  If not, log a Needs Maintenance with info about the damaged container.  If it's been more than a month with NM about holes in a cache container and no response, then a NA can be made.

And if  the log book is wet, don't seal it in a plastic bag! ;)

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I'm with Ku - maintenance issues are the responsibility of the CO. You don't HAVE to replace the log, bring duct tape, blah blah blah. If significant issues aren't dealt with in, say, a month, log the NA.

You might get a mean message or two from someone who hates to see old, abandoned, broken caches archived, but it is NOT the community's responsibility to prop up caches when the CO has disappeared. It'd be better to have them archived and removed, so that a current, responsible owner can place a new cache and properly maintain it.

(Your adoption request will go nowhere if the CO is gone. Adoptions must be initiated by the CO.)

Kudos to you for caring about the cache condition in your area!

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
8 minutes ago, TriciaG said:

You might get a mean message or two from someone who hates to see old, abandoned, broken caches archived, but it is NOT the community's responsibility to prop up caches when the CO has disappeared. It'd be better to have them archived and removed, so that a current, responsible owner can place a new cache and properly maintain it.

 

Yes!  And in the case where a cache is being used as a trash can and items are being strewn around, making it a safe cache might require a whole new hide.  The current one is now in a bad spot, so it's often found by non-cachers and has become a communal toy box.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, TriciaG said:

I'm with Ku - maintenance issues are the responsibility of the CO. You don't HAVE to replace the log, bring duct tape, blah blah blah. If significant issues aren't dealt with in, say, a month, log the NA.

You might get a mean message or two from someone who hates to see old, abandoned, broken caches archived, but it is NOT the community's responsibility to prop up caches when the CO has disappeared. It'd be better to have them archived and removed, so that a current, responsible owner can place a new cache and properly maintain it.

(Your adoption request will go nowhere if the CO is gone. Adoptions must be initiated by the CO.)

Kudos to you for caring about the cache condition in your area!

I sent as nice of note possible through the email function to offer help, since i read in another thread somewhere that people have had luck with that if the user isnt active on the site.

(sorry the site is being weird on my phone below is for ku)

Thank you for the NA time frame! That seems reasonable to me. I think I'm just a little nervous after finding someones TB just laying outside of a container. Its a real struggle keeping caches safe from non players isnt it? (And some players too from what ive read haha)

2 hours ago, kunarion said:

 

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, mimaef said:

I think I'm just a little nervous after finding someones TB just laying outside of a container. Its a real struggle keeping caches safe from non players isnt it? (And some players too from what ive read haha)

 

If it's an especially trashed cache, I retrieve TBs and place them in a better cache.  Then I mention in my log how the cache seems to be getting muggled regularly and that it's probably not a good choice for TBs.  You know the cache may be a problem if the owner is absent, the container is terrible, it has become super easy to spot over the years, it has actual trash and no fun swag, and it's in a popular hangout.  And all the NMs are good clues, too. B)

Lately if I even mention a serious problem in my Find log, the local reviewer may slap a warning log about the cache needing attention.  I don't even need to do an NM, just a decent description of the problem (and it sure beats all the guff I get from actually posting a well-deserved NM :ph34r:).  I guess my reviewer has good feel for which caches are problematic, your mileage may vary.

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
16 hours ago, mimaef said:

TBs missing but not logged as missing on the page

Just one note to add to what others have said above -- while the rest of the things you saw might be grounds for eventual archival, this one is not.  Don't get me wrong -- it's frustrating.  But it's not a reason by itself to archive a cache.

Link to comment
On 8/15/2017 at 10:38 PM, mimaef said:

I ran into a couple caches today that people weren't really logging very well to show the maintenance issues. TBs missing but not logged as missing on the page,

5 hours ago, hzoi said:

Just one note to add to what others have said above -- while the rest of the things you saw might be grounds for eventual archival, this one is not.  Don't get me wrong -- it's frustrating.  But it's not a reason by itself to archive a cache.

Yes.  The CO had the ability, but not the responsibility, to mark missing trackables as missing.  That, in and of itself, is not grounds for NM

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On 8/16/2017 at 9:24 AM, kunarion said:

 

Yes!  And in the case where a cache is being used as a trash can and items are being strewn around, making it a safe cache might require a whole new hide.  The current one is now in a bad spot, so it's often found by non-cachers and has become a communal toy box.

One of the caches that had turned into a tiny trash bin was adopted over to me. When I'm finished making the new, more water tight, cache, it would be better to just move the coordinates on the new one (or archive and make an entirely new cache, so the old owner doesn't get messages?)? I'm very excited to get the cache back into shape.

On 8/16/2017 at 5:00 PM, hzoi said:

Just one note to add to what others have said above -- while the rest of the things you saw might be grounds for eventual archival, this one is not.  Don't get me wrong -- it's frustrating.  But it's not a reason by itself to archive a cache.

 

20 hours ago, Harry Dolphin said:

Yes.  The CO had the ability, but not the responsibility, to mark missing trackables as missing.  That, in and of itself, is not grounds for NM

 

 

Thank you for that! I could have sworn I read in the guidelines that it was part of owner maintenance, but I was mistaken.

Link to comment

If the cache was officially adopted over to you in the GC system, they won't get emails anymore for the cache. You'll get them all, since you're the owner according to the listing system.

So it would be your choice on whether you move it a bit and update the coordinates, or whether you archive it altogether and start a brand new listing. If your new cache is really different from the old one (size of cache, hiding place, etc.) such that people will get a new caching experience, then IMHO, make a new listing for it. Others may have a different opinion. Like I said, it's your choice. ;)

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
52 minutes ago, mimaef said:

One of the caches that had turned into a tiny trash bin was adopted over to me. When I'm finished making the new, more water tight, cache, it would be better to just move the coordinates on the new one (or archive and make an entirely new cache, so the old owner doesn't get messages?)? I'm very excited to get the cache back into shape.

Adoption is primarily meant to continue the existence of the cache. If you want to cherish tradition and history then archiving is not a good option. The new cache also has its drawbacks. There will be a lot of players coming to it immediately, which may reveal it quickly again.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
6 hours ago, mimaef said:

One of the caches that had turned into a tiny trash bin was adopted over to me. When I'm finished making the new, more water tight, cache, it would be better to just move the coordinates on the new one (or archive and make an entirely new cache, so the old owner doesn't get messages?)? I'm very excited to get the cache back into shape.

The cache is a cemetery cache and several cachers have bookmarked it as a 'cemetery cache'. If you move the cache to where it's no longer at the cemetery, then it would be better to just archive it. Otherwise, cachers may see it on a cemetery list and then be disappointed when they get there and realize it's not.

If your main motivation for archiving is the emails, then don't worry. Anyone clicking on the hidden name at the top of the page will be directed to your profile page.

The cache page still shows the prior CO's name. You can edit that to anything else: mimaef, bluezombie (adopted by mimaef), mimaef (originally bluezombie), etc.

Link to comment
On 17/08/2017 at 3:46 AM, Harry Dolphin said:

Yes.  The CO had the ability, but not the responsibility, to mark missing trackables as missing.  That, in and of itself, is not grounds for NM

 

 

I believe that the CO's maintenance responsibility extends to the cache page and I submit that if the cache page displays inaccurate information it needs maintenance and hence NM is entirely appropriate.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Team Microdot said:
On ‎8‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 10:46 PM, Harry Dolphin said:

Yes.  The CO had the ability, but not the responsibility, to mark missing trackables as missing.  That, in and of itself, is not grounds for NM

 

 

I believe that the CO's maintenance responsibility extends to the cache page and I submit that if the cache page displays inaccurate information it needs maintenance and hence NM is entirely appropriate.

 

Wow, harsh!  An "entirely appropriate" unaddressed NM is grounds for archival.

 

 

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment
1 minute ago, Team Microdot said:
8 minutes ago, kunarion said:

 

Wow, harsh!  An unaddressed NM is grounds for archival.

Harsh?

Yeah - the minute or two it would take the CO to correct the inventory on their cache by marking missing trackables as missing could quite rightly be compared to punishment of biblical proportions :rolleyes:

 

Um, I said "archival".  That is not biblical punishment, it's the unlisting of a cache.

 

Link to comment

@arisoft @noncentric @TriciaG

Thank you for the suggestions. I'm putting together the cache right now so I'll think about it a little to weigh the pros and cons over the next few days before I put it out. The cache will be in the same cemetery, just on the other side, with a different container size, but this particular cemetery is quite small so there wouldn't be much new experience to be had unless they like my larger cache decorations and swag, haha. I'm leaning more toward keeping the original page because of its age, all the lists its on, and the fact it's a small cemetery (less than an acre and old!)  If it was one of the larger local cemeteries I would be leaning the other way.

Either way once it's out I'll be keeping a really close eye on it so it stays clean and nice for visitors and the permanent residents.

Link to comment
31 minutes ago, mimaef said:

 I'm putting together the cache right now so I'll think about it a little to weigh the pros and cons over the next few days before I put it out. The cache will be in the same cemetery, just on the other side, with a different container size, but this particular cemetery is quite small so there wouldn't be much new experience to be had unless they like my larger cache decorations and swag, haha. I'm leaning more toward keeping the original page because of its age, all the lists its on, and the fact it's a small cemetery (less than an acre and old!)  If it was one of the larger local cemeteries I would be leaning the other way.

Probably a good idea to check with the property owner, to be sure moving your cache to another location is even okay.  :)

Because of it's small size, where it's located now may well be the only spot that was agreed on (when the CO originally asked for permission).

Link to comment
On ‎8‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 4:19 AM, arisoft said:

I you have possibility to fix some of these problems like emptying trash inside the container to make people to enjoy them, you are welcome to do it yourself. You are allowed to:

  • Remove any trash from from the container and environment
  • Dry the logbook
  • Replace the punctured logbook cover bag
  • Sharpen the pencil
  • Drain the container
  • Repair holes in the container
  • Report missing traveller directly to the owner

If you do not have opportunity or willingness to do so or the damage is otherwise out of your control then a "needs maintenance" log is the right way to report the situation to the cache owner. "Needs archive" is the way to report major permanent problems to the reviewer when there is no way to sign the logbook.

I would strongly suggest you don't fix them up.  That's the owners job and if they aren't doing it the caches should be archived.  Fixing them up just allows the absentee cache owner problem to continue.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
46 minutes ago, arisoft said:

It is the owner's responsibility but assistance is permitted. Archiving is not the goal of this hobby.

If I know the cache owner and they are generally responsive to maintenance than I'll help out where I can.  What I won't do is enable a deadbeat cache owner to continue to neglect their caches by fixing them up for them.    The goal of this hobby is to find caches and have fun.  For me, poorly maintained caches take away from some of that fun. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

If I know the cache owner and they are generally responsive to maintenance than I'll help out where I can.  What I won't do is enable a deadbeat cache owner to continue to neglect their caches by fixing them up for them.    The goal of this hobby is to find caches and have fun.  For me, poorly maintained caches take away from some of that fun. 

This is a good example of how you can participate voluntarily. It certainly does not matter if you know the cache maker or not, if the cache is worthy of existence.

For example GC2CA4A may now get a new life because there is someone who cares.

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, arisoft said:

This is a good example of how you can participate voluntarily. It certainly does not matter if you know the cache maker or not, if the cache is worthy of existence.

For example GC2CA4A may now get a new life because there is someone who cares.

If you really care you'll post your NM and hopefully get a reviewer involved who will force the owner of the cache to maintain it or archive it and let someone else, who really dose care, place a new one.    It's about being accountable.   By placing the cache the owner agreed to maintain it for as long as it's active.   The caching community should hold them to that.    Fixing up someone else's cache is hurting the game not helping it. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, arisoft said:

Please, explain this. Maybe you have some bad experienses you may share with us?

I too was once a cache fix-r-upper until I came to my senses and realized that by fixing up caches I was perpetuating the problem.    The problem being absentee owners.   For this game to work and work well all cache owners need to follow through with their own maintenance.   Fixing up caches that have been abandoned sends the wrong message.  

I maintain my caches and I expect other cache owner to do the same.   If someday I can't maintain them I'll follow through with what I agreed to do when I placed them and archive them.    I have enough respect for the game to do that much.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

I too was once a cache fix-r-upper until I came to my senses and realized that by fixing up caches I was perpetuating the problem.    The problem being absentee owners.   For this game to work and work well all cache owners need to follow through with their own maintenance.   Fixing up caches that have been abandoned sends the wrong message.  

I maintain my caches and I expect other cache owner to do the same.   If someday I can't maintain them I'll follow through with what I agreed to do when I placed them and archive them.    I have enough respect for the game to do that much.  

I agree. Too many people seem to expect that others will take care of the cache for them and ignore maintenance responsibilties. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
50 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Please, explain this. Maybe you have some bad experienses you may share with us?

I see many caches that were placed some time ago by cache owners who have long since quit geocaching, yet the cache ends up in disrepair or frequently goes missing and is perpetually replaced by crappy throwdowns. While at the same time, there are plenty of cachers that are willing to publish a good cache in the same location and maintain it properly, but can't because the ownerless cache/perpetual throwdown is still thriving.

Edited by Team Christiansen
grammer
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
7 minutes ago, Team Christiansen said:

I see many caches that were placed some time ago by cache owners who have long since quit geocaching, yet the cache ends up in disrepair or frequently goes missing and is perpetually replaced by crappy throwdowns. While at the same time, there are plenty of cachers that are willing to publish a good cache in the same location and maintain it properly, but can't because the ownerless cache/perpetual throwdown is still thriving.

I agree with everything you said but I want to clarify one thing.  To me it doesn't matter if the cache is being replaced with something crappy or something better.  It's not the quality of the throwdown  that matters to me it's the act of throwing down or in this case fixing up a cache not being maintained by an owner.    You may temporally solve the problem but the bigger issue will remain.   

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
36 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

I maintain my caches and I expect other cache owner to do the same.   If someday I can't maintain them I'll follow through with what I agreed to do when I placed them and archive them.    I have enough respect for the game to do that much.  

Is this the reason why fixing up someone else's cache is hurting the game not helping it? I do not understand how these things are related. Have you deny the geocachers to dry the container when wet and return the cache back to the right place when it has fallen, because you want to take full responsibility? These are some of the most common maintenance tasks that are the owner's responsibility.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, justintim1999 said:

I agree with everything you said but I want to clarify one thing.  To me it doesn't matter if the cache is being replaced with something crappy or something better.  It's not the quality of the throwdown  that matters to me it's the act of throwing down or in this case fixing up a cache not being maintained by an owner.    You may temporally solve the problem but the bigger issue will remain.   

Agreed.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, arisoft said:

Is this the reason why fixing up someone else's cache is hurting the game not helping it? I do not understand how these things are related. Have you deny the geocachers to dry the container when wet and return the cache back to the right place when it has fallen, because you want to take full responsibility? These are some of the most common maintenance tasks that are the owner's responsibility.

It's the reason why the op should not fix up a cache that looks to be abandoned.   If the cache is wet than chances are it should be replaced.  I don't have an issue with drying out a cache for the next person but a NM should still be posted.   Mimaef is encouraged to try contacting the owner and offer to adopt the cache,  but if the owner is gone from the game chances are they'll be no response.   If they like the area and want to place a cache of their own then starting the process of getting it archived is the way to go. 

Who knows,  maybe the owner will get off their buttocks and take care of it.     

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
58 minutes ago, justintim1999 said:

Mimaef is encouraged to try contacting the owner and offer to adopt the cache,  but if the owner is gone from the game chances are they'll be no response.

If you have followed this thread you already know that the adoption of this seven years old cache succeeded in record time.

1 hour ago, justintim1999 said:

To me it doesn't matter if the cache is being replaced with something crappy or something better.  It's not the quality of the throwdown  that matters to me it's the act of throwing down or in this case fixing up a cache not being maintained by an owner.

Throwdowns are not a part of the official cache maintenance. When you wrote that "Fixing up someone else's cache is hurting the game not helping it.", did you actually mean that "Replacing someone else's cache without permission is hurting the game not helping it."? This is an another story.

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, arisoft said:

If you have followed this thread you already know that the adoption of this seven years old cache succeeded in record time.

Throwdowns are not a part of the official cache maintenance. When you wrote that "Fixing up someone else's cache is hurting the game not helping it.", did you actually mean that "Replacing someone else's cache without permission is hurting the game not helping it."? This is an another story.

If we're making such fine distinctions in a bid to prove some point it's worth remembering that this single successful adoption is a rare exception.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

Before this turns into the usual ten page discourse of back and forth, just wanted to remind y'all that this is the "Getting Started" forum and was a question from a new cacher.  Perhaps we can lighten up on the debate and save the post wars for the Geocaching Topics forum.

Edited by hzoi
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
59 minutes ago, arisoft said:

If you have followed this thread you already know that the adoption of this seven years old cache succeeded in record time.

Throwdowns are not a part of the official cache maintenance. When you wrote that "Fixing up someone else's cache is hurting the game not helping it.", did you actually mean that "Replacing someone else's cache without permission is hurting the game not helping it."? This is an another story.

Just different points on the same spectrum.

Link to comment
15 hours ago, arisoft said:

If you have followed this thread you already know that the adoption of this seven years old cache succeeded in record time.

Throwdowns are not a part of the official cache maintenance. When you wrote that "Fixing up someone else's cache is hurting the game not helping it.", did you actually mean that "Replacing someone else's cache without permission is hurting the game not helping it."? This is an another story.

I'm glad to learn that the cache was adopted.

 I disagree with both replacing and fixing up someone elses cache.    Again,  if I know the owner I'll replace a log or dry out the cache,  otherwise I'll post a NM and let the cache owner fullfull their responsibility.    If I came across this cache and it already had a few NM's that were not being attended to I'd post a needs archived which would undoubtedly catch the eye of a reviewer.     

I didn't realize that this discussion was heavy handed.    Maybe I'm comming across as a little harsh on this subject but I want to make sure that anyone reading this (particularly new cachers) understands that preforming maintanance on someone elses cache is not cool.  

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
2 hours ago, justintim1999 said:

Maybe I'm comming across as a little harsh on this subject but I want to make sure that anyone reading this (particularly new cachers) understands that preforming maintanance on someone elses cache is not cool.

I see that this is your final opinion. But how do you explain to a newcomer, that you have the right to maintain only those caches whose maintenance has been neglected by your friends. I do not care who is the owner, when I see a broken log book cover bag and I have a new one for a replacement.

Seven years ago, when I was a newcomer in this hobby, I realized that a cache which a have not found yet, was damaged recently. I took a new box with me when I went to search the cache. Some animal has made holes to the box and the logbook was wet. I replaced the box and dried the logbook. The cache is still there after these seven years. In this case, I do not see this "bigger issue which will remain" as stated earlier in this thread. I do not recommend to do what I did. I was a newcomer and I did this because I saw this opportunity to save this cache from archiving. I shoud have asked it for adoption, but I did not know this possibility at that time.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...