Threshold of Historic Caches

[+MNTA]

Don't get me wrong I'm not against old caches. In fact can't wait to go find Potter Pond some day. I just have been finding/not finding a lot of abandoned or problem caches. I do like the old ones but would like to see them owned and maintained just like any other cache placed today.

 

So what is historic or valued:

Age is a common answer but not the only.

First of something or first in the area.

Memorable/favorited finds.

Great spot. 

 

So now as a community. How are these to be identified and preserved. Once identified the COs of these caches that are still active can be contacted and a plan for continuity could be made should the CO wish. Some may not want to participate. The ones that have inactive COs if forced adoptions went so poorly in the past maybe we can have informal adoptions. With the new stewards watching the cache logs and performing maintenance duties possibly as a team. 

 

Though I do argue that if a cache is archived in SOME areas, that new ones will fill the void. If it was a great spot others will want to return and bring others there as well.

[+coachstahly]

8 minutes ago, MNTA said:

So now as a community. How are these to be identified and preserved. Once identified the COs of these caches that are still active can be contacted and a plan for continuity could be made should the CO wish. Some may not want to participate. The ones that have inactive COs if forced adoptions went so poorly in the past maybe we can have informal adoptions. With the new stewards watching the cache logs and performing maintenance duties possibly as a team. 

 

NOT where I wanted to go with this post.  That's a completely different can of worms.  I am interested in whether or not people consider caches in any sense of historical content, however that might be defined by each cacher.

 

I usually consider the first cache of each type in each state (or oldest active cache in each state) historical in nature.  I usually include caches placed in that first full year (5/2000-5/2001) as well.  However, that doesn't mean that they're elevated in stature in any way, to me. 

[+niraD]

28 minutes ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

The OP used the word 'historic'. I believe that this term is subjective, and will have different meanings to different people.

Absolutely. We have a friend from Europe who finds it amusing that Americans consider 50-year-old buildings to be historic. And Geocaching has been around much less time than the USA, so the time scale for "historic" geocaches is going to be much shorter.

 

But even if the "old" aspect of "historic" is relative, I still think the other two criteria mentioned in my previous (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) response should still apply. The age of the listing isn't enough. There should also be a "high degree of integrity", which I would apply to both the listing and the container itself. Original logs would be an even bigger plus.

 

And there should be a "level of historic significance", so the cache should be meaningful in some other way besides age and a clear. The Project A.P.E. caches were a "limited edition" project, so all of the surviving ones could qualify. The first cache qualifies. The first cache in a given country could qualify, but would primarily interest geocachers in that country. The first cache of a given type could qualify. And so on.

 

Of course, the first cache of a given type could be difficult to nail down. Is the first puzzle cache the first cache listed as an "Unknown" type? Or would one of the puzzle-like caches listed before cache types existed count?

[+niraD]

38 minutes ago, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

Tribute caches are used to mark something 'historic', either a location of a previous cache, or to highlight the deeds of a cacher. Do these fit the definition of 'historic'?

Are history text books historic? They document things that are historic, but I don't think they are themselves historic. The obvious exception might be a history text book that was used a couple centuries ago.

 

So perhaps the first tribute cache would be historic based on it being the first of its kind, but in general, no, tribute caches themselves are not historic, no matter how historic whatever it is that they commemorate.

[+L0ne.R]

4 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

It preserves the listing, but doesn't preserve the cache.  The oldest cache that I have found is The Spot.  I don't think I would have experienced the same feeling looking an archived listing than actually finding the cache and holding the original log book.

Wow. An actual original container with the original logbook. That’s amazing. Is the owner active? If this cache became a film canister (8th rendition of throwdown) would it still be historic? 

Edited July 27, 2018 by L0ne.R
Grammar

[+MNTA]

36 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

Wow. An actual original container with the original logbook. That’s amazing. Is the owner active? If this cache became a film canister (8th rendition of throwdown) would it still be historic? 

 

The consensus seems to be yes it it fills my Jasmer grid. 

[+NYPaddleCacher]

17 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

Wow. An actual original container with the original logbook. That’s amazing. Is the owner active? If this cache became a film canister (8th rendition of throwdown) would it still be historic? 

Actually, it's not the original container.  The original container was a plastic bucket but the CO replaced it with an ammo can (and transferred the contents) after a year or so when it was deemed not to be waterproof.   When there was some speculation that it might have gone missing awhile back the original CO posted a couple of logs on the cache listing.   It was a false alarm though and it's been found frequently since that happened. 

[+STNolan]

On 7/27/2018 at 7:56 AM, Wet Pancake Touring Club said:

The OP used the word 'historic'. I believe that this term is subjective, and will have different meanings to different people.

 

For some, it may be simply based on the age. Is Potters Pond historical? I've done Potters Pond, it is an ammo can in the woods. Nothing special about it, except for the fact it is one of 3 or 4 caches remaining that were placed in Aug 2000.

I found Potter's Pond about 3 years back and I think it's historic... what made it historic though was that I found the ORIGINAL LOG BOOK. I saw adventures and stories from more than 15 years past that were captured there. 

That's what made it different than just "placed in 2000." Having that logbook and knowing it was the same one that has been in play for all those years made it vastly more memorable an experience. Far more so than Mingo was in my opinion, which I found a few weeks later.

[+CAVinoGal]

On 7/27/2018 at 6:59 AM, NYPaddleCacher said:

The oldest cache that I have found is The Spot.  I don't think I would have experienced the same feeling looking an archived listing than actually finding the cache and holding the original log book.

 

I know the container has been changed, but finding "The Spot" with the original logbook was pretty special.  Having the cache still maintained and available to find and exchange trackables made for a very unique and fun experience.  We took pics, we retrieved TB's, we left TB's, we got muggled!, it was a memorable day.  Historic?  IN GC terms only because it was the oldest we had found, and was and old and still active, findable, loggable, cache. Significance otherwise?  It probably means nothing outside of GC!

[+Wet Pancake Touring Club]

I'm going to revise my thoughts a bit: After some research, I believe that we are mixing up two very similar words. They are 'historic' and 'historical'. From vocabulary.com; "Something historic has great importance to human history. Something historical is related to the past." Based on that, Potters Pond would probably be historical, while the very first cache would be historic. 

 

[+hzoi]

There was a great deal of furor when GC77 First Germany was archived by the second adoptive owner.  Also when GC1169 Mission 9: Tunnel of Light was shut down, for a while anyway.  And when GC30 Mingo kept getting filled with concrete...

 

It seems most geocachers' level of disappointment is increased exponentially when they haven't had a chance to log an old cache that goes away.

 

I enjoy going for older caches.  But they mean more to me when it's not just the listing that's historic (or historical, whichever), but the actual cache and contents are as well.  Otherwise it turns into the Ship of Theseus or grandfather's axe.

 

I was lucky enough to log GC18 Tarryall in the original container with the original logbook, before it got muggled and replaced.  Same with Tunnel of Light, The Spot, and others.  On the other hand, I didn't really get much out of logging replacement number whatever at GC90 Bonita Lakes.  And when I visited GC184 State Game Lands #109 and The Spot on back to back days, you can guess which one was a more rewarding experience.

 

tl;dr: If the listing is the only old thing about the geocache, maybe it's time for another geocache to be the "oldest."

[+MNTA]

4 hours ago, hzoi said:

There was a great deal of furor when GC77 First Germany was archived by the second adoptive owner.  Also when GC1169 Mission 9: Tunnel of Light was shut down, for a while anyway.  And when GC30 Mingo kept getting filled with concrete...

 

It seems most geocachers' level of disappointment is increased exponentially when they haven't had a chance to log an old cache that goes away.

 

 

 

Which is why certain caches deemed valuable to the community as a whole should be placed on a call it historical register that could be maintained by the community possibly adopted by the local geocaching community. 

[+hzoi]

46 minutes ago, MNTA said:

 

Which is why certain caches deemed valuable to the community as a whole should be placed on a call it historical register that could be maintained by the community possibly adopted by the local geocaching community. 

 

Yeah, but...

 

4 hours ago, hzoi said:

tl;dr: If the listing is the only old thing about the geocache, maybe it's time for another geocache to be the "oldest."

 

[+Bundyrumandcoke]

1 hour ago, MNTA said:

 

Which is why certain caches deemed valuable to the community as a whole should be placed on a call it historical register that could be maintained by the community possibly adopted by the local geocaching community. 

But again, who makes the determination as to which cache "is valuable to the community as a whole" and which isn't. And it still needs the OP to remove the MN attribute when the cache has been maintained by the community, which is the exact problem playing out with the container I replaced a few weeks ago, and outlined previously in this thread. 

[+dprovan]

5 hours ago, hzoi said:

I enjoy going for older caches.  But they mean more to me when it's not just the listing that's historic (or historical, whichever), but the actual cache and contents are as well.  Otherwise it turns into the Ship of Theseus or grandfather's axe.

Yeah, I agree. But to me it goes beyond the container. Yes, it's even better to see the original container and the original log, but even if we're talking about Theseus's ship, it's still pretty cool if it's still the ship. If it's a leaking rowboat by the time I get to it, then not so much. The main reason I consider it historic is because it was good enough to last the years as originally planted. Otherwise it's just a historical description in front of a plain old cache.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

On 7/26/2018 at 4:37 PM, The A-Team said:

I should point out that the 10-year-old Wal-mart LPC I mentioned is purely hypothetical. Everyone knows that a cache like that would never actually last that long out in the wild.

 

...now, everyone post their local 10-year+ Wal-mart LPCs to prove me wrong!

 

Not in a Walmart lot, but 12+ years old and points out some local history, so historic in it's own way: https://coord.info/GCTVH9 

[+Bundyrumandcoke]

So, what makes a historic cache. If we are talking original log book in original container, then what about

 

Hidden 20/10/06

 

Original container (large size- approx. 1000mm long x 200mm dia) 

Original log book

132 finds

Never been DNFed. 

Never been muggled

Never had a NM logged against it. 

Never been offline or temporarily disabled

Available 24/7

34 Write Notes (usually TB drops) 

3 Owner maintenance logs

 

Its one of mine. 

 

https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCYZ1H_carorica-gladstones-tb-motel?guid=eb0162f7-2e4b-4ecb-a4ca-c7c9118e1370

 

 

[+colleda]

3 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

So, what makes a historic cache. If we are talking original log book in original container, then what about

 

Hidden 20/10/06

 

Original container (large size- approx. 1000mm long x 200mm dia) 

Original log book

132 finds

Never been DNFed. 

Never been muggled

Never had a NM logged against it. 

Never been offline or temporarily disabled

Available 24/7

34 Write Notes (usually TB drops) 

3 Owner maintenance logs

 

Its one of mine. 

 

https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCYZ1H_carorica-gladstones-tb-motel?guid=eb0162f7-2e4b-4ecb-a4ca-c7c9118e1370

 

 

One near us. Placed 20/10/2001.

Appears to have original container and log book.

323 Found Its

12 DNFs

3 WNs

0 NMs

0 NAs

GC1C47