Move a cache?

[+SkellyCA]

I want to move a chache about 200 or so feet. Current cache keeps disappearing. New cache will be a different container and different hide.

 

Do I just archive the current cache and place the new cache or is there something special I need to do or should know?

[+niraD]

7 minutes ago, SkellyCA said:

I want to move a chache about 200 or so feet. Current cache keeps disappearing. New cache will be a different container and different hide.

 

Do I just archive the current cache and place the new cache or is there something special I need to do or should know?

With a different location, a different container, and a different hide, I would probably archive the current listing and submit a new listing.

 

But if you think that the experience is substantially the same as before (e.g., the scenic view, the historic location), even with the changes, then you could change the coordinates of the current cache listing.

[+hzoi]

I agree with all of niraD's points.  Moving it that far would normally change the nature of the hide, making a new listing apropos - but not always.

 

I'd add that pushing it that far may put it in closer than 0.1 miles/528 feet/161 meters to an existing cache, which would be problematic.  You may want to reach out to your reviewer and get a proximity check on the proposed new coordinates before changing the listing.

[+Bundyrumandcoke]

There is a limit to how far you can move a cache, I forget off hand what the distance is. Over that, you can request assistance from a reviewer, who, with the right justification from the CO, can make the necessary changes. 

 

I had this happen to me a few years ago. A nano on an object, that got moved about 2km down a road. The cache placement was about the object, not the location. The reviewer changed the coordinates to suit the objects new location, as it didn't clash with any other nearby caches. 

[+cerberus1]

I have a cache near an old, working grist mill in a tiny park, and it's there to share with others it's historic value.

It's original spot kept getting muggled  (by fisherman mostly) and had to be moved to another side of that tiny park 300 feet.

 

Since the cache is meant to draw people to the mill, it remained as the same cache (as it was simply placed on the other side of it).

If I placed just a park cache with no original intent,  put there just because I could, I probably would have archived the earlier one and started new. 

[+The A-Team]

9 hours ago, Bundyrumandcoke said:

There is a limit to how far you can move a cache, I forget off hand what the distance is. Over that, you can request assistance from a reviewer, who, with the right justification from the CO, can make the necessary changes.

The maximum distance you can move it on your own is the 0.1 mile/528 feet/161 meter distance mentioned by hzoi. The system will prevent you from moving it farther than that in an "Update coordinates" log.

 

Side note: Don't ever try submitting multiple "Update coordinates" logs in a row to move a cache farther than that, because the reviewers don't like that. Talk to the reviewer to move a cache farther than 0.1 miles/528 feet/161 meters.

[+SkellyCA]

It's going to be a totally different kind of container and a different type of hide. So besides distance, that's also why I'm asking.

[+niraD]

1 hour ago, SkellyCA said:

It's going to be a totally different kind of container and a different type of hide.

It sounds like there's your answer. If it's going to be a completely different geocaching experience, then archive the old listing and submit a new one.

[+cerberus1]

1 hour ago, SkellyCA said:

It's going to be a totally different kind of container and a different type of hide. So besides distance, that's also why I'm asking.

 

Curious what's meant by "type" of hide, as the only thing you can't change on the cache page is it's type, and you'd have to archive and start again with that new cache type

If you simply mean hide style, then again, it's kinda up to you.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2018 by cerberus1

[+HunterandSamuel]

I was searching for a topic close to this. If a geocacher owns a cache that isn't getting much activity due to the remote location, can it be placed elsewhere (even miles away from the original location but in the same town) but keep the same name &  log (with find signatures)?  

[RuideAlmeida]

7 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

I was searching for a topic close to this. If a geocacher owns a cache that isn't getting much activity due to the remote location, can it be placed elsewhere (even miles away from the original location but in the same town) but keep the same name &  log (with find signatures)?  

 

As long doesn't collide with the distances to physical stages of other caches, a owner can move a cache less than 161m (1/10 of a mile). More than that, you need to ask the reviewer.

 

Edited December 31, 2019 by RuideAlmeida

[+barefootjeff]

3 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

I was searching for a topic close to this. If a geocacher owns a cache that isn't getting much activity due to the remote location, can it be placed elsewhere (even miles away from the original location but in the same town) but keep the same name &  log (with find signatures)?  

 

Any move more than 161 metres from its original location would require a reviewer to make the change and, in the scenario you've described, I doubt that would happen because it's really a new cache with a different experience for the finders. One of mine, The Rememberer of Secrets, was in a local park but suffered from muggle interference each school holidays so I ended up relocating it to another reserve about 500 metres away. Even though the new version used the same themed physical waypoint (a small elephant which is the Rememberer since an elephant never forgets), I archived the original and created the new one The Rememberer's New Secret.

[+HunterandSamuel]

10 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Any move more than 161 metres from its original location would require a reviewer to make the change and, in the scenario you've described, I doubt that would happen because it's really a new cache with a different experience for the finders. One of mine, The Rememberer of Secrets, was in a local park but suffered from muggle interference each school holidays so I ended up relocating it to another reserve about 500 metres away. Even though the new version used the same themed physical waypoint (a small elephant which is the Rememberer since an elephant never forgets), I archived the original and created the new one The Rememberer's New Secret.

Thanks! 

[+HunterandSamuel]

16 minutes ago, RuideAlmeida said:

 

As long doesn't collide with the distances to physical stages of other caches, a owner can move a cache less than 161m (1/10 of a mile). More than that, you need to ask the reviewer.

 

Thank you. The reviewers in our area are very helpful. 

[+hzoi]

On 12/31/2019 at 10:46 PM, HunterandSamuel said:

I was searching for a topic close to this. If a geocacher owns a cache that isn't getting much activity due to the remote location, can it be placed elsewhere (even miles away from the original location but in the same town) but keep the same name &  log (with find signatures)?  

 

Did you read the posts above?  They appear to answer your question:

 

On 9/5/2018 at 1:33 AM, niraD said:

With a different location, a different container, and a different hide, I would probably archive the current listing and submit a new listing.

 

But if you think that the experience is substantially the same as before (e.g., the scenic view, the historic location), even with the changes, then you could change the coordinates of the current cache listing.

 

On 9/5/2018 at 9:09 AM, hzoi said:

I agree with all of niraD's points.  Moving it that far would normally change the nature of the hide, making a new listing apropos - but not always.

 

I'd add that pushing it that far may put it in closer than 0.1 miles/528 feet/161 meters to an existing cache, which would be problematic.  You may want to reach out to your reviewer and get a proximity check on the proposed new coordinates before changing the listing.

 

Keeping the container the same doesn't change my answer, and I dubt it changes niraD's.  Just archive the listing, pick up the container, and publish a new hide elsewhere.

Edited January 2, 2020 by hzoi

[+L0ne.R]

On 12/31/2019 at 4:46 PM, HunterandSamuel said:

If a geocacher owns a cache that isn't getting much activity due to the remote location, can it be placed elsewhere (even miles away from the original location but in the same town) but keep the same name &  log (with find signatures)?

 

The cache listing is a community listing. If I found that cache I wouldn't be happy to have it become a totally different experience. I found the cache under the footbridge in High Park, not the cache hanging in a tree in Sherwood forest 10km away. Now my log is in a cache listing that is not where I had been. Better to start a new listing for the sake of previous finders. Keep the history of the original listing intact. 

Edited January 2, 2020 by L0ne.R

[+cerberus1]

2 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

The cache listing is a community listing. If I found that cache I wouldn't be happy to have it become a totally different experience.

I found the cache under the footbridge in High Park, not the cache hanging in a tree in Sherwood forest 10km away.

But my log is in a cache listing that is not where I had been.

Better to start a new listing for the sake of previous finders. Keep the history of the original listing intact. 

 

I kinda feel the same.  I'm really picky about areas I'll visit.  I'd be at that "remote" location.

If it was changed to a spot unrecognizable to the area I visited (like in town...) , it'd be a subject of discussion at events. 

I'm not a numbers person, so my find deleted, and the use of the ignore function would be my first move.

 - But I feel the Reviewer here might try to talk them out of it, the new location not close to original.   

Odd, but many locally actually agree on this thinking (which is rare), when this came up last.

The CO should really take past finders into consideration.  They think they weren't getting much activity before...    

[+niraD]

5 hours ago, hzoi said:

Keeping the container the same doesn't change my answer, and I dubt it changes niraD's.  Just archive the listing, pick up the container, and publish a new hide elsewhere.

I agree that reusing the same container doesn't make it the same cache. I've seen a puzzle cache moved a few miles (with help from the volunteer reviewer), from one in-theme location to another in-theme location. But I'm not sure that was a good idea, and even if it was, it's extremely rare. More commonly, I've seen owners archive a cache, collect the container, and re-hide the container as a new cache.

 

On the other hand, changing the container doesn't necessarily make it a different cache. One of my caches started life as a decon container. I replaced the decon container with a camouflaged wide-mouth 1-liter bottle, but it was still essentially the same cache, because the location was the important thing for that cache, not the container.

[+dprovan]

On 12/31/2019 at 1:46 PM, HunterandSamuel said:

I was searching for a topic close to this. If a geocacher owns a cache that isn't getting much activity due to the remote location, can it be placed elsewhere (even miles away from the original location but in the same town) but keep the same name &  log (with find signatures)?  

Why wouldn't you just create a new cache? Good remote caches are getting rarer and rarer, so I'd hate to see you change yours into something easier just because it doesn't get enough traffic. A new, easier cache will get the increased traffic all by itself, so leave the old cache where it is for those people that still appreciate long hikes to remote caches.

[+HunterandSamuel]

6 hours ago, hzoi said:

 

Did you read the posts above?  They appear to answer your question:

 

 

I did read them but they didn't answer my question. I wanted to know if it was possible to move a cache to another location. Keep the same container, same name, and same log with the signatures of cachers who found it. The move would be more than 528 ft. But now I know that isn't possible without archiving the cache first. Once archived...I can not use the same log? That is important to me because cachers spent time and travel to find the cache and sign the log. I don't want to take that away from them. Plus the cache has TBs. I have read the posts after your post, they gave great advice and convinced me to keep the cache in place. Thanks everyone.

[+HunterandSamuel]

6 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

 

The cache listing is a community listing. If I found that cache I wouldn't be happy to have it become a totally different experience. I found the cache under the footbridge in High Park, not the cache hanging in a tree in Sherwood forest 10km away. Now my log is in a cache listing that is not where I had been. Better to start a new listing for the sake of previous finders. Keep the history of the original listing intact. 

Excellent advice. Thanks. That's what I will do. I now feel better about the location and cache (which got great reviews, some were hilarious, I do not want to take that away from them).

[+niraD]

12 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

I can not use the same log? That is important to me because cachers spent time and travel to find the cache and sign the log. I don't want to take that away from them.

You can use the same log. Or you can keep the old log, and put a new log in the cache. I'm not sure what value there is in old handwritten logs for a different cache being kept in a reused log book though.

 

14 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Plus the cache has TBs.

The best thing to do for TBs is to grab them from the old cache, and then drop them in the new cache once you've listed it.

 

Or you can follow dprovan's advice:

58 minutes ago, dprovan said:

Why wouldn't you just create a new cache? Good remote caches are getting rarer and rarer, so I'd hate to see you change yours into something easier just because it doesn't get enough traffic. A new, easier cache will get the increased traffic all by itself, so leave the old cache where it is for those people that still appreciate long hikes to remote caches.

 

[+HunterandSamuel]

5 minutes ago, niraD said:

Or you can follow dprovan's advice:

1 hour ago, dprovan said:

Why wouldn't you just create a new cache? Good remote caches are getting rarer and rarer, so I'd hate to see you change yours into something easier just because it doesn't get enough traffic. A new, easier cache will get the increased traffic all by itself, so leave the old cache where it is for those people that still appreciate long hikes to remote caches.

Yep.

[+barefootjeff]

2 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Excellent advice. Thanks. That's what I will do. I now feel better about the location and cache (which got great reviews, some were hilarious, I do not want to take that away from them).

 

It sounds like that cache is working well where it is, even if it's not getting a lot of visitors, so why not leave it there and just create another new one closer to town? Four of my caches had no finds at all last year, and a couple that I placed in 2016 have only had 5 and 6 finds respectively in all that time, but that's no reason to archive them.

 

 

16 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

Keep the same container, same name, and same log with the signatures of cachers who found it. The move would be more than 528 ft. But now I know that isn't possible without archiving the cache first. Once archived...I can not use the same log? That is important to me because cachers spent time and travel to find the cache and sign the log. I don't want to take that away from them. Plus the cache has TBs.

 

A cache is more than a logbook in a container, a lot more. It's about the whole experience: the description, the journey, the location, the search and ultimately the find. That experience remains for those who did it regardless of the future state of the cache, both in their own memories and in the logs they posted online (which will still be there even if the cache is archived). For most of the caches I've done, it's usually about the location and the really good ones will often have the description, journey, location, container and even the logbook woven into a common theme.

 

As for the TBs, if you do archive it, retrieve them from the cache so they're in your inventory then drop them off into other caches, the same as you would do with TBs that you've retrieved from any other cache.

[+HunterandSamuel]

15 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

It sounds like that cache is working well where it is, even if it's not getting a lot of visitors, so why not leave it there and just create another new one closer to town?

Yes, that's what I'm going to do. It was an interesting topic. Thanks everyone. Lesson I learned...a cache with infrequent visits is still valuable and deserves to be kept alive. I guess I'm spoiled by my bike path caches that get a lot of people finding them. I feel good now about this one.

[+K13]

On 1/2/2020 at 2:08 PM, HunterandSamuel said:

I did read them but they didn't answer my question. I wanted to know if it was possible to move a cache to another location. Keep the same container, same name, and same log with the signatures of cachers who found it. The move would be more than 528 ft. But now I know that isn't possible without archiving the cache first. Once archived...I can not use the same log? That is important to me because cachers spent time and travel to find the cache and sign the log. I don't want to take that away from them. Plus the cache has TBs. I have read the posts after your post, they gave great advice and convinced me to keep the cache in place. Thanks everyone.

No prior finder loses anything if you archive a cache, the only ones losing would be those who haven't found it yet. As a cache finder, the last thing I want to see is a logbook from Cache A put into Cache B. The log story I wrote would not apply to the new cache.