Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
on4bam

No vacation caches, yeah sure..

Recommended Posts

There have been other discussions about placing caches while on vacation or at least too far to maintain them. As I was looking at caches near a place we might visit I found a few of these where the listing clearly mentions the CO will not maintain the cache(s). On the listing he/she/they even asks for help in clear language. Bring containers, logs... not something to read on a cachepage lately (yes the caches are "recent".

I wonder how a reviewer would let this pass (unless the listing was modified later).

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

The answer is usually found in the pre-publication reviewer notes and by comparing the record for the cache at the time of publication vs. the current time.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, but it's strange these caches remain active so long. Must be local reviewers don't notice. If I were to place a vacation cache I would not use big fonts welcoming throwdowns, just asking for the next cacher to do maintenance after a NM was posted would stay under the radar much longer. In the case I mentioned it was the first thing I noticed. Weird.... anyway, I might go find one if our plans materialize unless there are more deserving ones in the area.

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, on4bam said:

Must be local reviewers don't notice.

What's your proof?

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Keystone said:

What's your proof?

That there are no notes and caches are still active after a considerable time. So they didn't notice or noticed and don't take action. Unless you can see a reason for allowing "bring containers and logs as I/we can't maintain these caches".

Besides, why do I have to proof anything? I see, I read, I question....

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, Keystone said:

Have any of the caches you're referencing had a "Needs Archived" log?  That is how a post-publication change would come to a reviewer's attention.  We don't page through thousands of caches looking for text changes post-publication.

 

What?!  My premium member fees pay your salary!  This is an outrage!!

 

:anibad:

  • Funny 6

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, Keystone said:

You are making definitive statements rather than just speculating.  So, yeah, back them up.

 

You're seeing things that aren't there. :rolleyes:

 

At least at the time of publishing there must have been a maintenance plan or the caches wouldn't be published right? The CO(s) live 2000+ Km away, shouldn't there be a local that's supposed to maintain them?

It look like the reviewer who published the caches is not a local.

Having just the latest 30 logs in GSAK I see no NM or NA logs, maybe when winter is over they will appear (petlings under rocks may suffer cracks). Anyway, I'm not looking to get the CO or caches in trouble, just wondering.

 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, on4bam said:

just wondering.

No, you're just ranting without a need and that's pretty small-minded.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, on4bam said:

You're seeing things that aren't there. :rolleyes:

 

At least at the time of publishing there must have been a maintenance plan or the caches wouldn't be published right? The CO(s) live 2000+ Km away, shouldn't there be a local that's supposed to maintain them?

It look like the reviewer who published the caches is not a local.

Having just the latest 30 logs in GSAK I see no NM or NA logs, maybe when winter is over they will appear (petlings under rocks may suffer cracks). Anyway, I'm not looking to get the CO or caches in trouble, just wondering.

 

If you aren't planning to report these to TPTB, then why are you even talking about them?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, K13 said:

If you aren't planning to report these to TPTB, then why are you even talking about them?

 

I would like to know how to make a vacation cache. It seems to be possible if this is true. Double standards are the way to go.

Share this post


Link to post

https://www.geocaching.com/play/guidelines

 

Don't hide caches far from home.

  • Vacation/holiday caches are usually not published because they are difficult to maintain. It's best to place physical caches in your area so you can respond quickly to maintenance needs. In rare circumstances a vacation cache with an acceptable maintenance plan might be published.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=128&pgid=709

5.5. Can I hide a cache while on vacation?

It’s not recommended

We recommend that you do not hide a geocache while traveling. Vacation/holiday caches are usually not published.

Geocache owners must visit their caches to maintain them. Log books fill up, cache contents get wet, or the cache can disappear. If you live far away from your cache, timely maintenance is impossible. It’s best to place physical caches in your usual caching area.

Maintenance plan

If you do place a geocache while traveling, you must have a maintenance plan. For example, a local geocacher agrees to maintain the cache in your absence. When you submit your cache, document your plan in a Reviewer Note. Include the local geocacher’s username, contact information, and written consent. Information in Reviewer Notes will auto-archive on publication and will not be available to other players.

Share this post


Link to post

It does not make a double standard by presenting one standard twice. B)

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, arisoft said:

I would like to know how to make a vacation cache.

If you read Lone.R's second post, there is explicit instructions on how to accommodate your request:

 

20 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

If you do place a geocache while traveling, you must have a maintenance plan. For example, a local geocacher agrees to maintain the cache in your absence.

I've also seen where close family members and friends have served as local maintainers quite adequately.  I wouldn't describe it so much as a "double standard", but rather a workaround to allow a small amount of flexibility, and stating the expectation so that the result stays within the intent of the Guidelines (i.e. don't abandon your cache, and expect others to clean up after you).

 

Best of luck with the vacation caches you're planning.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/17/2019 at 11:03 AM, on4bam said:

Yes, but it's strange these caches remain active so long.

 

I've mentioned this before but I know of a cache that would be classified as a vacation cache by todays guidelines.   The cache listing doesn't mention anything about asking for assistance to maintain the cache though.  It was placed in 2001, has over 1400 finds, only 1 NM log, and was found 4 days ago.   There's no double standard as the cache was placed before the no vacation cache guideline existed.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Is there any requirement that vacation caches with an approved maintenance plan must state such a plan in brief on the cache page (not just in a Reviewer Note)? If not, shouldn't there be?

 

I'm talking something simple like "my geo-aware sister lives in the area and can perform maintenance for me" or "Thanks to CacheaholicChris42 who agreed to help maintain this cache." This assures the community a maintenance plan is in place, similar to how permission is stated on the cache page when granted.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

I like your idea, but unfortunately it is not a requirement.  Among other things, a cache owner could object for privacy reasons to disclosure of his Aunt Edna's involvement in cache maintenance.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/18/2019 at 7:36 PM, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

I've mentioned this before but I know of a cache that would be classified as a vacation cache by todays guidelines.   The cache listing doesn't mention anything about asking for assistance to maintain the cache though.  It was placed in 2001, has over 1400 finds, only 1 NM log, and was found 4 days ago.   There's no double standard as the cache was placed before the no vacation cache guideline existed.  

The ones I've seen were placed last year.

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, on4bam said:

The ones I've seen were placed last year.

 

Saw this one yesterday.

 

It looked like a vacation cache but nothing in the description about maintenance. The COs first cache and in a foreign country?

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, on4bam said:
On 1/18/2019 at 2:36 PM, NYPaddleCacher said:

I've mentioned this before but I know of a cache that would be classified as a vacation cache by todays guidelines.   The cache listing doesn't mention anything about asking for assistance to maintain the cache though.  It was placed in 2001, has over 1400 finds, only 1 NM log, and was found 4 days ago.   There's no double standard as the cache was placed before the no vacation cache guideline existed.  

The ones I've seen were placed last year.

My point was simply to answer your query  about how vacation caches can remain active for a long time.   I am not condoning the placement of vacation caches without a viable maintenance plan but under the right circumstances they can provide an enjoyable geocaching experience for many years.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

My point was simply to answer your query  about how vacation caches can remain active for a long time.   I am not condoning the placement of vacation caches without a viable maintenance plan but under the right circumstances they can provide an enjoyable geocaching experience for many years.

I just wanted to make clear it wasn't about some longstanding, grandfathered caches but relative new ones. Nothing more.

 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, colleda said:

Saw this one yesterday.

 

It looked like a vacation cache but nothing in the description about maintenance. The COs first cache and in a foreign country?

 

Listing is currently TD. Seems like the CO is close by enough to know that the cache is missing, and is looking to replace it in a better spot.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, K13 said:
5 hours ago, colleda said:

Saw this one yesterday.

 

It looked like a vacation cache but nothing in the description about maintenance. The COs first cache and in a foreign country?

 

Listing is currently TD. Seems like the CO is close by enough to know that the cache is missing, and is looking to replace it in a better spot.

That's correct.  The CO's home coordinates are quite close to the cache location, so there was no reason for the reviewer to question this as a "vacation cache." 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Keystone said:

The CO's home coordinates are quite close to the cache location,

Could be Fake-Coords, right? Most finds of this CO were in Germany.

 

Hans

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, HHL said:

Could be Fake-Coords, right? Most finds of this CO were in Germany.

 

Hans

Perhaps.  Looks like three Events in the area, hosted by a group of Germans that frequent the area for vacation/diving from the sounds of it.   The Reviewer might have taken that into account.

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Looking at the Disable Note they posted, it's not clear they are going to relocate the cache nearby, or abandon the spot and move the cache and resubmit a new Listing for Review?

 

I wonder if they know how to Archive a Listing?

Edited by Touchstone
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Borrowing from another thread:  There's always the "It's a vacation cache, but the owners of the business are taking care of it for me.  Stop by and ask someone at the counter and they will hand it to you" vacation cache. 

 

Seems to be a theory in some places that having a solid maintenance plan washes the commercial issue.

 

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, ecanderson said:

Borrowing from another thread:  There's always the "It's a vacation cache, but the owners of the business are taking care of it for me.  Stop by and ask someone at the counter and they will hand it to you" vacation cache. 

 

Seems to be a theory in some places that having a solid maintenance plan washes the commercial issue.

 

 

Or perhaps some reviewers exercise a bit of leniency in places where it is unlikely that a cache would exist for very long without a caretaker.  The alternative to allowing someone at a counter hand over a container might be no cache at all.   Is that really preferable?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

Or perhaps some reviewers exercise a bit of leniency in places where it is unlikely that a cache would exist for very long without a caretaker.  The alternative to allowing someone at a counter hand over a container might be no cache at all.   Is that really preferable?

Yes.  Why not concede that "no cache at all" in certain "places" might in fact be OK and just reflective of local reality?   I'm not on board with the assumption that every urban location should be considered compatible with this hobby, or that 'forcing' a cache placement into a place where it's otherwise not viable by ignoring the gc guidelines is good policy.  There are places here in the U.S. where I wouldn't place a cache for a variety of reasons, not least of which the chances that it would be muggled.  Why should it be different in other countries or small islands?  Not all hobbies play well in all places.  It's hard to find a good downhill ski run in Puerto Rico. 

 

I think it's often more a problem of lack of participation by locals that causes many of these placements. 

If there are indeed locals placing caches, they're often placed and maintained successfully, in which case there isn't a valid reason/need for the type of vacation cache to which I refer.

If there is no real local participation, that should be remedied first -- if it can be.  I'd point out that when you find this sort of cache placement, you don't often see locals logging them, just tourists from afar.  Placing vacation caches for tourists doesn't automatically generate local participation.  It clearly takes more than that. 

 

"Is that really preferable?" begs the question of why it should be preferred.  That's the question that I never felt was well answered in the other thread where this was being discussed.  So as to light up a spot on the map for travelers?  Honestly, I think that's really the underlying purpose for many of them, and we should reasonably be able to ask if that's a good enough reason to bend the rules.  The only other explanation offered so far is to garner local participation, but as I say, that's not what I see when I read the logs for these types of caches. 

 

While we're opening up that particular can of worms, one could also inspect the logs for a great many of the event caches held in the 'difficult' locations under discussion here.  These events are set up in advance by tourists, and the resulting logs are often all by tourists and none by locals.  Not surprisingly, one can often find these sited near cruise ship ports.  There's an  island that hosts more event caches sponsored by tourists each year than there are physical caches on the island.  Yes, they are fun.  No, they often don't bend any rules, though one could sometimes certainly question the event location as being "in or near" cruise ports (that wording is from the guidelines).  Yeah, OK, I'll name names for once.  That particular guideline appears to be being violated by GC819AC.  <100' from the gangway.  Happens all the time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/22/2019 at 4:37 AM, colleda said:

Saw this one yesterday.

 

It looked like a vacation cache but nothing in the description about maintenance. The COs first cache and in a foreign country?

Didn't even last a week before it was muggled.  Now let's see how long it takes to replace.

 

Interesting that the one cache that the CO has found in Egypt is another 'commercial contact' vacation cache.  Per the long description:  "The box was placed in the office to prevent it from being put in the garbage or stolen."  (see GC6PRN0).

 

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/24/2019 at 7:14 PM, ecanderson said:

While we're opening up that particular can of worms, one could also inspect the logs for a great many of the event caches held in the 'difficult' locations under discussion here.  These events are set up in advance by tourists, and the resulting logs are often all by tourists and none by locals.  Not surprisingly, one can often find these sited near cruise ship ports.  There's an  island that hosts more event caches sponsored by tourists each year than there are physical caches on the island.  Yes, they are fun.  No, they often don't bend any rules, though one could sometimes certainly question the event location as being "in or near" cruise ports (that wording is from the guidelines).  Yeah, OK, I'll name names for once.  That particular guideline appears to be being violated by GC819AC.  <100' from the gangway.  Happens all the time.

 

I've seen plenty of these, also in front of (out of the way) airports even though it's clearly against the updated guidelines. Even worse than logs only by tourists are events with only the CO and his friends signed, no other visitors. Sometimes in "normal" places to have another country in your "hidden caches" list, but often also to have a found cache in an otherwise poor geocaching country, again clearly against the guidelines: 

  • Cannot be set up for the sole purpose of finding geocaches

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, HVILX said:

 

I've seen plenty of these, also in front of (out of the way) airports even though it's clearly against the updated guidelines. Even worse than logs only by tourists are events with only the CO and his friends signed, no other visitors. Sometimes in "normal" places to have another country in your "hidden caches" list, but often also to have a found cache in an otherwise poor geocaching country, again clearly against the guidelines: 

  • Cannot be set up for the sole purpose of finding geocaches

 

Fairly sure the guideline doesn’t apply to the event itself!

 

I find it difficult to understand why some people have such an issue with events held on vacation.  Most, as far as I can see, are set up with a genuine intention to meet other cachers, but you can’t force people to attend.  I can see how too many events having a ‘diluting’ effect, might be an issue, but what other problems do they cause?

  • Upvote 5
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/22/2019 at 10:44 AM, HHL said:
On 1/22/2019 at 9:30 AM, Keystone said:

The CO's home coordinates are quite close to the cache location,

Could be Fake-Coords, right? Most finds of this CO were in Germany.

The CO has found 5 physical caches in that area of Egypt, in 2009, 2013, 2014, 2018.  Not sure why there is so much suspicion about other cachers that are trying to hide caches.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, HVILX said:

I've seen plenty of these, also in front of (out of the way) airports even though it's clearly against the updated guidelines. Even worse than logs only by tourists are events with only the CO and his friends signed, no other visitors. Sometimes in "normal" places to have another country in your "hidden caches" list, but often also to have a found cache in an otherwise poor geocaching country, again clearly against the guidelines: 

  • Cannot be set up for the sole purpose of finding geocaches

 

Which part of the guidelines is it "clearly against"?  I'm looking  HERE  and don't see what the problem is.  It seems that most of the guidelines are about the "intent" of the event cache, and if the CO intends to meet other cachers than I don't see what the hubbub is about.  It's certainly one thing if the CO holds an event that only their friends CAN attend, but it seems like most events are open to anyone and it just happens that only their friends DO attend.

 

Edited by noncentric
typo
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, IceColdUK said:

I find it difficult to understand why some people have such an issue with events held on vacation. 

 

I "organized " a few vacation events and they were all in "difficult" locations. I try to find a location with easy access but even then it's hard to meet people as we prefer destinations away from mass tourism.

We enjoyed meeting people in Greenland, waited in vain on two Galapagos islands and met one American couple on a third. Waited in vain in Stanley (Falklands) but met with one of the locals the following evening. I think it's one of the best ways to meet fellow travelers and locals alike but the way we travel it's not easy planning ahead to make sure we can be at a specific place at a specific time. I'm sure that's the same for many others too which means little or no people might show up.

There are also no maintenance issues for events so comparing them to caches that have containers makes no sense.

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, on4bam said:

 

I "organized " a few vacation events and they were all in "difficult" locations.

By "difficult", I meant in countries/islands/whatever where logging a cache while visiting was bound to prove difficult, or at a minimum, in doubt,  but where setting up an event 'resolved' that problem for the CO.  I'm not sure that's what you mean by "difficult", but that was my intended description earlier. 

 

5 hours ago, on4bam said:

There are also no maintenance issues for events so comparing them to caches that have containers makes no sense.

Only that for the CO, they can serve the same questionable purpose as a vacation cache.  Often, there is little to no local participation ... based upon logs, that participation is even less likely for a tourist-planned event cache.

 

If I planned to set up an event cache on a cruise vacation, I'd want to do it somewhere that I could be better assured of a good meet and greet and story swap with some locals, not half a dozen people who for some reason turn out to be from the same county in Michigan.  I can do that shipboard after dinner.  But that's just me.  At least events held in this manner, providing they give some proximity, aren't inherently working to bend the rules the way physical caches too often are.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ecanderson said:

By "difficult", I meant in countries/islands/whatever where logging a cache while visiting was bound to prove difficult, or at a minimum, in doubt,  but where setting up an event 'resolved' that problem for the CO.  I'm not sure that's what you mean by "difficult", but that was my intended description earlier.

By "difficult" I mean that there's not a lot of activity. However, there were physical caches around to find and the event was not created to "bag a new one".

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, IceColdUK said:

I find it difficult to understand why some people have such an issue with events held on vacation.  Most, as far as I can see, are set up with a genuine intention to meet other cachers, but you can’t force people to attend.

I don't have an issue with holiday events per se. Many (most?) are probably genuine attempts to meet local cachers.

 

However, events in "difficult" areas (as defined by @ecanderson above) are quite often just means to get a "find" for that country. In my community, it's considered more or less "standard procedure" to create an event cache listing when going to holiday in an "exotic" country, to make sure that you can add that country to your find list. Even in situations described here...

11 hours ago, on4bam said:

the way we travel it's not easy planning ahead to make sure we can be at a specific place at a specific time

... some cachers list events. I've seen more than one case where the only "attendee" was the owner, logging something along the lines of "Sorry, our travel plans had changed, so we were at this place only two days later".

 

Call me a cynic, but whenever a fellow cacher tells me that they are going to some remote country (with very few caches in it, if any), and are going to hold an event there to meet other people, my first thought is "Yeah, sure, you just want to get that elusive country into your stats".

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, baer2006 said:

Call me a cynic, but whenever a fellow cacher tells me that they are going to some remote country (with very few caches in it, if any), and are going to hold an event there to meet other people, my first thought is "Yeah, sure, you just want to get that elusive country into your stats".

 

I think there are others who do it just to have some different countries show up in their owned caches column.  But yes, having a guaranteed find in a foreign land is most likely the main reason.  Perhaps related to the rise of "find at least one cache in ___ different countries" challenges.  Maybe if those challenges excluded events, it would cull the problem, but just a little, I bet.

 

Having vacationed in a few foreign lands, I get the temptation.  I was close to logging a DNF on our only cache in Mexico.  I had driven out from San Antonio specifically to try for the cache, carrying a rented bicycle in my rental car to ride the last three miles from the border crossing (I figured $10 for a bike was cheaper than getting Mexican car insurance).  There wasn't another cache for miles around.  So, sure, I was getting ready to be very disappointed when I finally spotted the container.  It would have been much easier to pretend to have a fish fry on the shore of the lake.  

 

For all of the issues raised in this thread, I think it's pretty likely that the reviewers had the same observations.  After all, Groundspeak doesn't look for neophytes to be reviewers.  But if a cache appears technically compliant with the guidelines, there's not much reason to deny publication.  In such cases, I suspect that the reviewers do all they can to suss out issues, then publish with the full knowledge that they may have to intervene at some point down the line.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, baer2006 said:

Call me a cynic, but whenever a fellow cacher tells me that they are going to some remote country (with very few caches in it, if any), and are going to hold an event there to meet other people, my first thought is "Yeah, sure, you just want to get that elusive country into your stats".

 

At least for me, there's no difference. No event has ever given me a new country.

 

1 hour ago, hzoi said:

Perhaps related to the rise of "find at least one cache in ___ different countries" challenges.  Maybe if those challenges excluded events, it would cull the problem, but just a little, I bet.

 

The challenges we have here (or at least the ones I've taken a look at) mention "physical caches only". So an event, virtual or earthcache means nothing to qualify. (reminds me to visit Oman as my only cache there is a virtual).

I also see no point in having an event is there are no physical caches as it's almost a guarantee for not having someone to show up.

The sad part is that in "low caching activity" places most of the physical caches are of very poor quality. Plastic bag with piece of paper in it, empty soda bottle with log, rusty can... CO's of these living 1000's of kilometers away and never coming back after their one off visit. Which brings us back to the #1 post in this thread :ph34r:

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, on4bam said:

reminds me to visit Oman

reminds me of climbing up a hill in brightest sunshine, noons heat and my uncomprehending colleague waiting in the taxi :D

 

On topic: I have a split oppinion on hollyday caches. On one hand I am happy, that they exist. On the other hand I am sometimes not happy about how they exist.

I´ve had some hollidays in countrys where geocaching is not a big thing for locals, or even non existing (thinking of Laos, Cuba and others). There would be simply zero caches to find without hollyday hides. What would be sad.

But I don´t like Holliday hides, even in countries with verry low cache density, wich are not thought well out. Like if they are to exposed to public or environment. Or When they are placed in a way that you feel unsafe when searching.

It´s also problematic when they get frequented highly, because it would raise suspicion to the allways curious natives, make them likely to get muggled.

 

It´s easy to set up a holliday cache, even with all the requirements. A maintenance plan can be forged and I wouldn´t expect from Reviewers to sherlock behind all these submitted plans.

Edited by DerDiedler

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, DerDiedler said:

I´ve had some hollidays in countrys where geocaching is not a big thing for locals, or even non existing (thinking of Laos, Cuba and others). There would be simply zero caches to find without hollyday hides. What would be sad.

It would just mean that you have to choose your holiday destination more carefully. If geocaching is to be an important (or even the primary) part of the vacation, don't go to a place where no caches exist. OTOH, if geocaching is more like "nice to have" ... well, go where you like and if there are caches to find, fine, but if not, also fine.

 

1 hour ago, DerDiedler said:

But I don´t like Holliday hides, even in countries with verry low cache density, wich are not thought well out. Like if they are to exposed to public or environment. Or When they are placed in a way that you feel unsafe when searching.

I agree. I've found vacation caches very close to popular beaches, which obviously get muggled a lot, and where you find either a recent throwdown or nothing at all. I've even seen listings of vacation caches, where nearly all finds were bogus (i.e. DNFs logged as finds, or throwdowns). Searching such a "cache" is not fun, and definitely not geocaching as I like to play it.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, on4bam said:

The sad part is that in "low caching activity" places most of the physical caches are of very poor quality. Plastic bag with piece of paper in it, empty soda bottle with log, rusty can... CO's of these living 1000's of kilometers away and never coming back after their one off visit. Which brings us back to the #1 post in this thread

 

I agree.  With the exception of some quality caches owned by a cacher who owns property on USVI, I saw overall low quality hides in the Virgin Islands, and that was before the hurricane.  

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, baer2006 said:

It would just mean that you have to choose your holiday destination more carefully. If geocaching is to be an important (or even the primary) part of the vacation, don't go to a place where no caches exist. OTOH, if geocaching is more like "nice to have" ... well, go where you like and if there are caches to find, fine, but if not, also fine.

 

What about those of us whose holiday destinations are chosen by a non-caching other half? ;-)

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, IceColdUK said:

 

What about those of us whose holiday destinations are chosen by a non-caching other half? ;-)

 

I've found caches in 30 countries and none of them were holiday destinations.  There were all associated with work I was doing in the country, a layover on the way, or in a country close to where I was working (for example, I was at a workshop in Belgium and had the weekend free so I took a train to Luxembourg for an overnight stay.   When traveling for work, the amount of time available for caching can be very limiting and I have relied on local public transportation (or transportation provide by the organization I'm visiting) in all but one country (Costa Rica, where I rented a vehicle).  Several of those countries had very few opportunities to find a cache (I think there were 6 in the entire country of Ethiopia when I found one there) but I've never held an event for the purposes of adding a country.

Edited by NYPaddleCacher

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

I've never held an event for the purposes of adding a country.

 

Neither have I, but I just don't see why people seem to see this in such a bad light; as if this is somehow reprehensible behaviour.

 

I've held seven events while abroad, and have an eighth next month, on a business trip in New Orleans.  (I'd prefer to attend locally-organised events when travelling, but unfortunately, the stars rarely align.)  Some have been better than others, but they've all been genuine attempts to meet other cachers, AS WELL AS working towards my own personal goal of adding new country / cache type combinations.

 

How does this negatively affect the game or other cachers?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, IceColdUK said:

 

What about those of us whose holiday destinations are chosen by a non-caching other half? 😉

Deal with it ;) ! In a healthy relationship, it should be no problem to come to a mutually agreeable arrangement. My wife is not caching, so I know what I'm talking about (... also, I don't do a lot of caching during our holidays ;) ).

 

Share this post


Link to post

Well as someone who travels extensively with geocaching on my radar, 78 countries so far, and expecting to be at least 4 or 5 new countries to be added this year, I'm extremely glad that "vacation caches" continue to be published.  Hopefully with well thought out and functional maintenance plans.  I do see some that I suspect the stated maintenance plan was rather more words to placate the reviewer than actual substance, but that can happen with all manner of guideline infractions on non-vacation caches too.  I have been and will continue to be ok with helping owners of such caches with their maintenance if necessary because personally I see the value in being taken to these places I might not otherwise have known about.  YMMV

 

Regarding vacation event caches, I've also been guilty of this heinous crime lol.  Recently in Tahiti I held one for new years eve and another for new years day, both at lovely spots fully accissible if local cachers wanted to show up.  Unfortunately none of the local (very small) caching community were available, and as we discovered most of the local COs lived in France anyway!  Bummer, we wanted to meet them.  Personally, I do lol a bit when I see vacation events pop up that are at ridiculous locations at ridiculous times that simply don't allow locals to turn up (eg right in the middle of the city on a work afternoon for the 30 min minimum time) so I don't do that, but all good for those that do.  I also am not interested in having an event cache to get my only find in a country as personally my goal is always to have at least one physical cache find.  I've gone to some rather ridiculous extremes to do so in some countries...

 

Anyway, cache on, and yay for caches in far flung locations that I can go find - thank you cache owners!!!!

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, funkymunkyzone said:

Recently in Tahiti I held one for new years eve and another for new years day, both at lovely spots fully accissible if local cachers wanted to show up.  Unfortunately none of the local (very small) caching community were available, and as we discovered most of the local COs lived in France anyway!

Now THAT is irony. 

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

×