We need more cache owners like this ???

[+L0ne.R]

Owner Maintenance

01/05/2020

I spent this afternoon hiking Section 1 of the SR Trail and checking up on my geocaches. I confirmed they were present, checked coordinates, checked the container, cleaned out any junk, and added new swag if appropriate. This cache is in good shape and ready to be found.
….G***H***

[fendmar]

How new are they, because I feel like that might be pertinent?

[+L0ne.R]

I would love it if there were a way to filter for OMs in the last 4 months. 

 

I know most will be non-OMs--the owner didn't actually do maintenance, but some might be the G***H*** type. I might consider a geovacation again if I could find places with (non-micro) caches that have recently been maintained by owners like this. 

[+rapotek]

25 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

I would love it if there were a way to filter for OMs in the last 4 months. 

 

I know most will be non-OMs--the owner didn't actually do maintenance, but some might be the G***H*** type. I might consider a geovacation again if I could find places with (non-micro) caches that have recently been maintained by owners like this. 

 

When my first caches have been published I checked them once a week or two on regular basis for almost a year (I had weekend walks with a stroller). But logged an OM only when I fixed something, a camo for example, while simple "checked and everything was alright" visits were a silent ones.

[+barefootjeff]

3 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

I would love it if there were a way to filter for OMs in the last 4 months. 

 

I would think any cache that needs maintenance every four months (or less) is poorly designed for its environment.

[+L0ne.R]

19 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I would think any cache that needs maintenance every four months (or less) is poorly designed for its environment.

 

Quote

I confirmed they were present, checked coordinates, checked the container, cleaned out any junk, and added new swag if appropriate. This cache is in good shape and ready to be found.

 

It's about checking to see if maybe it needs maintenance. I can vouch that GH uses great containers that rarely need fixing. But every 4 months it's a good idea to have a look. Where I live it's a good idea to check after the winter thaw.  

 

As you've experienced, sometimes the cache is not where it's supposed to be, or not covered up like it should be.

I've had the experience of finding my cache contents in rough shape and no mention of the condition in online logs. A couple of times after bubble containers burst, a few times after someone decided my logbook needed to be wrapped in a baggie that was too big for the container and ended up compromising the Lock&Lock seal--everything was soaked including the logbook. One time the hanging device on one of my caches had broken. And most often the inside of the cache could use a wipe down and junk removed. 

 

It's nice to see an OM that confirms the cache is in good shape.  And I'd like to spend my time and money on those types of cache experiences, so a way to find them would be nice. 

Edited March 5, 2020 by L0ne.R

[+barefootjeff]

5 minutes ago, L0ne.R said:

It's nice to see an OM that confirms the cache is in good shape. 

 

I was doing that on one of mine over an 18-month period until I realised I was talking to myself and saying the same thing over and over again.

 

 

Most of my caches get far fewer finds than visits from me. Of my 39 active hides, 27 have had no finds this year and 3 of those had no finds last year either. I generally only log an OM if I've done something to the cache (or listing), or if there's been a natural calamity (fire, flood, etc) nearby and I want to report that the cache survived unscathed. I try to check on my more muggle-prone caches after each school holidays but most of the time there are no issues. Logging repeated OMs for every routine visit would be overkill on caches that might only get one or two finds a year if that.

[+kunarion]

41 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

I would think any cache that needs maintenance every four months (or less) is poorly designed for its environment.

I hope it’s OK to check, even if it’s poorly designed.  I have a cache in a swampy area, and it has a remote doorbell and button.  Lots of moving parts.  Lots of mud and water.  And animals.  Sometimes design is an ongoing process. 

[+barefootjeff]

19 minutes ago, kunarion said:

I hope it’s OK to check, even if it’s poorly designed.  I have a cache in a swampy area, and it has a remote doorbell and button.  Lots of moving parts.  Lots of mud and water.  And animals.  Sometimes design is an ongoing process. 

 

Yeah, there'll always be exceptions. One of mine has battery-powered special effects so it gets regular visits to replace the batteries, but I'm not logging OMs for those as it would spoil the surprise. Another is in a damp cave that's subject to flash flooding in heavy rain so I check on it whenever there's been a storm. It's designed to survive in that environment, although there's been occasional minor physical damage that's compromised its waterproofing. That one's still on the learning curve even after nearly five years in the field.

[+L0ne.R]

On 3/5/2020 at 3:03 PM, barefootjeff said:

 

I would think any cache that needs maintenance every four months (or less) is poorly designed for its environment.

 

I should add that the point isn't so much the months as it is being able to filter for caches with OMs.

 

However, being able to also choose within x-number of months would be important because an OM 2 years ago doesn't help much. 

Edited March 6, 2020 by L0ne.R

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, L0ne.R said:

 

I should add that the point isn't so much the months as being able to filter for caches with OMs.

 

However, being able to also choose within x-number of months would be important because an OM 2 years ago doesn't help much. 

 

Just out of curiosity, I've done a search of physical caches I don't own within 10km of home that are more than 5 years old and have no outstanding NMs. There are 61 of them, most hidden in bushland although there are a few urban hides amongst them.

 

 

Of those 61, 28 have never had an OM log. For the remaining 33 that have, this is the distribution of when the most recent one was logged:

• 2020      1
• 2019      4
• 2018      5
• 2017      2
• 2016      1
• 2015      7
• Earlier  13

Of the 61, this is the distribution by year of the most recent finds:

• 2020    20
• 2019    33
• 2018      6
• 2017      2

So I don't think sorting by most recent OM would be overly useful around here.

 

[+cerberus1]

9 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

I would think any cache that needs maintenance every four months (or less) is poorly designed for its environment.

Agreed.   

 - And generalizations like "most cache owners don't do owner maintenance" doesn't  do much to help our hobby either...

I have a cache that has two large lock n locks inside a huge rural mailbox. How many times have people seen mailboxes with issues ?   

Our lengthy paddle-to has a 50cal that at one time was under water (it's at a dam) for months.

 After the water finally receded,  I checked to find it completely dry.  Replaced it anyway.    

If finders would use the action logs provided, there'd be little need for some to make silly impositions on cache owners...

 

 

Edited March 6, 2020 by cerberus1

[+cerberus1]

12 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

I would love it if there were a way to filter for OMs in the last 4 months. 

I know most will be non-OMs--the owner didn't actually do maintenance, but some might be the G***H*** type. I might consider a geovacation again if I could find places with (non-micro) caches that have recently been maintained by owners like this. 

5 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

I should add that the point isn't so much the months as being able to filter for caches with OMs.

However, being able to also choose within x-number of months would be important because an OM 2 years ago doesn't help much. 

 

Maybe it's just me, but if an OM can simply be a click every once in a while, I don't see where your plan works.   

We're happily surprised when we find a good one.  When we don't, we say so in a log.  That's what they're for.

 - It's  worked out for us  (and with a lot less stress...)  than assuming "most" are in poor condition. 

We'd find another hobby if we thought that way...     

[+CAVinoGal]

Within a mile of my house there are about 2 dozen geocaches that I pass by on my (almost) daily walk.  My son, my husband, and I are CO's for some of them, the rest belong to others , most of whom I know and can contact quickly if need be.  Most of the containers I can see as I walk without being obvious, some require a bit of stealth.  Occasionally I'll peek at the logs and check to see if they are damp or full or whatever.  I rarely log anything - a weekly update (Write note, Owner maintenance, whatever) seems overkill.  When I DO something (replace a full or soggy log, or a broken container) then I write the appropriate log.  Otherwise I just walk by and note to myself that all is well!

[+fizzymagic]

Quote

It's about checking to see if maybe it needs maintenance. I can vouch that GH uses great containers that rarely need fixing. But every 4 months it's a good idea to have a look.

 

I am, frankly, surprised that you are saying we need more geocachers with mental health problems.  IMO, we do not need more OCD cachers who obsessively check on their caches every month just to be sure everything is OK. 

 

What we need more of is cachers who hide caches in good containers that will last, in good hiding spots that will not be muggled, and who are willing to go check on their caches when a problem is reported.

 

OCD is not a fun disorder, and wishing it on other people seems rather churlish to me.  We do not need people like you encouraging it.

Edited March 8, 2020 by fizzymagic

[+rapotek]

2 hours ago, fizzymagic said:

 

I am, frankly, surprised that you are saying we need more geocachers with mental health problems.  IMO, we do not need more OCD cachers who obsessively check on their caches every month just to be sure everything is OK. 

 

What we need more of is cachers who hide caches in good containers that will last, in good hiding spots that will not be muggled, and who are willing to go check on their caches when a problem is reported.

 

OCD is not a fun disorder, and wishing it on other people seems rather churlish to me.  We do not need people like you encouraging it.

 

From Help Center, Ownership after publication:

Quote

To make sure your geocache is in good health, monitor the logs and visit the cache site periodically.

 

When I was starting geocaching, I was told (or read somewhere, I don't remember now), that once a month is a reasonable period. Do you suggest that HQ recommends us OCD behaviors?

I do not periodic checks by now, but I feel that I should to be a responsible cache owner and to AVOID problems being reported rather than having to respond to them.

[+barefootjeff]

1 hour ago, rapotek said:

When I was starting geocaching, I was told (or read somewhere, I don't remember now), that once a month is a reasonable period.

 

I currently own 39 active caches, all of them bushland hides and 29 T3 or higher. Some I can check in pairs, but others take a full day just to visit one. If I checked on them all once a month there wouldn't be much time for anything else.

 

A micro that gets hundreds of finds a month might well need a monthly check, but a remote ammo can or similar that gets somewhere between 0 and 1 finds a year can perhaps get by with a little less CO attention.

[+cerberus1]

11 hours ago, rapotek said:

When I was starting geocaching, I was told (or read somewhere, I don't remember now), that once a month is a reasonable period. Do you suggest that HQ recommends us OCD behaviors?

I do not periodic checks by now, but I feel that I should to be a responsible cache owner and to AVOID problems being reported rather than having to respond to them.

 

I'm guessing maybe someone who really didn't know.       "Reasonable" if often-visited 1.5 trads, but not practical elsewhere... 

[+rapotek]

19 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

 

I'm guessing maybe someone who really didn't know.       "Reasonable" if often-visited 1.5 trads, but not practical elsewhere... 

 

I think that depends on the caches you own and where they are placed. By the way: it's not the source of my information, but an example - Geocaching Official Blog:

Quote

Maintaining your geocache doesn’t have to be a pain. Think about working it into a monthly routine or you can even see if some of your geo-buddies will check in on it for you.

 

[+barefootjeff]

41 minutes ago, rapotek said:

 

I think that depends on the caches you own and where they are placed. By the way: it's not the source of my information, but an example - Geocaching Official Blog:

 

 

From that blog entry:

 

Quote

There’s a way to help stop “Needs Maintenance” logs: preventive care. If your geocache will not be accessible due to seasonal weather conditions, note this on the geocache page.  Also, be sure to check in on your geocache and make sure:

• The geocache container is still watertight
• Contents are free of debris
• There’s plenty of space in the logbook for more entries

Maintaining your geocache doesn’t have to be a pain. Think about working it into a monthly routine or you can even see if some of your geo-buddies will check in on it for you. Think of it this way: owning a geocache is kind of like owning a roller coaster: take care of it and it will keep making people happy for years!

 

Those three points can all be addressed with good cache design and choice of hiding place so that they don't need frequent visits by the CO or their geo-buddies (community maintenance anyone?) to achieve, for example this one:

 

 

It's in the roof of a cave so whether it's watertight or not doesn't matter. It's ant-tight, though, so is unlikely to fill with debris of its own accord. Its logbook is an A7-sized 160-leaf "Tradie" notebook, and with the cache only having had 8 finds in the year it's been there, it's not likely to fill up anytime soon.

 

Even caches that are exposed to water can be long-lasting through careful choice of container and placement. Some of mine have taken a bit of experimentation to see what works in the location and what doesn't, and some are still a work in progress, but my goal is to have hides that remain trouble-free for many years.

Edited March 8, 2020 by barefootjeff

[+cerberus1]

28 minutes ago, rapotek said:

I think that depends on the caches you own and where they are placed.

By the way: it's not the source of my information, but an example - Geocaching Official Blog:

Maintaining your geocache doesn’t have to be a pain. Think about working it into a monthly routine or you can even see if some of your geo-buddies will check in on it for you.

 

A little more accurate than that seven year old blog may be:

"To make sure your geocache is in good health, monitor the logs and visit the cache site periodically." 

 - As per the current guidelines.         

Makes it common sense,  instead of a general statement for all cache types and D/T, as periodically means from time to time or occasionally.

 

[+TerraViators]

On 3/8/2020 at 12:11 AM, fizzymagic said:

we do not need more OCD cachers who obsessively check on their caches every month

This is not a symptom of OCD.

 

You're correct, OCD is a serious disorder.  When we begin throwing it around like it's a personality quirk, it diminishes the seriousness of the mental health disorder.