cache in a temporarily inaccessible location

[+Arne1]

What to do with a cache in a temporarily inaccessible location?

I have had several caches at highway rest stops for almost ten years. Three rest stops are currently undergoing complete renovation and cannot be accessed, but this situation will end once the repairs are complete. The caches are currently disabled and will be restored once the repairs are complete. The local reviewer does not like the situation and claims that I am responsible for it due to neglecting maintenance. Is there a reasonable solution? In Germany, I saw the option to archive the cache myself and request its unarchiving once it becomes accessible again. Is this a way to resolve the situation?

[+lee737]

If you want to keep the location, post regular (monthly or so) updates - it would probably pay to add photos of the area showing it has been closed off by authorities.... 

[+Bear and Ragged]

In the UK, it's Temp Disable the cache, put a note to give an approximate date for re-enable, post regular Write Notes (Monthly/6 weekly). 

[Keystone]

I looked at one of your rest area caches that had a note from your local Reviewer.  I saw that your update note was posted just six minutes before the Reviewer posted their standard "form letter" note asking about the status of the cache.  I hope this is the explanation - the notes "crossed in the mail."

 

Here in Ohio USA, the state highway department is upgrading its rest areas.  There's at least six caches that have been temporarily disabled for many months.  Reviewers ask for periodic updates so that we know the cache owner is monitoring the situation.  Personally, I ask for updates at least every two months.  If an update is requested but not provided within four weeks, then I would archive the cache page.

[+JL_HSTRE]

You can probably find a DOT webpage about the project that will let (and cache page visitors and the Reviewer) know how long the project will last.

 

Depending on the location of the cache and the extent of the renovations at the rest area, archiving the cache might be a good idea. These projects often last a couple years and afterwards the place is unrecognizable to how it looked before. In such cases the cache has been bulldozed and a completely new listing is warranted.

 

If your rest area cache is on a perimeter fence or a forested area left untouched then maybe it's worth leaving it Disabled.

[+CAVinoGal]

1 hour ago, JL_HSTRE said:

These projects often last a couple years and afterwards the place is unrecognizable to how it looked before. In such cases the cache has been bulldozed and a completely new listing is warranted.

 

If your rest area cache is on a perimeter fence or a forested area left untouched then maybe it's worth leaving it Disabled.

 

Ahhh, rest area caches!! I agreed with JL_HSTRE - depending on the length of time and the scope of the renovation, a completely new cache may be in order.  In other words, archive the first and create a new cache when the renovation is complete.  And if the renovation doesn't affect the cache directly (meaning it's left untouched, simply inaccessible because the rest area is closed) then disabling with periodic updates to your reviewer would be the way to go. 

[+barefootjeff]

11 hours ago, Arne1 said:

The local reviewer does not like the situation and claims that I am responsible for it due to neglecting maintenance. Is there a reasonable solution?

 

The note from your reviewer is probably boilerplate text that gets posted to all caches that have been disabled for more than a few weeks, so don't read too much into you being responsible for causing the problem. You just need to provide frequent (usually monthly) updates on the situation and your reviewer should be okay with it.

 

I said "just", but it can start to feel like a battle of attrition as the months go by. I have a multi (GC6XHHJ) set along a section of the Great North Walk where it follows the bank of Mooney Mooney Creek through Brisbane Water National Park and the public reserve around an old dam where the actual cache is hidden. In March 2022, prolonged heavy rain flooded a tributary creek and washed a bridge off its foundations, resulting in the closure of that entire section of the trail until a replacement bridge could be installed, so I did the "right thing" and disabled my cache. I was aware of the monthly update requirement so I marked my wall calendar to remind me when updates were needed in the months ahead.

 

In spite of never missing an update in the 13 months it took the responsible government department to get the new bridge in place, I still got four Reviewer Notes, the first one telling me to "Please either repair/replace this cache, or archive it (using the archive listing link in the upper right) within the next 4 weeks so that someone else can place a cache in the area, and geocachers can once again enjoy visiting this location." The subsequent ones were a bit nicer, thanking me for the updates and reminding me that missing one would result in the cache being archived without further notice. In the end I posted 17 WNs, mostly saying "another 28 days and nothing to report", plus an OM when I went out there as soon as the trail reopened to make sure all my waypoints and the cache itself were okay.

 

After all that, the cache has only had one find since, that being in October 2023, so I'm really left wondering whether it would have been a lot easier and less nerve-wracking to have just archived it on the day of the flood. The system really doesn't make it easy for COs in situations like this when the disabling is outside their control.

[+Smitherington]

When they are doing a rest area renovation one does not have access to the rest area and may not know if the cache is affected or not. Unless it is old I would archive it and wait until they are done and replace it or use the old one (refresh it) and call it version 2. You may have to ask your reviewer to hold the spot. That way regular travelers will have a new one to stop for. 

[+Numanoid]

If there are no other caches in the area, move them to a suitable place outside the rest stop area and enable them. Then return them once the construction finishes.
Just remember, you can only move them in 161m steps by yourself

[+Bear and Ragged]

18 hours ago, Numanoid said:

If there are no other caches in the area, move them to a suitable place outside the rest stop area and enable them. Then return them once the construction finishes.
Just remember, you can only move them in 161m steps by yourself

Beware, make 'several' moves, even 2 just  under 161m to 'try' to get around the reviewers getting involved, the reviewers DO get notified!

[+JL_HSTRE]

On 7/5/2025 at 6:20 PM, barefootjeff said:

I said "just", but it can start to feel like a battle of attrition as the months go by. I have a multi (GC6XHHJ) set along a section of the Great North Walk where it follows the bank of Mooney Mooney Creek through Brisbane Water National Park and the public reserve around an old dam where the actual cache is hidden. In March 2022, prolonged heavy rain flooded a tributary creek and washed a bridge off its foundations, resulting in the closure of that entire section of the trail until a replacement bridge could be installed, so I did the "right thing" and disabled my cache. I was aware of the monthly update requirement so I marked my wall calendar to remind me when updates were needed in the months ahead.

 

In spite of never missing an update in the 13 months it took the responsible government department to get the new bridge in place, I still got four Reviewer Notes, the first one telling me to "Please either repair/replace this cache, or archive it (using the archive listing link in the upper right) within the next 4 weeks so that someone else can place a cache in the area, and geocachers can once again enjoy visiting this location." The subsequent ones were a bit nicer, thanking me for the updates and reminding me that missing one would result in the cache being archived without further notice. In the end I posted 17 WNs, mostly saying "another 28 days and nothing to report", plus an OM when I went out there as soon as the trail reopened to make sure all my waypoints and the cache itself were okay.

 

Each volunteer Reviewer probably deals (in some way) with dozens of caches daily and hundreds of others on the first of the month. Caches often spanning a state/province, and sometimes multiple countries. Probably few, if any, of the Reviewers have encyclopedic memory. So it's not surprising they sometimes lose track of the situation with any one particular cache. 

 

I expect that, even if the CO has been diligently posting updates and the Reviewer fully understands the situation, the Reviewer needs to leave at least a Quarterly boilerplate reminder. This serves as due diligence on their part and probably bumps it back down a list, while also showing the CO and other cachers that the Reviewer is indeed monitoring the situation. A little bureaucratic, but understandable.

[+barefootjeff]

47 minutes ago, JL_HSTRE said:

Each volunteer Reviewer probably deals (in some way) with dozens of caches daily and hundreds of others on the first of the month. Caches often spanning a state/province, and sometimes multiple countries. Probably few, if any, of the Reviewers have encyclopedic memory. So it's not surprising they sometimes lose track of the situation with any one particular cache.

 

From what our reviewer said at an event earlier this year, I gather the process is now automated from the moment a disabled cache is put on notice to the archival log being posted if the CO misses an update.

 

In the circumstances I just wanted to avoid the stigma of a having the cache archived by a reviewer, and if it needed to be archived I wanted to be the one to do it. If a similar situation were to arise again where the area around one of my caches was closed for more than just a few months, I'd take the easy way out by just archiving it from the get-go and going out to retrieve it when the area eventually reopened.

[+Numanoid]

4 hours ago, Bear and Ragged said:

Beware, make 'several' moves, even 2 just  under 161m to 'try' to get around the reviewers getting involved, the reviewers DO get notified!

Yeah, but, in my experience, most of them don´t care if you move them just a couple of hundred meters.

[Keystone]

34 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

From what our reviewer said at an event earlier this year, I gather the process is now automated from the moment a disabled cache is put on notice to the archival log being posted if the CO misses an update.

1.  This is optional.  I don't use this particular automation tool.  I never let a cache get archived without my human eyes telling me that it's the right thing to do.

2.  Emphasis should be placed on the words "if the CO misses an update."  If the CO posts ANY sort of response to the cache page, then a manual review by a human is required again.

 

(Note, however, that many reviewers are dogs.)

[Keystone]

32 minutes ago, Numanoid said:

Yeah, but, in my experience, most of them don´t care if you move them just a couple of hundred meters.

Multiple moves of a single cache by the CO, instead of the published advice to contact their Reviewer, has at least two consequences:

(1)  It's more work for the Reviewer.  We have to resolve each and every one of the notifications about a cache with updated coordinates.

(2)  It creates a degree of distrust by the Reviewer towards the CO.  I like the CO's who write to me for assistance, as instructed, better than the CO's who "march" their coordinates to a new location that hasn't been reviewed.

[+Hynz]

On 7/11/2025 at 1:01 AM, Keystone said:

I don't use this particular automation tool.  I never let a cache get archived without my human eyes telling me that it's the right thing to do.

Thanks for being diligent.

I'm not sure if this was already disclosed but the statement "no cache is archived without human interaction of a reviewer" seems no longer to be true, right?

Let's hope that those reviewers using that automatic archiving tool are appreciative being confronted with borderline situations of archived caches.

 

[Keystone]

3 hours ago, Hynz said:

the statement "no cache is archived without human interaction of a reviewer" seems no longer to be true, right?

 

You quoted an excerpt from a longer post that I wrote.  See the rest of that post for the answer.

[+Hynz]

46 minutes ago, Keystone said:

4 hours ago, Hynz said:

the statement "no cache is archived without human interaction of a reviewer" seems no longer to be true, right?

 

You quoted an excerpt from a longer post that I wrote.  See the rest of that post for the answer.

Sorry, in case you want to convey that the answer is "no" then I can't see it. Maybe it's a language thing. I really don't want to be confrontational.

But your (not so much longer) post confirms that there exists indeed a tool for reviewers (which you don't use) which archives caches without compulsory reviewer interaction at the moment of actual archiving.

The only interpretation for a "no" might be that you already consider putting a cache in that tool for eventually archiving in the future already satisfies the "human interaction".