Caches not being maintained

[Guest brokenwing]

There are at least two caches in my area that have obviously been plundered, and yet they are still listed. On one of them, the cache owner has even responded and verified that the cache is gone. I feel that they have a responsiblity to either replace the cache or archive it. Am I wrong for feeling this way?

 

Along the same note, there is another cache that while I cannot verify it is MIA, I'm pretty sure it's gone. The cache owner has not responded to any inquiry. What to do?

[Guest cache_ninja]

wierd, well, if you post in the log on the url that its been plundered, then, problem is solved superficially..maybe they want to leave it up so people can still check out a nice spot, or, they plan to replace it..its wierd that they don't ant to put a note on it in the meantime saying its gone, so, well, why dont you do it?

[Guest brokenwing]

quote:

---

Originally posted by cache_ninja:

wierd, well, if you post in the log on the url that its been plundered, then, problem is solved superficially..maybe they want to leave it up so people can still check out a nice spot, or, they plan to replace it..its wierd that they don't ant to put a note on it in the meantime saying its gone, so, well, why dont you do it?

---

 

I have posted in the log. This may keep others from trying to find them, but the cache owners have done nothing about the situation. I bothered by this mostly because these caches continue to show up at the top of my list since I've bagged everything else close.

[Guest jeremy]

the cache owner with no reply, give them a week or so and let me know. I'll make an additional request then archive it.

 

There are so many caches now it's hard for me to monitor the ones that have been logged missing, so I rely on the players to let me know if they're obviously gone.

 

Jeremy

[Guest Cache-potato]

one important note, a cache may not be indeed missing just because a couple people failed to find it .... $.02

[Guest brokenwing]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cache-potato:

one important note, a cache may not be indeed missing just because a couple people failed to find it .... $.02

---

 

But in that case, shouldn't the cache owner check the cache and verify it's still there?

[Guest logscaler]

I agree with brokenwing. I did check and verify mine when reported MIA. It was still there but you never know.

[Guest brokenwing]

On one of these, by the way, I found two items on the ground in the vicinity of the posted coordinates that were logged as left in the cache, but did not find the cache box. Finding items that should have been in it, but not finding the cache itself, makes it seem pretty obvious to me that the cache is MIA.

 

By the way, I logged this as not found, but if the cache owner never does anything, should I change my log entry to found???

 

[This message has been edited by brokenwing (edited 28 July 2001).]

[Guest jeremy]

Obviously each cache should be scrutinized before reporting the cache as missing. However, there are some caches that have been logged missing by multiple individuals with no finds in between, or lack of response from the cache owner.

 

Every cache should be treated on a case to case basis.

 

Jeremy

[Guest bearboy]

I have three logs at one of my caches.All 3 have said that they could not locate the cache.I went back to the site and the GPS zeroed out at the site.It was still there untouched.I thought it might have been raided or something.This is the only one of my ten that this has happened to so far.I intentionally made this one more difficult than all the others.I dont feel it needs to be archived though.This is my IOSCO CACHE IN MICHIGAN.

[Guest Guppy]

How often should I be checking on my caches?

[Guest Paul Lamble]

I've hidden 6 caches in the Kansas City area. That may be my limit because I feel strongly that you MUST visit your own caches about once a month to make sure they are still there, still in good condition, restock, clean up around them, check for adverse conditions like erosion, and so on. Of course, I'm one of those fussy types who won't place a cache without first getting permission of the park manager, so I feel doubly obligated to fulfill my responsibility for the caches.

 

Unfortunately, it will take a complete Saturday morning for me to visit all 6 of mine. This is time I cannot spend finding other caches, but since I feel the obligation, I take that trade off.

 

I'd say once a month is maybe a bit too frequently, at least during the summer months. All of mine are in areas of intermittent tree cover and unbroken bug infestation. I don't see a lot of visitors to my caches right now. It may pick up as the fall and winter weather come. However, I read the logs to see if anyone reports problems with my caches. I seem to have hidden them pretty well, so a lot of people report that they can't find them. I begin to worry that they've been removed. Then someone logs in reporting it found.

 

I think an acknowledged obligation to maintain your own caches, and the follow through of actually doing so on a regular basis, is part of the way we're going to win over the National Park Service to allow us to place caches on those lands.

 

I've seen entries here by people who travel around the country leaving caches wherever they go saying they then expect others to take the responsibility of maintaining them since the original folks won't be back that way again. I liken that to leaving babies in every town and expecting others to take care of them since you don't plan to return.

 

I can understand the idea of hiding a cache that you can't/won't maintain, but I think that is wrong.

 

Paul Lamble

[Guest bunkerdave]

ailing the owner, but how do you write someone and tell them their cache items sucked? It may be that what you thought was junk was what they originally put in the cache. WIth all the growth in my area, I have seen some strange things. It is a public game, after all.

[Guest bunkerdave]

ailing the owner, but how do you write someone and tell them their cache items sucked? It may be that what you thought was junk was what they originally put in the cache. WIth all the growth in my area, I have seen some strange things. It is a public game, after all.

[Guest keithpilot]

what about entertaining the possiblity of "co-owning" a cache?

 

For example, Molly Fishbucket of Miami, FL places a cache in Marblehead, MA while on vacation. She goes back to Florida, never to visit the cache again, but fellow geocacher JuJu Cachew emails Molly and tells her that he will help maintain the cache, in return for co-owner rights on the top of the cache page. JuJu makes his contributions to the cache maintenance, Molly can send JuJu items to put in from time to time, and we are all happier...

 

Has this been discussed before?

 

Keith

[Guest k2dave]

1st here a plundered cache that the owner doesn't live close to:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=663

 

That said I have placed one that I wouldn't get back to too soon if needed and have authorized other seekers to move the cache (a little) if needed. Perhaps we can leave in the cache web page if we would apporve of others moving or maintaining it.

[Guest cache_ninja]

i see nothing wrong with hiding a cache somewhere you don't plan to go back to for a very long time, if ever. i view all caches as temporary in nature anyway. they are there to create fun/and experience for people while they are there, not to be some permanent fixture. you find a nice spot, put something there to share it w/others.

 

a great many people have visited my caches and have had good experiences, and if someone logs that one is plundered,and i can't get back to it, or dont want to, i just take it off the site, no big deal. at least the people who got there previously had a good time and thats what its all about. If someone can't find it, I'll give them specific instructions where it is, if they still can't find it, I'll just take it off the site, again, no big deal.

 

I'll also add that when geocaching was getting started, i tried to get to places and states that didn't have any caches there yet, many other people did this as well...I knew i wasn't going back, but I also knew people would read/hear about geocaching, try to find one in their area, and if there wasn't something to find, chances are, they wouldn't get involved...

 

as far as critisizing others cache items, that seems pretty petty and silly to me..if its obvious they made an effort to find a nice spot, thats all that matters in my opinon..its nice if someone puts fancy stuff i suppose, but not everyone can afford to do that. and if you are really into geocaching for finding "treasure" i think you'll be disappointed. personally i'd rather have items that had some character, or usefulness, or just toys, but whatever, a log book by itself is just as good..

 

i have plenty of caches i will probably never go back to, ever. people seem to be enjoying them and logging visits. i really dont know what "maintaining" is necessary unless you put it in a dumb spot. in the very rare case where its pundered and there is actually still stuff around, most people have enough sense to gather it up...if you are concerned about the enviromental impact(ie if you again, put it somewhere kinda dumb and people are blazing trails), post a note and ask subsequent seekers to post the conditions/ask if there is a trail to cache etc, if there is, remove it from the site. again, no big deal. you can go back in 50 years and see if its still there....once i put my initial items in, i'm done, people bring and take what they want, i dont understand the above comment about cache contents, it seems as if you are implying that the cache owner should be re-visiting the cache to make sure what people left is up to par, which is pretty silly in my opnion..geocaching is a community thing, its not just about me. if someone goes out there and takes everything from my cache and doesnt replace anything, oh well, that just reflects on them..most geocachers, ive found, are good, rational people, and in this instance they would just leave more stuff.

 

but whatever, everyone is goign to continue to do what they please, as will I.

 

[This message has been edited by cache_ninja (edited 29 July 2001).]

[Guest makaio]

True, most of us, if we found a cache had been plundered and items strewn about, would make an effort to clean up the area and notify the cache owner so he/she can archive it. The point that some seem to be missing is this. If you place a cache full of items anywhere, it's your responsibilty to be sure that when the time comes to remove it (either because you decide to or because someone else decided to trash it), no trace of said cache is left there. As a cache owner, you can't rely on others to clean it up for you. People might, but people might not. To place a cache somewhere and forget about it (physically) is simply irresponsible. Simply archiving the cache does not constitute removing the cache.

 

[This message has been edited by makaio (edited 29 July 2001).]

[Guest cache_ninja]

of course, i agree. i was suggesting archiving it as a solution if its plundered in the instance where its completely gone, or can't be found at all. as i said, i view these thigns as temporary, i envision a time when i might take a week or so and make a tour of all my caches, and remove them all. but for the immediate future, there are some i can't get to anytime soon,and I don't view it as necessary to visit them once a month for any reason whatsoever... and enough people have visited them, live nearby, and have generally been so appreciative that they got into geocaching becuase of said caches, if someone notes its plundered and some stuff is still there and doesnt have the common sense to gather it up, there is always a huge list of people i can ask nearby to check it out(probably suggest they take whatever's left and use it to plant a cache there of their own)...so i guess we differ on this point, but i think in this scenerio it will always be resolved, and if i do need to eventually travel somewhere to take care of a plundered cache so be it...but i dont think it will be necessary.

 

[This message has been edited by cache_ninja (edited 29 July 2001).]