Jump to content

What does it take for you to archive a cache?


Exocet

Recommended Posts

That's the question that Chad, my partner-in-crime and I have been talking about lately.

 

It came up because we have 8 active caches spread out over a very wide area. Some caches are remote, some require a considerable hike to get to the cache, etc. We realized that maintaining the caches that we've placed is something we need to do, but can't even consider doing if we can't find the time to visually inspect them.

 

In particular, we feel that our home town, Portland, OR, is quickly reaching its Plimsoll line and can't really take any more caches. Either the "really good" locations are taken or it just doesn't feel right to put a cache down when there's another a mile away.

 

So we talked about archiving caches for a variety of reasons, which I will list below. I'd like to hear your repsonses. Would you consider archiving a cache (or have you?) for the same reasons we would?

 

- A cache has had very few visitors. For whatever reason, the location, cache or both are unappealing based on the cache's web page. Archive it and let someone else find a slightly better location or get a better cache together.

 

- A cache has had a ton of visitors. Archive it and let someone else have their turn - maybe they'll do an even better job?

 

- You just found the best location ever, but you've already got what you feel is the maximum number of caches you can actively maintain. Archive the one you like the least and go place the new cache. Or archive the oldest cache.

 

There are the usual reasons: bomb squad blew your cache up; someone stole your cache; animals trashed your cache, etc. Those are understandable. I want to hear from both the pro's and con's people on archiving a cache simply because you feel you're at your Plimsoll line - any more and you'll sink. Or because you like your cache location so much, you want someone else to be able put a cache there and feel the same way.

 

"Strictly hand-held is the style I go." --Beastie Boys

Link to comment

- A cache has had very few visitors. For whatever reason, the location, cache or both are unappealing based on the cache's web page. Archive it and let someone else find a slightly better location or get a better cache together.

 

As long as you're not thinking of archiving Pechuck cache. I've already bought a new tent for that one. Now if only the snow above 3000 ft would melt.

 

all rights reserved, all wrongs reversed

Link to comment

...I'm glad to hear you're going after Pechuck. And no, I don't think we'll ever archive it. Even at one or two visitors a year, which would be considered abysmal by most, is fine for this one. It is not an easy cache.

 

But really, it's not that I'm worried about what *I'm* going to do with my own caches. I just want to hear if anyone else has considered archiving one of their own caches for reasons similar to mine. And I want people to think about archiving because the area is saturated or because they've had a 100 visitors and now it's time to let someone else have their 15 minutes.

 

"Strictly hand-held is the style I go." --Beastie Boys

Link to comment

If you put a good cache fairly close (1 mile, you said) to an existing so-so cache, you'll probly both get more hits. I LIKE having two within walking distance, since I can get two in one driving trip. One multi-cache I went on even advertised for another guy's cache, since you were in the same park. It was an unexpected bonus, since I don't live near the area and the multi was all I was expecting to do.

 

But Web-ling is right... there are no hard and fast rules to this. Put out the best cache you can, wherever you think it should go. If it's near someone else's (and I don't count a mile as "near"), well, there's no rule against that.

 

> Martin (Magellan 330)

Don't have time to program and record your shows while geocaching? Get a TiVo!

Link to comment

I too hope to head after Pechuck when the weather gets a little better, but that's not what you want to know.

 

I would archive a cache if I thought the area was being abused by the number of visitors coming to it. Have actually thought about this in relation to my June Lake cache.

 

On another note, I have also realized that there is a limit to how many caches I can maintain. I archived the Stormtrooper cache recently, because it had disappeared, but I was frustrated with that cache for many a reason, and will carefully evaluate whether I replace it or not. It just took up to much time to maintain. This was in part due to it's location, and the distance from my doorstep. That all to say - I think all your reasons for potentially archiving a cache are sound.

Link to comment

I think i know what you mean. My cache at the Mt. Angel Abbey has had a lot of visitors. Even though the cache hunt intself isn't very creative or that much fun, the area is incredible. It includes Oregon's most important building (architecturally speaking). I don't plan on archiving it anytime soon. But if someone came to me with a really cool cache idea for there, then i would totally archive mine and give someone else a chance.

 

all rights reserved, all wrongs reversed

Link to comment

Actually, I archived a cache today for none of these reasons! It was a Christmas ornament cache, and while I considered leaving it to celebrate Christmas in July, right now it's March, the snow is melting, the park is going to get busy and therefore the cache is more likely to be stumbled upon by accident. I'm thinking I'll place it again, but in a different spot, for next Christmas.

 

I think all of the reasons you've listed are valid for archiving a cache (although if I had the problem of too many visitors, I'd be selfish and bask in the glory of all the "thanks for the great cache" emails I'd receive!). And there's a cache or two I'd like to place out of town this summer, and I really don't want to have to think about a city park cache. I placed it for Christmas, the log comments showed it achieved what I wanted it to and I'm happy with that ... so, it's done for now.

 

That you even started this thread shows that you're a responsible and thoughtful cacher (not that there was any doubt icon_smile.gif

Link to comment

Actually, I archived a cache today for none of these reasons! It was a Christmas ornament cache, and while I considered leaving it to celebrate Christmas in July, right now it's March, the snow is melting, the park is going to get busy and therefore the cache is more likely to be stumbled upon by accident. I'm thinking I'll place it again, but in a different spot, for next Christmas.

 

I think all of the reasons you've listed are valid for archiving a cache (although if I had the problem of too many visitors, I'd be selfish and bask in the glory of all the "thanks for the great cache" emails I'd receive!). And there's a cache or two I'd like to place out of town this summer, and I really don't want to have to think about a city park cache. I placed it for Christmas, the log comments showed it achieved what I wanted it to and I'm happy with that ... so, it's done for now.

 

That you even started this thread shows that you're a responsible and thoughtful cacher (not that there was any doubt icon_smile.gif

Link to comment

I dont know that I would archive a cache for being too popular. If people constantly visit it, obviously it has appeal. These tend to be the caches of lower difficulty in my neck of the woods. If it turned up missing, or if no one ever went to it, then I would archive it. But thats just me.

Link to comment

Macro,

 

A popular cache could indicate that the surroundings of the cache may be taking a beating. Recently I visited a cache with many entries in the logbook. The cache was hidden about 20 feet inside the treeline near a park. There was a well worn path straight to the cache and then about a five foot circle aound the cache that was trampled down to the dirt.

 

That sort of situation is no good. Cache owners should watch for this excessive impact, and if need be, the cache should be archived (at least temporarily so) to give the environment a break.

 

This is not only in the interest of tree-hugging, but a worn path invites uninterested parties to visit your cache, increasing the chances of plundering. Also, if placed on public property, a worn path does not look good to land managers (park rangers).

 

Jamie

Link to comment

I have archived one of my caches in Washington due to its popularity. There was a trail being worn to the hiding spot from so many visitors. I wanted to limit the damage to the spot so I archived the cache and designed a new hunt in the same area but not the same park Points of Interest

 

I have also put a cache on "hold" because of the surrounding area getting a little trampled. I plan on placing the cache in a different spot to give this spot a rest.

Whistle

Link to comment

I've archived two caches. The first one I archived after several months due to a lack of activity. I think perhaps I hadn't selected the best location. A month or so later, I placed an identical cache 1/4 mile away, in the same type of location. It receives frequent visits, so go figure.

 

I've also archived a cache because the location was taking a beating, and although I suspect (and hope) the damage to the area was not geocaching related, I felt it was best to remove the cache "just in case."

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

I've archived two caches. The first one I archived after several months due to a lack of activity. I think perhaps I hadn't selected the best location. A month or so later, I placed an identical cache 1/4 mile away, in the same type of location. It receives frequent visits, so go figure.


 

Ironically, you archived the first cache just a day or two before one of my earliest visits to the Princeton area. I don't think there would have been anything wrong with keeping that one, if that was the only reason for removing it, as it's only a matter of time before more people participate.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by stayfloopy:

 

Ironically, you archived the first cache just a day or two before one of my earliest visits to the Princeton area. I don't think there would have been anything wrong with keeping that one, if that was the only reason for removing it, as it's only a matter of time before more people participate.


 

Sorry, Floops! If only I had known . . .

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

 

Sorry, Floops! If only I had known . . .


 

Not a problem... I did visit your second cache location a bit later.

 

Now, I'll answer the question... if one of my caches were stolen or missing, then I'd archive it as I'm not likely to replace it. I don't think any of mine have had too many visitors yet and two of them are in rocky/bouldery areas where an excess of visitors shouldn't pose too much of a problem.

Link to comment

I think most caches will, over the course of years, go thru mutations, changes and all sorts of cycles.

 

Caches that are becoming a hazard to their surrounding environs should probably be allowed to go fallow until such time as the environ has a chance to regain some of its vitality. When a cache goes back up in that area it should be made so that it is either harder to get to or in a location that is less damaging.

 

Caches that are in a popular spot might want to consider mutations. That is to change up the theme of the cache, the methods used to find it, the exact location, or an event that surrounds it. A cache could become seasonal, either offering up different things at different times of the year or only being available in certain seasons. A monthly gathering could be set up to keep it maintained so that the load of the sites upkeep can be spread around.

 

I don’t think anyone person can properly maintain more than a handful to a few tens of active non-virtual caches at a time. There will always be the trailblazers, the folks who find the best sites. I think over time more and more folks will be involved in the upkeep of caches once they are setup.

 

Distributed upkeep

icon_smile.gif-

 

-tom

 

----------------------------

TeamWSMF@wsmf.org

Link to comment

I think most caches will, over the course of years, go thru mutations, changes and all sorts of cycles.

 

Caches that are becoming a hazard to their surrounding environs should probably be allowed to go fallow until such time as the environ has a chance to regain some of its vitality. When a cache goes back up in that area it should be made so that it is either harder to get to or in a location that is less damaging.

 

Caches that are in a popular spot might want to consider mutations. That is to change up the theme of the cache, the methods used to find it, the exact location, or an event that surrounds it. A cache could become seasonal, either offering up different things at different times of the year or only being available in certain seasons. A monthly gathering could be set up to keep it maintained so that the load of the sites upkeep can be spread around.

 

I don’t think anyone person can properly maintain more than a handful to a few tens of active non-virtual caches at a time. There will always be the trailblazers, the folks who find the best sites. I think over time more and more folks will be involved in the upkeep of caches once they are setup.

 

Distributed upkeep

icon_smile.gif-

 

-tom

 

----------------------------

TeamWSMF@wsmf.org

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...