Jump to content

Who should remove unapproved/archived caches?


Recommended Posts

Rather then go off-topic in the approver guidelines thread, I'd like to discuss this here. What should happen when a cache is not approved on GC.com? The container is still out there, and no one except admins and the cache owner know about it.

Ideally, the cache owner will retrieve the cache so it does not constitute litter (abandoned property). What if he leaves it there and cannot be contacted by the admins? Should the admin either retrieve it himself or ask another cacher to do it? The same question can be asked of archived caches.

 

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

Link to comment

Geocaching.com is only a listing service. They do not own the cache, the cache-placer does.

The placer can list the cache anywhere he pleases, including websites competing with Geocaching.com or his own website. He doesn't even have to list it on the Internet. It could be a 'word of mouth' cache where he only gives the coordinates to select individuals. I don't think the average cacher should remove a cache without express permission from the placer.

 

Every cache should have contact information inside. If that contact information leads to Geocaching.com, should that give the site some authority over the cache if they are contacted about removing it?

 

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

Link to comment

Good question.

 

The debate should start with the idea of ownership. From the beginning of geocaching history we have posted that the owner has the responsibility for the care and feeding of their cache. Geocaching.com does not own or cares to own each cache, but we do maintain the cache listing.

 

When a cache is not approved, the owner is notified immediately by email. At that point they can decide what to do with their own cache.

 

For caches where the owner goes missing, we usually stick red text at the top of the page asking for someone to adopt the cache. When adoption occurs, we let the new owner know that as a courtesy we normally like to return ownership to the original owner when they return.

 

If a cache owner goes missing, and enough "not founds" occur for a particular cache, we usually archive the listing outright.

 

If there are any suggestions on how to make these procedures better, I'd love to hear them. Also, any problems and solutions for scenarios are welcome, with the caveat that when you indicate a problem you have a recommended solution.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Criminal:

I've heard rumor that an approver might ask someone local to go retrieve it.


 

Yes, I have heard in some cases when the cache owner asks the reviewer's help in retrieving a cache (such as when they are placed on vacation). I know of no situations where a cache was retrieved without the owner's permission by a reviewer. The only cases I know involved a relationship between the owner and reviewer as a courtesy.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

I forgot the mention of the addition of disabling caches. This usually occurs after several not-finds with no activity from the cache owner.

 

Normally when someone indicates that "this cache should be archived" a reviewer looks at the cache page, and if the owner hasn't logged in for some time, makes a judgement call whether to disable the cache and leaving a note. This does two things 1) Emails the owner with the note letting them know that their cache was disabled and 2) informing others who do regional searches that a cache is in questionable shape.

 

If the cache owner has recently logged in, we let the owner handle it.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

I posted this on the other thread and will do so here. It has been stated by reviewers/approvers , both on the message board and on cache pages for people to remove the cache or the next one to find it to remove it. I agree 100% with your statement Jeremy about this is a listing service.

 

Solution - What if on the form you submit a cache, that you have a button to check that says you agree to the rules (cache removal). In the rules it would say basically what you said, that the cache owner is repsonsible for the cache. But, that GC will make attempts to contact the cache owners on those caches with problems and/or archived and then if there is no response or the cache is not brought up to standards or removed by the owner, that a representative will remove it. Whether the representative be a reviewer/approver or perhaps selecting "reporters" for areas. They could have a dual purpose. One for removing caches as indicated in their areas and also assisting reviewers/approvers in areas that might be in debate about over a review/approval process?

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

We have a "cache rescue mission" at MiGO where if there is an archived or abandoned cache we make attempts to contact the own and if we hear nothing from them a volunteer will pickup the cache. Its nice to have an active list of what is just sitting out there rotting.

 

MiGO

__________________________

Caching with a clue....

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

But, that GC will make attempts to contact the cache owners on those caches with problems and/or archived and then if there is no response or the cache is not brought up to standards or removed by the owner, that a representative will remove it.


 

I prefer umc's solution better. It becomes painfully obvious when caches go untended and if there is no response, the local organization can create their own policies. Making a cache inactive has been very effective in removing untended caches when the cache owner goes missing.

 

The current policy explains in no uncertain terms that the cache is yours. Period. I don't want any grey areas where someone feels safe to hide and forget.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

umc, my problem with that, is that your association is handling it. While we both agree it's for the better over all. I think it lies some responsibility on a person that acts on behalf of themselves or because someone verbally asked them to do it, when there is no notice given to the cache owner before placing the cache. I'm looking at more of a proactive solution with a reactive solution backing it up. Rather than a let's go get their cache, type of thing. When I mentioned about your association/organization doing it, then it is claiming repsonsibilty for doing it.

 

Here's a scenario that might back up my solution a little. Joe Bob comes to GC and lists a cache. Later on the cache becomes not confomred to the guidelines to GC standards. It got approved. He decides the check with GC and goes and lists it somewhere else and removed himself from GC. He/She may even not use the same email as they do on GC. The cache is still active on the list even though people suggested it for archival. Someone is asked to go remove it. They do, but his cache is active elsewhere and posted somewhere else or just privately between some people. GC is a listing service, under the current guidelines, they can remove it from the list. But can they physically remove it or even suggest it be removed? Add that disclaimer, give them the right. So if and when this issue comes up, it can at least be said that you agreed to it.

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy:

 

the local organization can create their own policies.


 

But when a cacher places a cache, they place them under GC policies and not the organizations out there. People shouldn't have to follow under several different policies. Many people don't belong to the organizations and should not be held accountable under their policies. Some places don't even have organizations either.

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

But when a cacher places a cache, they place them under GC policies and not the organizations out there. People shouldn't have to follow under several different policies. Many people don't belong to the organizations and should not be held accountable under their policies. Some places don't even have organizations either.


Don't you mean when a cacher lists a cache (on gc.com) they agree to gc.com policy? icon_confused.gif

Personally, I would assume when a cacher places a cache they do so under that park's (or other location) policies.

Link to comment

Yes Welch, I was referring to listing them on GC and when they do so, they list them under GC's policies. That statement was in remark to Jeremy's stating about letting the organizations and associations handle it. Cachers do not follow under the policies of those organizations or associations when they place a cache lisitng on the GC website. I still think it's asking for trouble when someone goes out and removes something physically. i.e. they(cache owner) may not be playing on the GC website anymore. Just because it's listed on here doesn't mean that it can be removed physically. They may be playing elsewhere. Someone may decide to start their own caching site and place caches 20 ft from those listed here. What can be done about it? Nothing...but that is another can of worms...

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

Woodsters,

 

What I'm reffering to in regards to the "cache rescue mission" that we have is only a way of cleaning up caches left for dead. [edit] In other words, caches that have run their natural course and are no longer properly maintained because the owner quit the sport or for whatever reason.

 

I think for the most part if a cache is turned down on submition for the approval process the cache owner is going to work out the kinks or retrieve it and place it elsewhere. I couldn't imagine too many people placing a cache then being told no and leaving it. I know that I put far too much time and money into the caches I place for that and I think others do the same.

 

MiGO

__________________________

Caching with a clue....

Link to comment

Are you saying that the cache owner shouldn't be responsible for the care and feeding of their cache?

 

UMC was very specific as to what the MiGO folks are doing. If it is effectively abandoned or archived they make reasonable attempts to contact the owner, or ultimately retrieve it. In the case of MiGO, they are extremely active with local land managers and act as stewards of the land for them. We need more organizations like these to help keep a positive relationship with local land managers.

 

We're not talking about an Evil Horde, but a group of local peers that are keeping this activity from being outright banned in regions.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy:

Are you saying that the cache owner shouldn't be responsible for the care and feeding of their cache?


Did I say that? I don't think that came across in my message.

 

quote:

UMC was very specific as to what the MiGO folks are doing. If it is effectively abandoned or archived they make reasonable attempts to contact the owner, or ultimately retrieve it. In the case of MiGO, they are extremely active with local land managers and act as stewards of the land for them. We need more organizations like these to help keep a positive relationship with local land managers.

 

We're not talking about an Evil Horde, but a group of local peers that are keeping this activity from being outright banned in regions.

 


 

The part the organizations play with land managers is a different topic. And I agree they probably do good on that part. This topic is about who should remove the caches. Just because one can't reach a cache owner that may not be active any longer with the geocaching website, does not warrant anyone to remove their caches period, whether rotting or not. My suggestion is to do it in a way where it is stated as to what will happen if such and such happens and then have a proper way of doing it. Still if you want to put the responsibility on the organizations to "clean up" their areas, then make it noted, it one place that a cache owner has to agree with. Then again, not everywhere has an organization. What about those areas?

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

Being proactive would be great, but there's just some people who might not give a hoot if their abandoned cache sits there.

 

A bit better description of what we do: Mainly, when a cache is added to the 'rescue' list, it's because there is no clear indication that an archived cache has been removed. A cacher visits the site to confirm that it has been removed. Most of the time, it has been removed/completely plundered. On one rescue mission, I retrieved several containers for a multi that had been left behind (owner had moved out of state, and I had let them know what I was doing beforehand). I think there are only a few that the actual cache and contents have been found. The cacher that finds it posts this info on the cache page, and I think those that have retrieved actual caches have offered to replace it if the owner again becomes active. I think that if someone found a cache appears to get active visitation from other sources that the finding cacher would post that note on the gc.com page, and the cache would be removed from the rescue mission.

 

I walk the Maze of Moments, but everywhere I turn to, begins a new beginning, but never finds a finish... -Enya, Anywhere Is

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by umc:

Woodsters,

 

What I'm reffering to in regards to the "cache rescue mission" that we have is only a way of cleaning up caches left for dead. [edit] In other words, caches that have run their natural course and are no longer properly maintained because the owner quit the sport or for whatever reason.

 


I understand that umc and it's a genuine thing to want to do. But again, because a cache has run it's course and/or a cache owner can not be contacted, doesn't warrant it being removed by any other person than possibly the person owning or managing the land. Like i've stated before, just because you can't get a hold of a cache owner doesn't mean they still aren't playing elsewhere. They may not be active with geocaching.com, but it's still their cache. My suggestion is to put a procedure or process in place for all cache owners to know about, that will happen to their caches if so and so happens. Unwritten rules only benefit those who make them up and those that know about them.

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by umc:

I couldn't imagine too many people placing a cache then being told no and leaving it. I know that I put far too much time and money into the caches I place for that and I think others do the same.

 

_http://www.mi-geocaching.org_

__________________________

Caching with a clue....


 

Umm.. there are a few vacation caches on that list of ours! I can think of at least 2 that cannot be tweaked by the owner (or local cacher) to be approveable.

 

I walk the Maze of Moments, but everywhere I turn to, begins a new beginning, but never finds a finish... -Enya, Anywhere Is

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Squirrel Nut:

Being proactive would be great, but there's just some people who might not give a hoot if their abandoned cache sits there.

 

A bit better description of what we do: Mainly, when a cache is added to the 'rescue' list, it's because there is no clear indication that an archived cache has been removed. A cacher visits the site to confirm that it has been removed. Most of the time, it has been removed/completely plundered. On one rescue mission, I retrieved several containers for a multi that had been left behind (owner had moved out of state, and I had let them know what I was doing beforehand). I think there are only a few that the actual cache and contents have been found. The cacher that finds it posts this info on the cache page, and I think those that have retrieved actual caches have offered to replace it if the owner again becomes active. I think that if someone found a cache appears to get active visitation from other sources that the finding cacher would post that note on the gc.com page, and the cache would be removed from the rescue mission.

 

I walk the Maze of Moments, but everywhere I turn to, begins a new beginning, but never finds a finish... -Enya, Anywhere Is


 

That is fine as long as the cache owner knows and agrees to it. What if you contact a cache owner and they said not to touch it? The cache could be being used amongst a smaller group of people that don't anything about your rescue mission and it's page about those caches.

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

Hey Jeremy...

 

Think we can get something like this added to the GC terms and conditions:

 

"I agree that, if one of my caches is archived and no clear indication has been given in the logs to state that the cache has been removed, and that after no responce is recieved to inquiries sent to the e-mail address under which the owner has registered with gc.com, that geocaching.com and regional geocaching groups approved by geocaching.com may remove the cache and any contents to restore the area to it's original condition."

 

I walk the Maze of Moments, but everywhere I turn to, begins a new beginning, but never finds a finish... -Enya, Anywhere Is

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

Like i've stated before, just because you can't get a hold of a cache owner doesn't mean they still aren't playing elsewhere. They may not be active with geocaching.com, but it's still their cache. My suggestion is to put a procedure or process in place for all cache owners to know about, that will happen to their caches if so and so happens. Unwritten rules only benefit those who make them up and those that know about them.


 

It would make sense to know what may happen to your cache if you leave it and don't take care of it anymore.

 

If I were to archive a cache here and still have it active somewhere else the responsible thing would be to make sure that my email address still works or is valid so that I can be contacted. I don't have a seperate email address just for geocaching but I'm sure there are some do and I think we are talking about these people that abandon their cache listing on gc.c and abandon that email address too. My point is that you should be able to get a hold of someone if they have a valid email address.

 

Also if the cache is active somewhere else there would or should be current logs in the book and I think that would indicate that its a active cache that is being used.

 

MiGO

__________________________

Caching with a clue....

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy:

Are you saying that the cache owner shouldn't be responsible for the care and feeding of their cache?


Did I say that? I don't think that came across in my message.


 

Check this box. It absolves you of maintaining your own cache and puts it in the hands of someone more responsible.

 

The part the organizations play with land managers is not a different topic. You made the point that UMC and MiGO was in some way wrong to rescue abandoned caches. In their relationship with the land managers they should have the ability to remove them as good stewards for their region. A checkbox isn't necessary for that.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Squirrel Nut:

Hey Jeremy...

 

Think we can get something like this added to the GC terms and conditions:

 

"I agree that, if one of my caches is archived and no clear indication has been given in the logs to state that the cache has been removed, and that after no responce is recieved to inquiries sent to the e-mail address under which the owner has registered with gc.com, that geocaching.com and regional geocaching groups approved by geocaching.com may remove the cache and any contents to restore the area to it's original condition."

 

I walk the Maze of Moments, but everywhere I turn to, begins a new beginning, but never finds a finish... -Enya, Anywhere Is


 

Simple solution eh? icon_wink.gif

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by umc:

 

It would make sense to know what may happen to your cache if you leave it and don't take care of it anymore.


 

Yep and why I suggested a phrase as squirrel just did to cover that.

 

quote:

 

If I were to archive a cache here and still have it active somewhere else the responsible thing would be to make sure that my email address still works or is valid so that I can be contacted. I don't have a seperate email address just for geocaching but I'm sure there are some do and I think we are talking about these people that abandon their cache listing on gc.c and abandon that email address too. My point is that you should be able to get a hold of someone if they have a valid email address.


 

People will up and leave for no reason and no way of contacting them. Bottom line, it's their cache snfshould not be touched under the current rules.

 

quote:

Also if the cache is active somewhere else there would or should be current logs in the book and I think that would indicate that its a active cache that is being used.

 

_http://www.mi-geocaching.org_

__________________________

Caching with a clue....


Not nevessarily. Wherever they are playing at may not require the log book and may have differnet rules or are doing things differently.

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

 

That is fine as long as the cache owner knows and agrees to it. What if you contact a cache owner and they said not to touch it? The cache could be being used amongst a smaller group of people that don't anything about your rescue mission and it's page about those caches.

 

Brian

http://www.woodsters.com

 

_"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it..._


Well, if they said not to touch it, I'd post to the page that I managed to get in contact with the owners, and they are still maintaining it for other purposes.

 

Anything questionable, such as vacation caches where the owner told me that, I'd leave for the Approvers to determine what to do with it. It might be bound to happen eventually, but the VAST majority of the rescues so far has just been verifying the cache is GONE. And the vacation caches I had mentioned in my previous post are placed in areas that are off limits to physical caches. And if I ever retrieved them I'd be more than happy to mail them back to their owners.

 

Bottom line: how would you legally claim ownership of a piece of tupperware, notebook, and inexpensive trinkets left in a public location, and apparently abandoned? Shall we go underground with cache 'rescue missions'... hmm.. oops, that archived/inappropriate vacation cache's been Plundered! too bad! icon_wink.gif

 

I walk the Maze of Moments, but everywhere I turn to, begins a new beginning, but never finds a finish... -Enya, Anywhere Is

Link to comment

quote:
Also if the cache is active somewhere else there would or should be current logs in the book and I think that would indicate that its a active cache that is being used.


UMC hit the nail on the head. If someone from this site is sent out to retrieve an abandoned cache, they should check its logbook. There may be current visits because the cache may be listed on another site. If that is the case, the cache is not abandoned and should be left alone. The listing on geocaching.com should be disabled with a note explaining the removal attempt or that it is listed on another site and not associated with geocaching.com any longer.

 

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy:

Ever heard of personal responsibility?


 

I think this is the major issue here. One way or another the person who places the cache has to be responsible for their cache. Bottomline. Whether its posting in your archive note that you are pulling it from this site but it is still active elsewhere. If your email address is going to be changing then leave the new one. Be responsible for your cache so nobody else has to.

 

MiGO

__________________________

Caching with a clue....

Link to comment

I have published this list of abandoned caches in Northern California. It seems to have had good results so far, with over a half dozen caches retrieved or proven missing in the first week.

 

My position is that the cache is the owners property until he abandons it. When he places it while on vacation hundreds or thousands of miles from home, he has abandoned it. When he archives the cache because he's tired of maintaining it, and he doesn't retrieve it, he has abandoned it. When he places it in a National Park, he has abandoned it.

 

Once abandoned, its up for grabs by whoever wishes to go after it.

 

Hemlock

Volunteer Cache Reviewer

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy:

 

Check this box.


Statements like this make you real popular.

 

quote:
It absolves you of maintaining your own cache and puts it in the hands of someone more responsible.

 

Who's right is to completely remove someone elses property? It's one thing not to recognize it as a geocaching.com cache, but to incorporate your own unwritten rules and steal others property is not cool.

 

quote:

The part the organizations play with land managers is not a different topic. You made the point that UMC and MiGO was in some way wrong to rescue abandoned caches. In their relationship with the land managers they should have the ability to remove them as good stewards for their region. A checkbox isn't necessary for that.


I didn't say they were wrong for rescuing caches as there are some situations where that will work. But not in all situations. In regards as their relationship with land managers and being good stewards, then it would be one thing if the land owner regarded that and the cache owner knew the consequences. Some places have been mentioned about obtaining permits to place caches which is a good idea. That way the land manager can take action as they warrant and advise the expectations to the cache owner. Then under the land managers directions an organization can remove them. But that doesn't happen or at least I have not seen it mentioned.

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

From my perspective, the listing on geocaching.com relates to the virtual (listings and guidelines regarding listings). We do not tell people to remove caches and I don't believe we have the right to do so. We can archive the listings, disable them, etc., but ultimately the cache owner decides whether to remove, place, move, etc. their caches.

 

We do not feel it is in geocaching.com's place to task individuals to remove caches. If organizations decide to do so, that is their choice and should be held responsible for their own actions. Geocaching.com and Orgs are separate entities.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

 

Statements like this make you real popular.

 

quote:
It absolves you of maintaining your own cache and puts it in the hands of someone more responsible.

 

Who's right is to completely remove someone elses property? It's one thing not to recognize it as a geocaching.com cache, but to incorporate your own unwritten rules and steal others property is not cool.

 


 

This isn't a popularity contest. This is an ideal that I hold firm. If you are delegating your responsibility to someone else then you are irresponsible. It's your cache. You have the responsibility to care and feed it.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

Persoanl Responsibility exactly....with the current way the guidelines are then that's the way it should be. Not the repsonsibility of others to remove it.

 

AS far as the logbook thing goes. Well where they play, they may not use a logbook anymore. They may not even open the dman thing either. it may be a new type of virtual game somewhere else.

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

Personal Responsibility exactly....with the current way the guidelines are then that's the way it should be. Not the repsonsibility of others to remove it.


 

Isn't it the way it is? I haven't heard otherwise.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location

Link to comment

Woodsters...

In all the time I've been reading the forums, I thought I had seen mention of about every spinnoff/sister/remotely related sport to Geocaching.

 

I'm itching to find out what this 'other' sport is that just has you out looking for a box, just to find the box but not touch it or leave a trace of you being there. Especially if the exterior of the box makes no reference to this new sport in any way.

 

I walk the Maze of Moments, but everywhere I turn to, begins a new beginning, but never finds a finish... -Enya, Anywhere Is

Link to comment

Woodsters, that's why a note should be posted on the cache page that tells what happened when the cache was 'rescued'. If the cache owner is playing on a different site 'deterioration_of_tupperware_in_the_woods.com' or something, there is a way for him to find out what happened to it. He knows it was listed on GC.com at one point and can come back here to search for it.

 

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy:

From my perspective, the listing on geocaching.com relates to the virtual (listings and guidelines regarding listings). We do not tell people to remove caches and I don't believe we have the right to do so. We can archive the listings, disable them, etc., but ultimately the cache owner decides whether to remove, place, move, etc. their caches.

 

We do not feel it is in geocaching.com's place to task individuals to remove caches. If organizations decide to do so, that is their choice and should be held responsible for their own actions. Geocaching.com and Orgs are separate entities.

 

smile.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location


 

Jeremy I agree with this 100%! This is the way that I've interpreted things from the get go. But as I've stated, there are those who represent this site and have stated on this site for people to remove caches. My suggestion of the reporters and the statement was to help with those abandoned caches. I agree that abandoned caches should not be out there. They do not look good for the site or the community at all. But it's not so with the current guidelines and what you just stated.

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

BTW, I'm sure that if SOMEHOW an archived cache that was being used for other purposes was wrongly taken and the owner contacted the retrieving cahcer, that that cacher would do their best to make amends. I know if I ever retrieved an actual cache and contents, I'd probably keep it as is in my basement for at least half a year, then keep the logbook indefinately. And this is even after I've tried to contact the owner to let them know what's going on...

 

I walk the Maze of Moments, but everywhere I turn to, begins a new beginning, but never finds a finish... -Enya, Anywhere Is

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

 

Who's right is to completely remove someone elses property? It's one thing not to recognize it as a geocaching.com cache, but to incorporate your own unwritten rules and steal others property is not cool.


 

Its been a day of examples and analogies hasn't it? Heres another that I like.

 

I've seen this used before and I'm sure others have. I'm going to state it as I've seen it then put your twist on it.

 

When you go camping (hehe) you setup camp and hang out. So you leave your camp for the day and do whatever. Just becaues you left doesn't mean you are abandoning your property (tent, cooler, ect) right? You will be back to check on it and use it. So on that note you still own what is there, its yours, and if someone were to take it while you were gone it would be theft.

 

The twist.

 

If you left that day to go do "whatever" and never came back or haven't came back within a reasonable amount of time it would be considered abandoned. I think you need to show that you are currently active in checking on your camp and maintaining it and if not then its not theft because you left it and weren't taking responsibility for it.

 

MiGO

__________________________

Caching with a clue....

Link to comment

Rules should be uniform for the site. There should be no "Opt in and opt out" buttons for all the variouse rules that you have to have.

 

When it comes to removing a cache, it is my opinion that a cache that is abandoned should be removed. The debate becomes exactly what abandoned means. Active on any listing site would not be abandoned.

 

You have to say up front what abandoned means, what a reasonable effort to contact the owner will be, and then live with it. The adoption of abandoned caches is a viable solution.

 

I'm all for owners rights. They are my caches to set as I see fit, to maintain as I see fit, and to archive, relist, use abuse and starve due to bad feeding habits. However there is a balance to maintain between oweners rights, and the larger needs of the sport. Geolitter (glitter?) is not something geocaching in general needs a reputation for regardless of what site lists what.

 

As an aside, while I applaude the active efforts of MiGO I would say that the authority to authorize a rescue mission is limited to it's own members and to the site the cache is listed on. Those are the places where the legal teeth if you will, can be inserted into the problem. If GC does come up with a good policy out of this thread then MiGO would be an excellent resource for cache rescue missions. CRM caches would be a prestigiouse cache to find.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Team GPSaxophone:

Woodsters, that's why a note should be posted on the cache page that tells what happened when the cache was 'rescued'. If the cache owner is playing on a different site 'deterioration_of_tupperware_in_the_woods.com' or something, there is a way for him to find out what happened to it. He knows it was listed on GC.com at one point and can come back here to search for it.

 

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness


 

That would be ideal GPSaxophone, but not always the case. Especially if he doesn't return to the site. Then if he realizes it is gone and happens to see that someone removed it, will he want to have another deteriorated tupperware placed back there or what if the cache was in good condition. Who's responsible for replacing it and /or what happens to the cache if the owner can not be contacted? Is there a cache lost and found?

 

Squirrel, I pulled that out of my a$$ as an example as you know, but after reading some of the things and examples that have been posted for caches, one never knows...

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

Persoanl Responsibility exactly....with the current way the guidelines are then that's the way it should be. Not the repsonsibility of others to remove it.


 

Its not the responsibility of others until the cache owner gives up being responsible for their cache and someone else takes over from there. The key in this is that "the cache owner no longer assumes responsibility for their cache", there are many ways to determine this.

 

MiGO

__________________________

Caching with a clue....

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

... They may not be active with geocaching.com, but it's still their cache. My suggestion is to put a procedure or process in place for all cache owners to know about, that will happen to their caches if so and so happens.


 

I can see what you're saying. But the best place for policies to be created/maintained is locally IMHO. It's more likely for a cacher who only caches on one site to hear about policies from their local organization than from a web site that they do not visit. What's the point in gc.com creating/publishing these policies if they are meant to benefit people that cache only on other listing sites? icon_smile.gif

 

I think that made sense...

 

--------

trippy1976 - Team KKF2A

Assimilating golf balls - one geocache at a time.

Michigan Geocaching Organization Homepage

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by umc:

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

 

Who's right is to completely remove someone elses property? It's one thing not to recognize it as a geocaching.com cache, but to incorporate your own unwritten rules and steal others property is not cool.


 

Its been a day of examples and analogies hasn't it? Heres another that I like.

 

I've seen this used before and I'm sure others have. I'm going to state it as I've seen it then put your twist on it.

 

When you go camping (hehe) you setup camp and hang out. So you leave your camp for the day and do whatever. Just becaues you left doesn't mean you are abandoning your property (tent, cooler, ect) right? You will be back to check on it and use it. So on that note you still own what is there, its yours, and if someone were to take it while you were gone it would be theft.

 

The twist.

 

If you left that day to go do "whatever" and never came back or haven't came back within a reasonable amount of time it would be considered abandoned. I think you need to show that you are currently active in checking on your camp and maintaining it and if not then its not theft because you left it and weren't taking responsibility for it.

 

_http://www.mi-geocaching.org_

__________________________

Caching with a clue....


 

But, if it's considered abandoned, then it's not the right for someone to come up and take it. If they do, it's theft. However a land manager/owner has the right to remove the camping gear if it is deemed abandoned due to the nature that a campground is a business. Even if it not a campground and the side of a mountain, the land manager dept will have a policy in place to deal with the said items or will contact the authorities and/or legal help on the situation..

 

Brian

www.woodsters.com

 

"TOUGH NUTS" - for those who don't like it...

Link to comment

Suppose you stumble upon a new-looking cache with a paper that simply says, 'log your visit online'. You go home and check geocaching.com and find no caches listed in that area. You wait a few days just in case the approvers are behind. Still no cache in that area. You check known competing websites and find nothing. A month goes by, you go back and check on the cache. It's still there, and nothing appears different. Do you take it with you?

 

Took sun from sky, left world in eternal darkness

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Woodsters Outdoors:

what happens to the cache if the owner can not be contacted? Is there a cache lost and found?


 

If the cache owner cannot be contacted then they are not being responsible.

 

If my clients cannot contact me then I am not being responsible and therefore will lose my clients. Who's fault is that? Mine.

 

I think its a "known" when placing a cache that you need to be responsible for it otherwise its your fault for not.

 

As far as a lost and found, we already mentioned with the CRM icon_wink.gif

 

MiGO

__________________________

Caching with a clue....

Link to comment

The ultimate responsibility for cache removal when the owner is not available is up to the local goecachers.

 

It may not be "My problem" when someone places a cache while on vacation or quits the game, but if the offending cache is not adopted or removed, it soon will be.

 

An unmaintained, abandoned cache quickly turns into litter. All of us at the local level need to keep an eye on caches in our area and alert others if one seems to be in need of adoption.

 

Here is a thread I started on the Alaska Geocaching site for caches with AWOL owners.

 

Other locals should look into doing the same. In the end the cache you save may very well be your own.

 

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

I have never been lost. Been awful confused for a few days, but never lost!

N61.12.041 W149.43.734

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...