Cache essentially junked--is it worth keeping?

[Guest bjbest]

I've got a question for the group. I recently had one of my caches vandalized/stolen (the Shaw Park cache, http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=2027 ). As the logs say, the only thing left (and still hidden) is the lid to the Tupperware container, which has written on it the name of the cache, the coords, and the www.geocaching.com address. Why only the lid was left is beyond me. At any rate, I've been discussing the situation with cache co-hider Big Jimmy, and we've come up with three alternative courses of action: 1.) Replace the cache; 2.) Leave the lid there as is, and call that the "cache" (of course this would be noted on the cache description page); 3.) Remove the lid and archive the cache. Which course of action do you think is best? It should be noted that this destruction isn't particularly surprising, as the park is always rather busy, so I'm somewhat skeptical of replacing the cache. But do people want to go out and just find a lid? Thanks.

[Guest c.mathis]

Is it possible to move the cache to a more secluded area of the park?

[Guest makaio]

I'd remove the lid and archive the cache.

This will allow the area to return to it's pre-cache state (if applicable). Then find another location nearby which is less prone to accidental discovery to plant a new one.

[Guest bjbest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by c.mathis:

Is it possible to move the cache to a more secluded area of the park?

---

 

Not really, unfortunately. It's a pretty urban park, not very forested. The cache is hidden in the base of a tree, which was pretty much the only hiding spot I could come up with.

[Guest arffer]

Replacing the cache will likely result in the same loss; sounds like this park is not a good choice for a standard cache.

 

Leaving the lid simply makes this a virtual cache. If that's your desire, I suggest you remove the non-natural lid and pick a spot in the park to make it truly a virtual cache. Like a sign somewhere that the hunter can describe to you to verify they were their. Or an unusual tree "how many trunks does it have". Something that pre-exists in the park. Don't leav a lid that will probably disapear anyway. Make sure you change the cache type to "Virtual".

 

Sorry about your loss...

 

[This message has been edited by arffer (edited 20 August 2001).]

[Guest brokenwing]

I agree with the other posts. If the chance of discovery is too great, maybe the park is not a good place for a cache. You might try a microcache if you can find a place for that. An example: I really wanted to put a cache in a park about 5 miles from my house. This park is really well maintained and has a nice fishing pond. It has no land that is not mowed or landscaped, however. After looking around pretty thoroughly, I found one decent spot for a microcache, but otherwise nada. I am still debating on the microcache idea.

 

I won't make it a virtual cache, however. A virtual cache should have more to recommend it. I don't believe in placing a virtual cache just to have a cache there. I think we have a responsiblity to ensure there is something worthwhile before listing it. If there is nothing "special" about the place, virtual caches are just not a good idea IMHO.

 

For me, there would be nothing more frustrating than driving 100+ miles to see a tree. The same kind of tree, mind you, that I can see in my local park.

 

Thanks,

Brokenwing

[Guest Ole Cache]

I don't know if this is the right place to do it, but I want to propose a cache for archiving: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=288

The most recent log entry states that it has been vandalized and only the empty box remains.

(Too bad 'cause I think it was Mexico's first)

Is it still a geocache despite?