Cache Maintenance

[+Renegade Knight]

In another thread cache maintenance was clarified. The clarification on the guidelines made me realize that the majority of my caches do not meet this sites guidelines for listing caches. My own estimation is that I’m about average for maintaining caches and maybe even on the low end of average. It’s disheartening to learn that some of your better caches, the ones you are most proud of, don't meet standards and would not be listed today if the rules were strictly applied.

 

As a cache owner what do you really think is appropriate for maintaining the caches you own? This isn’t a thread for discussing GC.com guidelines. They are what they are. This is a thread to get the opinions of real world cache placers. The people who make this hobby happen on what they like to do ideally and what they do in reality when it comes to taking care of their caches.

Edited December 16, 2003 by Renegade Knight

[+Team Og Rof A Klaw]

Situations that signal that a cache requires maintenance:

 

* Two DNFs in a row

* Two TNLNSLs in a row

* Any log entries about a wet cache

* Any log entries about removing garbage from the cache

* If I happen to be in the area, I'll stop and take a peek

* Any log entry concerning the long sobs of dead clams dancing at midnight

 

HTH,

-Team Og.

[+carleenp]

Two TNLNSLs in a row

 

Why this one? That can be quite common on caches that are in perfect condition around here.

[+Stunod]

Two TNLNSLs in a row

 

Why this one? That can be quite common on caches that are in perfect condition around here.

That MIGHT signal that there is nothing worth trading for in the cache. But I agree that it isn't unusual to see. A lot of cachers never trade, no mater what is in the cache.

 

I think just being able to get to the cache within a week or two is adequate for maintenance. Read the logs as they are posted and respond if there is a problem noted.

[+Team Og Rof A Klaw]

I guess it depends on the area. And it would depend on the log, too. If I had a log that said:

Wow! Wonderful location and wonderful hide. The cache is in perfect shape and stuffed with goodies, but I only had a dirty golf ball and a rusty Ikea allen wrench, so TNLNSL.

I wouldn't worry too much.

 

Speaking of different customs, Georges seem to vary a lot. Here in NJ, they just get circulated between caches. In MI, people seem to take them out and spend them. I've never had a George that I placed in a cache in NJ get spent, but a couple of the ones we placed in MI wound up at restaurants, etc.

[SLCDave]

Two TNLNSLs in a row

 

Why this one? That can be quite common on caches that are in perfect condition around here.

I think that means the cache has been devalued through people trading junk for anything remotely related to an item of value. Personally, I've given up restocking my caches. I just clean out the absolute garbage, and maybe put a couple of things in if there is nothing left after cleaning.

[+hikemeister]

I watch the logs and if notes are left regarding any of the following:

 

-- wet log book

-- no pen / pencil

-- junk left in cache

-- cache getting too full

 

then I go out and take care of the problem.

 

Also do a drive around to check on caches so that I check any particular one on about a monthly basis. However, this is helped by the fact that three of us who go geocaching together periodically check on each others caches if we happen to be in the area.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

I won't upgrade contents after they've been devalued. I'll change a logbook and repair or replace the box but the contents are what they are. I've taken to leaving more micros these days anyway.

[+briansnat]

The first and most important thing is being able to respond promptly to problems (the type mentioned by Team OG, and Hikemiester). If it's a frequently visited cache, you should be able to get there within a week, or two at the most. If it's a more remote and less visited cache, you should be able to respond within a month, or so.

 

I have different standards for remote and rarely visited caches than I do for heavily visited ones because my hope is to expose as few people as possible to a cache that is wet, or otherwise in poor shape (we all have experienced moldy log books and caches filled with slimy, green water and it's not pleasant). If the cache is likely to have a bunch of visitors, I want to get there ASAP, but if its likely there won't be a visitor for a month or two, or two then I won't be in as much a hurry to get there.

 

Outside responding to problems, the caches should be visited periodically, depending on the popularity. For a remote, rarely visited cache, I think once or twice a year is fine. For popular cache, every couple of months is a good routine.

 

Personally, I like to restock my caches when I visit. I think the 50th finder deserves as nicely a stocked cache as the first finder.

Edited December 16, 2003 by briansnat

[+gallahad]

* No pen / pencil

* Junk left in cache

* Cache getting too full or damaged in some way

* Two DNFs in a row

* Any comment about junk in the cache

* Any log entries about a wet cache

* Any log entries about removing garbage from the cache

* Any log entry reporting that the camera, if one was left, is not working or out of film

* I try to get by at least every 15 - 20 days, regardless of the log report, to check the cache

 

Like Lazyboy and Mitey Mike, I have drawn the conclusion that micro caches are the less likely to generate problems, and they seem to attract only the more dedicated participants in the sport; those who are more interested in the challenge of the search than the promise of some tangible reward.

From what I've seen, a cache can be traded down to a pile of junk in a very short time and I'm not in favor of feeding the greed of the few.

[+The Leprechauns]

I went back and read the Cache Maintenance guidelines to compare my own habits against what's published. Those guidelines read as follows:

 

The responsibility of your listing includes quality control of posts to the cache page. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements.

 

As the cache owner, you are also responsible for checking on your cache periodically, and especially when someone reports a problem with the cache (missing, damaged, wet, etc.).  You may temporarily disable your cache to let others know not to hunt for it until you have a chance to fix the problem.  This feature is to allow you a reasonable time – normally a few weeks – in which to arrange a visit to your cache. In the event that a cache is not being properly maintained, or has been temporarily disabled for an extended period of time, we may archive or transfer the listing.

 

Well, I definitely do read the logs on my caches. In a grand total of one case, I had a suspicion about someone logging the cache page without signing the logbook. It turned out that he was in the logbook, but logged his cache finds online well after the fact, and was a little imprecise in his online log about the date of the visit. I think I would do the same investigation again if I saw a suspicious log. I do check the logbooks when I visit my caches.

 

I do follow up promptly (within a few weeks) when a problem's reported with one of my caches, and I fix the full logbook, wet cache, etc. I have four caches overdue for maintenance now: one was flooded and is wet, one has a full logbook, one may have adverse environmental impact, and one multicache needs maintenance at two stages. I'll get to two of these caches before the end of the month. If I hadn't come down with the flu, I'd be more on top of this. I haven't found a cache since November 16th right before I got sick. (I did hide a bunch of micros one weekend, but they were all very short hikes.)

 

The guidelines say I'm also supposed to visit my cache "periodically" even if there's no problem reported. Personally I think once or twice a year is "periodic" when there's a nice watertight ammo box. Some caches I've visited very frequently; others I've never revisited because they were placed within the past six months. When I visit, I look for social trails or other wear and tear, especially on one cache which requires scampering up a loose hillside. It's been fine over 16 months with three maintenance visits.

 

Finally, the guidelines encourage me to only keep a cache temporarily disabled for a brief period of time, "normally a few weeks." I had a "broken" multicache, with a single not-found reported in May, which I checked on July 4th weekend. It was broken worse than I thought.... the final cache had been plundered and all the ground cover in the area had been burned by an amateur arsonist. Moving the final stage meant adjusting the clues in the three micros which led up to it, and it's a 6.5 mile cache. I didn't get it back online until August 23rd. I've never let a single stage cache remain disabled for anywhere near that long... maybe 3 or 4 weeks max.

Edited December 16, 2003 by The Leprechauns

[+Shawn&Holly]

Like Lazyboy and Mitey Mike, I have drawn the conclusion that micro caches are the less likely to generate problems, and they seem to attract only the more dedicated participants in the sport; those who are more interested in the challenge of the search than the promise of some tangible reward.

From what I've seen, a cache can be traded down to a pile of junk in a very short time and I'm not in favor of feeding the greed of the few.

My microcache has been my biggest headache, destroyed once and stolen once. It has been disabled more then it has been enabled, Geomuggle squirrels. They keep chewing up the container and I could not even find the last one, only a few days after the last replacement. Micros are more difficult to find and therefore more calls for checking to insure it is still there are asked. I have searched out a few micros and could have sworn that I checked everywhere to have someone else log a find or the owner to check and tell me its still there . Part of the challenge and I will go back and look again and again and again alone because the wife gave up on me .

[CurmudgeonlyGal]

I think that means the cache has been devalued through people trading junk for anything remotely related to an item of value.

I think Carleen's point (and that made by others as well) is that there are a lot of people who always TNLNSL.

 

It is rare I will trade anything if I'm by myself, no matter the contents of the cache. In almost-200 caches, I've traded for myself 4 times (and it's weird, kooky stuff with almost zero value to the average bystander.)

 

Open can, pull out log book, shake it a bit to see if there's a rattling TB tag in there somewhere, sign log, put it all back together, leave.

 

Much faster that way!

 

-=-

michelle

[+carleenp]

I think Carleen's point (and that made by others as well) is that there are a lot of people who always TNLNSL.

 

Yep!

 

It is rare I will trade anything if I'm by myself, no matter the contents of the cache. In almost-200 caches, I've traded for myself 4 times (and it's weird, kooky stuff with almost zero value to the average bystander.)

 

I'm kind of the same. I do trade a little more, but usually for signature items or wierd little things. I do tend to leave a signature item even when I don't take anything. Regardless, around here a bunch of TNLN logs would not necessarily indicate anything was wrong. I have noticed that people around here also tend to comment if the cache is really empty. "Here" is Nebraska BTW.

[+mozartman]

I just own 2 micros, so my situation is different than many of you guys. when I get one or two DNF I check on it, or if there is a comment about something wrong, or I know the log sheet must be getting full... other than that, I leave it alone, unless I am in that part of town and want to see if it's OK.

[+BeachBuddies]

I think Carleen's point (and that made by others as well) is that there are a lot of people who always TNLNSL.

Right, but even if you TNLNSL, you can still leave a better message when you log it online. Even something as simple as "the cache is in good shape."

 

But if the only log you get is TNLNSL, that might well indicate the cacher didn't have a very good experience with your cache (for whatever reason), and was just too polite to say so. I know if I got a couple of those logs, I would try and find out if there was something wrong with my cache.

[+hikemeister]

I hardly ever trade anymore, but I do leave behind a signature item and always provide some type of comment about the cache (good hiding spot, nice view, etc.) in my log. However, I suspect that there are folks who do a huge number of caches in a single day (I'm lucky if I get 3), and perhaps some of them just cut and paste a TN/LN/SL into each successive log that they provide on the web site. This weekend a group of four of us will hit about 20 caches in a wild day long geocaching trip -- perhaps be the 20th log, I'll be typing TN/LN/SL