My Cache Denied For Not Logging Online!

[+TEAM 360]

I am not out to ruffle anyones feathers, or to start a flame war. I am certainly not out to make anyone look bad at all. Geocaching rules state that if a cache is turned down, I can post an appeal here in the forums. So I am doing just that: I would like to appeal to CO Admin or TPTB to take another look at one of my caches I submitted for approval over a week ago. It is a traditional microcache, with a logsheet, hidden at a stop along Interstate 40, just a bit outside of the AZ border, right at the high point of the Continental Divide in New Mexico. In addition to being a regular cache with a logbook, the place has got a WOW factor, IMO, along with some great scenic views. It could easily pass the requirements for a Virt, yet it is a physical cache that I placed. The spot is always busy with tourists stopping there.

 

I got this message back:

 

"CO Admin posted a note for THE DIVIDE (Traditional Cache) at 6/26/2004

 

Log Date: 6/26/2004

Since you do not post your finds on the website I really have no way of

knowing if you can or can not maintain a cache this far away from where

I think you live. while it may be roughly the same distance from you as

some of your other caches it is in a different direction and may lead

to you spreading your self too thin

The archive must stand

Sorry

CO Admin"

 

Now, just about everyone knows I don't post my "finds" online, I do, however, post a "note" on the cache page, allowing the owner to read about my hunt. The only reason I don't post a "find" is to avoid having my numbers tracked. It would appear from this message that you have to NOW POST YOUR "FINDS" ONLINE IN ORDER TO SUBMIT A CACHE FOR APPROVAL. Additionally, it would seem that you can only hide caches in ONE DIRECTION, and not deviate from this "one-way cache corridor" for fear of "spreading yourself too thin". So now I can't hide a cache just a few miles outside of my own home state? Along a route I take at least a few times a year? I only go to Portland only once a year, but am able to "maintain" the Original Stash Tribute Plaque"....I fly to Michigan a couple of times a year, but have caches approved there, too....I drive to Nevada several times a year, and have 2 caches there as well....

 

I have had several off-site exchanges with CO Admin in the past, and he seems like a good approver, as well as a nice guy. Is this some new policy here at GC.com? I have a hard time accepting these reasons for my cache being denied.

[+CO Admin]

Its not a policy, just a way to tell if you can maintain the cache. Since I don't know how often you go to this area a record of finds would have made it easy for me to see. Simply a tool I use. I feel the other reason I gave you was much more important.

while it may be roughly the same distance from you as

some of your other caches it is in a different direction and may lead

to you spreading your self too thin

 

Again its not a guideline or a rule just something that makes it easier to tell your maintainable distance. Perhaps it could have been better worded as "Since I dont know how often you travel in this area a cache that is a few hundred miles from where I believe you live and in another direction from your other far away caches may be outside your maintainable distance." Looking at a hiders finds is just one thing I can to do make the approval process quick and painless. It is a tool not a guideline. I was trying to explain the process. Perhaps I would have been better off just saying its a vacation cache and there fore can not be approved.

 

So now I can't hide a cache just a few miles outside of my own home state? Along a route I take at least a few times a year? I only go to Portland only once a year, but am able to "maintain" the Original Stash Tribute Plaque"....I fly to Michigan a couple of times a year, but have caches approved there, too....I drive to Nevada several times a year, and have 2 caches there as well....

 

Total Est. Time: 5 hours, 29 minutes Total Est. Distance: 365.25 miles is NOT "just a few miles outside of my own home state?" As far as I remember your MI caches have someone watching them with you(I could be wrong about this but I seem to remember that this is the way it is). Perhaps I made a mistake on approving your nevada caches. If I did then I would allow then to stay there as you should not be punished if I made a mistake. Also the Nevada caches are 100 miles closer to you than the one in NM and If I remember correctly a lot closer to some of your other caches.

 

CO Admin

Edited June 26, 2004 by CO Admin

[+El Diablo]

As much as I respect and admire CO, I would have to disagree with him. If you live within a reasonable distance of the cache and feel you can maintain it, then it should be approved.

 

There are cachers out there that have dozens if not hundreds of caches placed. At which point does an approver decide that a cacher may be spreading him or herself too thin? The point being that a cacher can have a hundred caches hidden within 5 miles of where he lives and another may have 3 hidden within a 50 miles. Would it not be harder to maintain the 100 versus the 3?

 

El Diablo

 

Edited to say I think your avatar should be banned. It is a family site after all. Our kids are already exposed to too much already.

Edited June 26, 2004 by El Diablo

[+CO Admin]

As much as I respect and admire CO, I would have to disagree with him. If you live within a reasonable distance of the cache and feel you can maintain it, then it should be approved.

 

There are cachers out there that have dozens if not hundreds of caches placed. At which point does an approver decide that a cacher may be spreading him or herself too thin? The point being that a cacher can have a hundred caches hidden within 5 miles of where he lives and another may have 3 hidden within a 50 miles. Would it not be harder to maintain the 100 versus the 3?

 

El Diablo

 

Edited to say I think your avatar should be banned. It is a family site after all. Our kids are already exposed to too much already.

from mapquest. from Phoenix AZ to Continental Divide NM where the cache in question is

Total Est. Time: 5 hours, 29 minutes Total Est. Distance: 365.25 miles

This cacher has caches that are

Total Est. Time: 4 hours, 33 minutes Total Est. Distance: 215.72 miles from his location however they are in the opposite direction.

 

That is a vacation cache in my book. not within the normal maintainable distance or direction for this cacher. All this needs is a local cacher to watch it and its approvable.

Edited June 26, 2004 by CO Admin

[+TEAM 360]

Also from Mapquest, for my Michigan caches:

 

"Total Est. Time: 30 hours, 40 minutes Total Est. Distance: 2033.56 miles"

 

I am not out to flame you, CO, I am just publicly appealing to see what the general concensus is and if I can get my cache approved.

 

If you look at a map of AZ, anyone can see that it is 4 hours to anywhere from Phoenix...4 to Vegas, 5 to LA....we put on a lot of miles getting anywhere around here.

Edited June 26, 2004 by TEAM 360

[+Team GPSaxophone]

That is a vacation cache in my book. not within the normal maintainable distance or direction for this cacher. All this needs is a local cacher to watch it and its approvable.

I'll maintain it for him. I drive I-40 almost every time I visit family in California. I also have a cache in California that I visit often enough to maintain (with the help of a local).

[+CO Admin]

Also from Mapquest, for my Michigan caches:

 

"Total Est. Time:  30 hours, 40 minutes Total Est. Distance: 2033.56 miles"

 

I am not out to flame you, CO, I am just publicly appealing to see what the general concensus is and if I can get my cache approved.

 

If you look at a map of AZ, anyone can see that it is 4 hours to anywhere from Phoenix...4 to Vegas, 5 to LA....we put on a lot of miles getting anywhere around here.

From your original note to the reviewer on your MI cache

12/30/2003 TEAM 360 posted a reviewer note for GEOCACHING 101    [visit log]

This is not a vacation cache. I travel to Michigan at LEAST twice a year (that's probably more maintenance than 90% of cachers do anyhow). I have family and friends here and am a member of MiGO (Michigan Geocachers Organization). Nothing to worry about with this one.

 

 

you state "I have family and friends here" that tells me you have someone who can check on your cache if needed. If you had family of friends in Fiji Id approve a cache there too. That is the difference between MI and NM.

Edited June 26, 2004 by CO Admin

[+El Diablo]

If you are 365 miles away...then I agree with CO.

 

El Diablo

[+TEAM 360]

Yes, but I also stated in my "note to the approver" on the denied cache, that "I travel this route often enough to be able to maintain the cache".....

[+Subterranean]

Post deleted.

 

Seeing the way this has unfolded, I regret getting even slightly involved.

 

Matt

Edited June 26, 2004 by subterranean

[+CO Admin]

Yes, but I also stated in my "note to the approver" on the denied cache, that "I travel this route often enough to be able to maintain the cache".....

I just looked at the archived logs and on the cache page and do not see you saying ""I travel this route often enough to be able to maintain the cache"....."

In an e-mail to me you said "It is, however, located on a route I take every time I go to Albuquerque, and not at all too far away for me to maintain." but you do not state how often that is. A few times a year is not often enough for this cache to be maintained.

[+TEAM 360]

If you are 365 miles away...then I agree with CO.

 

El Diablo

Well, then let's make it a hard and fast rule about mileage limitations...what should we make the cutoff at? 50, 100, or 200 miles? How far is "too far"? How often should the cacher drive the route? Once, twice or three times a year?

 

What a headache this has become....

[+El Diablo]

If you are 365 miles away...then I agree with CO.

 

El Diablo

Well, then let's make it a hard and fast rule about mileage limitations...what should we make the cutoff at? 50, 100, or 200 miles? How far is "too far"? How often should the cacher drive the route? Once, twice or three times a year?

 

What a headache this has become....

Works for me. Lets make it 100 miles.

 

El Diablo

[+TEAM 360]

A few times a year is not often enough for this cache to be maintained.

And why not? I only go to Portland ONCE a year, on May 5th (the geocaching birthday) to maintain the Original Stash Tribute Plaque....yet that is okay...

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Grants is only 80 miles or so from my house. Problem solved

[+Nazgul]

Yes, but I also stated in my "note to the approver" on the denied cache, that "I travel this route often enough to be able to maintain the cache".....

How often is that? Based on your previous notes, you think that being there at least twice a year is adequate. If I were an approver I wouldn't approve a cache for someone who may not be able to do maintenance more than every 6 months, and perhaps less.

 

On a related note, it is not my (limited, local) experience that twice a year would provide more maintenance than 90% of cache owners do. The vast majority of caches in this area get much better maintenance than that when it is needed. I'd say your number was reversed, that twice-a-year maintenance (or less) would cover perhaps 10% of caches. Of course, YMMV.

[+CO Admin]

If you are 365 miles away...then I agree with CO.

 

El Diablo

Well, then let's make it a hard and fast rule about mileage limitations...what should we make the cutoff at? 50, 100, or 200 miles? How far is "too far"? How often should the cacher drive the route? Once, twice or three times a year?

 

What a headache this has become....

Or you can get a local cacher to watch it and Ill approve it.

 

A hard and fast rule would be a problem as there are peopl who travel from New york to LA once a week. That would not be a problem for them to maintain. A 14 year old cache who is limited to a bicycle for transportation would have a problem maintaining a cache 50 miles away. It is different for each person.

Beside do we really want another hard and fast rule?

[+CO Admin]

A few times a year is not often enough for this cache to be maintained.

And why not? I only go to Portland ONCE a year, on May 5th (the geocaching birthday) to maintain the Original Stash Tribute Plaque....yet that is okay...

Special dispensation was granted for that cache AND from what I can see it needs a lot more maintenance then you can give it. The log book has already been replaced a few times. Maybe you should let that one be adopted. Last log book went missing on may 16th. on may 19th you said you would take care of it. it wasnt untill June 22 "June 22 by ponyryder (6 found)

Thanks to Team 360 sending it to me, a new mini-cache "Altoids" container with log sheet has been placed at the Tribute Plaque. I hope this one lasts longer. " over a month is way too long to to wait to replace a missing log book.

Edited June 26, 2004 by CO Admin

[+TEAM 360]

This is not about the Plaque, which, by the way, I spent hundreds of dollars to maintain, buying my roundtrip airline tickets, car rental, hotel room and supplies to paint and maintain the Plaque...and I will continue to do this, EVERY YEAR (out of my OWN pocket, thank you)...

The logbook was replaced BY ME on May 5th of this year, and was stolen shortly afterwards (the Altoids tin was done so well that someone wanted it for their own). I sent a replacement logbook to a local cacher (ponyryder, whom I met at the site during maintenance) and it is now in place.

 

Well, Sax has stepped up to the plate and offered to maintain this.

 

I have plead my case. Your Honor, the Defense rests.

[+Nazgul]

I think the bottom line is that actual physical distance is probably less of a concern than how often a cache can be maintained.

 

Using recently-logged caches can be a useful indicator, but it doesn't necessarily match.

 

Running through some scenarios in my head, I'd question anything where a maintainer couldn't get there at least every 90 days or so. If several solid DNFs cause the owner or an admin to temporarily disable a cache, you shouldn't have to leave it in that state for more than 2-3 months before it can be checked, replaced, whatever.

 

(I'm waiting for Team GPSaxophone to jump in with "HelllllOooOOooooooooOOOO!!!!! I CAN WATCH THIS ONE!!! HellooooOOooo!!!")

[+CO Admin]

This is not about the Plaque, which, by the way, I spent hundreds of dollars to maintain, buying my roundtrip airline tickets, car rental, hotel room and supplies to paint and maintain the Plaque...and I will continue to do this, EVERY YEAR (out of my OWN pocket, thank you)...

The logbook was replaced BY ME on May 5th of this year, and was stolen shortly afterwards (the Altoids tin was done so well that someone wanted it for their own). I sent a replacement logbook to a local cacher (ponyryder, whom I met at the site during maintenance) and it is now in place.

 

Well, Sax has stepped up to the plate and offered to maintain this.

 

I have plead my case. Your Honor, the Defense rests.

Money spent out of your own pocket is not the issue here.

Ability to maintain a cache is. The tribute cache was an example. over a month is too long for a new log book.

 

Thank you for all the above information.

Edited June 26, 2004 by CO Admin

[+Team GPSaxophone]

(I'm waiting for Team GPSaxophone to jump in with "HelllllOooOOooooooooOOOO!!!!! I CAN WATCH THIS ONE!!! HellooooOOooo!!!")

Actually, I'm moving to Colorado in a matter on months. I'd be able to do the first couple of maintenance checks, then we'd have to find someone else to do it. When I move to Colorado I'll take I-70 instead of I-40. Sorry Jeff.

[+TEAM 360]

UH, PAY NO ATTENTION TO THAT LITTLE SMURF!!

 

Sax said he would maintain it.

Cool.

Problem solved.

Feel free to approve this cache ASAP.

Don't read the post above.

Thank you.

[+Robespierre]

Hey, this is educational. Thanks, guys.

As to...

I'll maintain it for him. I drive I-40 almost every time I visit family in California. I also have a cache in California that I visit often enough to maintain (with the help of a local).

Well, I hope the sax man can get there often enough, 'cause too little sax.....

[+CO Admin]

Problem is not solved.

 

Cache Permanence

 

When you report a cache on the Geocaching.com web site, geocachers should (and will) expect the cache to be there for a realistic and extended period of time. Therefore, caches that have the goal to move (“traveling caches”), or temporary caches (caches hidden for less than 3 months or for events) may not be approved. If you wish to hide caches for an event, bring printouts to the event and hand them out there.

 

We realize that it is possible that a planned long-term cache occasionally becomes finite because of concerns with the environment, missing or plundered caches, or the owner’s decision to remove the cache for other valid reasons. Please do your best to research fully, hide wisely, and maintain properly for a long cache life.

 

Since the Blue cacher is moving he will not be able to maintain this cache for any lenght of time. Im sure you can find another local cacher that can help.

[+Renegade Knight]

Good to see all these issues coming out.

 

Maintainable distance.

 

My rule and it's the only one I use is 6 months or so to maintain a cache. It lets me place remote caches. As everyone knows a remote cache doesn't need as much maintaining due to less visitors and being so far from the beaten path.

 

This RASH takes time and money. There are places I get to a few times a year and those are valid cache locations. There are places I'll never go again and I've adopted those caches out after I moved. Of course this is just my opinion as a cache owner.

 

A month to three months is optimistic. Sure it works for local caches but not that really cool one that was set by Idaho's Rock Arch. You know that remote cache that has had what, 3 or 4 visitors in 2 years?

 

Everything depends on everything. I will keep placing caches according to my own ability to maintain them and I will maintain them as my schedule allows.

 

At some point there is an issue of trust. Do you trust Team360 to maintain a cache that he says he can maintain or not? It's as simple as that. If you don't trust him to maintain a cache then where he finds them doesn't matter. If you do trust him to maintain the cache then where he finds them doesn't matter.

[+TEAM 360]

At some point there is an issue of trust. Do you trust Team360 to maintain a cache that he says he can maintain or not? It's as simple as that. If you don't trust him to maintain a cache then where he finds them doesn't matter. If you do trust him to maintain the cache then where he finds them doesn't matter.

My point exactly. I shouldn't HAVE to go and get someone else to "maintain" it for me...I can do that myself...but hey, we need to get a second voice before we are believed...

 

I give up. Ya know, this whole thing about getting a cache approved just cracks me up.

If you want to place a Virt, you have to jump through all these hoops, and admins turn them down on the basis of: "You can put a traditional cache there instead."

I was going to make this a Virt to begin with, but then I thought it would have a better chance to get approved it a traditional cache was there. So I placed a micro. And then it STILL gets turned down.

 

Maybe we should all just be finders, instead of hiders, and see how this sport grows.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

At some point there is an issue of trust.  Do you trust Team360 to maintain a cache that he says he can maintain or not?  It's as simple as that.  If you don't trust him to maintain a cache then where he finds them doesn't matter.  If you do trust him to maintain the cache then where he finds them doesn't matter.

My point exactly. I shouldn't HAVE to go and get someone else to "maintain" it for me...I can do that myself...but hey, we need to get a second voice before we are believed...

 

I give up. Ya know, this whole thing about getting a cache approved just cracks me up.

If you want to place a Virt, you have to jump through all these hoops, and admins turn them down on the basis of: "You can put a traditional cache there instead."

I was going to make this a Virt to begin with, but then I thought it would have a better chance to get approved it a traditional cache was there. So I placed a micro. And then it STILL gets turned down.

 

Maybe we should all just be finders, instead of hiders, and see how this sport grows.

You mean you were within 80 miles of my place and you didn't stop by?

[+Cache Viking]

... It lets me place remote caches. As everyone knows a remote cache doesn't need as much maintaining due to less visitors and being so far from the beaten path. ...

Thats for sure. I have one that is about 50-60 miles away that has been in place since January 2004 and has only 2 finds. Nice hike and views for 2 miles from parking area. I at first thought I would be making the hike every 6-8 weeks but now see that not to be the case.

[+TEAM 360]

At some point there is an issue of trust.  Do you trust Team360 to maintain a cache that he says he can maintain or not?  It's as simple as that.  If you don't trust him to maintain a cache then where he finds them doesn't matter.  If you do trust him to maintain the cache then where he finds them doesn't matter.

My point exactly. I shouldn't HAVE to go and get someone else to "maintain" it for me...I can do that myself...but hey, we need to get a second voice before we are believed...

 

I give up. Ya know, this whole thing about getting a cache approved just cracks me up.

If you want to place a Virt, you have to jump through all these hoops, and admins turn them down on the basis of: "You can put a traditional cache there instead."

I was going to make this a Virt to begin with, but then I thought it would have a better chance to get approved it a traditional cache was there. So I placed a micro. And then it STILL gets turned down.

 

Maybe we should all just be finders, instead of hiders, and see how this sport grows.

You mean you were within 80 miles of my place and you didn't stop by?

I placed this one while coming back from your Campout cache, actually...you weren't even home yet. You were still wrestling with that grizzly, back at the campsite...

[+AJ of Dunbar]

Im kinda torn here. I want to agree with 360, but that cache is quite a ways off. But if you have some one closer who agrees to help you maintain it, why not? It covers all the bases. It seems there are far to many politics in placing a cache. A micro really doesnt need maintiance unless its muggles or someone doesnt screw the lid back on correctly (im assuming bison tube). Now dont get me wrong yes it should be checked into but micros rarely need that unless muggled. If the area is great then whats the problem?

 

Wasnt geocaching about getting out and seeing places you have never seen before? Why should little stipulations like distance which can easily be over come by a 'helper' deny the cache which has been said to have a great view or what ever it has? Geocaching is about exploring the outdoors, going places you have never been, not procedures which can be overcome by simple solutions?

 

just my $.02

 

aj

Edited June 26, 2004 by rc_racer_007

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Im kinda torn here. I want to agree with 360, but that cache is quite a ways off. But if you have some one closer who agrees to help you maintain it, why not? It covers all the bases. It seems there are far to many politics in placing a cache. A micro really doesnt need maintiance unless its muggles or someone doesnt screw the lid back on correctly (im assuming bison tube). If the area is great then whats the problem?

 

Wasnt geocaching about getting out and seeing places you have never seen before? Why should little stipulations like distance which can easily be over come by a 'helper' deny the cache which has been said to have a great view or what ever it has? Geocaching is about exploring the outdoors, going places you have never been, not procedures which can be overcome by simple solutions?

 

just my $.02

 

aj

Actually, the New Mexico portion of the Continental Divide is not at all spectacular. Hardly a "wow". If you want "WOW", you'll have to go to Colorado. (Any guesses as to why I'm moving there?)

[+AJ of Dunbar]

well i was assuming, i havent been any further west then indianapolis. Im in WV.

[+The Leprechauns]

A micro really doesnt need maintiance unless its muggles or someone doesnt screw the lid back on correctly (im assuming bison tube). Now dont get me wrong yes it should be checked into but micros rarely need that unless muggled. If the area is great then whats the problem?

In my experience, micros clearly require MUCH MORE maintenance than traditional caches. Just with my own caches, I have had twelve maintenance issues this year alone. Nine of them involved micro containers. I found out the Altoids breath strip tins don't hold up to a Pittsburgh winter, even if spray-painted, and that a "waterproof" match case wasn't. Plastic keyholders deteriorate and fall apart. One-pint rubbermaids can get damp, soaking clue sheets. Logbooks fill up and need to be replaced.

 

Maybe dampness and rust aren't issues in New Mexico, but muggles and full logbooks definitely are issues everywhere. And at least around here, if a cache maintenance issue on a micro isn't fixed within two or three months, you're likely to hear criticism.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Maybe dampness and rust aren't issues in New Mexico, but muggles and full logbooks definitely are issues everywhere. And at least around here, if a cache maintenance issue on a micro isn't fixed within two or three months, you're likely to hear criticism.

Rust? Isn't that a color?

[+Mopar]

I agree, micros are usually much more to maintain the larger caches. I just archived one of my own that was just too far from me now for me to handle all the issues, and we have another micro thats required 4 maintenance visits in 4 months. Logs fill up fast, they loose pencils, they get moved or go missing..... and I'm gonna take a canoe trip this week to help someone else replace a micro that was reported eaten. (?)

Edited June 26, 2004 by Mopar

[+TEAM 360]

Well, now CO wants to get nasty about it. He just archived the Original Stash Tribute Plaque in retaliation for me going public about this cache.

If there WAS any maintenance issue about the Plaque, why was it not addressed back in September, when it was listed?

Answer: there is no maintenance issue about the Plaque, this unwarranted archival is clearly a retaliatory action. I have proven I can take care of the site. Having the Original Stash Tribute Plaque archived is a slap in the face to all who made it possible and is complete BULL****.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Well, now CO wants to get nasty about it. He just archived the Original Stash Tribute Plaque in retaliation for me going public about this cache.

If there WAS any maintenance issue about the Plaque, why was it not addressed back in September, when it was listed?

Answer: there is no maintenance issue about the Plaque, this unwarranted archival is clearly a retaliatory action. I have proven I can take care of the site. Having the Original Stash Tribute Plaque archived is a slap in the face to all who made it possible and is complete BULL****.

Hang on a sec, Jeff. The maintenance issue wasn't addressed in September because there was no issue then. The issue didn't surface until the logbook went missing last month. Now it's being looked at. Well, it was looked at. For this situation, I think the approvers should discuss it amongst themselves rather than have one admin archive it out of spite. However, I don't know if more than one approver was involved, so I can't say if the correct action has been taken.

 

However, since you don't live in Oregon, you should have a local cacher available to replace the logbook within a couple of weeks should it go missing again. That's what I have for my cache in California.

[+TEAM 360]

However, since you don't live in Oregon, you should have a local cacher available to replace the logbook within a couple of weeks should it go missing again. That's what I have for my cache in California.[/color]

If CO had actually taken the time to READ THE FRIGGIN LOGS, he would see that I sent a replacement Altoids and logsheet to Ponyryder, who lives right up the road from the Plaque, and he replaced it for me.

 

But NOOOOO, he didn't even bother to look...

[+carleenp]

I agree, micros are usually much more to maintain the larger caches. I just archived one of my own that was just too far from me now for me to handle all the issues, and we have another micro thats required 4 maintenance visits in 4 months. Logs fill up fast, they loose pencils, they get moved or go missing.....  and I'm gonna take a canoe trip this week to help someone else replace a micro that was reported eaten. (?)

I agree too. I archived one that was 4 blocks from my house because maintenance became such a chore! People kept putting it out of reach and the pencil went mising about once a week. I was so glad when it went missing so that I had a better excuse to archive it.

 

On other issues, it was suggested making a bright line rule for distance. I think that is problematic because maintainable distance varies among locations. Here in Nebraska 100 or even 150 miles can be nothing. There is no traffic, easy terrain, high speed limits and everyone tends to speed beyond that. But in a metropolitan or mountainous area, a 100 mile drive could take many hours. Number of times a route is driven is difficult. I don't think that is as important as the question, how fast will the person get to the cache to fix problems? I would hope in less than a week or so, but because circumstances vary could see a few weeks. Regardless 365 miles seems too far to me unless there is someone closer who agreed to help maintain it.

Edited June 26, 2004 by carleenp

[MOCKBA]

Total Est. Distance: 365.25 miles

I think the approvers should give more thought to the content of their denial notes. CO Admin didn't just write "It's 300 miles from your home and therefore I think it is a vacation cache"

Rather, CO Admin wrote that "The owner doesn't log finds, therefore I am gonna make arbitrary assumptions about his caching area".

Sounds like the problem is about 360's note-logging habits rather than about time required for the owner to check on a cache.

And indeed, if latter was the case, how would anyone approve any caches which require overnight camping trips? Should I conclude, CO Admin, that *all* remote caches are now banned?

I recently placed a cache which required a 6 hr hike, one-way. I'd say it will be more difficult for me to maintain than for TEAM 360 to maintain the micro in question. And although I log some of my finds, my nearest logged find is also a 6-hour trip away. Would you archive mine as a "vacation cache", too?

Don't be hypocrites, for heaven's sake. You either do not bring up the find-logging issues in the archival note, or you own up to what you wrote and stop pretending that you had some different basis for your decision.

[+Cache Viking]

I agree, micros are usually much more to maintain the larger caches. I just archived one of my own that was just too far from me now for me to handle all the issues, and we have another micro thats required 4 maintenance visits in 4 months. Logs fill up fast, they loose pencils, they get moved or go missing..... and I'm gonna take a canoe trip this week to help someone else replace a micro that was reported eaten. (?)

I had a micro 3 blocks from my house that went missing 3 times before archiving. Prior to archiving I was always over there replacing pencils and logs and in winter baggies. Not worth the trouble for me.

[+Mopar]

It's always something, isn't it?

[+Huntnlady]

Team 360 is a Geocaching FORCE within our membership. His hides are all ingenous and creative beyond compare. And what he did in creating the original cache plaque, well that is great dedication.

It does bring up a problem that he doesn't log his finds. I wanted to write him a while ago, and when I went to look up geocacher by finds, he didn't have any, so I couldn't. Had to go look up the forum logs in order to get his profile.

However, if Team 360 placed it and says he can maintain it, I say approve it.

[+TEAM 360]

You know Mopar, it's not about that cache. I already had it removed.

 

But you are right, it's always something.

 

Something with the Admins.

[Keystone]

Hello,

 

As the originator of this topic has also opened a separate topic regarding the Original Stash Tribute Plaque, I would ask that discussion of that issue be confined to the other thread. If the topic owner prefers to continue the discussion here, then the second thread should be closed. Thanks.

[+TEAM 360]

Hello,

 

As the originator of this topic has also opened a separate topic regarding the Original Stash Tribute Plaque, I would ask that discussion of that issue be confined to the other thread. If the topic owner prefers to continue the discussion here, then the second thread should be closed. Thanks.

Agreed, Keystone...let's keep this thread about the unapproved cache, and the other thread about the retaliatory measures taken against me by archiving the Original Stash Tribute Plaque.

[+Mechanics Hands]

Call me crazy or anything else, but I thought one of the main guidelines of getting a cache approved is to clearly show maintainability. Co clearly stated several times with this issue that " All this needs is a local cacher to watch it and its approvable" Seems like this is a very fair and resonable request. It would seem absolutely silly to place a cache where it cannot be reached by you, or someone else that has accepted responsibility in maintaining it, within a short time. Even with my few finds its clear that caches require maintenance, some more than others.

 

From the geocaching website cache placing guidelines:

 

"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. "

 

To have caches in states or area you only visit a couple times a year, or in the case of your Portland Oregon one "I only go to Portland only once a year," certainly seems like you cannot maintain them. Dumb question here but realisitically, how can you maintain a cache in an area you visit only once a year? I know if I moved from an area, or had a cache placed in an area I didnt go to often, as a responsible cache owner I would find someone to help out.

 

It must hurt to have your Portland cache archived. But the policy that YOU agreed to is very clear. I'm sure if you asked the NW geocachers it would be easy to have someone volunteer to help maintain it.

 

Reminds me of an old saying, the squeeky wheel gets the oil. Well you drew attention to yourself and your many caches scattered thoughout many states. Heck I myself was wondering how all the caches could be maintained and what condition they were in. If I was wondering that I know others, especially the approvers wondered the same thing. To have one in disrepair for so long, it appears that the reviewers took appropriate actions. IMHO you should have temporarily disabled it for repair then if you were unable to get there yourself, ask for help from someone in the area. I know you could have found someone to help with it.

 

We all know the guidelines, I know them from the caches I have wanted to place. Is it really that unrealsitic? We have many caches in the dallas area that are maintained by others because the original owners moved. They were responsible and asked for help and got it. I just got an email from one the other day because there had been rains in the area and they were about to do a maintenance run just to ensure they were ok. I saved them a trip by logging the cache and reporting everything was ok.

 

Seems like you might try relaxing and taking it less personally. I can see both sides, and it seems like Co's requests were very fair and resonable. I hope its not a power trip, which I doubt it is. You jsut drew attention to yourslef in an open forum and exposed how little maintenance you can and actually do. Heck use GPSSaxophones generous offer to help maintain it and get it approved. Thats all that was really asked for. But instead of looking at that you kept it up in the forums. OOPS.

 

just my .04 worth

 

MH

Edited June 26, 2004 by Mechanics Hands

[+TEAM 360]

Call me crazy or anything else, but I thought one of the main guidelines of getting a cache approved is to clearly show maintainability. Co clearly stated several times with this issue that " All this needs is a local cacher to watch it and its approvable" Seems like this is a very fair and resonable request. It would seem absolutely silly to place a cache where it cannot be reached by you, or someone else that has accepted responsibility in maintaining it, within a short time. Even with my few finds its clear that caches require maintenance, some more than others.

 

From the geocaching website cache placing guidelines:

 

"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. "

 

To have caches in states or area you only visit a couple times a year, or in the case of your Portland Oregon one "I only go to Portland only once a year," certainly seems like you cannot maintain them. Dumb question here but realisitically, how can you maintain a cache in an area you visit only once a year? I know if I moved from an area, or had a cache placed in an area I didnt go to often, as a responsible cache owner I would find someone to help out.

 

It must hurt to have your Portland cache archived. But the policy that YOU agreed to is very clear. I'm sure if you asked the NW geocachers that it would be easy to have someone volunteer to help maintain it.

 

Reminds me of an old saying, the squeeky wheel gets the oil. Well you drew attention to yourself and your many caches scattered thoughout many states. Heck I myself was wondering how all the caches could be maintained and what condition they were in. If I was wondering that I know others, especially the approvers wondered the same thing. To have one in disrepair for so long, it appears that the reviewers took appropriate actions. IMHO you should have temporarily disabled it for repair then if you were unable to get there yourself, ask for help from someone in the area. I know you could have found someone to help with it.

 

We all know the guidelines, I know them from the caches I have wanted to place. Is it really that unrealsitic? We have many caches in the dallas area that are maintained by others because the original owners moved. They were responsible and asked for help and got it. I just got an email from one the other day because there had been rains in the area and they were about to do a maintenance run just to ensure they were ok. I saved them a trip by logging the cache and reporting everything was ok.

 

Seems like you might try relaxing and taking it less personally. I can see both sides, and it seems like Co's requests were very fair and resonable. I hope its not a power trip, which I doubt it is. You jsut drew attention to yourslef in an open forum and exposed how little maintenance you can and actually do. Heck use GPSSaxophones generous offer to help maintain it and get it approved. Thats all that was really asked for. But instead of looking at that you kept it up in the forums. OOPS.

 

just my .04 worth

 

MH

No "oops" about it. Sax agreed to maintain it, didn't you read that? Still, it didn't get approved, because he is moving away from the area he is currently in.

 

Who says I can't maintain this cache?

CO Admin, that's who.

Glad to see everyone knows my travel schedule, even better than I do.

Unbelievable.

[+Mechanics Hands]

A cache in an airport? After 911? THATS NUTS!! I'm an aircraft mech and wanted to do one at dfw airport (already a virt there) but had common sense to keep the idea as a virt. Common sence says to keep away from airport property etc, especially after 911. Not only is it illegal to place things on airport property, but it would also would give geocaching a HUGE black eye.

 

Lets all take a Deep breath relax and not turn this into attacking accusing etc. To make comments like the admins issues etc WILL NOT help you to get your caches approved. I would hate to see your inputs to the forums and giving to the sport decrease. Sounds like it was a wonderful idea and thing you did with the portland cache. But still is it really that hard to follow the rules and use some respect and sence with things?

 

MH