Distance Caches

[+woodsters]

Well i just read last night part of another thread about yet another cache that was denied because it was considered a "vacation cache". I will admit that I did not read the whole thread (it was eventually locked) and do not know the correspondance between the cache placer and the approver, but it did bring up some old thoughts on the issue that I have argued about before. I also noticed some comments from some the cachers that have reinterated what I have discussed before.

 

First of all, I am 100% against a cache being placed without being able to properly care for it. Whether it's placed 100 yards from where the owner lives or 1000 miles. Secondly, there is no distance defined of how far away a person can properly maintain a cache. Thirdly, there is no set timeframe that a cache must be maintained. I have not seen it written where a cache owner must go to their cache in certain intervals to check on their cache whether it's been posted it needs it or not.

 

So what you have is, people telling others that they can't maintain a cahce because it's a certain distance away. One factor that Ii have seen mentioned that is used is they (approvers) check to see if the person cached in the area. Well they might of, but that does not , mean they will return or that they know where the best places to put a cache is. On top of all this, you have fly by night cachers that come through and place a cache or tow and never to be seen again. Doesn't mean the caches are bad or not worth finding, it's just a fact that they are unknown with no finds and their caches are approved. Then you have people with numerous finds and no bad reports of not caring for a cache and they get denied.

 

I think there should be more emphasis placed on those with a little positive history on finding and placing caches, and allowed. I would recommend possibly a quota to be reached by newer ones before placing caches. Something with a timetable as well that shows they are not a cache dumper to never return again. I believe veteran cachers that have sweated and searched for caches will gain more of a gratitude when placing a cache, whether close or far away and will know that they are responsible for it and meet the agreements that are required. Otherwise make the guidelines a little stricter to meet these invisible rules that are subjectively enforced differently throughout the regions.

 

This is not a slam on the approvers at all. It's just some thoughts that it would be much easier and simpler across the board, as well a little more fair.

[+Robespierre]

All right, anybody can see the problems, it takes someone special to see the solutions. That's what I've been taught, so I feel bad with what I'm gonna mention, but here goes:

 

I think there should be more emphasis placed on those with a little positive history on finding and placing caches, and allowed. I would recommend possibly a quota to be reached by newer ones before placing caches. Something with a timetable as well that shows they are not a cache dumper to never return again.

The problem is: Experience can not always be measured by numbers!!! Are you taught by an experienced cacher??? How much time did you spend with that cacher?? Did you take a personality test to see if you'd make a good parent/owner?? I think city cachers may need experience outside the city. I think eastern cachers (and I'm one) might want some experience in....say,...Colorado, or Montana....

 

--guess I'm sayin', "not all cache experience is equal."

Edited July 6, 2004 by Robespierre

[+JMBella]

--guess I'm sayin', "not all cache experience is equal."

That's true, however I think cachers build a reputation and the admins can make a judgement based on that rep. I agree with most of what woodsters said except...

I would recommend possibly a quota to be reached by newer ones before placing caches.

We have a cacher in our area that has a couple of really great hides and has yet to log a find, at least online. He's been a registered member for more than 2 and a half years. It's very possible for a complete noob with no finds to hide a great cache.

 

All in all it seems to me that the "vacation" cache is not a wide spread problem. I say leave well enough alone and don't add any more guidelines. Let's say a cacher has a good rep for hiding and maintaining caches. He/she hides a cache that is a questionable distance but they insist they can maintain it, I say give them the benifit of the doubt. But hey, thats just me.

[tappsy]

As an example, I've just posted (in a German thread) a detailed description of the cache stuation on the Greek island of Crete: 7 caches, all by foreigners, 6 quite well, highly appreciated, no problems logged; 1 lost (GCD92C). No locals ever logged or hided a cache.

 

Even if not all of the caches really have local maintainers, it's great that these caches do exist. In such undeveloped caching regions, it should be sufficient that the cache owner is present once a year. A lot of people visit a region annually and know it very well. They could provide great caches.

 

On the other hand: How should I ever prove caching activity in a region without caches?

 

tappsy