Annual Cache Review

[seldom|seen]

Coming off the Puzzle Tour thread and relating to the Lonely Cache Game thread is a re-occurring theme that in areas of high cache saturation, particularly in urban areas, the caching community would benefit from a voluntary cache review and archive commitment from its members, to make space for new and/or better caches.

The Lonely Cache Game is meant to address some of the more delinquent caches and either get them in the hands of others with more time and ability to maintain them, through the adoption process, or get the owners to archive them. period. So far it would appear that while a few are being archived, most trouble caches are being adopted. This is a good thing. But, it isn’t opening up any space for new caches.

Then there is the issue of puzzle caches where the puzzle is the unique part of the cache, but the final container is just being placed to meet the guidelines – having something in the field to log. Many of these are in urban areas where a traditional cache would never be placed. Others though are in prime spots for traditional caches. For these, the location of the final is not critical to solving the cache. modifying the final location of any puzzle cache would require re-tooling the puzzle and that is a lot to ask but is certainly not out of the question.

So , I propose a voluntary annual portfolio review of your cache holdings to determine if you own any cache listings that could be moved, offered up for adoption or archived to open up space for others to place new caches. I am thinking something like 5-10% of your caches. For most cachers that would translate to 1 or 2 caches. For me it is closer to 10 caches and for someone like Ecorangers… well that’s a lot.

Maybe this is treated like a New Year’s Resolution and at the end of every year there could be some kind of award for the cacher that did the most to open up space for new ones. Or, maybe it’s just a pledge and we leave it to scout’s honor to follow through. Just a thought.

[zuma]

Hi,

I think that it just common sense to be constantly evaluating what works and what does not work, and adapt as necessary. This is true of cache placements as it is of everything else in life.

The first series I put out in 2004, a series of 7 caches along a rails to trails near Osseo (Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere) project needs a little updating, and I plan to get down there when the snow melts to update the hides. That series works, and I intend to keep it going for as long as I can.

I had a series along the old route of Highway 53 from Eau Claire to Rice Lake. That series (Human Highway) did not work, and I removed 4 of the 7 caches in the series last year, just keeping the 3 that I liked.

I have a series (Heart Of Gold) of 7 along the Eau Claire River that I like, but hardly ever gets hunted, so I plan on archiving the whole series this spring when the snow melts. For whatever reason, that series does not work as I intended to showcase the Eau Claire River, so it will be gone by May, replaced with something else that hopefully will work better.

As to the Yellowstone Trail series, I am pretty much constantly updating and modifying that series. Basically, I try to identify the weakest links and figure out ways to make them stronger. For example, this winter I improved the YST final locations for the ones in Waupaca and Menomonee, and got rid of the one at Lake Emily entirely. There are several more that I want to improve, once I figure out a way to do it.

Those are just a few examples. Basically, what I am saying is that all caches that I own are under constant review. If they suck, or dont get hunted much, then they get archived.

I have recently started using the geocaching rating system, and placed that web link on my cache pages so that folks can rate my caches. I am hopeful that allowing folks to rate their experience of the cache will help provide even more data about which caches are deserving of archival, and which deserve to stay in play.

zuma

[Lostby7]

I already do this..for many reasons including opening areas and due to volunteer trails.

[rogheff]

Would you be willing to Archive, put up for Adoption or substantially alter 10% of your caches?

To what end?

I ask all of you cache seekers, Would you be willing to delete, put up for adoption or substantially alter 10% of your smileys?

Why should I have to change anything about my caches? Geocaches are designed to be found be each seeker once. When the locals have all found a cache, it’s going to sit for a while. Why is that a problem?

When I see a problem develop (cacher trails or environmental damage) I archive the cache. That’s the maintenance that I agreed to perform when I placed the cache.

Is the purpose to “open up areas for new caches”? That’s a seriously silly excuse. I can place a cache anywhere in the state. The only problem that I might run into is if it’s too close to an existing geocache listed on one website. Thank goodness there’s more than one website listing caches.

I am unaware of any areas in the state where saturation is a problem that forced archiving of active caches is required.

[-cheeto-]

Would you be willing to Archive, put up for Adoption or substantially alter 10% of your caches?

Archive is probably the most likely. I certainly will archive caches that are not well received, cause issues with their surroundings, are frequently muggled, etc. That would certainly fit into this “yearly cleanup” activity.

And further, I am always open to cachers contacting me about cache placement altering and/or help as I would expect other’s to be as well. If you are planning something, let other’s know. You don’t need to keep it all “top secret”. If you have a great spot picked out and a theme and all that, just shoot that cache owner (who’s got a cache near your prime spot) an email and engage them. You never know what will happen until you do! You might just find out that that cache owner was thinking of archiving or changing that cache anyway. It’s going to get to a point where this will have to happen or the general level of quality will certainly go down.

I am unaware of any areas in the state where saturation is a problem

I don’t think you have spent a lot of time trying to place a new cache on public property in Appleton….

The only problem that I might run into is if it’s too close to an existing geocache listed on one website. Thank goodness there’s more than one website listing caches.

I have read your comments on the alternative cache listing pages with interest but I am not exactly sure that going elsewhere just to work around the .1 listing rule is such a great idea either….

Interesting topic s|s…. I am interested to watch the responses unfold.

[gotta run]

There seems to be a myopia around this issue in that only experienced cachers play the game and after a while the community owes it to them to place new caches for them to find. For people new to the game, every cache is a new cache.

Yes, owners have a responsibility to maintain their caches, and an occasional review of one’s placement portfolio is common sense.

But there seems to be an undercurrent that after some time, caches should be archived “just because” and that makes no sense.

There are letterboxes that have been around for decades, but we just found them last year. I’m glad they were left there. Geocaching is just getting started. It’ll all work out over time…

On the Left Side of the Road...

[Team Hemisphere Dancer]

Nobody can force another to archive their caches. I think it should be a completely voluntary activity. If you don’t think the area needs refreshing then you don’t have to “refresh” your caches.

I personally had the same feelings a S|S on this topic. I would never force folks to archive. Also if the cache is a very popular one(i.e. cache of the month, or other rating systems) then leave it out there I have 2 caches that I absolutely love but do not get hit very often at all. I still plan on leaving them out there. But there are a few others that have run their course so those are going to be archived and/or reinvented to make higher quality caches for the area. When the snow melts as to not make it any easier on Dave.

[ecorangers]

Two years ago a family contacted us asking us to archive one of our caches in a small-town city park that was in their hometown. There was nothing wrong with our cache…but reluctantly we agreed since it was located in their hometown and not ours. Well, to this date they still have NOT planted a cache there. 🙁

As for the other question NO! I will not archive my caches in the West Bend/area. WE are planning a huge event in West Bend and we hope to attract the “local” crowd plus out-of-staters who have not geocached in West Bend yet.

Plus, I for one (Professor does not agree with me on this) I enjoy seeing the “low” GCnumbers on my cache pages. Tami

[ecorangers]

Oh….I voted NO on the poll but NOT because I have only a few caches planted. Tami

[marc_54140]

Last summer I cleaned house, and archived around 30 caches, to bring my active number down to 100.

I would not anticipate doing this every year, so I guess my answer would be no.

[Team Hemisphere Dancer]

@marc_54140 wrote:

Last summer I cleaned house, and archived around 30 caches, to bring my active number down to 100.

I would not anticipate doing this every year, so I guess my answer would be no.

So you have just done this and are good for a while?LOL

[furfool]

I have not yet placed any caches myself. However, I was a bit dissapointed to find, on seperate occasions, that a couple of caches I was looking forward to finding had been archived due to low activity. In both cases the caches were in populated areas. In August of last year while on vacation in the north woods, my son and I were able to hunt a cache that had been idle since February of last year. It was in perfect like new condition. This same cache has been sitting idle again until about a week or two ago when there was a did not find post. Sure, this is not in a “saturated” area, but I would surely hate to see this one get archived due to low activity. As for more “saturated” areas (I’m guessing mostly in urban areas) go, yes most of the locals have probably found them already, but what about cachers that come from out of town? I know when I leave town to visit people, I always try to find a couple of caches near their home. I would hate to see some caches that I want to find archived when I get there.

By the way, that north woods cache was Esker in the Kettle (GC10MGP) by rockheadfamily.

[seldom|seen]

Interesting feedback.

I expect that the lonely cache game will flush out the caches that need attention.

I posted the Poll question not necessarily to get everyone to comment on cache placer’s responsibilities, but to get a sense of how everyone’s response about Puzzle cache finals would jive with my sentiments on the issue.

Observations:

There is a strong sense that everyone should be responsible for their caches, and perform whatever maintenance they need when they need it. This is assumed and understood (by most).

That an infrequently visited cache does not mean a “bad” cache. Quite the contrary. An infrequently visited puzzle may be a top-notch cache, just difficult to solve and find.

If there are good caches are there, traditionals, multi’s or otherwise, and there is little or no room around them for any more caches, so be it.

At some point and in some places, specifically Appleton, we have reached cache saturation in almost all of the public parks. I understand where Hemi is coming from on this. In another year, with the prolific cache placers we have in the area, there simply will be no more room in Appleton Public Parks for any new caches. This doesn’t concern me as I am adept at working around the issue, but does concern new cache players who are just starting out and want to place a traditional in a park. They are going to be pretty quickly dissuaded from placing new caches and they may in turn, turn them off from the sport. I think this is Hemi’s larger point.

Unanswered questions:

One question I was asking, specifically, was whether or not you’d be willing to move a Puzzle cache final where the final location has no bearing on the Puzzle. For example, would you move a Puzzle final from a Park location to a more urban location if that meant opening up the spot for a traditional? In hindsight, that should have been my poll question.

Any response to that?

[Sagasu]

Sure, I’d be willing to move a puzzle final from a park unless it was an ammo can and hard to place somewhere else. I do have one like that, but the “park” it’s in has about twenty square miles of open space so that won’t likely come up, and the rest of my five total puzzles are in similarly large “parks” with little cache saturation, except for a couple I inherited or adopted. I think the idea of moving a puzzle final that only has a log and is in a nano or key-holder sounds perfectly suitable unless the location is tied to the puzzle theme, which in some cases it is.

[marc_54140]

I would be willing to move the final of any of my puzzle caches, if another cacher asked about placing a cache ‘nearby’.

Except: Heesaker Woods. That’s MY park!

[Author]

Posts