Cache Permanence

[Team Deejay]

Something has been kind of bothering me for a little while, so I thought I would post my rambling here. My understanding of the cache hiding process is that the placer should intend for the cache to be permanent. I’ve noticed that certain hiders (some of whom have hides totalling more than 100) manage to keep nearly all their caches active, while others will often archive their caches after one minor problem. Many of these people will have many hides, but only a small fraction of those hides are active caches. I can understand that occasionally a cache may be badly placed or otherwise unsuitable. Obviously caches placed inadvertently on private property, in areas which become unsuitable due to construction or physical changes to the land (such as bridge washouts), or in places where permission is subsequently revoked after placement would also need to be archived. If you look at the hides of some of our members, however, you will see that it only takes one muggling, one container failure, or even one complaint to result in the cache being archived. This seems to be contrary to the spirit of the sport.

Please note that I am not talking about events, special seasonal caches or other special cases, only ordinary caches placed in the normal fashion. Also note that I am not referring to people who have stopped geocaching for some reason, only active cachers who continue to log finds every week or so, and even continue to place more caches (which might also be quickly archived). I just don’t get anyone would go through the trouble to create a cache and then not want people new to the game to have the experience of finding it. Am I off base here?

What started me thinking about this was looking at the COTM listings, where fully 50% of all the winners are archived or inactive (there are some events in there). Surprisingly, the Honorable Mentions are doing a little better at around 30% archived or inactive. To those cache owners of the 26 active COTMs and 104 active HMs, thank you for keeping these all going.

[Folk Trakers]

Our philosophy has been to place ‘permanent’ caches, but there has been alot of discussion on this. Many feel that after a year or two, the nature in the area is getting a bit run down so they deactivate. Or, as we have done, we are seeing that we aren’t getting that many hits any longer (after two years of finds), so we voluntarily archive to give some other cachers the opportunity to use the area for their creativity. Also, I know that some cachers just know their maintenance ‘limit’ is only a handful of caches, therefore as they think of new cache placements, they choose to deactivate less active or less popular ones so they don’t end up with too many to properly watch and maintain.

It’s all in the opinion of the cache placer.

[marc_54140]

When it comes to placing caches, it’s impossible to know what’s going to happen in the future. Concerning my problem caches, some I have replaced 4-5 times before archiving. A few, after only one incident. It really depends on the circumstances, which are different every time.

[Buy_The_Tie]

[Ray]

We had hidden one cache that was selected for COTM – May 2003 -Diamond in the Rough (GCF72C). The cache was in the mix for a little over a year. This cache was archived for several reasons: (1) it was not available during July (GMO); (2) it became high maintenance, requiring weekly visits to replace WP1 since there were a number of cachers that became creative with replacing it; (3) damage to the hiding spot at WP1 and (4) dwindling finder interest.

What I find surprising is that I should have to justify archiving a cache two years after the fact. I guess I can understand the interest, but if a cacher decides to archive a Cache, that is his choice. No explanation is owed. The implication that archiving a cache is a disservice to the community is difficult to accept.

Look at it this way…. EVERY cache will eventually be archived. WHEN that occurs is up to the cache owner or the site administrators. I prefer to control the destiny of my own caches.

JMHO ~tb

[Cheesehead Dave]

I enjoy setting out expansive themed cache series, but not only can those be difficult to maintain, but they take up a lot of good hiding spots. After a couple of years, when they begin to go weeks without finds, is when I consider archiving them.

By archiving Cheesehead Trivia, it opened up UW-Parkside to a large number of new caches, including the COTM-winning Pink Panther.

In a couple days, I’ll be archiving “?”. Already, new caches have been hidden in places formerly taken up by the earlier stages of the series.

The Clue series is already almost a year old, and I predict that by the end of 2007 it will probably archived as well, and I’ll have a new series ready to go to replace it.

While I enjoy hiding caches, I also enjoy finding them. While it’s Not About The Numbersâ„¢, those three series make up 34 caches that other people have been able to claim finds on. By opening up those areas for new cachers to hide caches of their own, that’s 34 potential new caches that I’ll be able to hunt.

The other reason is that there is a limited number of really good hiding places in my area. As one of the earliest cachers in the area, I was the first to tap the nicer hiding places such as the Parkside trails and Bong. As those spots filled up and newer players wanted to hide caches, they were forced to hide them in less-exciting places. (With many exceptions, of course.) By archiving some of these older caches, it will give newer cachers a chance to place better-quality caches in some prime areas.

[EnergySaver]

I currently have 22 active caches and 8 inactive caches. I’d estimate that my inactive ones were active for between 6 months and 2 years. I think you have a very valid point and I suspect in SOME cases people are removing them too quickly without a good reason.

I’ve never placed a cache with any thought or goal of making it inactive. The reasons I have made them inactive:

A series of 4 caches (so half of my 8 ) pretty much tied up about 75% of a park – after a 2 year run I decided it was polite to give someone else a chance to hide caches in that park – plus the series was getting very little activity (I’m in somewhat of a rural area and the series was pretty time consuming, so it seems like it’s natural audience was pretty much depleted).

My “Port Puzzle” (one of those caches of the month), was stolen by a resident animal and dragged into a hollow space under a long concrete stairway – so after about 1 1/2 years of replacing it every few months, I decided it was time to let the animal win – plus this was a very involved puzzle cache and 2 of the important historical parts of it were removed by the city. I suspect that in SOME case (as with mine) a “cache of the month” is something a little above and beyond the average cache, which sometimes it means (as in my case) that it’s also in a “high risk” setting that might cause an early death to the cache.

The remaining 3 caches, ranging in life space from 6 months to a year, we’re stolen or burn to a blob, 2 to 3 times – in most cases with very little time between each occurrence – my feeling is that when “vandals” know about a cache and take it more than once, you’ll never keep it in place at that location.

[OuttaHand]

I, too, had to archive a cache after just three months.

It was a multi-cache in the woods that had two stages that were micro-caches. One stage was about the size of a AA battery and was hidden in a stump.

We made several trips out there because the micro stages were not found. In two cases the containers were actually gone. The other times the people just didn’t look hard enough, gave up, and told us they were gone. That got old pretty quick and we got sick of trying to keep it going.

That cache was a bit of a “project” or “statement” if you will. There had been much talk of the appropriate-ness or correct-ness of having a micro in anyplace other than a busy urban setting. My opinion was that a micro is fine anywhere as long as the seeker knows they’re looking for a micro.

I still believe that, but I’m not going to try to prove it again cuz the upkeep is just too much.

Of my other active caches, the one that’s been in place the least amount of time is a year now. The others have been in place for 3 yrs, 4yrs, and 4yrs. At this point, I don’t foresee pulling them out. But if, at some point the area starts getting trashed, or something else changes, I could see me removing them.

In fact, one of them has me thinking. It’s on our land and I’m thinking about removing it to put something new there. Something very, very different in nature that would make a more interesting hide.

So I don’t see why cache placements have to be considered “permanent” things. The game itself keeps evolving, so why shouldn’t the caches themselves.

[PCFrog]

In general I think that caches should be in place for one year at least.

Now as stated above if you hide a cache and in 2 or 3 months turns out not to be such a good idea archiving it is fine is understandable.

What I got from OP is that it seems that people are intentionally putting out caches for only 1-3 months.

I don’t know if people are or not and certainly not going to check as well. This also applies to the cache of the month as well.

However, If you take a moment to think about it, IF a lot of the cache of the months are archived then what the heck are they getting Cache of the Month for? (Rhetorical question don’t answer) Some people like to visit the caches that win and IF they are being archived (1-3 months afterwards) then part of the point of the Cache of the Month is lost. I thought the Cache of the Month was for recognizing good caches and to let travelers know if they are in the area, a good cache to hit. Having them archived soon afterwards does defeat that.

I personally think your typical cache should be planed for at least 1 year stay or longer. Things do come up and change the life span of caches. **I’m going to catch flack for this next comment** I do however think that the cacher made poor judgment to place a multi cache or elaborate cache hides then shortly later archive it since it was to much to maintain. Yes, do archive it, since no one wants to search for poorly maintained caches. The hidder of the cacher should have considered how they were going to maintain those types of caches to start with. And don’t tell me that you don’t think a cacher should consider how to maintain a cache prior to placing it.

Anyhow, caches come and go and people that win Cache of the Month should consider trying to keep such caches in operation for at least that years end if possible.

[EnergySaver]

“PC Frog”, I liked your points … no “flax catching” from me.

My own personal experience, which may or may not apply to other individuals … when I was “young” to geocaching I placed many more caches than I do now … I think they were good caches (at least I hope others feel that way); but my excitement level was much higher then. So I could see other cachers hiding caches without thinking through what they’ll need to do in the future to keep them going. I suspect that if any other cachers are like me, after the “freshman rush” wears off, there might be an occasional thought of: “Why did I place that thing way out there 3 miles from the parking lot, that now I need to fix every 2 months?”

[Team Deejay]

These are all great points, folks. Regarding opening up space for new hides, it is fascinating how quickly new caches are placed when a long disabled cache is finally archived. The place I am thinking of Bluhm Farm Park in Waukesha county. Bluhm Park had a disabled cache occupying the space until about 4 months ago. Today there are now two active caches in that same park. “If you make space, they will put a cache in it!”

And, of course, cache owners have the right to archive any cache they own. I will say, however, that seeking out the COTM winners and nominees is a very good way for new people to understand “what a good cache looks like”. I personally have learned by doing this, so I am a little sad to see some of the better hides disappear before the newer people (I think I’m still one) can find them.

Thanks for keeping the discussion civil.

[TyeDyeSkyGuy]

I believe it is up to the person hiding the cache, on whether or not to archive their cache. I do though see your points.

I too have noticed a surprising number of caches lately are archived. Of my current 234 finds this year, 29 of them are archived at this point. At least 4 of them didn’t last the 3 months talked about earlier. I do not know however the reason behind any of them being archived.

What I do know is that once again, it’s a free country, and everyone should feel free do do what they like as long as it is not hurting anyone else. And I hardly think archiving a cache constitutes any harm to any one.

Smile and enjoy the day, they are limited! 🙂

[Author]

Posts