Life span of a cache, just a few thoughts….

[sbukosky]

Perhaps without the benefit of personal give and take, one’s intentions may not come clear. It would be my intention that some common sense in reporting environmental concerns would eliminate the thought of suggesting that a time limit should be considered for caches. Indeed, as I understand the official international guidelines, a cache should not be temporary in nature and should have longevity to it. As I understand temporary, it would be a matter of months and not anything concerning temporary event caches.

[sidnaw]

Gosh, I hate this whole topic. Being new to geocaching, I don’t want caches archieved after a year. I haven’t found them yet! I don’t care how old they are. I don’t just go for the newer ones. If new ones crop up somewhat close to an old one, great! More for me to find. Yes, if there are environmental concerns, by all means tell the owner and the owner should check it out and do what is appropriate, but just a random year or month or 3 days for the life of a cache is doing nothing but adding rules where rules aren’t needed.

[Thraxman]

Let’s see:

If trails are worn to the cache, archive it.

If it isn’t visited frequently, archive it.

Now… frequently visited caches tend to show well-worn paths. The vegetation surrounding older, less frequently visited caches has plenty of time to re-grow between visits.

Unless the cache is located on pavement, our two main tests for archiving a cache seem to indicate most caches should be archived

[Cathunter]

I agree that less rules are better; I just forsee bigger problems to come when cache density starts to cause more denied applications.

There are already parks that would not allow for additional caches due to the .1 mile rule between caches. It’s not a problem for us that LIKE to drive many miles to persue caches, but not everyone is like me.

I say, if you have a trail, MOVE the cache! Even a couple hundred feet will do the job.

Number of times found has very little to do with the “quality” of a cache. I love a good 3-4 mile hike to a cache, but I notice it sure is not popular with the majority of cachers. If your cache does not get many hits, ask why. Maybe it needs another in the area to draw more attention. Maybe you need to fill it with money, etc.

If I had the need to, I would hope that I could ask the owner of a 2 year old cache that’s probably not in the best shape if they would consider archiving it so that I or someone else cold do something new there, and it would not be a big issue.

On the other hand, i’ll take quality & originality over quantity and average any day. I will admit shaking my head when I see folks that have more hides than finds or even close, for that matter. It takes experience to know how to hide a cache that will survive any amount of time.

But, as they say, to each his own.

If you want something different, try Geodashing

[This message has been edited by Cathunter (edited 02-05-2004).]

[GrouseTales]

Joe,

I’ve noticed you left 1523 “should be archived” notes last night. Based on your suggestion, I’ve archived all caches in Wisconsin.

(Kidding of course, but good point Thraxman)

[This message has been edited by GrouseTales (edited 02-05-2004).]

[Mama Fishcacher]

Lots of great thoughts on both sides…. Very interesting topic.

[Author]

Posts