"Saving" a spot

[GeoJorg]

A cacher in the next county “saves” spots (cemeteries) for future caches he may want to place by partially completing the new cache reporting form and then unchecking the reviewer box. He does this to “save the spot” in case he wants to put a cache nearby later. Others have had new listings denied as, I am supposing, the reviewer sees the “saved spot” as a new cache in process by another. This seems wrong to me, but does not appear to be officially “against the rules”. Anybody else got an opinion on this? ❓

[-cheeto-]

@GeoJorg wrote:

A cacher in the next county “saves” spots (cemeteries) for future caches he may want to place by partially completing the new cache reporting form and then unchecking the reviewer box. He does this to “save the spot” in case he wants to put a cache nearby later. Others have had new listings denied as, I am supposing, the reviewer sees the “saved spot” as a new cache in process by another. This seems wrong to me, but does not appear to be officially “against the rules”. Anybody else got an opinion on this? ❓

I’ve heard that the WI reviewers may have done this in the past. I’ve also heard that in-progress spots may have been “given away” rather than “held”.

All of the above is hearsay. Perhaps the Groundspeak reviewers will speak up to clarify current practice.

I don’t have an opinion one way or the other on how this should be handled as I could be swayed by arguments in both directions depending on the circumstances.

[uws22]

i’ve run into the same issue in the same cemeteries in that area. one of them was “occupied” for a year. i have basically given up on placing any WSQs in the area around him aside from the few i managed to sneak in.

[kc9gbo]

We have a cacher around here that likes to do that also.. I’ve run into that issue on a cache with him saving the spot, if you dig there is a small thread somewhere on here discussing that. My thoughts is you can save the spot for maybe two weeks, after that put a cache there or open it up.

[gotta run]

Relevant excerpt from this thread: http://wi-geocaching.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=10540&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=save+spot&start=0

@Team Deejay wrote:

When we have multiple unpublished caches in the system, the lowest number takes priority. Now, if you enter a listing and don’t do anything with it for an extended period, it might be deleted during database cleanup…

To be honest, we discourage the practice of “saving spots”. It is difficult enough for hiders to avoid hidden multi and mystery cache waypoints. It is impossible for people to avoid unpublished caches. That said, you can submit a page and then take time to plan your caches, execute timed releases or get permission for a placement. Just don’t make it your life’s work to get a permit filed.

On the Left Side of the Road...

[The Crippler]

This same cacher has saved multiple spots in larger cemeteries because “that cemetery deserves a multiple”. So not only are they saving spots for long periods, months if not longer, they are dictating what type of cache they feel is required. Worst part is that once a cache is finally published, there are now so many that maintanence is shoddy if at all and if caches go missing it takes months for any action to occur. I have been past the same cemetery on 4 occasions that has not had a potentially missing cache addressed. This practice needs to be STRONGLY discouraged.

[Nurse_Pat]

WOW. People feel strongly on this. I submitted a cache for review on Saturday 8/7/10 and it was denied because of this situation. I feel the reviewer handled it fairly, telling me that the spot was already spoken for, and if I didn’t see one published there to resubmit in a month. Again, the problem is this cacher that’s saving the spot has over 200 hides (not all active), AND uses his girlfriend & son’s accounts to place caches so that they are not all in his name. This way, even tho he is the one hiding them, he can still go log them as his finds. I think it awesome that he has given us all so many caching opportunities, but don’t be greedy. My cache was ready to go… he’s still “thinking’ about what he is going to put in that spot.. along with about 8 other spots he’s already “saving”.

[BakRdz]

I’ve been on both sides of this.

I had a multi in an empty park I was ready to publish only to find out a “mystery cacher” had it “saved.” I checked around with my known local placers and no one claimed it. The reviewer did send a message to the “saver” and two months later because of lack of response it was finally released so I was able to have mine there. The process was frustrating mostly because I didn’t know who the other cacher was and all I could do was sit and wait.

On the other hand, I have a spot on “hold” right now. The reason I haven’t done anything with it is because it is near and will involve an area that is under major construction. My plan is to submit the cache shortly after the construction is complete. The spot is the planned final to a multi and because it is the best spot for the final, I didn’t want to lose it to someone doing a Duct Tape and Drop P/G nearby while I patiently wait for Road Construction Season to end. HOWEVER, if someone were to contact me with a reasonable request to release the spot, I would consider releasing it because I’m not ready and won’t be for a bit. It would depend on the timing and situation.

So…I guess where I stand is I think there is a place for “saving.” I think there is a place for it if a cacher is working on a complex or detailed cache over time and needs to make sure they aren’t wasting their time because just before publishing someone drops a pill bottle in a guardrail within a few 100 feet away. However, if a cacher is just hording spots without a specific idea in mind, that seems to violate the idea of it. Of course the problem is that line can be a very thin and gray line.

[Astro_D]

We have a spot ‘saved’. We are working on a night cache that got detrailed for nearly two months as our GPSr crapped out and we didn’t get a new one until last week. We are now working on getting it finished up. We are going out this week to make a night run or two to make sure everything is in place and, if things are good, we’ll have it submitted by the end of this coming weekend. Seems like forever that we’ve had the spot held, but sometimes, things do happen that delay the cache being sent to the reviewers.

I don’t agree with holding spots for an indefinite time with no action though. I would think that if no action or notes to reviewers on the placement status/problems of the cache is made, the area should be opened up after a certain amount of time.

[TyeDyeSkyGuy]

Unfortunately, there is no GS rule on this, so it’s entirely up to the reviewers to make the call. That said, I think all of Wisconsin’s reviewers are doing it properly, as I’ve been on both sides of this as well.

Some of my puzzles and caches take time to get just right, and on a few occasions, they have saved a spot for me for a short period.

Also, I have had at least one cache I can remember that was denied for another cache waiting. I had to wait for a few weeks, but eventually the one I was waiting for was published, so no hard feelings. Sure, the spot was perfect for me, but it was for the other cacher as well, who also put forth great effort on their cache.

[Team Deejay]

If we find this situation, the response depends on how long the spot has been “reserved.” If it is less than 3 months (as in Nurse Pat’s case), we give the “latecomer” a time frame on when to check back, as 3 months seems reasonable for someone to get everything arranged (double/triple checking coordinates, lining up permission, customizing containers, etc.) More than 3 months but less than a year, we put off the new person temporarily and contact the “reserver” to find out what the holdup is. Depending on the answer, we give them a fixed amount of time to get organized. If they don’t get organized in the time frame given, we just publish the newer cache. Longer than a year, we just assume it is abandoned and archive the old listing.

Note that this system was put in place to give people a chance to obtain permission for their hide. I would think that 3 months is more than enough to get an answer back from any land manager. (No answer after 3 months is kind of an answer in itself.)

[CodeJunkie]

@Team Deejay wrote:

No answer after 3 months is kind of an answer in itself.

Kind of like an RSVP – Regrets Only situation. 😆 😆 😆 😆

[The Crippler]

I am sure we all appreciate the reviewer’s comments to clarify the efforts made on their part. What gets me is that despite all of this the amount of caches placed put this in the category of not being able to maintain. I know this subject has been discussed ad nauseum but the saving of an area that will never get maintained properly is the added insult.

I understand that non-local cachers have placed caches outside of their general area. I have some over 3 hours North and South, but I make sure that I will visit enough or that a friend/relative will get to it as soon as it needs help. In this particular case, the placer insists that the locals assist them in maintainence and get quite upset when refused.

Honestly, I do not object to assisting cachers that may have one or two in my local area and are from out of town. I will gladly help, but when the placement of certain types of caches becomes an obsession relying on others to fuel it I become resentful and will not assit. I suppose this is the wrong attitude but it reflects badly on the area which does keep cachers away.

[CodeJunkie]

@The Crippler wrote:

I am sure we all appreciate the reviewer’s comments to clarify … it reflects badly on the area which does keep cachers away.

While I can empathize with the frustration, this is a separate issue (cache maintenance) which is far different from the original post which is “saving spots”.

I personally have a few spots currently saved, but am working up some puzzles. Puzzle require extra time to craft and the location being solid is critical to the development of the rest of the cache. Permission can also be a bit challenging is some circumstances.

While I understand the issues with urban saturation, it makes me wonder about all the untapped wide open spaces that still exist. I’d suggest people think outside the P&G urban saturation and go find a good spot out on some DNR managed land. There are many tracts of land that have few or no caches on them currently just screaming for a great cache. If you can’t get a WSQ, then grab some DNR land.

I also felt honored recently where a couple of local Fox Valley cachers contacted me about a new location for a cache to continue the Historic Neenah series. They could have easily dropped a P&G cache at the location, but offered it to me for a puzzle. I feal honored that there was this level of respect amongst fellow cachers to ask before placing. It doesn’t get much better than that.

[Author]

Posts