Adopting a Geocache

[+Imogen Michel]

There is a geocache at the end of my road which is a D5 and very popular/well-known by local cachers. The owner hasn't logged in for over 2 years and doesn't respond to emails.

 

The cache is marked as needing maintenance; is there a way to officially adopt it seeing as the owner is clearly AWOL (this would allow the adopter to clear the 'needs maintenance' attribute for example) beyond just doing occasional maintenance on a local cache?

[RuideAlmeida]

The adoption has to come from the owner.

 

You may make some maintenance yourself, or log a "Needs Archive". After the reviewer archive the cache, you can place one of your own... by instance.

[+Imogen Michel]

Thanks; I was wondering if there was any way of a reviewer or someone transferring ownership, but it sounds like there isn't. That's useful to know anyway, thank you for the quick response!

[+Path Pacer]

It sounds like you could just take it once it's archived. Go up and replace the log book with a new one, then republish it. That way it will remain more or less the same cache it always was.

[+Touchstone]

It sounds like you could just take it once it's archived. Go up and replace the log book with a new one, then republish it. That way it will remain more or less the same cache it always was.

It's not the OP's to "take". If the only issue is the NM attribute, but otherwise the cache is in good shape, I would contact the local Reviewer to see if they could clear it from the Listing page. I would choose the Archive route as a last resort. The local community might not take kindly to hijacking the location and the container.

[+justintim1999]

after looking at the cache page I'm not sure there is much you can do right now. The only issue with the cache seems to be a wet log that people keep replacing. I'm not sure if the "Needs Maintenance" icon is enough to get the cache archived. The last time the cache owner did anything with the cache looks to be about 5 years ago. Just because they are not logging in doesn't mean that they are not taking care of the cache (I mean why should they, everyone else is doing it for them). Looks like you'll have to wait till a few other cachers log a needs maintenance. Not a bad idea to put the cache on the radar of your local reviewer.

[+niraD]

The only issue with the cache seems to be a wet log that people keep replacing.

Well, a perpetually wet log (even after it is replaced multiple times) indicates a problem with the container. The wet log may be the only thing people report, but it probably isn't the only issue with the cache.

 

I'm not sure if the "Needs Maintenance" icon is enough to get the cache archived.

It isn't. The volunteer reviewers are not notified when NM logs are posted. It takes a NA log before the volunteer reviewers are notified.

[+Imogen Michel]

after looking at the cache page I'm not sure there is much you can do right now. The only issue with the cache seems to be a wet log that people keep replacing. I'm not sure if the "Needs Maintenance" icon is enough to get the cache archived. The last time the cache owner did anything with the cache looks to be about 5 years ago. Just because they are not logging in doesn't mean that they are not taking care of the cache (I mean why should they, everyone else is doing it for them). Looks like you'll have to wait till a few other cachers log a needs maintenance. Not a bad idea to put the cache on the radar of your local reviewer.

 

Unfortunately it's not their only cache in the area and none of them are being maintained or updated (including for example a multi-cache which now has inaccurate/misleading information on it due to changes in local businesses since they last logged in). I'm pretty certain that they aren't interested in doing any maintenance or even updating their caches.

 

I've emailed the owner to ask to adopt it (no response) but, after the helpful advice given in this thread, I understand that this is my only option so I'm not pursuing it any further at this point.

[+BCandMsKitty]

If the cache(s) need to be archived, then just enter a NA log, and let the reviewer take the next step.

I'm so tired of hearing that others might not like having a particular cache archived .... If the CO isn't maintaining and/or playing any more then they are just so much geolitter that aren't being maintained other than from the occasional cacher that puts in dry logs, etc.

What's the point? Log NA to get rid of them and open the spot to a cache that will be maintained!

[+narcissa]

after looking at the cache page I'm not sure there is much you can do right now. The only issue with the cache seems to be a wet log that people keep replacing. I'm not sure if the "Needs Maintenance" icon is enough to get the cache archived. The last time the cache owner did anything with the cache looks to be about 5 years ago. Just because they are not logging in doesn't mean that they are not taking care of the cache (I mean why should they, everyone else is doing it for them). Looks like you'll have to wait till a few other cachers log a needs maintenance. Not a bad idea to put the cache on the radar of your local reviewer.

 

Unfortunately it's not their only cache in the area and none of them are being maintained or updated (including for example a multi-cache which now has inaccurate/misleading information on it due to changes in local businesses since they last logged in). I'm pretty certain that they aren't interested in doing any maintenance or even updating their caches.

 

I've emailed the owner to ask to adopt it (no response) but, after the helpful advice given in this thread, I understand that this is my only option so I'm not pursuing it any further at this point.

 

If the cache can't be completed and the NMs have been ignored, then an NA log is the right thing to do. You could always put out a reboot or a tribute if it's worth it.

[+L0ne.R]

If the cache(s) need to be archived, then just enter a NA log, and let the reviewer take the next step.

I'm so tired of hearing that others might not like having a particular cache archived .... If the CO isn't maintaining and/or playing any more then they are just so much geolitter that aren't being maintained other than from the occasional cacher that puts in dry logs, etc.

What's the point? Log NA to get rid of them and open the spot to a cache that will be maintained!

 

I agree. Post the NA and outline the reasons why you think the cache should be archived (abandoned, cache owner hasn't logged into the site since month/year, x number of logs that mention a wet log, cache finders adding logsheets, no response or maintenance from cache owner).

 

There are some reviewers that will not post a reviewer note until there are logs that the cache is missing, but most will disable the cache right away (then archive it after a month with no response from the CO). If you get the former, at least you tried.

[+jellis]

The volunteer reviewers are not notified when NM logs are posted. It takes a NA log before the volunteer reviewers are notified.

You are correct. Though I heard they can make sweeps or someone can send a message to the reviewer about the issue

[+Markwell]

The volunteer reviewers are not notified when NM logs are posted. It takes a NA log before the volunteer reviewers are notified.

You are correct. Though I heard they can make sweeps or someone can send a message to the reviewer about the issue

 

Or instead of whispering in the reviewers ear through email, shout it from the rooftops "THIS CACHE HAS ISSUES AND SHOULD BE ARCHIVED!" Then the owner has a chance to respond to it. Sending a direct message to the reviewer never lets the owner see who is requesting the cache to be archived.

[+The A-Team]

The volunteer reviewers are not notified when NM logs are posted. It takes a NA log before the volunteer reviewers are notified.

You are correct. Though I heard they can make sweeps or someone can send a message to the reviewer about the issue

Or instead of whispering in the reviewers ear through email, shout it from the rooftops "THIS CACHE HAS ISSUES AND SHOULD BE ARCHIVED!" Then the owner has a chance to respond to it. Sending a direct message to the reviewer never lets the owner see who is requesting the cache to be archived.

1. Some people aren't comfortable doing this because locals can view them as being responsible for a cache being archived. Regardless of how misguided that viewpoint is, we continue to hear about people receiving hate-mail after posting an NA.
   
2. If there have already been Needs Maintenance logs posted, the owner has already been duly notified.
   
3. If you contact the reviewer directly and they feel it's warranted, they'll disable the cache and give the owner a final warning. The owner still has a chance to respond and fix their cache. It isn't necessary for a cacher to issue such a warning in an NA log.
   

[+hzoi]

The volunteer reviewers are not notified when NM logs are posted. It takes a NA log before the volunteer reviewers are notified.

You are correct. Though I heard they can make sweeps or someone can send a message to the reviewer about the issue

Or instead of whispering in the reviewers ear through email, shout it from the rooftops "THIS CACHE HAS ISSUES AND SHOULD BE ARCHIVED!" Then the owner has a chance to respond to it. Sending a direct message to the reviewer never lets the owner see who is requesting the cache to be archived.

Some people aren't comfortable doing this because locals can view them as being responsible for a cache being archived. Regardless of how misguided that viewpoint is, we continue to hear about people receiving hate-mail after posting an NA.

I'll admit, I usually feel more at liberty to leave an NA log when I'm outside my home area for this same reason.

Edited August 1, 2015 by hzoi