- This topic has 16 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’ve just received this email from Jerry Cox (aka Valliant Knight) asking for adopters for his caches:
Hi Dave
I wonder whether you may be able to help me out with an adoption issue with my Dartmoor caches. Back in 2005 when I started out on the cache trail, we owned a static caravan down at Bedford Bridge. It was easy then to place and maintain my caches, since 2010 when we sold the van, maintenance has proved to be impossible. As you will appreciate journeying down to the moors from Bristol to mop out some water from a damp box is a financial no no!!
I have already archived two of the sites but the following boxes are still ‘out’ and gradually needing checking over…- The Knights View…..1 (up the road from Post Bridge) 332 visits
- The Knights View…..2 (on the road just past Warren House Inn) 333visits
- The Knights View…..4 (further along the road toward MoretonHampsted) 301 visits
- The Knights View….5 (on the road from Mary Tavy to Brentor) 162 visits
- The Knight’s Woodland Wander..(Lower Grenofen) 143 visits
- Knight’s Woodland Wander..Bonus……(Lower Grenofen) 159 visits
- The Sky at Knight…(mystery not far from Yelverton) 56 visits
It would seem to be a pity if these were to have to be archived as they have in total received nearly 1500 visits and quite a few favourite stickers.
Could you let me know whether it is likely anybody down there may be able and willing to take them on.
I shall be most grateful for any help you can offer.All the best
Jerry (Valliant Knight)
Firstly, well done to Jerry for asking for help. Understand totally the reason – I wouldn’t be happy driving two or three hours each way to replace a soggy log either!
It would be better if somebody came forward to adopt what remains of the full set.
If nobody does (and I’ll mention on facebook too) I would offer to take those along the main road east of Two Bridges only. Those west of there will be too far away to commit to, sorry.
So yeah, better if somebody can take them all.
The Knights View 1,2 and 4 adopted by myself.
Sorry, Mary Tavy a little too far for my to take as well.
Hope to sort out those three in the next week.
Hats off to Simon & Yvonne for adopting some of Jerry’s caches…………………
Kinda reminds me of one of Dave’s mantra’s from when he first set up this here site – ”Shouldn’t it be EVERYONES responsibilty to maintain geocaches on Dartmoor?”
Hi Phil – I thought you had dropped off the planet! Anyway, your post has prompted me to write a new topic for discussion, Dave
We do try to practice what we preach. A good cache is worth preserving and therefore worth adopting. (All caches in a gorse bushes are good!!!) However if the cache is a traditional one and just consists of a box under a boulder it’s best to archive and free the location for a new cache. The new cache may even have some interesting information in its notice or an intriguing puzzle. In any case a new cache will encourage cachers who have already found the original to visit the place again.
Not all caches are worth preserving. We have adopted three caches and they have all been puzzles and would have taken more but they had already gone.
What’s worth saving is obviously a hugely subjective view, and happily one that an individual cacher can take for themselves when asked to adopt, or even perform running maint on someone else’s cache.
Some consideration for longevity might skew such a decision, an otherwise nondescript cache that is 7 or more years old I would consider taking on if it was convenient, just to keep a few oldies around – helps those who are trying to complete various other challenges or grids based on age.
But I’m rarely glad to see any cache go, especially as a forced archiving by a reviewer, since the story behind that is usually that the CO has lost the will to maintain the cache, usually having given up geocaching entirely.
Should there not be a way of adopting caches that the owner has lost interest in and are not being maintained. For example if the owner has not logged in for six months or more and doesn’t respond to needs maintenance logs.
Unfortunately the reviewers do not allow this. There has to be agreement from the CO to allow adoption – crazy I know. Reviewers will also not allow adoption of caches that have been archived, even with the CO’s permission. So you need to adopt BEFORE the cache is archived.
It’s not crazy, gc.com cannot do it. The cache is the legal property of the owner and unless they were to include the ability to waive ownership rights in the T&C’s, they cannot give another person the rights to it.
I’m sure you are right dartymoor, but that makes it even more crazy. Abandoned caches therefore cannot be collected even if a new CO places his new cache at the exact location of an archived one! There is enough geocaching litter out there already (much of which is active caches), allowing adoption of abandoned caches would at least allow the legal removal of such litter. Fortunately, in practice the new CO will always remove this, but as you say, he has no legal right to do so. Also as you say, a simple change in the T&C’s would change all that.
Why on earth would anybody ever want to adopt an archived cache? If it was that good one could put a cache with an identical description (even an identical puzzle) in the same place in one’s own name!
If the owner has lost interest in a cache it should be marked “needs archiving” so that the reviewer is alerted to the problem.
When a cache has been archived it is reasonable to treat it as geo-litter and remove it from the countryside. One could, if one felt that one had committed a criminal act, e-mail the owner to seek instructions for its disposal or return!
Hobo – the age of a cache is a strong reason to adopt or wish for an archived cache to be enabled. Apart from that I can’t see any specific reason that couldn’t be equally well done by putting a new one in the same spot, and benefits cachers by giving them all a new opportunity.
Dave – I am quite happy to continue breaking the law and continue to remove rubbish or geo-litter for the greater good and take my chances. (As I did on Saturday, with the extra tupperware lid one of your caches had gained that was serving no purpose!)
Technically speaking, all rubbish – geo or otherwise – is owned by somebody, but a little common sense must come into play or the beautiful spaces we love and cherish would not stay so for long. But I do understand groundspeak taking that line when the original intention by the CO was probably not to create litter.
“common sense” thats what a lot of people lack.
Dartmoor Dave go caught tresspassing the other day again!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
