Every so often I get a question about how to go about adopting caches of inactive geocachers. There is a form for this on the Geocaching.com website but it only works if you can get the cooperation of the inactive geocacher, which is not always easy to do, especially if they are no longer monitoring their emails sent via Geocaching.com. But if you do manage to get their cooperation and permission, have them use the page I linked to above.
If you can’t get their permission, I’m afraid their caches can’t be adopted. In those cases, you could post a “Needs Archived” log on them,
which flags them to our attention as well as to the attention of the cache owner. We will give the cache owner a reasonable amount of time to respond. If the cache owner does not respond, the
cache will be archived and another geocacher is then able to submit a new
geocache at that location. Heck, you can even give the new cache the same name if you want to. More often, new caches at the same location as an archived cache are usually designated with a name that lets geocachers know there's "fresh meat" out there for the finding. For example, "Under the Bridge - Redux" or "Under the Bridge Take 2" or something similar.
2 comments:
Under the Bridge, Part 2???? That doesn't sound like a good name for a cache to put out for newbys to see. What happens to caches by Homeland Security "under the bridge"??
Great idea, but change the example maybe.
Jeff,
There are scores -- possibly hundreds -- of geocaches under, around or near bridges in Iowa. A hide under a bridge is not necessarily enough reason to not be published on Geocaching.com. What reviewers look for is the potential problems that a geocache might cause. Specifically, where is the bridge located. For example, is it a rural road versus an interstate overpass where there is no pedestrian walkway. Would a geocacher looking for the geocache at that location cause concern among passersby?
Post a Comment