Cachez

I've only been asked twice. The first time was an old man who jocularly asked me what I'd lost as I scouted the edge of a backstreet car park for a nano. I told him I was looking for hidden treasure and he laughed, got in his car and drove off. The second time I was looking in a field in the middle of nowhere on a walk. Had not seen a single soul for hours then a walker popped up just as I was searching for the cache and asked if I was lost. I told him I was geocaching and he said 'Ah right!' and walked off.

I originally had two premium and two non-premium caches. The two non-premium have gone missing 2-3 times each in the last eight months or so. The two premium ones have not. I've now made the original two premium as well to see if it makes any difference. I've also recently adopted two non-premium caches in a rural area but I'm less concerned about those as they're a bit harder to get to. It's not about elitism for me - in fact, that wasn't even something that crossed my mind. It was more that I made the assumption (rightly or wrongly) that premium members would have more of a commitment to caching and be less likely to be careless about searching, finding and re-hiding because they had a better understanding of the game having spent £25 on it before doing anything. Obviously, I accept that there are some premium members who might also be careless, but the risk in my mind was less.

Yeah, I have since made them both premium so will see if they have any further problems. We do seem to get a lot of parents and kids caching around here in the holidays. You just reminded me, I found a cache last year where the log had been ripped to shreds and carefully replaced in the container!

That was initially my first thought but it was the fact that both were returned. I'd have thought kids would just take them and chuck them in a hedge or something.

Bit of an odd one, this, and I'm interested in any theories people might have. I have two caches which were found by a a number of people including a local cacher who appeared to be caching with a group of kids. She then decided to check on the two caches at a later date (not the same date, a couple of months apart) and reported them missing. Having confirmed myself (and got husband to do a sanity check) that both were definitely missing after a thorough search, I replaced them, only for this to happen: Cache 1: next finder reported two caches in situ next to each other. I went to remove one and found both gone so decided to change the location. Have not yet checked the first location again. Cache 2: replaced cache with new log. Next finder confirmed they were the first to sign the new log. The next day, another finder reported the log was full and both confirmed there were two caches in situ. Contacted the person who reported them missing who says she just happened to be passing and decided to check and found them gone. I'm definitely not suggesting she had anything to do with it, but I am rather mystified by it. The spare cache 2 has been rescued and returned to me with the new replacement left at GZ. It's not really a major issue, but I'm just intrigued! Anyone got any ideas?

The Lee Navigation trail is still active and I used to live right by a section of that so that's a possible for us too.

Thanks for the update! Still, it's disappointing - we'd planned out the next section and were looking forward to it. But I guess a trail of that size and fame would have been a bit of a burden to manage. On the plus side, we discovered the Essex Way, which we hadn't known about before and I think we'll continue the walk.

Ah OK, I didn't know that they planned to go and retrieve the containers. So that's good news for the TBs. I was genuinely curious as it all seemed a bit out of the blue.

Until a few days ago, there was a cache trail on the Essex Way but it was all suddenly archived. For non-locals, the Essex Way is a historic footpath which runs from Epping to Harwich totalling 81 miles. There's been a bit of discussion about it on local Facebook groups but does anyone know why it's been archived? I messaged the CO but got no reply. The other issue is that a number of people had TBs in the caches. It's a real shame - we started it last September and had done about a quarter of it but planned to pick it up again when the weather was a bit better. Obviously, we can still do the actual walk, but having the caches made it more of a fun thing to do. If anyone has any info it would be interesting to hear.

I'm not massively worried about germs and bacteria, though aren't cachers more at risk from Lymes and Weils Disease? I carry antibac handwipes or liquid with me, though I think urban hides can be more germy given the tendency of some men to piss on the street.

Wow, you sound pretty organised! I like the fact you use ammo cans too - it's nice to see people doing something other than nanos and film cannisters.

I'd really appreciate it if those of you who want to argue could do it elsewhere. I posted this thread because I had a genuine query and a lot of people have posted helpful responses. It would be really disappointing to see my thread locked when it could be helpful for others too.

Microdot I am genuinely curious. As I said, I'm relatively new but keen to pick up tips. I've been to two of mine (I only have four) to check them because I was passing, but I am interested to know how often people just go and visit their own caches for a general healthcheck. Grouchy, that sounds reasonable if no logs have been posted. <makes mental note>

OK, a question which has come out of this discussion: if you own a cache, how often do you just go and check on it? Let's assume it's relatively close to your house and you've had no DNFs or NMs.

I'm a relative newbie and I marked two of mine as PMO because I wanted people who were a bit more careful and interested in caching to find them rather than kids with apps. Is that wrong? Perhaps, but maybe because I was new to hiding as well as finding, I was being a bit cautious. I have another cache which I'm planning but am in two minds as to whether to make it PMO or not. It will be an ammo box and I'm a bit wary about it going missing.

As a woman, I would never use nail polish I just found somewhere because I'd have no idea what was in it or where it came from. Frankly, I think it's a bit grim. I'd also have doubts about putting a chemical substance in a glass bottle in a cache.

I would like to see some more enforcement of CO-disabled caches. There have been quite a few I've seen which have been disabled for months before the reviewer steps in. Not that I necessarily think that's the reviewer's job, but perhaps some kind of auto-archive functionality where if a cache has been disabled for longer than x months with no note from the CO, it gets archived automatically?

I don't mind it too much. It does look rather spartan, but that's not a bad thing when looking at the forum at work.

What happens when a CO isn't maintaining the cache though? I think replacing the odd log is fine, but I'm less sure about replacing entire containers, especially if we don't know that the CO is still active.

Some really interesting views here. It was a genuine question as I'd sort of had the impression from the forums (and backed up in real life) that there was a reluctance on the part of cachers to post an NM/NA which I didn't fully understand. I've seen a bad reaction from one CO locally to people posting NA on their cache, but IMHO, it was entirely justified given the logs. I've posted NA on three - all of which were blatantly not viable, missing and in the last case, the CO living on the other side of the world. I've also had NM posted on one of my caches - I was a bit suspicious at first as it was a new cacher, but when I went to check it turned out to be correct and prompted me to move it. I suspect a curtain twitcher opposite had seen people finding the cache, not liked it and gone and removed the containers. So it saved me a few nanos that someone flagged it up.

I'm a bit curious about this. It's become fairly clear that a lot of cachers seem to have a problem with posting NM/NA logs and I don't really understand why. Does anyone have any insight as to why, or has anyone told you the reason they don't want to?

I only put a DNF log if I've had a really good look and still can't find it but I don't delete it if/when I do actually find the cache. It had never occurred to me to do so! I don't mind admitting that I couldn't find something.

Yes, I decided I wanted to release some TBs just to see what happens but I didn't want to attach the tags to anything too stealable. I've been wanting to do a penguin TB to go to Antarctica (because I have a thing about penguins) so I got a bag of assorted plastic sea creatures and am going to do a few other themed TBs. It's actually given me an idea for a new cache too so happy days.

No, it would not be rude. I find the reticence to post NA on a cache astonishing. I went to find one in my local area which had clearly been defunct for some time yet even the last finder, despite noting that it was in need of maintenance, had not logged an NM or NA. At GZ it was clearly not viable so I logged an NM, then an NA a week later. The thing is, I've tried to find other caches by the same prolific owner and as they haven't logged in for a year, my assumption is that they are inactive, There was another one locally which clearly was not there, yet there was eight months of DNFs and no-one reporting that it had gone. Sorry, but I think it's a waste of everyone's time not to post an NA, when the cache clearly isn't there.

I have been harassed more on the London underground than when I've been geocaching.