DonutHoes

Another (fairly) common hide requires you to pour water into a tube/pipe, then the cache floats up to the top for you to grab it. On some of the more tricky ones the pipes have holes in them at intervals which need to be covered or blocked, or you need to pour the water in quicker than it can escape. Could this be one of these? Does the cache page have the "special tool required" attribute? which would give the clue for the one you saw. With the water hides, you'd probably want to check whether there's a way for water to empty out before fill the pipe. If the pipe lacks a drain or removable plug or holes drilled into the side of it, then filling the pipe with water may raise the cache container and leave it raised permanently. One option might be to contact previous finders (recent ones are best) and ask them how they retrieved the container. From the logs of the cache you're referring to, it indeed sounds like the cache progression was: -- The CO placed it as a 1.5 -- The cache broke and couldn't be retrieved -- The CO raised the difficulty "until someone makes it back into a 1.5" -- Someone found it and "made it a lot easier for the next team" on 9/18/2013 -- Whatever change made it easier broke on 12/19/2015 Good advice. I'll do that next time Thanks!

Actually, that may be the best idea yet. It *may* be a floater, but if not, there may not be a drain for the water, and floating it out would then cause damage to the hiding spot. If *may* be magnetic, but maybe not. Or if so, is the pole that it is in also magnetic? If so, that makes retrieval with a magnet quite difficult. A grabber may not be able to open wide enough to grip something if the container is a tight fit in the pole. To the OP: While it may seem like laziness, it is entirely within the cache owner's right to decide that the string idea was a lame one, and that his is a much more fun idea of a hide, thus he changes the rating and leaves it as-is. You still haven't made clear, either, if you logged with a Found It log type, or a note or Needs Maintenance log type. If you did log as a Found It, but didn't get your hands on the cache and your name in the log, the cache owner was within his rights to delete your log. And finally, what you see as a "passive-aggressive" reply from the cache owner may simply have been a poorly worded or misinterpreted reply. Possibly. Give him the benefit of the doubt... after all, he's the one that went through the time and effort to hide the cache for you to look for. I mentioned we marked it NM = need maintenance. Look, I'm grateful that people hide caches...that's not what this post is about. It was definitely a rude remark, but still not the point. I was under the impression that once you create a cache you maintain as it was originally planted, which the CO has chosen not to do. Apparently that's okay to do so I'm moving on from it. It's not even that I care if they CO is lazy, but if you're going to change your mind because someone broke the way you originally set it up then don't give people attitude when they question the integrity of the cache. I wasn't the first, nor will I be the last to question it since all other logs and pictures indicate it's hung from a string.

Another (fairly) common hide requires you to pour water into a tube/pipe, then the cache floats up to the top for you to grab it. On some of the more tricky ones the pipes have holes in them at intervals which need to be covered or blocked, or you need to pour the water in quicker than it can escape. Could this be one of these? Does the cache page have the "special tool required" attribute? which would give the clue for the one you saw. Nothing about a special tool until CO deleted our comment and said "use TOTT". We went back and looked through all the logs and images. The cache WAS at one point attached to a string as indicated by the pictures but has since broken. I guess CO didn't want to fix it and instead changed the difficulty I hope we find one that's like a puzzle. That sounds awesome. Most of what we've come across is pretty vanilla.

I have one of these and I don't even think it's long enough. I cant fit my hand into the pole and I would need at least another 5 inches or so to make the grab. I don't know if this could open wide enough to get around it either. If I visit it again I'll probably weld a couple wire hangers together with a hook at the end and see if I can go at it that way. Or maybe a vacuum hooked to a generator LOL - just kidding, but kind not.

I'm still confused what you actually logged this as: Did Not Find Needs Maint Found It (Needs Archive) Note People will often mention in a Found It log that the log is wet etc. For me that gets mentioned but then a separate NM log. Reason being a cache owner may not read every find log, but certainly as a CO, I read anything that says Needs Maint. Plus as someone else said - I'm far less likely to try a cache that is showing the NM flag. At the very least I'll read the NM log to see what the issue is (wet log - I will take a spare log and silica sachet) NM. I mispoke and said we'd found it because we had eyes on it, but no physical retrieval. We suggested maintenance and that's when we got the sassy response. I've been digging through the logs more and I've concluded that the cache is supposed to be on a string that's attached somewhere near the top of the inside of the pole. However, it's broken several times and the CO (instead of reattaching it) has changed the difficulty rating. Is his normal behavior? I guess I thought that if the cache is altered from it's original state the CO is expected to fix it, not adjust the difficulty rating and call it a day. Adjusting the difficulty sounds about right. Originally it was a lower difficulty with the string and the CO seems to have made the decision to have the cache continue on without the string, therefore increasing the difficulty factor. You now need to do more work to get the cache out. I didn't think that was common practice, but it makes sense. If that's the case, I wish the CO would have indicated that instead. I can't imagine we will be the only one who makes this observation and think it needs maintenance. Oh well, not my cache to maintain and marking this as a lesson learned.

I'm still confused what you actually logged this as: Did Not Find Needs Maint Found It (Needs Archive) Note People will often mention in a Found It log that the log is wet etc. For me that gets mentioned but then a separate NM log. Reason being a cache owner may not read every find log, but certainly as a CO, I read anything that says Needs Maint. Plus as someone else said - I'm far less likely to try a cache that is showing the NM flag. At the very least I'll read the NM log to see what the issue is (wet log - I will take a spare log and silica sachet) NM. I mispoke and said we'd found it because we had eyes on it, but no physical retrieval. We suggested maintenance and that's when we got the sassy response. I've been digging through the logs more and I've concluded that the cache is supposed to be on a string that's attached somewhere near the top of the inside of the pole. However, it's broken several times and the CO (instead of reattaching it) has changed the difficulty rating. Is his normal behavior? I guess I thought that if the cache is altered from it's original state the CO is expected to fix it, not adjust the difficulty rating and call it a day.

While planning a cacheday I don't load such a cache in my GPS. I don't like to waste time on unavailable caches I'll keep that in mind next time. I didn't see the other responses on the log until we started having issues finding it. It was weird that half the people were claiming it was easy and quick and others were suggesting maintenance. Next time I'll browse the logs before even bothering.

The log had several comments indicating it may need maintenance, that was what was so confusing. I was trying to indicate it may need repair without totally giving the location away to other potential cachers. CO could have simply indicated they had checked it and it was as described. *shrug* Oh well, the world goes on turning haha.

Lol while this option is entirely tempting I live in California where they are constantly preaching to us about the drought we're in. I'm going to pass on it for now and maybe when I find myself with a few gallons of rainwater I'll make another go at it.

Ah, that a big part of the problem. This is why I discourage newbies from filing NM logs since experience is often important in determining whether an NM is warranted. That's no excuse for the CO being rude, of course, but it explains why he was grumpy. Going forward if it obviously needs maintenance I just won't log it lol - I'll let someone else get their head bit off. We're just out having fun, doing our best to comply with the rules and employ stealth. Not looking to get in altercations with people who think they're the Geocaching god. Thanks for looking out.

I said we marked it found, which was inaccurate. We found it is what I meant, but indicated it needed maintenance. In any case, I'm just going to let this one go. A lot of people have offered great suggestions for future endeavors and I appreciate those who have opted not to lecture me on the rules

On4bam, a person who logged a month before us admitted they broke the string... That would be why.

Thanks for the helpful responses!

Bflentje, i have read the rules, yes. I also don't care if I sound naive. That's why it's a question. Geocaching is supposed to be fun - not about being an elitist.

The cache itself is a 4 rating so the difficulty is definitely in the extraction. It looks like it's in a film canister of some sort. It's pink. I didn't think of a magnet but I'll consider that next time. I wish the person who planted it had been this nice and helpful lol. Based on other logs this was an "easy/quick find" so my gut tells me either it's been busted or no one is actually removing it from the pole.

I was out caching with some friends and we found the intended cache at the bottom of a thin pole roughly 4-5 feet in height. It appears the cache was at one time suspended but the string broke, causing it to drop to the bottom of the pole. We marked it as found and suggested it needed maintenance only to have our find deleted and a passive aggressive comment about its difficulty. The only way I can see this cache being obtainable is if we dig up the pole (which is a no no anyway) or find something super thin that is able to grab it. Either will defeat the use of stealth as its very visible on a busy street. Any advice on this? I feel like the person who planted it is super unapproachable and other cachers will continue to have issues with it.