J the Goat

Wow Dadfish, one of your Pillsbury caches was one of the caches that inspired me to think about this one. BigD and I were talking about making a Pillsbury run sometime in the next month or so. One of the stages I was planning on was out that direction, just not that far out. I'm okay with seldom visits, it seems even the urban caches here don't get hit very often. I'm leaning more and more towards enjoying those that are a little more difficult, and am trying to lean towards "hide what you like to find." Uhhhh..... Twin Peaks? Is that the one I'm thinking of? Maybe...

I'm still trying to decide whether I want to place a long distance, fairly high difficulty multi as opposed to 3 or 4 medium to medium/high difficulty regular caches. The area I'm in wouldn't get many visits for either, but probably less for the multi. When I say long distance, I'm talking a total of somewhere between 15-25 miles from stage to stage, 3 or 4 stages. Still trying to figure out all the specifics, I just wanted to bounce this one off of you guys to see which, if you were in my area, you would prefer. Please keep the "it's up to you"s to yourself, I'm well aware with whom the final decision lies

I see this thread getting squashed in the very near future.

GC1j1pe. I probably went back to this one 5 or 6 times. I talked to the CO and was assured I was in the right area. I recoginzed the hint, looked everywhere I could think of, and still no dice. Then one day I found another cache by the same CO and thought, "I'll go check out the Mini Forest again." Got it that time. In a spot I swear I'd looked before. I just got beat. Badly.

I think arguing lie vs. misinformation here is just semantics and is a complete waste of time on either side. IMHO, it doesn't matter what you decide to call it, it boils down to this; 1) The NCC has changed their geocaching policy. At least they haven't banned it completely. 2) A local reviewer caught wind of said changes and took it upon himself to send out a seemingly premature letter regarding voluntary/automatic archival. 3) Said reviewer should send out emails retracting his prior statements, unless TPTB have suggested that he not do for whatever reason. At the very least, he's admitted his mistake. I'd be careful if I were you in using words like "incompetence" when describing your local reviewers. Mistake = Incompetence? This may not be the first issue you've had withis reviewer, but even so, GS seems to think they're alrightfor the job. I'd be willing to bet that this guy/gal will be paying ridiculous close attention to the guidelines from here on out, I know I would. Are you certain all your hides are well within the guidelines? I guess I''m just asking that you take a step back and not let the fact that this person screwed up huge get you angry. It's already done, now the only thing you can do is make the best of what's there now. It sounds like your local organization is doing just that. Good luck, and try to keep calm.

I don't have a problem with an authorized "throwdown", as long as it's not in a situation like this. This owner is most certainly not interested in maintaining his cache, and someone replacing it isn't going to change that. I would replace a local cache if the circumstances were right and I knew that the owner would be following behind me to either place it correctly or maintain what I put out. Maybe the OP should get in touch with a local reviewer and get him/her privvy to the situation. Seems like a good reason for archival to me, even with a new cache in place.

I haveacache inside of 300 feet from my house. I've caught a couple people searching, I've gone over and said hello each time.

Micro and micro.

Those people who are too scared to leave their homes? Or people who are too large to leave their homes. I guess they could armchair some virts though...

Sorry, Google and GeoLex failed me. Took Buddy's Dog To Go To The Store? Too bad dude, the gator took the stuff?

The name of the reviewer that published your cache will be the first log on the cache page, you can send them an email and explain the situation. You may want to contact the cacher in question, they may have tried to find your cache and found it to be missing so they put one there. Don't jump to conclusions. this could be true too. maybe they tought they were helping. (my 2 cents is that you shouldn't replace an entire cache without contacting the owner first, but not everyone thinks this way) Or they don't know any better. Did you go to see if your can is still there? You should go check your spot if you haven't yet. If all else fails, very kindly contact your local girl scouts and find out how to get ahold of said troop. Be diplomatic though, no need to piss off an entire nation of 5-17 year old girls. You may never get another cookie for your entire life. It pains me to think....

The name of the reviewer that published your cache will be the first log on the cache page, you can send them an email and explain the situation. You may want to contact the cacher in question, they may have tried to find your cache and found it to be missing so they put one there. Don't jump to conclusions.

While I can't say that I log ALL my DNFs, I do log most of them. I would log this as a DNF. DNF logs are partially there to help the CO notice if something is wrong with the cache, but in this instance it would just be for your records. Not logging this one, for those who care about their stats, wouldn't make a difference. I, though, would log it as I looked and was not able to retrieve.

Please do not put caches in blackberry bushes. If you have to ask why, you don't deserve an answer.

Ya, I was going with what he said in the logs listed above. I think he'll get around to it, but not yet. See what I get for speaking a bit too soon?

So here's an update on the CO. He's decided to archive all his caches because of this nonsense. Yes, I fully believe it's nonsense. I understand the whole "treat everything as if it were a bomb, these guys are risking their lives" arguments. It's a shame that an active and responsible cacher/cache hider is now choosing not only to stop placing caches, but to archive all of his active caches because one got demolished. I wish I knew how to link here, it's just over my head at this point but it shouldn't be too hard for one of you savvy folks to verify.

I've just started bypassing hides like this if I'm not in the mood. Some of my favorite hides have been micros, and there's one in particular here that keeps beating me. I keep going back though, I'm bent on getting it by myself. Make one like that and you'll have succeeded.

I think this is unlikely as the OP stated that the containers were removed but the contents left in place.

I might actually try to put this one together. It's (kinda) close to me

personally, i blame the LS-who grads. Being a raiders fan, I don't want to hear anything about any LS-pew grads

This sort of thing has happened to me alot. Sometimes I've only loaded regular sized caches in my GPS, so if it's a micro, I don't know that it's there. Sometimes I've only got time to do 1 or 2 caches and not the 4 or 5 that are in a particular park/forest. Sometimes I just don't feel like going that extra mile. Sometimes I'm fussy and do the caches that appeal to me more. Sometimes I do them all. I don't think it's reasonable to say "X cacher found these two caches, but they didn't find the other two a mile away....hmmm, I wonder if they stole the other two and that's why they didn't log them". That's an absurd and paranoid way to think. I absolutely agree with this, as it's regularly the case with me as well. I have small children who enjoy going caching with me, but regularly can't make the entire hike for all the caches on a trail. You are, given the evidence you've presented, really jumping to conclusions on this one. You've been asked at least 6 times to present the evidence that it's a cacher and you have neglected to do so. You've been defensive and rude in response to GeoGeeBee who has simply asked and stated the obvious without being rude in the first place. It seems you're bent on the fact that it's a fellow cacher and nothing is going to change your mind. Why are you here in the first place? To accuse? Not us, I understand you're not coming after us here, but that makes even less sense. On top of that, you want to run surveillance on your caches? Dude, if you posted my picture on the internet without asking me there would be HUGE problems. That is a horrible idea, I strongly advise against it. I hope you figure out how to keep your caches in place, but your attitude has gained absolutely zero sympathy from this geocacher.

Next time I'll read the cache page first. The CO was also at my 10 year event. I'm familiar with some of his hides. How this was mistaken for a pipe bomb is beyond me. Pill bottle=pipe bomb? Wow...

I was going to post this topic until I read it was already here. It's funny, without checking on the GC #, I know the people in the quote above. One was at my 10 year event. What gets me is the absolute lack of information in the newspaper article. I'm not one with links, but if you're curious check out the Lake County Record Bee. It's less than a paragraph and some stupid picture that could be any incident on the side of this highway. They don't even call it by name, they just say something about a treasure hunting game played partially on the internet. Initially, I was going to say something about terrorists not even knowing where Lake County CA is. Trust me, for those of you who aren't familiar with the area, it's a dump. Pretty lake (sometimes) and pretty mountains, but the towns are absolutely trash with very few exceptions (no offense meant to the OP, please don't take it personally). With that in mind I then thought "Hey, there's a lot of Meth (a LOT) in lake county, this could be something that a ticked off or delusional tweaker or spun out high school kid might do in this area. I'm hoping this was the concern involved for calling the bomb squad, as there is no way in Hades that a terrorist would strike LC. None. Now I'm gonna go look at the cache listing.

Ya, I agree with this. Depending on the cache, I'd probably tell you where to look too. If it's right near me, I might go look, but otherwise a very detailed description of it's location would probably work for me. Log the NA, it'll get checked on or it'll get archived. Problem solved either way.

If you're torn about the NA log, you could always email a previous finder and see if they'll check on it. Not the approach I'd take, but it's an option. I'd check if I got that email.