TahoeJoe

I’m pretty confident that you will encounter very few caches that have log books signed with blood. If you happen to come across one and it’s a long log, you might want to look around for a body.

So instead of acting like an adult and asking questions and finding out the rules before you start, you just do it your way (which was not the correct way) and expect people to accept it. You're going to be disappointed. Anyway this was probably the meanest reply. Your question was andwered, with explanations. (that signing the log is one of the few rules) and the explanation that owners who allow photos regularly could get their cache archived. And like I said in another thread not having a pen is not a good excuse. You're a geocacher, thats part of the game. You could lose it, break it, run out of ink. Ok. But knowing you dont have one, why go looking for the cache? IMO everybody should always carry a pen anyway. They're cheap and small, and used very often. I think he already knows the rules; he just didn’t have a pen with him that day and wanted input from the community. No need to attack him and tell him he needs to act like an adult. Insults are cheap and small but unlike pens they shouldn’t be used often.

I’ve done that on several occasions where I’m out riding my mountain bike and decide to see if there are any caches in the area. I belong to the school of thought that a considerate CO will provide something to sign the logbook. If it were my cache, I would accept the find. I can’t imagine a CO putting in the time and effort to cross reference physical and online logs to verify someone visited the cache. This response comes from someone who geocaches for the journey and having fun while paying no attention to statistics and numbers.

Correct. A good CO is one who who can respond to issues with the cache and perform maintenance on a regular basis, even preventive maintenance. A CO cannot respond to "I Stood on the cache and crushed it" when they are half a world away, which only leads to propping up crappy caches. I know everyone has "A friend" who can look after it.... but why doesn't that friend place it instead? The OP stated he has a friend who will maintain the cache. Your ludicrous over the top reply is irrelevant to the question that was asked. I disagree. The OP asked whether it would be acceptable to place a cache while traveling if they had a friend that would take care of it. Several of the responses (many based on actual experience) discouraged doing so with the premise that someone that is only acting as a care taker for someone elses cache will not likely maintain the cache as well as if the placed, and owned the cache themselves. If there are issues with the cache only the cache owner can disable/enable the listing (unless they share their username/password with the caretaker). While there are exceptions of vacation caches, maintained by someone other than the cache owner that are actually maintained, I suspect that the percentage is so low that it doesn't justify encouraging the OP to go ahead and place some while traveling. As others have suggested, why not suggest to the friend that they create their own account and hide the cache themselves. So you're saying that because poor caches of other types are being propped up already we shouldn't discourage a different practice that props up poor caches? Do you see a flaw in that logic? I don't see vacation caches as a bad thing if you are able to provide for it. The poor quality caches I have in mind are the ones thrown down by locals for power trails or other ways to inflate find counts. In the past, I've had positive experiences with vacation caches. Vacation caches in my experience are not going to be part of a PT or a leaky pill bottle. A few of the vacation caches I logged were placed because of some special meaning the location had for the CO. The first cache I ever found that got me into geocaching just went inactive after a 15 year run. It happened to be a vacation cache.

Well said! I feel ashamed when I read some of the responses to legitimate questions asked by new members of the geocaching community.

Great ideas!

That's a great response for someone asking for a little friendly advice from the geocaching community.

Correct. A good CO is one who who can respond to issues with the cache and perform maintenance on a regular basis, even preventive maintenance. A CO cannot respond to "I Stood on the cache and crushed it" when they are half a world away, which only leads to propping up crappy caches. I know everyone has "A friend" who can look after it.... but why doesn't that friend place it instead? The OP stated he has a friend who will maintain the cache. Your ludicrous over the top reply is irrelevant to the question that was asked. As for the popping up of poor caches, I think that ship has long set sail.

As long as your friend agrees to maintain the cache or you frequent the area on a regular basis, I don’t see what the issue is. I live in a resort area and when I first started geocaching, I wouldn’t have had many geocaches to look for if it wasn’t for vacation caches. Many of these caches are still around and well maintained. You shouldn’t just assume that a vacation cache is going to be an inferior cache. A good CO is what makes a cache.

I added to the confusion by not being more specific.

I was referring to Basildon park put on lockdown after dog walker finds toy grenade and calls police. The camo and string coming out of the top of the cache makes it look questionable. If it were my cache I would have picked a more discrete container.

Looks like a pipe bomb to me especially if the geocaching sticker was facing the backside and the cache was not hidden out of sight. I think that's a risk you take placing a cache in a well traveled urban area. Perhaps the CO should have used Hello Kitty stickers on the cache instead of army camo.

I have no idea, but personally I would rather not play the game in a manner where I might have to explain what I am doing in court. You can count me out too if I have to possess burglary tools to find a geocache. I'm lucky to get 2 or 3 visits to some of my hiking caches a year. I'll have to follow this cache and see how it does.

You personally, correct? - Because for me, can't tell you the number of distant "lonely" caches I've gone to (after a recent "find"), to realize the cache hasn't really been there in some time. That's precious time (and money) spent, from that jerk's post, when I could have used the day(s) heading for one I knew (by the CO) was actually present and intact instead. Good point, I've never run into that situation yet but you would never know if the log was bogus if the cache was missing. While I might be a little disappointed the cache was missing, I would still have enjoyed the hike to the cache. At least I'll be able to post a needs maintenance log for the CO. If a cache in an interesting location has several DNF's I'm still inclined to go look for it just for the excuse to hike.

I would place this cache in a remote location that involves a good hike to discourage damage. I would also encourage photos of attempts to unlock the cache.

You are always going to have people that cheat and really in the end what does it matter if someone logs a cache they did not visit? It’s not a professional sport or a contest with cash and prizes. If someone fraudulently logs a cache I’m going to visit, it will have no effect on my caching experience. Are numbers really that important and define you as a geocacher?

A good bolt cutter would be much more efficient.

In the early years of geocaching before micros and macros the majority of geocaches were large enough to accommodate a normal size log journal for cachers to record their thoughts and experience of the cache hunt. It was the norm to write something with substance instead of useless acronyms nobody reads. Back then you had a larger proportion of the caching community that were outdoor enthusiasts who were focused on the outdoor aspect and journey to the cache. It’s a totally different mindset today with the dominating focus being on numbers and stats. Wishful thinking or favorite points for logs is not going to change this current mindset any time soon. These days I pretty much stick to logging larger remote caches and take the time to relax, read the logs and record my thoughts without the thought of having to hurry off to the next cache.

I remember keeping my eye out for a yellow jeep when out driving and taking a picture of it from my car. Other drivers probably though I was strange. Now days I would get a ticket for having a electronic device out while driving. I found Locationless Caches fun and sometimes challenging.

I have always enjoyed photos of visitors to my caches. My virtuals from 13 years ago require selfies for verifaction way before the term selfies was coined.

Uh, what? Is this a thing, or was it a muggle messing with the cache? I've seen it as a thing ... but I think it is beyond gross and hope it doesn't get copied anywhere. Perhaps the vaseline keeps critters out. I know it would keep me out.

I tend to place caches in places I would enjoy going to and in containers I would enjoy finding for the particular placement. Good luck on your first cache hide!

I don’t think favorite points for logs will have any effect on how someone signs a log just like it doesn’t have any effect on creating better caches. I enjoy reading both the physical and online logs. I consider it good manners to write something nice and personal about a enjoyable cache for the CO and others that find the cache. As someone who reads logs, I find it very annoying and distracting to read logs that someone copies and pastes over and over.

I would do what feels right to you. I certainly wouldn’t try to retrieve a cache where I might injure myself. I don’t understand why someone would place a cache high in a tree to begin with. It’s only a game and logging it isn’t going to hurt anybody. I’ve logged a few caches on the spur of the moment while out on my bike or hiking where upon opening the cache, there is no pencil inside. In the end, it’s up to the CO whether it’s a find or not. Personally under the circumstances you described, I wouldn’t have a problem logging it. It certainly seems way more more ethical than the way many numbers cachers log power trail caches.

One does exist: ISS but I suspect you do not have the wherewithal to replicate it. The ISS cache is published pursuant to the listing guideline on Geocaches in Space, which was included specifically to override the other guidelines that might otherwise prohibit its publication (the moving cache guideline being one example). Maybe it's just me but I don't really consider the ISS cache to be anything more than a novelty, a cache listing for a cache that realistically isn't going to be found by anyone and probably shouldn't be used an example of a type of geocache one might try to place. How many remembered or logged International Space Station? This one was from back in 2003 when they allowed locationless caches. Granted this is not a true moving cache but it was the closest I had the opportunity to get to the ISS.