Goldenwattle

An apology was received.

This is lovely to visit. I visited it last year. I found the local bus service was good to use to get around much of the island. There are also historic electric trams, a horse drawn tram and a steam train you can use.

I have never heard that on the app, but I mostly use a Garmin GPS, and that still beeps to let me know I am close.

My guard rail cache has 26 favourites (about one in three finders have given it a favourite). GC7AWYW. There you will find guarded treasure. The last maintenance check I did on it, Sep. 2023, it was in good condition. No finders since then. I reattached some of the guards. Bad caches can be down to the laziness and lack of imagination of the hider. Even a guard rail cache can be fun. You need to go further a field to find small and larger cache. In fact I often just don't bother finding micro sized cache...unless there are no alternatives, or they belong to a subset of caches I find, such as the SideTracked series. Go bushwalking. Often the more remote caches are better examples of what caches should be.

Signing the log is proof of a visit. It's the basis of the game. And no app is a trustworthy as physical evidence. Most caches I visit are in okay enough condition to sign. I have over 14,000 finds, so seen a few . I check logs on my caches to see it has been visited. If you haven't signed a log of mine, you will be getting a message to please explain, because I have no proof you found it. The game isn't visiting a spot and thinking that's enough. You have to find the cache and sign the log. Come on, how onerous is that,...really! LOL, needing to bring your own pen...how is that a burden. You should bring at least two, as ink can run out, and after an experience I had of both pens running out of ink in about a minute of each other, I now often bring three. You don't have to bring a replaceable log, and in most cases you shouldn't replace it without permission from the owner. NEVER replace a log, as the CO might want to check it. A responsible CO will want to do this. Sometimes people might add a log, but this isn't necessary, as the CO should be maintaining their own caches. Do a NM log. If the owner criticises you for this don't get upset. In my experience, most COs won't criticise you for this, but there is the odd nark (I use that in the Aust/NZ sense - an annoying person or thing). I would thank you for the NM and letting me know, as all COs should. Ignore the sad narks ! I think the problem in some people's minds these days is everything should be able to be signed on a touch screen with your thumb, and pens (who uses 'quills' these days) are archaic. Well news for you, pens are not archaic. I see you are American. Only recently I had to sign an official USA form, and your government doesn't think signing is archaic. In fact, the rules there were the most stringent (narkish ) I have come upon. APP...Some of us use GPSs, which can go where no app can go...

I like to post images on caches if there is something interesting. I don't want my pictures to be only for the CO. Such as I posted recently on 'what's your favourite cache this year'

Cloud zones can be so pretty. Literally seeing a cloud ahead and driving into it. As a teenager I lived in a cloud zone. Some clouds would touch the ground and 'crawl' across the landscape.

Not my first visit to all these countries, but my first time as a Geocacher. Italy, Greece, France, Vatican City, Germany; plus Bayern, Hessen, Nordrhein-Weatfalen, Hungary, Austria, Slovenska, Netherlands, Isle of Man, Irish ones: Dublin, Leinster, Munster, and on the way home a surprise one; Taiwan; forced there by a typhoon. Still planning 2024.

This was one of my favourites. GC372. It filled in a find for February 2001; plus the drive there was pretty.

No, you don't need immediate verifiable proof of finding. You only need to check the log regularly, whether once every few months, or perhaps maybe every a couple of years. This depends on the number of loggers, where the cache is, and other factors. Compare the logs then and take a photograph of the log as a record. I add mine to the OM log. If I can't find a signature, I contact the person. If they can supply other proof of visit, such as a photograph, or a very good description of the log, cache and hide, I allow the log to stay. I do say they should sign the log. For very new beginners I have started being more lenient, saying I will accept the log this time, but please sign logs from now on. (If though I find they have again for a later find of one of my caches continued not to sign my logs I will likely delete both logs. That hasn't happened yet.) I blame the lack of actual writing these days for more unsigned logs; with people (especially younger generations), hardly ever picking up a pen. 'Who' signs anything theses days🙄! Just wait to the day people just dictate their messages and never write. ALs are catering for this mindset too.

Yes, I saw a cache log the other day with a find logged for a cache in Australia with words something like, "I have never visited Australia, but I decided to log a cache there." If that was my cache as soon as I saw the email, I would delete it. No need to go out and check the log for that one. As it was still on the cache log after a few days (weeks?) it seems the CO of that cache is just leaving the armchair logger's log there. Where it gets really annoying, is where the CO does nothing about these logs, and ruins others using that cache to fulfil a Challenge. I see that as selfish of both the logger and the CO. The CO for not making it fair for all geocachers. Examples; 1. Years ago I was trying to build up enough caches for a find caches not found for six months challenge. This multicache had not been found for a year, but someone mucked that up by logging a find for, as they wrote, "Found the first WP." The CO never deleted that, even after being contacted. 2. The second example could be logged, but it makes it unfair for those who really fulfilled the challenge, which was a VERY hard one. Find a cache is every Australian Territory in one calendar year. I qualified for that, but likely had to drive about 15,000kms to do it, and catch a ferry to Tasmania. You also naturally had to log the cache, which I did. Some people either never signed the log, or had only ever found caches in one Territory. The CO did nothing about either. If a CO makes a cache a challenge, that should check people do actually qualify. I suppose the warning there that the CO wouldn't be checking people qualified, is that this very hard challenge was only rated the (I don't really care) 1.5D/T. Sadly you are correct, but I have found there is often a correlation between those who do check logs and take the appropriate action, and those who maintain their caches. The two go hand in hand.

Only if a CO doesn't do regular checks and maintenance, or puts the cache in an unwise place. I regularly check my caches, and the log is rarely missing, but because I do regularly check the cache (how often depends where the cache is, etc), even if the log did go missing, I would still have photographs of most past logs. I put the latest photograph of the signatures in my maintenance log as a record. Then if the log goes missing this copy still exists. An example. Checked after 11 months from the previous check. It's an eleven stage multi, and doesn't get found that often. It's been sitting in the weather (although somewhat protected by the overhead oak tree) for 8 years. It's the original log and as can be seen in the photographs of the log, still good. https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC61P7D_narrabundah-ramble

"I have had 1,354 trackables belonging to someone else pass through my hands." Sorry, I misunderstood.

Was this person 'collecting' other geocachers' trackables? Will they be set free again?

That's as I suggested to you before, but seem to have dismissed. "2. Those I qualify for but haven't found yet, I copy the coordinates and add them as updating the coordinates as though it were a solved multi or puzzle cache. Then it shows up on the map as solved." To make it clearer, changes to: . What is wrong with that? Stands out! For those I have signed, but don't qualify for yet, I just keep a list in a document on the computer. Simple.

Very hard to find in some countries. Not common as they were once. I travelled to a few countries this year and was looking for postcards to send to some children, and they weren't always easy to find.

Thanks to this I learnt about this Locationless cache. Now logged. One was fun, but I hope we don't get many of them. Another game I haven't played for awhile ended up with many Locationless caches, which was a big reason I haven't played it for ages. A few very rare ones are fun, many killed the game for me. Congratulations on your streak. Well done. Hard work to keep streaks going. 4.5 years impressive.

Yes, if the ink is waterproof.

Good , it wasn't a narrow micro cache log for the letter box cache. I have come upon that, and my stamp is too big for that. As would be many people's.

I usually only use the stamp for letter box caches, when they actually have a log big enough for stamps (amazing how many so called letter box caches are not supplied with a log big enough and suitable for people's stamps), and is in good condition. I do sign as well. Most other cache logs only get my signature.

Separate stamp pad. The original ink on the pad (yellowish orange, as my stamp is a sprig of wattle) might not maybe have been waterproof (not sure), but the bottle of ink to top up the stamp pad is waterproof, and it passed the test. Checked the test stamp again and it still has not bled .

Stop making up what I do, it doesn't make you look good. I don't send "threatening emails" and never said I do, as you must know. What I wrote was, "It might even fade away completely. Then you will get an email asking where your signature is." No threats there; only a question from a CO who does regular maintenance and checks logs, and when I can't find a signature or stamp I ask about the signature. I am reasonable and will also accept other proof, such as a photograph or a good description. I give people a chance. I also accept I might just have missed someone's scrawl. I did once and when they pointed it out I apologized. Beginners with only a few finds I am now being very lenient with, saying they should have signed the log, but as they are new to the game I will accept their log this time, but please sign logs from now on. I don't want to chase away new players. I personally have also received an email from a CO about a log I signed, asking where my signature was. I took it well; it wasn't a "threatening email" and I never considered it such. Gees, I appreciated that there are other COs out there who take their responsibilities seriously. I described the hide, the log, the surrounds; even the parking, and my log was accepted. A "threatening email"; gees you can't be real! (The log had become ratty and was falling apart, so not surprised my signature might have been missed. But good the CO was fixing this.)

I am familiar with it; the basic question being answered, "Does anyone have any good recommendations for log stamps?" Stamps don't come separate to ink. They are a pair. One does not work without the other. Maybe you should reread it. My recommendation was on track with, (use might have been better as buy, but same meaning) "If people use stamps, please get water proof ink, because if the log gets even damp, the stamp image will run, and it will be unreadable. It might even fade away completely. Then you will get an email asking where your signature is."

That got me thinking. Although the ink is marked Archival Ink, Acid Free, Permanent, Waterproof, I had actually never tested it. So I made a stamp on paper, wiped moisture over it (spat on it) and it didn't smug. Ran tap water over it and it didn't smug. The paper has been wet for several minutes now and it hasn't bled yet. I bought the ink from a specialist stamp and ink shop. Ink, made in USA. Ranger brand.

Blurry stamps make checking logs and cross checking the online log difficult. I react quickly to maintenance problems and regularly check the logs. No one has ever needed to replace a log for me, as I do maintenance, and I would be very annoyed if they did replace a log rather than do a NM. So, your comment, "in some cases the logsheets have been replaced so any earlier signatures are no longer there anyway",is incorrect, for if any logs are replaced it's been by me and I have had a log to check.