Lactodorum Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 A cache was submitted a few weeks ago by someone whilst on holiday. As it cannot be published under the guidelines I shall have to archive it. Normally that is end of the matter. However in this case it contains 4 travel bugs. It would be a great shame for them to end up as "geolitter". So I'm looking for someone who is prepared to go and try and rescue the cache and the TB's. It's in Kensigton Gardens in London and if you e-mail me (lactodorum at gmail dot com) I'll send you the co-ords and cache description. Thanks. Link to comment
+Haggis Hunter Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 I think as a reward to the person going to rescue the TB's they should for one, be allowed to keep the entire cache, but once they let you know they have it, it should be enabled and then disabled immediately, to allow them to log it as a find. You can still log an archived cache. Link to comment
+*mouse* Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 I think as a reward to the person going to rescue the TB's they should for one, be allowed to keep the entire cache, but once they let you know they have it, it should be enabled and then disabled immediately, to allow them to log it as a find. You can still log an archived cache. A first to find and a final to find! That would be kinda cool! Link to comment
+ryme-intrinseca Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 Hubbie says if you still need help finding these TBs, we can definitely go to London on Monday... so if I'm not too late..??? Link to comment
Lactodorum Posted April 15, 2006 Author Share Posted April 15, 2006 Thanks to ryme-intrinseca for volunteering. Details have been sent and I like the idea of listing/archiving to enable them to log it. I'll sort that out. I've also suggested they re-use the cache rather than let it become geolitter as well. Link to comment
+tteggod trackers Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO GO ON MONDAY LET US KNOW WE COULD DO IT NO PROBLEM ON MONDAY,IN FACT THINKING ALOUD WOULD BE HAPPY TO ADOPT IT IF THATS AN OPTION? Link to comment
+Hi-Tek Posted April 15, 2006 Share Posted April 15, 2006 On a similar subject ... What has happened to ... GCV790 - last appeared in a PQ 14th April 2006 ? GCTRP5 - last appeared in a PQ 20th March 2006 ? When accessed both now show "Sorry, you cannot view this cache listing until it has been published." Odd as they've already been distributed in a PQ & GCTRP5, in particular, has a "found log" against it in the PQ Link to comment
Lactodorum Posted April 16, 2006 Author Share Posted April 16, 2006 On a similar subject ... What has happened to ... GCV790 - last appeared in a PQ 14th April 2006 ? GCTRP5 - last appeared in a PQ 20th March 2006 ? When accessed both now show "Sorry, you cannot view this cache listing until it has been published." Odd as they've already been distributed in a PQ & GCTRP5, in particular, has a "found log" against it in the PQ Both had permission problems concerning the Forestry Commission. While these problems are being sorted out I had to "Unpublish" them to prevent details continuing to be visible. Nothing sinister, just admin problems ! Link to comment
+tteggod trackers Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 any reply for my posting lactodorum? Link to comment
+Haggis Hunter Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 Thanks to ryme-intrinseca for volunteering. Details have been sent and I like the idea of listing/archiving to enable them to log it. I'll sort that out. I've also suggested they re-use the cache rather than let it become geolitter as well. That's a fair solution, thanks for considering it. IN FACT THINKING ALOUD WOULD BE HAPPY TO ADOPT IT IF THATS AN OPTION? This is probably the best solution, I would hope you will still log it as a find, even if you do adopt it. I have adopted 3 caches, all of which I had found previously. Link to comment
+tteggod trackers Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 (edited) first thing i would do on adoption would be to go find it to be satisfied of location and container etc.just waiting on a reply from lactodorum, may be too late i fear as ryme-intrinseca are heading there tomorrow i think. oh dear lactodorums mail had gone to the junk folder!! thanks for reply shame we can't help.we are heading to london in the next hour anyway! Edited April 16, 2006 by tteggod trackers Link to comment
Lactodorum Posted April 16, 2006 Author Share Posted April 16, 2006 .......oh dear lactodorums mail had gone to the junk folder!! ......... Charming!!! I'll remember that next time you have a cache up for review Link to comment
+tteggod trackers Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 its very odd it went to junk because it hasn't in the past when we have communicated .its now rectified and red carpet is laid for any forthcoming communications. Link to comment
+Hi-Tek Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 On a similar subject ... What has happened to ... GCV790 - last appeared in a PQ 14th April 2006 ? GCTRP5 - last appeared in a PQ 20th March 2006 ? When accessed both now show "Sorry, you cannot view this cache listing until it has been published." Odd as they've already been distributed in a PQ & GCTRP5, in particular, has a "found log" against it in the PQ Thanks for the reply - that explains things nicely - ta Link to comment
+Chris n Maria Posted April 16, 2006 Share Posted April 16, 2006 Hmmm - I wonder if the cache mentioned was the one we arranged to recover with the owner last week. I was hoping to get round to it on Tuesday... Chris Link to comment
+ryme-intrinseca Posted April 17, 2006 Share Posted April 17, 2006 In reply to the posting about adopting the cache - sorry, I didn't look at the forums after my last posting, above. If it's any consolation, we found the cache, and IMHO it wasn't in a very suitable place. There was a note inside to say it had been placed in a hurry, there was no log book or anything, just the TBs. It was in a very 'manicured' garden, and I'm not too sure how the park wardens would have felt about people clambering through the flowerbeds to find it?? Also, I'm 99.9% sure it was within 0.1 miles of another cache, if not, it was only over that by a few feet. The container was just a standard tupperware tub, someone tell me how to attach a photo if you would like to see it. If you would like me to send the cache to you by post, with the TBs, perhaps I could do that, and if Lactodorum says it's okay, I could give you the co-ord's to replace it? Apologies. Link to comment
+Pharisee Posted April 18, 2006 Share Posted April 18, 2006 On a similar subject ... What has happened to ... GCV790 - last appeared in a PQ 14th April 2006 ? GCTRP5 - last appeared in a PQ 20th March 2006 ? When accessed both now show "Sorry, you cannot view this cache listing until it has been published." Odd as they've already been distributed in a PQ & GCTRP5, in particular, has a "found log" against it in the PQ Both had permission problems concerning the Forestry Commission. While these problems are being sorted out I had to "Unpublish" them to prevent details continuing to be visible. Nothing sinister, just admin problems ! I noticed those, too. However, if you're using GSAK (is there anyone who doesn't?) you can still view all the cache details even though they've been 'un-published' by clicking 'edit waypoint'. Link to comment
Lactodorum Posted April 18, 2006 Author Share Posted April 18, 2006 Thanks to ryme-intrinseca for recovering the cache and rescuing the TB's. Given the location it certainly wasn't a candidate for adoption. Chris, I don't know if you'd corresponded with the owner but I couldn't have published it where it was. If you want more details, drop me a note. I'll now close this thread so a final thanks to all those involved. Link to comment
Recommended Posts