Muggled Cache

[+Jedi Cacher]

This is the first cache that I have encountered that it was muggled. I know the cache was in the area I was looking because I had seen this type of cache done before earlier in the day. It was a birdhouse with a hidden compartment. Nothing was in there except a businees card that other cachers had been using to sign thier names to say they had been there. I also noticed that some cachers have been logging this as a find even though there is nothing there. How do I log this one?

[+Renegade Knight]

This is the first cache that I have encountered that it was muggled. I know the cache was in the area I was looking because I had seen this type of cache done before earlier in the day. It was a birdhouse with a hidden compartment. Nothing was in there except a businees card that other cachers had been using to sign thier names to say they had been there. I also noticed that some cachers have been logging this as a find even though there is nothing there. How do I log this one?

 

Email the owner and ask.

They can confirm that the cache was what you think it is and tell you to log.

[+Miragee]

If people are signing a business card as a log instead of logging DNFs for a cache that is missing . . . well . . .

[+briansnat]

Simple. You went to find the cache and didn 't find it. So you log a "didn't find it".

[Neos2]

I looked at the cache page for that one ...

 

The cache owner hasn't logged in to gc for a week, and a "needs maintenance" note was put on it by two other cachers just two days ago. The owner may not know there is a problem yet.

 

I'd post the DNF and drop an email to the owner through their profile. The most important thing at this point is to make sure the owner knows there is a problem. Some folks are reporting some notification problems recently, the owner may not have gotten the automail from the needs maintenance report.

 

A secondary consideration is whether you should/may log it as a find or not. That's why you need to go ahead and log your DNF, or at least a note. If it were my cache, and you found the container and you signed something so I knew you had been there, then I'd be fine with you claiming that as a find, and I'd email you to suggest that. It wouldn't matter to me that you hadn't found the second container that was supposed to hold the logbook unless there was something unique about the second container (like it was a puzzle box you had to figure out to open it). It really is the owner's call, though, not mine, and not anyone else in these forums.

 

And if the owner says to log it as a find, it's totally your call whether you feel comfortable with that. If you feel you have to see both the outer container and the inner container with the "real" logbook for it to count as a find, you can always go back again and sign it once it's repaired.

[+Jedi Cacher]

I looked at the cache page for that one ...

 

The cache owner hasn't logged in to gc for a week, and a "needs maintenance" note was put on it by two other cachers just two days ago. The owner may not know there is a problem yet.

 

I'd post the DNF and drop an email to the owner through their profile. The most important thing at this point is to make sure the owner knows there is a problem. Some folks are reporting some notification problems recently, the owner may not have gotten the automail from the needs maintenance report.

 

A secondary consideration is whether you should/may log it as a find or not. That's why you need to go ahead and log your DNF, or at least a note. If it were my cache, and you found the container and you signed something so I knew you had been there, then I'd be fine with you claiming that as a find, and I'd email you to suggest that. It wouldn't matter to me that you hadn't found the second container that was supposed to hold the logbook unless there was something unique about the second container (like it was a puzzle box you had to figure out to open it). It really is the owner's call, though, not mine, and not anyone else in these forums.

 

And if the owner says to log it as a find, it's totally your call whether you feel comfortable with that. If you feel you have to see both the outer container and the inner container with the "real" logbook for it to count as a find, you can always go back again and sign it once it's repaired.

 

 

Thanks for the info. I didn't know that cache owners recieved automail reports. That is very cool! I will also send an Email to the owner and let them know that way too. I did write a note saying that the cache had been pirated in case somebody else finds it anytime soon. Once the cache is up and running I will revisit the area and hit some other caches that I didn't get to get to. It was a very good 2 day trip of caching and saw allot of cool sites and history. Even hit a small jackpot at the Casino. 500 nickles Wooohooo!

[+Ed & Julie]

Well...the bird house is a container, and the business card is acting as the log...that is the bare minimum requirements for a geocache.

 

You found the (swagless) container, signed the (makeshift) log...I say: Log as a find.

[+Renegade Knight]

Well...the bird house is a container, and the business card is acting as the log...that is the bare minimum requirements for a geocache.

 

You found the (swagless) container, signed the (makeshift) log...I say: Log as a find.

 

They found a log placed by someone other than the owner. If you as a cacher can't find my cache and set a log book in the "right general area" it's not the cache. It's cache interference. In this case it may actually be in the right spot, but it's still not the orginal log placed by the orginal owner and they may not know that until they ask.

[+StarBrand]

Simple. You went to find the cache and didn 't find it. So you log a "didn't find it".

yup - easy enough.

[+Jedi Cacher]

Simple. You went to find the cache and didn 't find it. So you log a "didn't find it".

 

 

I would also agree with you on this on Briansnat. I did log it as a did not find and contacted the owner of the cache. I still have heard nothing back yet via Email, and noticed that they have not logged in since April 20th. I am 99% positive that the cache container was the bird house-feeder with the hidden compartment. I found a cache exactly like that one earlier in the day by the same owner. It is a great idea, but somebody muggled the contents including the log book. There were two cachers before me that logged it as needing maintanence, then turned around and decided to log it as a find. Maybe because they found a geocoin laying on the ground. Please correct me if I am wrong on this since I am a newbie, but dont you have to sign the logbook to constitute the find?

[+Jedi Cacher]

Well...the bird house is a container, and the business card is acting as the log...that is the bare minimum requirements for a geocache.

 

You found the (swagless) container, signed the (makeshift) log...I say: Log as a find.

 

 

Thanks, you also raise a good point! This is a tough call.

 

Love the Star Wars quotes!

[+sargenv]

They found a log placed by someone other than the owner. If you as a cacher can't find my cache and set a log book in the "right general area" it's not the cache. It's cache interference.

 

I have a question about this. I've found a few micros lately that had a log but it was such a wet goo of mush that was unsignable. I've then placed a new log into it with a mini-ziploc, placed the goo back in the cache (In case it dries out) and of course signed the log I just placed in. Would this be considered cache interferance or would it be considered a "good samaritan act" of me making it easier for people to actually log the container as a find as opposed to repeating, "Log was unusable, logged find anyway"?

 

Just trying to clarify the idea.. though in the case of the missing inner container, I could see that it might constitute interference. I had a recent micro replaced for me since it was thought to have been muggled but when I went to check on it, I noticed that a previous cacher had moved it like 10 ft from my original hide. I found it and placed it back where I wanted it and snagged the replacement to either give back to the replacer or hide it with an assist somewhere else.

 

I try to keep things the way they are but don't mind maintaining things like that if they are obviously needed. I have not as yet replaced containers for other people and wouldn't do so unless I knew the cache placer personally.

 

Vince

[+StarBrand]

They found a log placed by someone other than the owner. If you as a cacher can't find my cache and set a log book in the "right general area" it's not the cache. It's cache interference.

 

I have a question about this. I've found a few micros lately that had a log but it was such a wet goo of mush that was unsignable. I've then placed a new log into it with a mini-ziploc, placed the goo back in the cache (In case it dries out) and of course signed the log I just placed in. Would this be considered cache interferance or would it be considered a "good samaritan act" of me making it easier for people to actually log the container as a find as opposed to repeating, "Log was unusable, logged find anyway"?

 

Just trying to clarify the idea.. though in the case of the missing inner container, I could see that it might constitute interference. I had a recent micro replaced for me since it was thought to have been muggled but when I went to check on it, I noticed that a previous cacher had moved it like 10 ft from my original hide. I found it and placed it back where I wanted it and snagged the replacement to either give back to the replacer or hide it with an assist somewhere else.

 

I try to keep things the way they are but don't mind maintaining things like that if they are obviously needed. I have not as yet replaced containers for other people and wouldn't do so unless I knew the cache placer personally.

 

Vince

 

Fisher Space Pen or the far cheaper alternate - Uniball Power Tank Pens - they will put a mark on most wet goo.

 

However, I have often left a new log sheet and baggie along with the old goo where possible.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Well...the bird house is a container, and the business card is acting as the log...that is the bare minimum requirements for a geocache.

 

You found the (swagless) container, signed the (makeshift) log...I say: Log as a find.

 

 

Thanks, you also raise a good point! This is a tough call.

 

Love the Star Wars quotes!

 

Many points raised here as to what qualifies as a 'find'. Some say that you have to sign the log that the cache owner left. Others say that you need to leave your log inside the cache container. I have logged two where I have obviously found the container, but no log book. I DNFed one where the container had been hit by a lawn mower. I found the container and the log (in small pieces strewn across the lawn). No way to put a log in the container! And I have deleted logs where people said "Found container, but didnt bother to open it to sign the log."

Different opinions as to what qualifies as a 'find'. The problem with the birdhouse is that it may or may not have been the actual cache container. The container might have been inside the birdhouse; in which case the cache itself is missing. That would be a DNF, IMHO. It might have been a decoy? Maybe the cache is actually the fake rock at the base of the pole? Only the cache owner can tell you whether the birdhouse is the container, or merely the hiding place for the actual container. This one, I would DNF with a note to the cache owner.

[+briansnat]

Different opinions as to what qualifies as a 'find'. The problem with the birdhouse is that it may or may not have been the actual cache container. The container might have been inside the birdhouse; in which case the cache itself is missing. That would be a DNF, IMHO. It might have been a decoy? Maybe the cache is actually the fake rock at the base of the pole? Only the cache owner can tell you whether the birdhouse is the container, or merely the hiding place for the actual container. This one, I would DNF with a note to the cache owner.

 

I own a cache that was hidden in a small, white plastic container hidden in a tree stump. Someone rightly logged a DNF when he found an empty small, white plastic container next to a stump. He sent me a photo of the container laying on the ground. From the photo it appeared that he might have found the container, so I went to the cache site and found my cache safely tucked away in its hiding place. About 30 feet away, I found an empty butter tub about the same size of my cache on the ground next to another stump.

 

My point is that you often really don't KNOW that you found the cache unless you find it intact.

[+Chuy!]

I say advantage goes to the cacher; you made the effort to go to GZ and I feel you are justified in claiming the find unless the owner tells you otherwise. But I claim the find only if I am able to leave behind a suitable temporary replacement container and logsheet. I also call some cachers in the area to ensure I've looked in the right location.

 

On my muggled caches: once I confirm the cache is really MIA, I give the DNF'ers the option to log a find regardless if I replace the cache or archive it.

[+Night Stalker]

Here again most posters are assuming that you and the other loggers really found the cache. This may not be the case. I had people signing a makeshift log to one of my caches that definately was not at the cache. I know because I checked and my cache was hidden right where I left it without these cachers logs. You need to communicate with the cache hider and find out if you actually found the cache. Then you need to find out if the owner will allow you to show the cache as found.

 

As an example I found a cache (I hoped), but I could not get it open to verify my find. I returned several months later to try again with the same result. The second time I met the cache owner and got permission to log a find inspite of my inability to open the cache. Without her permission I would have logged another DNF.

[+Jedi Cacher]

Different opinions as to what qualifies as a 'find'. The problem with the birdhouse is that it may or may not have been the actual cache container. The container might have been inside the birdhouse; in which case the cache itself is missing. That would be a DNF, IMHO. It might have been a decoy? Maybe the cache is actually the fake rock at the base of the pole? Only the cache owner can tell you whether the birdhouse is the container, or merely the hiding place for the actual container. This one, I would DNF with a note to the cache owner.

 

 

 

I do like your thinking of a simple misdirection with a decoy container. You are giving me some ideas for my first cache placement, very sneaky, I like! However it could be confusing to some. I wonder if anyone has done this before?

 

I Emailed the cache owner twice and I did not hear anything back yet. I know that this person could be on vacation but noticed that they have not logged in for the past 23 days. I am also the last cacher to visit the area. If I do not hear anything back soon, I like Chuy!'s idea of contacting some of the other cacher's that have found this cache to see if it was the correct container. I just hope this person is doing alright, since it has been awhile it it does make you worry or wonder about them.

[+Jedi Cacher]

Just thought I would update this situation and would like some feedback. Since I logged this one as a DNF there has been no reply back from the cache owner and they still have not logged on since 4/20. Several cachers have found the birdfeeder and have signed the business card that was left in the compartment. The business card is full of signatures now, and one cacher left behind 3 pages of notebook paper for other cachers to sign. They have all logged it as a find even though it is not maintained and there is no logbook. It's kind of funny how the cachers united to keep this one going without anybody officially adopting it.